Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1979-03-27 Regular Meeting
MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1979 7{60/1 —6116 -p Or! No, Der,� 1 2 13 5 6 7 8 9 A 7- MWOM" JORM MICRDLAB ....... .... . . . . . . ............... Al JORM MICRDLAB ROLL CALL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 21, 1979 7:30 P.M. PRESENT ABSENT BALMER ✓ dePROSSE ERDAHL ✓ NEUHAUSER ✓ PERRET ROBERTS ✓ VEVERA ✓ r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I- .'t it I� f' f I�, COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF COUNCIL ACTIVITIES MARCH 27, 1979 Iowa City Council, reg, mtg.,3/27/79 7;30 P.M. at the Civic Center. Councilmembers present: Balmer, deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Vevera. Absent: Neuhauser, Roberts. Mayor Vevera presiding. Staff - members present: Berlin, Helling, Hayek, Vitosh, Brei. Council minutes 3 tape-recorded on Tape 79-9, Side 2, 1 439. Mayor Vevera proclaimed the week of April 1-7, 1979, as Host Family Week. bo Moved by Perret, seconded by Balmer, that the following items and recommendations in the Consent Calendar be received or approved and/or adopted, as presented: Approval of Official Actions, re subj, to correction, as recommended by City Clerk. Minutes of Boards & Commissions: IP & Z Comm. -3/15/79;2 f 8d• o ' Adjustment -3/15/79 3Resources Conserv. Comm.-2/27/79;AHousing s Appeals Bd.-1/11/79• L Permit Resolutions, Bk. 55, recommended by City Clerk: RES. y 0 7 #79-132, P. 457, APPROVING CIGARETTE PERMIT Le»'s •Hns * al.Qdcil y (p09 Correspondence referred to City Mgrfor reply: 'Diane ' re parking on S. Governor St -7 -Clyde Hanson, re reasons Uornburg,610 for choosing-? ice: Ifor model owa City to live. 3 Protective Assoc, for Tenants, re suggestions i b on: 1Mayfieldse. Rd.,3200rblock from Traffic parking prohibition St. &6300 block of Lee s may_ Affirmative roll call vote unanimous 5/0. Neuhau�o a. D -L_._. b S Council noted the recomms. from P & 2 Comm. to approve the pre]. & final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village and to approve the prel. & final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush Co. Sta}� 1u q9160z SRo4a bo'ti, , � I�-- Leda Bergmann from Melrose Neighborhood Assoc., appeared and stated the c; endorses the editorial which appeared in Iowa Citv IreIOW ty, ging tUparticipationtY in Planning between lour, U of 518 and the proposed U of I arena in relationntoJohnson trafficCo Movedby FW deProsse, seconded by Perret, to send a letter from the Mayor to the U of I requesting that we set up a committee, which would include a minimum of two representatives each, from the City, U of 1, members of the Melrose neighborhood area (and possibly U. Hgts, & IDOT) to look at questions relating to the development of the sports arena and traffic problems; furthermore, the letter should indicate appreciation for past cooperation. Motion carried, 5/0. (,17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ` C, WciI Activities M. .n 27 , 1979 Page 2 John Suchomel, 611 E. Burlington, appeared and thanked Council for 615 renewing his contract for litter pickup. He reported on a survey he took on the amount of garbage in the municipal parkinglot.appeared and Furman 2305 Cae Dr., aw opment ofj Dell hFWd5187due23 Eto overloading ading of trafficway619 endorsed the speedy in westside area. The public hearing was held on the issuance of $2,000,000 General 1020 Obligation Bonds. No one appeared. t RES. Moved b458a461, INSTITUTINGyPROCEEDINGStTo TAKE ADDITIONALACTION Bk. 55, pp• FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. Affirmative (�2.1 roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. ES s. Moved by Perret,IRECTING THEBalmer, to ADVERTISEMENTpOFRSALE#OF $54500,000 Bk. 55, pp. 4622-466, D GENERAL OBLIGATION BONGS. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0,�_ Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Balmer bustservicethat to University Heightsfigures werewhich nowhavaiiable. Heed regarding_ hoped that Council could discuss and take action on this matter in April. ttorney Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, to direct the Aagainst to investigate possible outside counsel to look into litigationossible. the IA Dept. of Transportation regarding FW 518, as soon as p Balmer suggested that the City request the IA Dept. f Transportaion Committee to clarify in writing their p lignin tto City Mgr. Berlin indicated he would like to send a staff person IDOT's office to reviele matMotionsforeoutside counsel was npassed, agreeable to both suggestions."no" and Neuhauser and Roberts absent. 3/2, Balmer & Vevera voting Moved by Erdahl, seconded by Vevera, to authorize the City Attorney to do what he can to defeat Senate File 406, property tax exemption for nursing homes & care facilities, possibly by letter to the Committee=_ introducing it. Motion carried, 5/0. City Mgr. Berlin presented two Resolutions to Council for consider re Rohret Rd. and Senior Citizen Furniture. Moved b467, IMPOSING seconded by Perret, to adopt RES. #79-135, Res. Bk. 55ET , p• rollHcallsvote unnanimoOus,V5/0,LES Neuhauserl&C Roberts absent.Affirmative S. Moved b48469, AWARDINGdby BIDSBFOReSENIORadopt CENTEREFURNITURE6TORBE Bk. 55, pp. 468-469, ANS ACT ACQUIRED WITH FUNDING AVAILABLE UNDER TITLE V OF THENeDulauserR&C Roberts a Y OF 1965. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous , 5/0, absent. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Cfoo'1 it Activities M4._h 27, 1979 Page 3 Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adopt RES. H79-137, Res. Bk. 55, pp. 470-471, AMENDING THE FY79 BUDGET ENDING JUNE 30, 1979. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. �y 8 Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, that AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 1 SECTION 5-2(2) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY TO CORRECT A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR WHICH OMITTED THE CLOSING TIME FOR ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR OR BEER ON WEEKDAYS be considered and given first vote for passage. Motion carried, 5/0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, that AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY CONSISTENT WITH AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 601A OF THE CODE OF IOWA (Human Rights Ord.) be considered and given first vote for passage. Motion carried, 5/0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. 4-30 Moved by Balmer, seconded by deProsse, to adjourn the meeting, 8:14 P.M. Motion carried, 5/0. I ROBERT A. VEVERA, MAYOR I i ABBIE STOLFUS, CITY CLERK MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES -' City of Iowa Ct ? MEMORANDUM DATE: March 23, 1979 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Material in Friday's Packet Copies of letters to Senator Culver and Congressman Leach regarding SMSA status for Iowa City. 631 Memorandum from Carol deProsse regarding trip to Washington, D.C. (.32 Copies of letters from the City Manager to Applegates Landing and the Brown Bottle regarding the no -smoking ordinance. ✓0 3 3 Memorandum from the City Manager to the State legislators regarding transit funding. &Sy Copy of letter from the Transit Manager to Andrea Hauer in reply to letter on the consent calendar. (,3S Memoranda from the Director of Public Works: a. East Side Cambus Route 6 06 b. Sidewalk in the 1100 Block of North Dubuque (e3 7 Copy of letter from the Director of Public Works to Hy -Vee regarding traffic signal conduit interconnect. 6 313 Letter from Iowa City Community School District regarding crossing guards. 6.3q Memorandum from the Finance Director regarding G.O. Bond Issue. 6 L1 O Memorandum from Paul Glaves regarding CBD Street Improvement Project, Phase II Gy/ Second quarter reports for the Departments of Public Works and Planning and Program Development. 6 H z Mayor's Youth Employment Program monthly report for February 1979. 6113 Letter from Johnson County Regional Planning Commission regarding meeting with legislators. 6y'J oun i soon. Agenda for March 27 meeting of Resources Conservation Conmission 6 ys Article: Balanced Budget Fallacies 6-16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nOINES 6_ ie 1 MATERIAL DISTRIBUTED AT INFORMAL DISCUSSION OF 3/26/79 Copy of Resolution on Urban Interstate Highways, including an article, "A U -Turn for Beltways" Memo from CDBG Prog. Coord. re Senior Center Furniture - Award of contract for furniture to be acquired with Title V funds Memo from Sophie Zukrowski & Angela Ryan, Staff Assistants to the Iowa City Human Rights Comm. re proposed changes in the Local Non- discrimination Ordinance (Human Rights Ord.) Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study (this item is placed directly behind this meeting folder) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF COUNCIL ACTIVITIES MARCH 27, 1979 Iowa City Council, reg. mtg., 3/27/79, 7:30 P.M. at the Civic Center. Councilmembers present: Balmer, deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Vevera. Absent: Neuhauser, Roberts. Mayor Vevera presiding. Staff - members present: Berlin, Helling, Hayek, Vitosh, Brei. Council minutes tape-recorded on Tape 79-9, Side 2, 1-439. Mayor Vevera proclaimed the week of April 1-7, 1979, as Host Family Week. Moved by Perret, seconded by Balmer, that the following items and recommendations in the Consent Calendar be received or approved and/or adopted, as presented: Approval of Official Actions, reg. Council mtg., 3/13/79, subj. to correction, as recommended by City Clerk. Minutes of Boards & Commissions: P & ZComm.-3/15/79; Bd. of Adjustment -3/15/79; Resources Conserv. Comm. -2/27/79; Housing Appeals Bd.-1/11/79. Permit Resolutions, Bk. 55, recommended by City Clerk: RES. #79-132, p. 457, APPROVING CIGARETTE PERMIT. Correspondence referred to City Mgr. for reply: Diane Dornburg, re parking on S. Governor St. Clyde Hanson, re reasons for choosing Iowa City to live. Protective Assoc. for Tenants, re suggestions for model lease. Memorandum from Traffic Engr., parking prohibition on: Mayfield Rd., 200 block of Hutchinson Ave., & 300 block of Lee St. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Council noted the recomms. from P & Z Comm. to approve the prel. & final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village and to approve the prel. & final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush Co. Leda Bergmann, from Melrose Neighborhood Assoc., appeared and stated the Assoc. endorses the editorial which appeared in Iowa City Press -Citizen urging joint participation in planning between IDOT, U of I, Iowa City, Coralville, University Hgts., and Johnson Co. regarding FW 518 and the proposed U of I arena in relation to traffic. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Ferret, to send a letter from the Mayor to the U of I requesting that we set up a committee, which would include a minimum of two representatives each, from the City, U of I, members of the Melrose neighborhood area (and possibly U. Hgts. & IDOT) to look at questions relating to the development of the sports arena and traffic problems; furthermore, the letter should indicate appreciation for past cooperation. Motion carried, 5/0. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Council Activities March 27, 1979 Page 2 John Suchomel, 611 E. Burlington, appeared and thanked Council for renewing his contract for litter pickup. He reported on a survey he took on the amount of garbage in the municipal parking lot. Mike Furman, 2305 Cae Dr., and Dell Richards, 723 E. Washington, appeared and endorsed the speedy development of FW 518 due to overloading of trafficways in westside area. The public hearing was held on the issuance of $2,000,000 General Obligation Bonds. No one appeared. Moved by Balmer, seconded by deProi:.se, to adopt RES. #79-133, Res. Bk. 55, pp. 458-461, INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by Perret, seconded by Balmer, to adopt RES. #79-134, Res. Bk. 55, pp. 462-466, DIRECTING THE ADVERTISEMENT OF SALE OF $5,500,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Balmer stated that the financial figures which he had requested regarding bus service to University Heights were now available. He hoped that Council could discuss and take action on this matter in April. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, to direct the City Attorney to investigate possible outside counsel to look into litigation against the IA Dept. of Transportation regarding FW 518, as soon as possible. Balmer suggested that the City request the IA Dept. of Transportation Committee to clarify in writing their position on FW 518 alignment. City Mgr. Berlin indicated he would like to send a staff person to IDOT's office to review file material since Nov. 2, 1978. Council was agreeable to both suggestions. Motion for outside counsel was passed, 3/2, Balmer & Vevera voting "no" and Neuhauser and Roberts absent. Moved by Erdahl, seconded by Vevera, to authorize the City Attorney to do what he can to defeat Senate File 406, property tax exemption for nursing homes & care facilities, possibly by letter to the Committee introducing it. Motion carried, 5/0. City Mgr. Berlin presented two Resolutions to Council for consider- ation, re Rohret Rd, and Senior Citizen Furniture. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adopt RES. #79-135, Res. Bk. 55, p. 467, IMPOSING WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS UPON VEHICLES TRAVELING ROHRET ROAD. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by Perret, seconded by Balmer, to adopt RES. #79-136, Res. Bk. 55, pp. 468-469, AWARDING BIDS FOR SENIOR CENTER FURNITURE TO BE ACQUIRED WITH FUNDING AVAILABLE UNDER TITLE V OF THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT OF 1965. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Council Activities March 27, 1979 Page 3 Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adopt RES. N79-137, Res. Bk. 55, pp. 470-471, AMENDING THE FY79 BUDGET ENDING JUNE 30, 1979. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, that AN ORDINANCE AMENDING s SECTION 5-2(2) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY TO CORRECT A I TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR WHICH OMITTED THE CLOSING TIME FOR ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR OR BEER ON WEEKDAYS be considered and given first vote for passage. Motion carried, 5/0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, that AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY CONSISTENT WITH AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 601A OF THE CODE OF IOWA (Human Rights Ord.) be considered and given first vote for passage. Motion carried, 5/0. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 5/0, Neuhauser & Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by deProsse, to adjourn the meeting, 8:14 P.M. Motion carried, 5/0. ROBERT A. VEVERA, MAYOR ABB E STOLFUS, CITY CLERK I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i ia IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1979 1:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7 ia IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 27, 1979 1:30 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES AGENDA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 27, 1979 Item No. 1 - MEETING TO ORDER. ROLL CALL. Eat Item No. 2 - MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS. a. Host Family Week, April 1-7, 1979. Item No. 3 - CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. a. Approval of official actions of regular Council meeting of March 13, 1979, subject to correction, as recommended by the City Clerk. b. Minutes of Boards and Commissions. i (1) Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of March 15, 1979. (2) Board of Adjustment meeting of March 15, 1979. (3) Resources Conservation Commission meeting of Febru- ary 27, 1979. (4) Housing Appeals Board meeting of January 11, 1979. C. Permit Resolutions, as recommended by City Clerk. J (1) Resolution Approving Cigarette Permit. d. Correspondence. (1) Letter from Diane L. Dornburg regarding parking on South Governor Street. This letter has been referred to the City Manager for reply. (2) Letter from Clyde Hanson regarding his reasons for choosing Iowa City as a place to live. This letter has been referred to the City Manager for reply. (3) Letter from Protective Association for Tenants giving suggested changes in the model lease. This letter has been referred to the City Manager foe reply. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES UPIES Agenda Regular Council Meeting March 27, 1979 7:30 P.M. Page 2 (4) Memorandum from the Traffic Engineer regarding parking pro- hibition on Mayfield Road. (5) Memorandum from the Traffic Engineer regarding parking pro- hibition in the 200 block of Hutchinson Avenue. (6) Memorandum from the Traffic Engineer regarding parking prohibition in the 300 block of Lee Street. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. Item No. 4 - PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. a. Consider a recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the preliminary and final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village. 5-7841. Comment: The Planning and Zoning Commission, at a regular meet- ing held March 15, 1979, recommended by a unanimous vote (5-0) approval of the subject development plan located between Gil- bert and Van Buren Streets just north of the Abrams Furniture Store with the following contingencies: 1) the signatures of the utility companies be provided on the plan; 2) the legal descrip- tion be completed including a metes and bounds description and the certification of a registered land surveyor; 3) the sidewalk must continue through the drive on Van Buren Street back to the existing sidewalk; and 4) the revision of the legal papers being completed. This recommendation is consistent with the staff recommendation presented in a staff report dated March 15, 1979, which is attached to this agenda. A resolution for consideration of the item will be presented at the next regular meeting pend- ing resolution of the contingencies noted above. b. Consider a recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve the preliminary and final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush Company. 5-7905. Comment: The Planning and Zoning Commission, at a regular meet- ing held March 15, 1979, recommended by a unanimous vote (5-0) approval of the subject development plan located on Lower Mus- catine Road at Mall Drive with the following contingencies: 1) the legal description should be corrected so that it coincides with the boundary description; 2) the right-of-way width of Lower Muscatine Road should be indicated; 3) the future expan- sion plans should be deleted from this plan; and 4) the re- vision of the legal papers being completed. This recommendation MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES I Agenda Regular Council Meeting March 27, 1979 7:30 P.M. Page 3 Iten 4.b, continued. is consistent with the staff recommendation presented in a staff report dated March 15, 1979, which is attached to this agenda. A resolution for consideration of the item will be presented at the next regular meeting pending resolution of the contin- gencies noted above. Item No. 5 - PUBLIC DISCUSSION. 3a b5d4 G i;f t:ai I Ru rjza.�,4 Avf L VIA.) 51?, 1Jq wY.��vtt1, 1+n{ci . b� l w.1��w U � �� 1?a.T � 2 . lC , � C�i•2/�/�:l� .f f=e.J f e/.z. .itN 1• C. i 14 !=> (-I Olt wrra I Item No. 5 - PUBLIC HEARINC ON ISSUANCE. OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS Comment: Action: Item No. 7 - 13 3 Comment: Action: A memo on the Bond Issue from the Director of Finance was included in the March 9, 1979, agenda packet. n)o Golf Ci1�'f/FC� `�� I CONSIDER RESOLUTION INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE. OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. After all objections have been received during the Public Hearing and considered, if the Council decides not to abandon the proposal to issue said Bonds, this Resolution should be introduced and adopted. I k? T, 1 510 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101IIES A q 00 A- "er Q�t,'.•.� So�C`..In7�r,+t'�(,' `l ka�.�cs `-��lrc, c.ca-,:k r: �, ,:-�' , �>u.,�LJY��� le, + la,nk UJ -{-o C) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 2 I I / rF_�- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Agenda j Regular Council Meeting March 27, 1979 7:30 P.M. Page 4 Item No. 8 - CONSIDER RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ADVERTISEMENT OF SALE OF $5,500,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. Comment: This Resolution authorizes advertisement of the Honda. Notice of Sale will be published in the Iowa City Press -Citizen and the Bond Buyer and sets the Bond bid opening on April 17, 1979, at 1:00 P.M. Action: Item No. 9 - CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. U. I v, Fo . uo �znn E t (Sl�rn��ci b£ a IiLee -b 4,uce, cum+i ti Item No. 10 - REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY. /3 s,a. City Manager., V,J2(4I)A:()-v:�?iir-�Id7� ; G'- .:'���'/'>"j- ✓�( -------------------- X36 s� b. City Attt'orney.l1) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IIIES 1 0�, ..vim, VJ 1�GL`v'v_j t Ott L(. pOS; +� 6yL I G 1 \) VA Oro (A `\ a a. 4a �r W tt`'—�_ I� V G f V✓�.A.tt't�p , Be-/ I H e S { %j cel- 4- ' 1 Y�Gn (�lr\ I?`7irrC Cr,t,-_uwptia�/5C I Uf II,, A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I4DINES wA be 2- 4 V ATG 0-n. VKDA-1 C-vt.. Gov MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Agenda Regular Council Meeting March 27, 1979 7:30 P.M. Page 5 Item No. 11 - CONSIDER RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FY79 BUDGET ENDING JUNE 30, 1979. Comment: A detail of the amendments to the FY79 budget was included with the agenda of March 20, 1979. A public hearing on this matter was held on that date. This resolution authorizes approval of those amendments. Action: Item No. 17. - CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE, AMENDING SECTION 5-2(2) OF THE CODE OF ORDIN- ANCP.S OF I014A CITY TO CORRECT A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR WHICH OMITTED THE CLOSING TIME MR ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR OR BEER.ON WEEKDAYS. (first consideration) Comment: In reviewing the new Code, we discovered a typographical error which omits the closing time for weekdays. This amendment merely reestablishes the old provision. This provision is also found in Section 123.49(2)(b) of the Code of Iowa. Action: G7 L -P/ Item No. 13 - CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY CONSISTENT WITH AMF.NDENTS TO CHAPTER 601A OF THE CODE OF IOWA. (first consideration) Comment: The City Council received a memo in the packet of December 8, 1978, outlining the proposed changes to the Human Rights Ordinance in order to make it consistent with Chapter 601A of the Code of Iowa. The ordinance has been adapted to the new numbering and the slight re- visions in our new code. The provisions are the same as those re- fbrred to in the memo with the exception of a few grammatical changes. A copy of the referenced memo is attached to the agenda. Action: G�G�/ ' %i. lSf 647, 5, 5X 1 Item No. 14 - ADJOURNMENT. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES COUNCIL MEETING OF 3/a 7/79 'TONS, AGREEMENTS, CONTRACTS, NOTICES. ROUTING FOR ORDINANCES, RFSOLU ORIGINAL ORIGINAL XEROX XEROX DEPUTY j COPIES COPIES COPIES CONT. INSTRUCTION AGENDA CERT. OF OF OF AFTER FOR i ITEM H FILE H R ITEMS CONTRACT ITEMS EXECUTION FINALIZATION V ,i- r/ "tee S Gam. V i i f� 1 f MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NE5 COUNCIL MEETING OF ROUTING FOR ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AGREEMENTS, CONTRACTS, NOTICES. ORIGINAL ORIGINAL XEROX XEROX DEPUTY COPIES COPIES COPIES CONT. INSTRUCTION AGENDA CERT. OF OF OF AFTER FOR ITEM N FILE N RECR. ITEMS CONTRACT ITEMS EXECUTION FINALIZATION 03c1 / 3 ;L 4 1 ✓ 'REo 62,000 000 133 C2,;o -0eldE`— .60D'5 ��{-�•"�y�, ✓ mE 0 Hca (z) ,ate �o2drw FaM w .b o B '5 YvLEE ✓ %0 A2 sv;km eAftav (2) ?P o ✓r A1W�At 137 x rr�w. . I✓ Cen�i�y� TNafIcE. t!2 i�hoof's! Y4ilitO:•l 330 r 4 I (o �;_ c.-!..- (N� PPD {dt �ouwKcks �Filekw i-opsa"&L� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Ccn . A uAiin a. Ok-REO. �E4 I 1 C MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES l CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CEN(ER 410 E. WAST IINGTON 31 IOWA C11 IOWA 52240 (319) 354.180 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the International Host Family Program is an organization of families in and around Iowa City who are interested in meeting and helping students and visitors from other countries, and WHEREAS, this Program provides foreign visitors and the American families with an opportunity to gain new perspectives by exchanging ideas from different cultures, and WHEREAS, the International Host Family Program is planning special activities for the week of April 1 - 7, 1979, to promote the Program and recruit additional host families, NOW, THEREFORE, I, RobeAt A. Vevena, Mayon o6 .the City 06 10ua City, do heheby pnoctaim .the week o6 AptU I - 7, 1979, as HOST FAMiLV WEEK, and Lunge aU citizenh to j0.in me .in suppo&ting .the e66ont6 o6 .thda Pnognam. . /��//'//, Payo Signed .in Iowa City, TOM, .thio 27th day o6 blanch, 1979. r - _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES boy i MINUTES OF OFFICIAL ACTIONS OF COUNCIL - 3/13/79 The cost of publishing the following proceed- ings & claims is $ . Cumulative cost for this calendar year for sa— d blication is $ Iowa City Council, reg. mtg., 3 13 9, 7:30 P.M. at the Civic Center. Mayor Vevera presiding. Councilmembers present: Balmer, deProsse, Erdahl, Neuhauser, Perret, Vevera. Absent: Roberts. City Clerk Stolfus requested addition of three beer/liquor licenses to the Consent Calendar. Moved by Neuhauser, seconded by Balmer, that the following items and recommendations in the Consent Calendar be received, or approved, and/or adopted, as amended: Approval of Official Actions, reg. Council mtg., 2/27/79, subj. to correction, as recommended by City Clerk. Minutes of Boards & Commissions: Design Review Conn. -2/28/79; Housing Comm. -3/7/79; Library Bd. Trustees -2/22/79; Airport Comm. - 2/15/79. Permit Resolutions, recommended by City Clerk, Bk. 54: RES. 79-102, p. 405, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE, and RES. 79-103, p. 406, SUNDAY SALES, for B.P.O. ELKS #590. RES. 79-104, p. 407, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE, & RES. 79-105, p. 408, SUNDAY SALES, for Gringo's. RES. 79-106, p. 409, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE & RES. 79-107, p. 410, SUNDAY SALES for Sheep's Head Cafe. RES. 79- 108, p. 411, REFUNDING CIGARETTE PERMIT to O'Brien's. Additions: RES. 79-109, p. 412, APPROVING CLASS B BEER PERMIT, & RES. 79-110, p. 413, SUNDAY SALES for Taco Grande. RES. 79-111, p. 414, APPROVING CLASS C. LIQUOR LICENSE for Magoo's. Resolutions Setting Public Hearings on 3/20/79, Res. Bk. 54: Res. 79-112, p. 415, setting public hearing on resolution proposing to sell an interest in real property, re conveyance of scenic easement over Capitol St. to State of Iowa, and Res. 79-113, p. 416, setting public hearing on resolution proposing to sell real property, one block of Harrison St., to the University of Iowa. Correspondence: Regarding parking, both pro & con, from Connie Keeling, Leanne Keeling, Jim Donkersloot, Sally Smith, Della Grizel, petition signed by 20 residents, Michael McCoy, Robert Dahlberg, Lisa Veach, Nancy Selden, Robert Rogers and Rabbi Jeffrey FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JES Official Actions Portman, Edwin Green, Karen Peterson, Marshall March 13, 1979 Hunter, Mr. & Mrs. A. Rittenmeyer and Louise Page 2 Levine. Referred to City Mgr. for reply: S. Smith re new garbage collection procedure. Memo from Human Rights Comm. re Linda Eaton. Information: Traffic Engr. re parking prohibition on Governor St. .from Bowery to Burlington St. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Mayor Vevera repeated the two public hearings set. Moved by Neuhauser, seconded by Balmer, to adopt RES. 79-114, Bk. 54, p. 417-418, APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF LYN-DEN HEIGHTS, PART 2, as approved by P&Z Comm, Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Gene Edmon appeared requesting suspension of enforcement of parking regulations until proposed modifications can be discussed. After discussion of process, citizens were advised to obey the signs until there is a consensus from Council as to what will be changed, and to forward any problems to the Public Works Dept. Staff will report on why meters at corner of College and Van Buren were taken out. John Suchomel appeared reporting on cleaning of municipal parking lot across from Penney's. Lonn Kadue appeared regarding parking and garbage collection changes. These matters will be discussed at the informal meeting of March 19th. Harold Bechtoldt appeared re both issues, and lack of communication with citizens. Mayor Vevera announced that the vacancies on the Board of Appeals would be readvertised. Appointments to Broadband Telecommunications Commission: Moved by Perret, seconded by Erdahl, to appoint Sandra Eskin to one year term expiring 3/13/80. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to appoint Bruce Washburn and William Terry to two-year terms expiring 3/13/81. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Perret, seconded by Neuhauser, to appoint Jen Madsen and Robert Pepper to three-year terms expiring 3/13/82. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Perret, to adopt RES. 79-115, Bk. 54, pp. 419-423, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE ECUMENICAL HOUSING CORPORTAION, as modified, for 80 units of elderly housing on the site immediately east of the Old Post Office & a portion of the Iowa Ave, parking lot. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. blICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 410111[5 Official Actions Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to March 13, 1979 adopt RES. 79-116, Bk. 54, pp. 424-425, AUTHORIZING Page 3 AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH SHIVE-HATTERY & ASSOCIATES for design of BDI special assessment project to include upgrading of Heinz Lift Station. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-117, Bk. 54, pp. 426-427, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES PERFORMED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Perret, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-118, Bk. 54, p. 428, DESIGNATING THE LOCATION OF THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARD FOR POSTING NOTICE OF, AND TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR, MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION CREATED BY THE COUNCIL, EXCEPT THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION AND THE IOWA CITY LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Neuhauser, that the ORDINANCE CLOSING THE EASTERN TERMINUS OF MELROSE COURT TO MOTOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM MYRTLE AVE. BY PLACING A TRAFFIC ISLAND DIRECTLY WEST OF GREENWOOD DRIVE ON MYRTLE AVE. be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 4/2, Balmer and Vevera voting ' no' . Roll call vote on second vote for passage adopted, 4/2, with following division of vote. Ayes: deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Neuhauser. Nays: Vevera, Balmer. Absent: Roberts. Moved by. deProsse, seconded by Balmer, that ORDINANCE AWARDING A FRANCHISE FOR CABLE TELEVISION TO HAWKEYE CABLEVISION CORPORATION be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 6/0. Affirmative roll call vote on second vote for passage unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adjourn the meeting, 8:20 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. A more complete description of Council activities is on file in the office of the City Clerk. s/ROBERT A. VEVERA, MAYOR s/ABBIE STOLFUS, CITY CLERK Submitted on 3/22/79. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIrIES COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF COUNCIL ACTIVITIES MARCH 13, 1979 Iowa City Council, reg. mtg., 3/13/79, 7:30 P.M. at the Civic Center. Mayor Vevera presiding. Councilmembers present: Balmer, deProsse, Erdahl, Neuhauser, Perret, Vevera. Absent: Roberts. Staff - members present: Berlin, Stolfus, Ryan, Helling, Glaves. Council minutes tape-vecorded on Tape 79-9, Side 1, 1030-1688. City Clerk Stolfus requested addition of three beer/liquor licenses to the Consent Calendar. Moved by Neuhauser, seconded by Balmer, that the following items and recommendations in the Consent Calendar be received, or approved, and/or adopted, as amended: Approval of Official Actions, reg. Council mtg., 2/27/79, subj. to correction, as recommended by City Clerk. Minutes of Boards & Commissions: Design Review Comm. -2/28/79; Housing Comm. -3/7/79; Library Bd. Trustees -2/22/79; Airport Comm. - 2/15/79. Permit Resolutions, recommended by City Clerk, Bk. 54: RES. 79-102, p. 405, APPROVING CLASS C'LIQUOR LICENSE, and RES. 79-103, p. 406, SUNDAY SALES, for B.P.O. ELKS #590, 637 Foster Road. RES. 79-104, p. 407, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE, & RES. 79-105, p. 408, SUNDAY SALES, for Rugger -Burns Rest. dba/Gringo's, 115 E. College. RES. 79-106, p. 409, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE & RES. 79-107, p. 410, SUNDAY SALES for Sheep's Head Cafe, 209 N. Linn. RES. 79-108, p. 411, REFUNDING CIGARETTE PERMIT to 0.'Brien's, 119 Iowa Ave. Additions: RES. 79-109, p. 412, APPROVING CLASS B BEER PERMIT, & RES. 79-110, p. 413, SUNDAY SALES for Taco Grande, 331 E. Market. RES. 79-111, p. 414, APPROVING CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE for Magoo's, 206 N. Linn. Resolutions Setting Public Hearings on 3/20/79, Res. Bk. 54: Res. 79-112, p. 415, setting public hearing on resolution proposing to sell an interest in real property, re conveyance of scenic easement over Capitol St. to State of Iowa, and Res. 79-113, p. 416, setting public hearing on resolution proposing to sell real property, one block of Harrison St., to the University of Iowa. Correspondence: Regarding parking, both pro & con, from Connie Keeling, Leanne Keeling, Jim Donkersloot, Sally Smith, Della Grizel, petition signed by 20 residents, Michael McCoy, Robert Dahlberg, Lisa Veach, Nancy Selden, Robert Rogers and Rabbi Jeffrey Portman, Edwin Green, Karen Peterson, Marshall Hunter, Mr. & Mrs. A. Rittenmeyer and Louise Levine. Referred to City Mgr. for reply: S. Smith re new garbage collection procedure. Memo from Human Rights Comm, re Linda Eaton. Information: Traffic Engr. re parking prohibition on Governor St. from Bowery to Burlington St. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CLnAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES ouncil Activities March 13, 1979 Page 2 Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Mayor Vevera repeated the two public hearings set. approMoved by Neuhauser, seconded by Balmer, to adopt RESNG FINAL PLT OF LY14-EN HIGHTS . 79-114, Bk. ved by4P&Z Comm. AffirmativeA Aroll callOvoteEunanimousR70 6/0, Roberts absent. Gene Edmon, 721 Iowa Ave., appeared requesting suspension of enforcement of parking regulations until proposed modifications can be discussed. Neuhauser suggested modifying the parking times on the alternate side parking. After discussion of process, citizens were what advisedll be to obey the signs until there is a consensus from Council as to Dept.wlStaff willgreportdonoforward why meters natpcornerst the Public Works Buren were taken out . oCollegeVan John Suchomel appeared reporting on cleaning of municipal parking lot across from Penney's. garbagencollectionlchanges. Thesenmattersrwilleberdiscussedlat and the informal meeting of March 19th. Harold Bechtoldt, 1152 E. Court, appeared re both issues, and lack of communication with citizens. Mayor Vevera announced that the vacancies on the Board of Appeals would be readvertised. Appointments to Broadband Telecommunications Commission: Moved by Perret, seconded by Erdahl, to appoint Sandra Eskin, 1047 Woodlawn, to one year term expiring 3/13/80. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to appoint Bruce Washburn, 1208 Ginter Ave., and William Terry, 206 Park Road, to two- year terms expiring 3/13/81. Motion carried unanimously. Moved by Perret, seconded by Neuhauser, to appoint Jen Madsen, 1315 Whiting Ave. Ct., and Robert Pepper, 311 Woolf Ave., to three-year terms expiring 3/13/82. Motion carried unanimously. Staff was requested to see that all appointees receive a copy of the ordinance. As a result of visiting the sports complex at Ames, Balmer suggested that a representative from the City be included in the University planning discussions re new fieldhouse, so the City can be apprised of the plans for traffic movement and the impact. A letter from the Mayor will be sent to Pres. Boyd. Neuhauser pointed out concern re parking in area of Eagle Store, N. Dodge, and for a business at 803 E. Church. Staff will monitor spaces available. Vevera announced he would be gone the rest of the week, cheering on the Regina Regals at the state tournament. deProsse outlined the schedule set up for appointments she & Erdahl have made in Washington, D.C., on Thurs. & Fri. with Sen. Culver, Rep. Leach, D.O.T., U, M. 7. A., E.P.A., & Sen. Jepsen. Modifications to the contract for sale of property to Ecumenical Housing Corp. had been presented. Moved by deProsse, seconded by MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES HOINES uncil Activities March 13, 1979 Page 3 Perret, to adopt RES. 79-115, Bk. 54, pp. 419-423, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE ECUMENICAL HOUSING CORPORTAION, as modified, for 80 units of elderly housing on the site immediately east of the Old Post Office & a portion of the Iowa Ave. parking lot. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-116, Bk. 54, pp. 424-425, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH SHIVE- HATTERY & ASSOCIATES for design of BDI special assessment project to include upgrading of Heinz Lift Station. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-117, BY.. 54, pp. 426-427, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES PERFORMED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Perret, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-118, Bk. 54, p. 428, DESIGNATING THE LOCATION OF THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARD FOR POSTING NOTICE OF, AND TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR, MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND ANY BOARD OR COMMISSION CREATED BY THE COUNCIL, EXCEPT THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION AND THE IOWA CITY LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Neuhauser, that the ORDINANCE CLOSING THE EASTERN TERMINUS OF MELROSE COURT TO MOTOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM MYRTLE AVE. BY PLACING A TRAFFIC ISLAND DIRECTLY WEST OF GREENWOOD DRIVE ON MYRTLE AVE. be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 4/2, Balmer and Vevera voting 'no'. Roll call vote on second vote for passage adopted, 4/2, with following division of vote. Ayes: deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Neuhauser. Nays: Vevera, Balmer. Absent: Roberts. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Balmer, that ORDINANCE AWARDING A FRANCHISE FOR CABLE TELEVISION TO HAWKEYE CABLEVISION CORPORATION be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 6/0. Affirmative roll call vote on second vote for passage unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adjourn the meeting, 8:20 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. ROBERT A. VEV A, MA R AB IE S OLFUS, I CL MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs•Drs !101nEs 'uncil Activities March 13, 1979 Page 3 Perret, to adopt RES. 79-115, Bk. 54, pp. 419-423, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE ECUMENICAL HOUSING CORPORTAION, as modified, for 80 units of elderly housing on the site immediately east of the Old Post Office & a portion of the Iowa Ave. parking lot. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-116, Bk. 5q, pp. 424-425, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT WITH SHIVE- HATTERY & ASSOCIATES for design of BDI special assessment project to include upgrading of Heinz Lift Station. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-117, Bk. 54, pp. 426-427, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES PERFORMED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Affirmative roll call vote unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Perret, seconded by Neuhauser, to adopt RES. 79-118, Bk. 54, p. 428, DESIGNATING THE LOCATION OF THE OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARD FOR AND TANY BOARDING NOTICE ORFCOMMISSIONAND ACREATEDEBYATHERC UNCILNGEXCEPTOF HTHEIIOWA CITY COUNCIL, MUNICIPAL Iroll call voteunanimous, 0iIOWA 6/0,CITY RobertsRabsenRY BOARD OF TRUSTEES. Affirmative t. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Neuhauser, that the ORDINANCE CLOSING THE EASTERN TERMINUS OF MELROSE COURT TO MOTOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM MYRTLE AVE. BY PLACING A TRAFFIC ISLAND DIRECTLY WEST OF GREENWOOD DRIVE ON MYRTLE AVE. be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 4/2, Balmer and Vevera voting 'no'. Roll call vote on second vote for passage adopted, 4/2, with following division of vote. Ayes: deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Neuhauser. Nays: Vevera, Balmer. Absent: Roberts. Moved by deProsse, seconded by Balmer, that ORDINANCE AWARDING A FRANCHISE FOR CABLE TELEVISION TO HAWKEYE CABLEVISION CORPORATION be considered and given second vote for passage. Motion to consider carried, 6/0. Affirmative roll call vote on second vote for passage unanimous, 6/0, Roberts absent. Moved by Balmer, seconded by Perret, to adjourn the meeting, 8:20 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. ROBER A. VEV A, R AB IE S OLFUS, CITY CLERK MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DF.S g010ES INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION MARCH 12, 1979 INFORMAL COUNCIL; DISCUSSION: March 12, 1979, 1:30 P.M. in the Conference Room at the Civic Center. Mayor Robert Vevera COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT; ' Neuha Balmer, presiding. Erdahl. Absent: Roberts user, deProsae, Perret Vevera, STAFFMEMBERS PRESENT: Berlin, discussions, as noted. Stolfus, Halling, Others present for certain TAPE-RECORDED: keel 79-10, Side 1, 1 -End, 6 over to Side 2, 1-405. uen neiehte Lal 1SLON oothroye papers are ready, subdivision ready for action, 1'10 AGENDA - COUNCIL BUSINESS 1• Rea. an f�ea for Citv r xeroxing to see if—� rk s Office. Staff will check 10-320 2• Res: an Official BulletinIt lBoardects actual costa, charge for 3. Council —discussed dlision neu to be Outlined Library sbould be notified. 4• Kucharzakthe smemo re Donan kin has begun. Y the Mayor before noted. Discussion will be scheduled of in code violations b 5• Neuhauaer su scheduled with City`or_ey Hayek. Court ggeated conducting a fiscal im act anal sis re zoning ordinance and Com reheneive Plan. City Atty CO discuss allocation Of time to City business at an informs Bion 6• Neuhauser presented a r 6 fiscal analysis. the Mayflower. Petition es flooding of sld9Kaa across from 7• Neuhaus` Staff will suggest alternative solutions. D.C. to suggested establishing a liason with officials in Washington deprossesandk for Iowa City's needs in competin �— congresamen 6Erdahl were interested and will g for federal federal agencies. present issues to grants. 8• Balmer called attention to problem at Penneys with water in the lower level. City Mgr. Berlin has request from Best Steak Housewritten a memo on this discussed with the �`ousto the Cit Problem and the City Ar o,, Y Attorney. This should be APPLICATIONS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Board of A �eals-Clerk reported no applications filed. Broadband Telecommunications Comm. 320-370 LO appoint Pepper 6 Ptadaen to 3 City Mgr. memo 3/8/79 noted. and Eskin co 1- yr. terms; Terry 6 Washburn to 2 yr term yr term. yr terms; HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING Linda Schreiber, Pam Ramsey Proposal in 3/9 packet noted. A majority of Councilmemberaowill support the proposal if Johnson Count 370-500 that the Mayor would attend the y supports it. It was decided Council, urging the Gaunt rs 3/22 meeting, representing a repare letter ur Y Participation, Staff will the Schreiber advisedthat why the Council thinks it ie important. support, Regional Planning will be It staff MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DE. tfoltlCs Page 2 Council Informal March 12, 1979 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ISSUE Vitosh, Dietz 500-690 Several persons thought that the Benton/Riverside improvement was to start this summer. Dietz explained lead time was needed for right-of- way acquisition and appraisals, and for compliance with Federal guide- lines. Dietz suggested waiting until State Hwy. 1 project is scheduled. Also Gilbert St., Captitol St. will be under construction this summer. Public Warks will have a project chart soon outlining all projects being worked on. Because of the 51 projects scheduled, Public Works will contract for aerial photography for Scott Blvd., const. to start next spring, 1980. Perret questioned whether or not Council had made a policy regarding extra -width paving. City Manager Berlin explained that a policy was being investigated. As sufficient extra -width paving monies can be taken from last year's bond sale monies, none was added to this year's bond sale. For use this year, $68,000 is available. Land acquisition for the wastewater Treatment Plant will not be started until after E.P.A. has given us the grant for the Corridor Sewer. Only $234,000 of the four million dollar River Corridor project are not eligible for Federal funds. Public hearing on $5,500,000 g.o. bond issue will be set 3/27/79. DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE PROJECT. PHASE II Glaves, Mose, Comm. Vetter 690-1330 Mossman (Univ.) Klaus (Old Capitol Assoc.) Claves reviewed the issues discussed last week. Re controversy with Univ. over placement of sidewalk, another sidewalk will be narrowed and the bus moved up, so the controversial sidewalk can be placed where the Univ. wants it. For expansion of bus spaces, there are still two spaces in front of the bank east of Clinton. Gloves stated that if Council wanted to experiment, they should allow one-way traffic as the first experiment. The plan as shown would allow one-way traffic. He also explained reconstruction of Madison/Washington corner & grade transition which leaves 220' not being reconstructed, and suggested narrowing this portion to two paved lanes, not allowing parking & the Univ. doing the landscaping. (Washington St. between Madison & Capitol). Staff will provide costs. Concerning two-lane or four -lane Clinton St. between Burlington & Washington, a majority of Councilmembe.s agreed to four -lane, with buses stopping at the pedestrian areas. Discussion of the pull -in areas resulted in a majority favoring pull -ins holding two cars. PARKING RESTRICTIONS In Council Chambers 1330 -End Mayor Vevera stated that Council was aware of several problems, & Side 2, outlined reasons why restrictions were adopted. He added that 1-405 Council does not think that the City is obligated to provide parking spaces on City streets. Those appearing both for and against the regulations included: John Karras, 1715 E. Church; Marshall Hunter, 704 Ronalds; George McCormick, 230 Fairchild; Chuck Engberg, 409 Brown; Helen Finken, 510 Brown; petition; John Stamler, 706 E. College; Diane Dornburg, 415 S. Governor; Don Standley, 511 S. Johnson, Student Senate President; Traci Maxted, 112 S. Governor; Sue Soseman, 232 S. Summit; Chris Coughlan, 918 E Jefferson; Debbie Bayer, 1025 E. Washington; Mike Groh, 715 E. Davenport; Phi Beta Phi Sorority Representative, 815 E. Washington; Roger Weinstein, 819 Iowa Ave; Virginia Kardon, 420 E Fairchild; Martha Allen, 415 Brownt Tom Zynda, 504 S. Johnson; Elizabeth MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB C ZDAR RAP105. OEs HO rliS Page 3 Council Informal March 12, 1979 Osenbaugh, 420 E. Fairchild; Deborah Shopman, 728 E college; Jan Smith, 525 Iowa Ave.; Mike Malloy, 404 S. Johnson;' Margaret MacDonald, 615 N. Dubuque; David Peterson, 1510 Sheridan; and Monica Suretti, 220 E. Fairchild. Observations made included the following: Plowing of alleys is needed for access to parking; Changes are long overdue; Parkers for Baptist Church are being ticketed, parking needed for Bethel A.M. Church; Snow Emergency Routes suggested; Previous regulation of 8 to 5, weekdays, Sundays and holidays excepted, worked well; University has a responsibility to provide parking; University storage lots not available to off -campus students; Street storage laws should be enforced; Students need cars to go to work; A committee should be created consisting of representatives from Univ. Students, Citizens, Council, to work on parking problems; Leeway should be given in building codes to allow provision for parking; (Councilwoman deProsse left the meeting, 4:55 P.M.); Changes to more one-way streets suggested; (Council requested status of Northside Study); Leave parking on wide streets such as Washington, Iowa and College; There was not enough citizen input before enacting the regulations, the effect of these regulations the same as zoning changes; Problems for service calls and for guest parking; Thank you for parking on even -numbered sides on even -numbered days; In alternate side parking, inconvenience in times for moving cars, safety of women should be considered, along with use of additional fuel in times of fuel shortage. Letters received included: Anna May & Charles Miller, 1333 Davenport; Petition and letter from Julia Persson, #230 Mayflower (sidewalk flooding) Diane Dornburg, letter & petition for area of Governor St. between Bowery & Burlington; Petition from North Side residents, Helen Finken; Memo from Roger Tinklenberg, Energy Program Coordinator; Marian McNamara, 803 Church, business parking; Don Standley, Pres. Student Senate, recommended alternatives; Linda Bakas, 425 E. Jefferson; David Koury, 2 Kirkwood Circle; Isabelle & Maynard Welk, 707 Brown. City Manager Berlin stated that next winter snowplowing of alleys could be worked into the schedule. Staff will assess timing on restrictions, and suggest alternatives. Status of Northside Study will be investigated, along with provisions of lease for Grand Daddy's parking lot. Berlin request- ed that other parking problems be brought to the Staff's attention. Meeting adjourned, 5:45 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP10$•DES HOIRES hIINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RARCH 15, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Blum, Jakobsen, Kammermeyer, Lehman, Ogesen MEMBERS ABSENT: Cain, Vetter STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Ryan, Wilkinson RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. 5-7841. That the preliminary and final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village be approved subject to the following contingencies: (1) the signatures of the utility companies be provided on the plan;( 2 t he legal including a metes and bound description andthecertificationroftaoregisteredeted land surveyor; and (3) the sidewalk must continue through the drive on Van Buren Street back to the existing sidewalk. Z. approved S-7905. That the preliminary and final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush Company be be corrected dsotthat tit coincidhe following e withlthenbounda y cies: (1d the legal description should way width for Lower Muscatine Road should be indicated; and t(3)'the future 2 expansion plans should be deleted from this plan. ( ) the right -of- () RE UESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR INFORMATION OR STAFF ASSISTANCE: None SU"BY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN: Blum called the meeting to order and asked if anyone present wished to discuss any item not included on the agenda. No one responded. Blum then called for consideration of the minutes of the meeting of February 26, 1979. There being no discussion of the minutes, they were unanimously approved as circulated. S-7841. Public discussion of the preliminary and final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village, located between Gilbert and Van Buren Streets, just north of Abrams Furniture Store; 45 -day limitation period: waived. Boothroy presented an overlay and explained that the Board of Adjustment had met earlier and had granted the special use permit for parking that had been requested by the Abrams. lie explained that many of the deficiencies and discrepancies have been taken care of and that an additional island with a tree has been included in the plan, thus eliminating the need for an innovative parking plan. The deficiencies remaining are: (1) the signatures of the utility companies still are not provided on the plan; Of a (Z) the legal description including a metes and bounds description and the certification continue Ethrough lthe drive and suryyon Vanor dBurens to bStreetltoetheaexistinghsidewalklk does not 605 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I r", I'Innning and Zoning Commission March 16, 1979 Page 2 There being no discussion on these plans, Blum called for a vote for approval of the preliminary and final LSRD plan of Ralston Creek Village subject to the following contingencies: (1) the signatues of the utility companies be provided on the plan; (2) the legal description be completed including a metes and bounds description and the certification of a registered land surveyor; and (3) the sidewalk must conti�iue I through the drive on Van Buren Street b unanimous (5-0). ack to the existing sidewalk. Approval was S-7905. Public discussion of the preliminary and final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush Company, located at Lower Muscatine Road and Mall Drive; 4S -day limitation period: 4/18/79. Boothroy presented an overlay of the area and explained that a revised preliminary and final LSNRD plan had been submitted. Deficiencies remaining included: (1) the legal description needs to be completed so that it coincides with the boundary description; hwidth oLower plan. Boothroyalso statedthathewould Fprefer nthe ofuture ad uexpansionld belcated plans bon the e taken off this plan. Blum called for approval of the preliminary and final LSNRD plan of Owens Brush subject to the following contingencies: (1) the legal description should be corrected so that it coincides with the boundary description; 2 ) theLower Muscatine Road should be indicated; and(3)the futurerexpansion planstshofor uld be deleted from this plan. Approval was unanimous (s-0). There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared b' aandra S. Wilkinson, PPD Secretary I 1 Approved by� j Ernest W. Lehman, Pf,Z Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 15, 1979 -- 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Baldus, Harris, Hughes, Conlin (4:40 p.m.) MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Ryan, Wilkinson, Boothroy, Schmeiser, Farmer i FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN: 1. V-7903. That the request for a special use permit for parking be granted subject To the following conditions: (1) notice of the possible flooding dangers be described in detail in the leases, (2) signs describing the potential hazard be posted in the parking lot, and (3) a warning system to alert residents of the al buildings be installed and operated. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Harris called the meeting to order. Harris moved, and Baldus seconded, that Hughes serve as Chairperson of the Board for the next period of rotation. The vote on this motion was unanimous (4-0). Hughes called for approval of the minutes of the meeting of February 15, 1979. Harris moved that the minutes be amended as follows: (1) Under Formal Actions Taken, add the following sentence at the end of the paragraph applying to case V-7902: "Both variances are conditioned upon compliance in actual development with the layout and details as shown on the site plan submitted as a part of the application; this plan being titled: Planned Area Development and Large Scale Non -Residential Develop- ment Plan, ACT Testing Processing Facility, Iowa City, Iowa, prepared by Shive-Hattery and Associates, dwg, no. 178536-1, dated January 2, 1979; and (2) Page 2, paragraph 4 under case V-7902, add at the end of the last sentence ", i.e., installation of a green strip, curbs and curb cuts within the right-of-way of the street, if dedicated to the City." Baldus seconded the motion for these amendments and the motion carried unanimously. 4 Hughes called for a vote to approve the amended minutes. Baldus moved, and Harris seconded, that the minutes of February 15, 1979, be approved as amended. Motion carried unanimously. V-7903. Public hearing on an application submitted by Sam and Gary Abrams for a "Special Use Permit", according to Section 8.11.02.13 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit parking to be located less than ten meters from the Ralston Creek bank. Boothroy presented an overlay of the proposed site and explained that parking is one of the uses permitted by right within the floodway except when located closer than ten meters (32.8 feet) from the creek bank. He further explained the Flood Management Regulations as stated in the Staff Report. Frank Farmer, Civil Engineer for the City of Iowa City, presented some slides of r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI0IRES Board of Adjustment March 15, 1979 Page 2 the immediate area during the 1972 flood, which was described as being a 17 -year flood. He explained that Burlington Street was completely closed and that portions of Gilbert Street were impassable. Access to the property in question was impossible during this time. IBill Meardon, attorney for the applicants, presented a memorandum, which is attached, from Mr. S.W. Wiitala, Hydrologist for Shive-Hattery and Associates. This memorandum presented considerations for the justification of the special use permit. 1 John Wi llers of Shive-Hattery and Associates explained that a warning system is a possibility for use in warning residents of the buildings of impending flooding. He explained that the system is similar to the system used by police and fire officials.; He also explained the possibility of posting warning signs in the parking lot. He further explained that major changes would be necessary if the special use permit is denied. These changes would make the project economically unfeasible. Following a very lengthy discussion that included the use of right and liability for damages caused by automobiles floated away in a flood, Harris moved, and Baldus seconded, that the special use permit be granted subject to the following conditions: (1) notice of the possible flooding dangers be described in detail in the leases, (2) signs describing the potential hazard be posted in the parking lot, and (3) a warning system to alert residents of the buildings be installed and operated. The vote for approval of the motion was unanimous (4-0). V-7904. Public hearing on an application submitted by James W. Powers for a variance In the Tree Regulations, Section 8.10.40.11(B)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow parking spaces to intersect with a drive. Boothroy presented an overlay of the area and explained that the plan meets the iTree Regulations with the exception of an island between parking spaces and the drive Following a brief discussion by Board members, Baldus moved, and Conlin seconded, that further discussion and action on this item be deferred until the next meeting. The vote was 4-0 in favor. A discussion followed regarding the date for the next meeting. It was decided that the next meeting will be scheduled for Wednesday, April 4, 1979. At this time, the Board will continue its consideration of the Kerber application (deferred from the February meeting) and the Powers application (deferred at this meeting). There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared Approved ' Official Filing Date: MAR 19 1979 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■ B r"+ HERO TO: Board of Adjustment City of Iowa City, Iowa FROM: S. W. Wiltala, Hydrologist Shive-Hattery L Associates, Iowa City RE: Appeal dated January 17, 1979, to permit parking to be located less than ten meters from the stream bank for the proposed Ralston Creek Village (Section 0.11.02.12D.3 of the Flood Plain Management Ordinance) DATE: March 12, 1979 Hydrologic considerations for the justification of the subject special -use permit are: I. The distance from the Gilbert Street bridge to the drainage divide is approximately 35,000 feet, and the difference in elevation is about 180 feet. Using these data in an empirical relationship indicates that the time of concentration for the Gilbert Street site is about 3 hours. This is the time required for water to travel from the most distant part of the watershed to Gilbert Street. With a time of con- centration of about 3 hours, empirical relations indicate that for a severe storm the time from the beginning of excess rainfall to the flood peak would be about 2-1/2 hours. Recc Js of the U. S. Geological Survey show the following for the flood of July 17, 1972: Ralston Creek at Rochester Avenue Approximate time of beginning of rise - 2:45 p.m. Time of crest - 5:15 p.m. South Branch Ralston Creek at Muscatine Avenue Approximate time of beginning of rise - 2:30 p.m. Time of crest (leading edge) - 4:45 p.m. For this flood, the heavy rainfall in the basin began in the hour ending at 1:00 p.m., July 17, with the crest occurring approximately 4 hours later. For seven other moderate stream rises (peak discharges all less than 550 cfs) for which Information was readily available, at the Rochester gauge the time between beginning of rise and the crest varied from I hour to 4-1/4 hours. The time to peak at the two USf,S gauginn stat inns should be less than that at Gilbert Street because the tributary drainage area at Gilbert Street is almost three times that at the two gauging stations. SHIVE•HATTERY& ASSOCIATES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES Marto to Board of Adjustment March 12, 1979 Page Two 2. Flood peaks that occur between midnight and 6:00 a.m, would probably cause more damage than those at other times of the day. The time of the peak was available for 83 floods that were recorded at the Rochester Avenue gauge between 1925 and 1977. Twenty-five of the 03 flood peaks occurred between midnight and 6:00 a.m., 22 between 6:00 a.m. and noon, 16 between noon and 6:00 p.m., and 20 between 6:00 p.m. and midnight. Thus, there is about one chance in 3.3 that when a flood does occur, it will be in the midnight to 6:00 a.m. quarter of the day. Time -of -peak information is available for 7 of the 8 major floods (discharge greater than 1,000 cfs) that were recorded at the Rochester Avenue gauge. Only one of the seven major floods occurred during the midnight to 6:00 a.m. quarter. 3. The regulatory base flood Is the 100 -year flood - the flood that has a 1 in 100 chance of occurring in any year. Coupling this frequency with that discussed in the above paragraph indicates that there is about 1 chance in 330 for a 100 -year flood to occur between midnight and 6:00 a.m. in any year. The odds on the occurrence of other types of property damage accidents are probably much less than these flooding odds. 4. Velocity is directly related to conveyance which, in turn, is directly related to depth of flooding and inversely related to the roughness of the channel. Because the proposed parking lol is nearly level and the roughness factor remains the same, there would prnhably not be a great difference in velocity at a point near the streamward edge of the parking lot and a point 10 meters landward. 5. The construction of flood water detention reservoirs in the Ralston Creek basin should reduce the magnitude and the frequency of damaging i floods. Obviously, such construction should also reduce the damage potential at the parking lot in question. Considering the above, it would appear that the approval of the special -use I permit is justified. I - Sulo IJ. WiIta]a, P. E. SWW:sd SHIVE•HATTERY b ASSOCIATES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I10111ES MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 27, 1979 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Bolnick, Denniger, Hotka, Stager. STAFF PRESENT: Tinklenberg, Lee. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL The Resources Conservation Commission recommends against the purchase of the Hewlett-Packard programmable calculator. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN Stager moved, Bolnick seconded, to approve the minutes of February 13, 1979, meeting as read. Approved unanimously. CONCLUSIONS OF DISCUSSION CONCERNING PROGRAMMABLE CALCULATOR Pros and cons were discussed. The pro is that it solves the problems for the building owner. The cons are that the cost of it is not justifiable, the City should act strictly as an inspector not a consultant, and there will be a continual need for an engineer to monitor the staff and machine performance. Hotka moved, Bolnick seconded, to recommend against the purchase of the calculator. Motion approved. Stager abstained. National Energy Act Status Report. The energy package was divided between the Commissioners for analysis and summarization. They are recorded as below: -The Natural Gas Policy Act and the Power Plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act were analyzed by Hotka. Hokta suggested that the National Gas Policy Act will not affect the City in the near future. This Act mainly controls the price of the natural gas and the development of additional gas reserves. The price of natural gas is tied in with increases or decreases in the Gross National Product. The Power Plant and the Industrial Fuel Use Act contains an incremental change on the price of natural gas used in the power and generating plants. -The Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act was analyzed by Bolnick. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 607 MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 27, 1979 PAGE 2 He reported two points of interest to the Commission: 1. Cogeneration of small power production for alternative energy resources. It would require utilities to buy energy from small power production units in order to decentralize power production. 2. Title IV. The small hydroelectric power project providing loans for studies on producing electricity with existing dams may concern the City more. The loan repayment schedule varies from 10 to 30 years. -Energy Tax Act. Stager stated that the main point of this Act is that a person is entitled to a credit of 15 percent of the first $2,000 he or she spends on the components to conserve energy at home, for a maximum credit of $300. Also, a person can claim a credit of 30 percent of the first $2,000 plus 20 percent of the next $8,000 spent on renewable energy source equipment for a maximum credit of $2,200. -The National Energy Conservation Policy Act. Denniger reported that the federal government has ordered states to adopt energy policies in order to qualify for federal aid. The Commissioner agreed to prepare a detailed outline for the energy package in a few weeks. Tinklenberg reported that Professor Ellis will have students working on the Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act only. Recycling Bolnick suggested that people be reminded of various opportunities for recycling in Iowa City. A list of recycling opportunities could be composed and mailed to residents to remind them about recycling. Staff should find out the cost of printing and mailing such a flier. OTHER BUSINESS Denniger mentioned nuclear fission as the cheapest way of generating energy and that the possible problems and possibility of system failure are misstated by TV programs. A general discussion of nuclear fission followed. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40IRES MINUTES RESOURCES CLb. ERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 27, 1979 PAGE 3 Mandatory ation of f"I use Commission should analyze the Potentialaproblemext fall and the Sta should collect data on the gasoline old per motor vehi�cleuin John on bymassand The meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg, Katy Lee Ira Bolnick, Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING APPEALS BOARD JANUARY 11, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT:SMITHEY, OWENS, POLLOCK, HILLSTROM MEMBERS ABSENT: GRAHAM, KLAUS STAFF PRESENT: KUCHARZAK, BURKE, BOWLIN, MALONE, BARNES Minutes of November 9, 1978 were approved as corrected. Minutes of December 14, 1978 were approved as corrected. Those who planned to testify were sworn in by the chairman. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. THOMAS MARTIN - 125 RIVER STREET Burke reviewed background information as contained in the staff report and introduced drawings based on measurements 'taken at the time of inspection. Malone described the conditions he observed during his inspection. Mr. Martin described the history of the house. He said the room has always been popular with student renters, and has not been vacant since he owned the property. Martin said drawings presented by staff were not accurate and that he has 82 square feet of floor area. Martin said closing the room would be an undue taking under the due process clause of the I Constitution. Malone indicated that the area on the south side has a partition wall and is used as a closet. Hillstrom asked for clarification on the partition and doorway to closet. i Bowlin commented that citation is proper because the requirements are unchanged from the State Code since 1919. Hillstrom asked Smithey to review powers of the Appeals Board. Smithey responded briefly. Pollock moved to uphold both items as cited. Motion was not seconded. Owens moved to uphold Item #5 (ceiling height) but not to uphold Item #4 (floor area). Hillstrom seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. i f (.0g MICROFILMED BY '1 JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES IOWA CITY HOUSI..,; APPEALS BOARD JANUARY II, 1979 Page 2 BOARD TO CONSIDER CASE OF MR. A. J. LAREW - 308 N. CLINTON Chairman swore in those who would testify. Burke presented background information as indicated in the staff report. Burke withdrew both citations dealing with ventilation in the kitchenettes. Inspector Barnes distributed floor plans of the building to those present. These were drawn based on measurements taken during the inspection. She referred to these and to a drawing placed on the blackboard to describe the conditions she observed during her inspection. Barnes also introduced photographs of the kitchenettes. Larew said both bathrooms have windows. Trott said that an architect named Carpenter designed the apartments in 1937 and that the plans were reviewed by the City. Trott said the Terry Appeal sets a precedent relevant to this case. He said the Housing Code is for the rich, that 64% of units inspected last month were in violation, that Board members can make variations, that Supreme Court case 260-393 upholds his position, that if the unit can't be rented then it is taken without compensation, that Denny vs. Mt. Vernon (50 -2nd -983) held that the City had abused its police powers, so the violations should not be upheld. Holly Hart, a tenant in the property, testified that she had no problems living in a small apartment. I Larew said rent control did not support the building. His income from the building is diminished if he has to make changes. Tenants tike his small apartments. Bowlin established that kitchenettes have remained the same since 1937, but Larew did not recall date that bedrooms were set up. Approval of plans by the City could not be specifically verified. Kucharzak pointed out that the Board is not empowered to grant variances. Bowlin said the City objected to the Terry case decision and that it did not set up a compelling precedent. He said the requirements under consideration were established in 1919, long before Larew did the remodeling of his property in 1937. Burke drew a diagram on the blackboard to clarify bedroom layout. Trott made concluding remarks to Bowlin and the Board members. After comments from Hillstrom, Pollock and Smithey, Pollock moved to uphold item #4 (minimum room size - bedrooms) and item #2 (minimum room size - kitchenettes) as cited in the Notice of Violation. Hillstrom seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES IOWA CITY HOUSI JANUARY II, 1979 Page 3 APPEALS BOARD BOARD TO CONSIDER CASE OF BREESE & CO. - 521 KIRKWOOD Chairman swore in those who would testify. Poula said he and his client were appearing in order to take the case to court,'after exhausting the administrative remedy of the Appeals Board. He agreed to install a handrail on the steps without further contesting the item, after he viewed a photograph of the property. A completion date was not established during the meeting. Burke presented background of the case as contained in the staff report. Inspector Barnes related her observations in the field and presented photographs of the contested items. Poula argued that police powers of the City do not apply to the items contested. He felt these were a matter of aesthetics. Poula said there is no factual dispute being offered, but requested the citations be overruled. Mr. Breese concurred. Bowlin inquired about the gutters and the reference to the Reihmann case mentioned by Poula. I Poula stated the house is an an MI zone. i Kucharzak recited the order to show that aesthetics were not the concern here. Poula disagreed. Hillstrom commented on aesthetics and gutters. Smithey asked Barnes to clarify her observation of the gutters and fence. Hillstrom moved that items #I, 3 & 5 of the Notice of Violation be upheld as cited. Pollock seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. I OTHER BUSINESS Burke requested that the Board consider meeting every two months instead of on a monthly basis. He and Kucharzak explained that the monthly schedule was causing administrative problems. After some discussion, Owens moved that the Board schedule its next meeting for the second Thursday in March at 8:00 AM. Hilstrom seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 4 Meeting was adjourned. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES 1 C, RESOLUTION NO. 79-132 RESOLUTION TO ISSUE CIGARETTE PERMITS cation Ha dApaidhtheomulctntaxlrequiredrms and pb ersons law have made le of cigarettes and cigarette Y law for the sale of papers; therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that the applications be granted and the City Clerk be and he/she is hereby directed to issue a permit to the following named persons and firms to sell cigarette papers and cigarettes: Lon's Gas and Grocery, 105 E. Burlington It was moved by Perret and seconded byRoberts that the Resolution a' read b dopted were: , and uponrollc there AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Balmer r x deProsdePros=_ X ErdahErdahl X NeuhauNeuhau-_ X PerrePerret X Roberts �'-- X Vevera X Passed and approved this 27th 19 79 day of March Mayor Attest:. 7/�c� �• &NEI City Clerk / WDA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES "10EIVED ;:.:,', ' 9 1979 DIANE L. DORNBURG ATiORNEYATLAW P.O. BOX 25 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 338-5818 March 16, 1979 The Honorable Mayor and Members of The City Council Civic Center 410 East Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mayor Vevera and Members of the City Council: Personally and on behalf of the other residents who live on South Governor Street between Bowery and Burlington, I wish to thank you for your prompt action in returning parking on the street near our homes to its previous status. I appreciate the fact that you were willing to admit a mistake and that once the problem was recognized, you did not spend an unreasonably long time in rectifying the situation. I particularly appreciate the fact that once the decision was made to remove the signs, they were removed the following day. I do continue to support those residents of other areas of the City who are seeking changes in the parking restrictions affecting them. I trust that you will adopt the least restric- tive alternatives available to effectthe purposes intended to be met, taking into consideration the hardship to the residents as well as the structure and usage of each individual street in question. Again, thank you for your prompt consideration of the prob- lem which confronted us on Governor Street. Sincerely, Diane L. Dornburg MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES f� Mayor Robert Verera. City of Iowa City Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mayor Vetere, r,z, DIVED MAR 1 Y 1979 16 March 1979 Clyde G. Hanson 324 4th Avenue Iowa City, Iowa 52240 I am a new resident of Iowa City and I am writing to share a few positive observations on my new community. My wife and I were indifferent between Iowa City and Muscatine, In --terms of job access, as the location of our new home. We chose Iowa City because of the attractive downtown, the city parks and boulevards, and the cultural opportunities offered by the University of Iowa. The downtown pedestrian mall is attractive and we are looking forward to the openning of the new shopping center. We have noted with approval the efforts to replant street trees. The large street signs posted on the traffic signals are very helpful to newcomers. The combined street light and traffic light.standards improve the roadside appearance. Regulation of commercial signs seems to be yielding noticable results. The bus system has allowed us to keep one car in the garage. The transit fares are reasonable and service in our area is good. I am not familiar with city policies and politics but I have noticed these physical details. I trust you will find this feedback useful. Please share my letter with your city council and staff. Sincerely, *CydeH8"o r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tdOINES 611 April 4, 1979 Mr. Clyde G. Hanson 324 4th Avenue Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. [Janson: At its regular meeting of March 27, 1979, the City Council received and placed on file your letter sharing your observations about Iowa City. It is indeed refreshing to receive such a complimentary letter since it is usually people with problems who write to City Hall. Iowa City is a good place to live, and it is an exciting time with the fruition of the urban renewal plans. There will be some inconveniences during the construction season, especially with parking, but I believe the results will be worth any problems that will be encountered. I would like to invite you to attend our Council meetings - the informal work sessions on Mondays at 1:30 P.M. and the formal meetings on Tuesdays at 7:30 P.M. - to become acquainted with city policies and also with the people who make up the City government. Sincerely yours, ( vjlf(z-e'G+-� Robert A. Vevera Mayor Is cc: City Clerk,-/ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RANDS -DES MOINES 06 t PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION FOR TENANTS Iowa Memorial Union IOWA crrr, JOWA 53292 Iowa City City Council Civic Center Phone 353.3013 March 16, 1979 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Members of City Council: The following comments are PAT'S recommendations for changes to the draft Iowa City Model Lease. We discussed these suggestions with Ms. Ryan on March 12. 1. There should be a clause indicating that a tenant must be notified of any rent increase at leasE 30 days before the effective date as under the Iowa j Landlord and Tenant Law, Section 13(5). Although the rent cannot be raised at any time during a lease period, this section makes clear that a tenant must have 30 days notice of a rent increase before termination of the original rental agreement, if they plan to extend or renew that lease. Tenants often ask us questions as to when their landlord can raise their rent. This important information should be included in the lease. f 2. A clause should be added indicating that tenant agrees to vacate and deliver the keys to the landlord at the termination of the tenancy. Some landlords have charged tenants for rent after they have vacated or for changing locks simply because they have failed to turn in their keys on time. Tenants should be notified in advance that it is necessary for them to turn in their keys at the end of their tenancy in order that they may avoid these charges. i 3. It should be made clear that tenants should notify their landlord as to needed repairs, and also that tenants are not responsible for damage to the apartment caused by normal wear and tear. 4. In the section on Rental Deposits, clause 3, there should be an option as i to whether the landlord keeps the interest from the deposit for himself or allows the tenant to have this money. Many landlords do choose to give the tenants interest on their deposits. Since this is a model lease, this option should be included. We realize that the wording of clause 3 is taken directly from the Landlord -Tenant Act, but we do not feel the law intended to preclude the landlord from giving up his property right in the interest to a tenant. But without making this option clear in the lease, many people may interpret clause 3 as precluding this option. A model lease should not be limiting in this way. 5. In clause 5 on utilities, an option should be provided for those tenants who do pay utilities as to whether they should pay them directly to the utility company or to the landlord. In the rooming house situation, tenants often pay utilities to the landlord and if somehow this money did not get forwarded to the utility company, much confusion could result as to who was responsible if it is not clear in the lease to whom tenants should pay. It also saves any MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401MEs 6/2- I _2_ confusion or mistake on the tenant's part. 6. Clause 6 on utility rates would appear to practically be a prohibited provision under Section 11(1)(a) under the Landlord -Tenant Act. For those people who unfortunately do not read their lease or do not read it carefully enough, they could forego their right to have utility rates, etc. explained to them as under Section 13(4) of the Landlord -Tenant Act as a result of this clause. Such a result would violate the goals of openness and fairness in the leasing situation which the Landlord -Tenant Act seeks to promulgate. 7. We feel that in the interests of all parties, it would be beneficial to be more explicit in clause 12 as to what "unreasonably withholding consent" is. We would suggest the following phrase: "Such consent shall not be withheld without good cause relating to the ability of a prospective Assignee or Subleasee to comply with the provisions of this lease and any rules adopted under Paragraph 10 of this lease." 8 Instead of listing a few specific, remedies such as has been done in clauses 14, 15 and 16, we suggest that clauses be added stating the fact that the Iowa Landlord -Tenant Act provides certain remedies to landlords/tenants and section numbers and a very brief description of those remedies. The remedies give in clauses 14, 15 and 16 are not necessarily the most important ones which landlords and tenants have under the new law. We feel it is better to have a general overview of all remedies available than a more detailed description of a few, not extremely important ones. 9. Clause 18 on checklists seems to imply that a tenant must complete the list before moving in and though they have 7 days to transfer the list to the landlord, they cannot add anything to that list within those 7 days. Though it is a very good idea to fill out the list prior to moving in, when the apartment is easiest to inspect, it is also very possible to miss important things in this first, often too hasty, look through the apartment. A tenant should be allowed to add items to the checklist which he/she discovers at any time before the checklist is to be turned in. There is no problem with fraud by allowing this since the landlord has the right to object to any listed items which he/she disagrees with. Also on this clause, we feel the tenant should be given 10 days to turn the checklist in to the landlord instead of 7. The landlord has 10 days to make his written objection and there is no reasonable basis for allowing the landlord more time than the tenant. 10. In clause 19 on Liability, it would be very helpful to all concerned to explain briefly what is meant by joint and several liability. Since people are given a choice in this clause, they should be given the opportunity to make a knowledeable decision. The distinction between 19(1) and (ii) should be made clear. 11. Clause 20 on Notices should be either deleted or modified since many of the notices provided for in the lease do not require a writing under the Landlord -Tenant Act, for example, the 24 hour notice to enter a dwelling and tenant's notice of an extended absence. Some flexibility should be given the landlord -tenant relationship; a formal written notice should not be required in all instances. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES f We hope you will take our suggestions into serious consideration when reviewing the draft model lease. Thank you for sharing your time with us. Sincerely, Jean Lawrence Jeff Albright Director MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES April 4, 1979 Jean Lawrence Protective Association for Tenants Iowa Memorial Union Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Re: Model Lease Dear Ms. Lawrence: We recognize the time and effort which your detailed review of the Model Lease represents and we appreciate your interest. Ms. Ryan has informed me that she discussed your letter at length with Clemens Erdahl and that she will prepare another draft which incorporates many of the changes that you and other persons have suggested. I will send you a copy of this revised lease as soon as it is completed. Sincerely yours, Neal G. Berlin City Manager jm2/31 cc: Mr. Jeff Albright, Director Protective Association for Tenants City Clerk ✓ r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NE5 6/Z City of Iowa City _. MEMORAND`OM Date: March 21, 1979 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council l�2 From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer\' Re: Parking on Mayfield Road As directed by Section 34-16 of the Municipal Code of Iowa City this is to advise you of the following action: ACTION: Pursuant to Section 23-234 of the Municipal Code of Iowa City the Traffic Engineer will direct that signs be installed on the north and south side of Mayfield Road so as to prohibit parking at all times from the intersection of Mayfield Road with First Avenue east to a point 50 feet east of the above intersection. This action will be taken on or shortly after April 5, 1979. COMMENT: This action is being taken to permit smooth and safe turning movements at the T -intersection of First Avenue and Mayfield Road. After a field review of the intersection the Traffic Engineer feels that cars have been parking in the approaches of this intersection making turning movements onto and from First Avenue difficult and unsafe. jm3/14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES F°1D MAR2111979 ABBIE STOLF.U.5% Crry CLEW'%' 6/3 City of Iowa City �- MEMORANDOJ Date: March 20, 1979 To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Brachtel, Traffic Enginee 415 Re: Parking in the 200 Block of Hutchinson Avenue As directed by Section 23-16 of the Municipal Code of Iowa City this is to advise you of the following action: ACTION: The City Traffic Engineer will direct that signs be installed on the west side of the 200 block of Hutchinson Avenue so as to prohibit park- ing from 8 A.M. until 5 P.M. Monday through Friday. This action will be taken on or shortly after April 4, 1979. COMMENT: This action is being taken at the request of the abutting property owners. Earlier this year a post card survey was conducted of the 200 and 300 Block of Hutchinson Avenue. At that time consensus of the abutting property owners of the 200 Block of Hutchinson Avenue was to not install the prohibition as stated above. At that time the consensus preferred to maintain the existing uncontrolled parking on the west side. Consensus of the abutting property owners of the 300 Block was to install the 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. Monday through Friday prohibition. In the weeks that have passed since the installation in the 300 Block, resi- dents of the 200 Block have noticed an increasing amount of pressure for parking from individuals who live outside of this area and use Hutchi- nson Avenue for on street storage during the work day. There now exists a consensus of the residents of the 200 Block of Hutchinson that the prohibition as stated above is needed and has been requested by them. jm2/2 MAR2 0 1979 ABBIE STOLRUS CITY CLERK MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nOu+Es ,-_.City of Iowa City_.. j MEMORQNDOM Date: March 21, 1979 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer Re: Parking on the 300 Block of Lee Street As directed by Section 23-16 of the Municipal Code of Iowa City this is to advise you of the following action: I ACTION: Pursuant to Section 23-234 of the Municipal Code of Iowa City the City Traffic Engineer will direct that signs be erected on the west side of Lee Street from Highwood Drive south to River Street so as to prohibit parking 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. Monday through Friday. This action will be taken on or shortly after April 5, 1979. I COMMENT: A postcard survey was conducted of the affected property owners and it was their consensus that this prohibition is desirable and needed. jm3/23 MAR 2 11979 D ABBIE STOLFUS CITY CLERK f 6� MICROFILMED BY I JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Item: S-7841. Ralston Creek Village GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Applicable regulations: 45 -day limitation period: SPECIAL INFORMATION Public utilities: Public services: Prepared by: Doug Boothroy Date: March 15, 1979 Sam Abrams 408 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Gary Abrams 4005 Yorkshire Lane Northbrook, Illinois Approval of a large scale resi- dential development plan To construct 72 multi -family units Between Gilbert and Van Buren just north of the Abrams Furni- ture Store Undeveloped and CBS North - commercial and C2 South - commercial and C2 East - commercial and C2 West - office and C2 Provisions of the LSRD and Stormwater Management Ordi- ances and the Tree Regulations. Waived Adequate water and sewer service is available. Sanitary service is available as well as police and fire protection. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Transportation: Access is via Gilbert and Van Buren Street. Physical Characteristics: The entire site is located within the 100 -year floodplain of Ralston Creek. The topography level (O-2%). ANALYSIS which are The applicant proposes to construct three 24 -unit apartment buildings, two of brick ovals sewer. No Citysewers: alternative2forrbuildeingrlocati n existand a s atf fthe density proposed due to the floodway boundary. At the time of installation of the 42" trunk sewer, the City entered into an agreement (1970) allowing the aPPlicant to build over the sewer. It is the staff's opinion that under no condition is it advisable to build on a sewer but because of the aforementioned agreement, the City has no legal recourse regarding building over the sewer. According to the Flood Management Regulations, parking cannot be located less than 10 meters (32.8 feet) from the Ralston Creek bank without the granting of a "Special Use Permit" by the Board of Adjustment. Approximately 40% of the Proposed parking spaces are affected by this requirement. Application has been made to the Board regarding this matter and action will presumably be taken by the Board on March 15, 1979, before the Commission's formal meeting. If the applicants' request is denied then the LSRD would need to be substantially revised and action by the Commission, therefore, could not be taken. A common drive is proposed from Gilbert Street to serve as access to both the the residential development and Abrams' Furniture Store. It has been the Legal staff's opinion that in the event contiguous parcels are developed as part of a coordinated development (in this case, provision of a common access)then both Parcels should be included within t building is not requihe LSRD plan. However, the Abrams' Furniture red to meet either the provisions of the Tree Regulations (no alteration no change use) or the (building permit not required).). Stormwater Management Ordinance RECOMMENDATION It is the staff's recommendation. that action on the LSRD plan be deferred. Upon revision of the plan incorporating the deficiencies and discrepancies noted below, the staff recommends the plan be approved. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES I. Signatures of the utility companies should be provided on the plan, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES J 2. Certification of a registered land surveyor should be provided. 3. A metes and bounds discription of the property should be provided. 4. The total acreage of the property should be indicated in the legal de- I scription. f 5. The plan does not comply with the Tree Regulations and an innovative parking area design plan would need to be approved by the Commission. 6. The furniture store parcel should be integrated into the proposed LSRD plan. 7. Furniture store should be fully dimensioned and the total retail floor area indicated. 8. The drive access from Van Buren Street should be narrowed to 24, in width with the necessary curbs and sidewalks provided within the right-of-way. - 9. A note should be added to the plan indicating that the 2 -foot -by -3 -foot brick oval sanitary sewer will be removed per the 1970 agreement. 10. A note should be provided as to the number of bedrooms the proposed apart- ment units will contain. 11. Curve radius for the streets and intersecting private drives should be indicated. 12. Building width of the proposed apartment buildings should be indicated on t the plan. s ATTACHMENTS Location map. d A ACCOMPANIMENT LSRD plan Approved by / fo✓ Dennis R. Kraft, Director s Dept. of Planning and i Program Development a t i I € MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES fY, i PPO✓ECT euvev Jr Z OCAT/ON AMO NO JfA6E S-78,41 r _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES STAFF REPORT To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prepared by: Doug Boothroy Item: 5-7905. Owens Brush Company Date: March 15, 1979 Preliminary and final LSNRD Plan GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Requested action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing land use and zoning: Surrounding land use and zoning: Applicable regulations: 45 -day limitation period: SPECIAL INFORMATION Public utilities: Public services: Physical characteristics: Owens Brush Company P. 0. Box 552 Lower Muscatine Road Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Approval of a preliminary and final Large Scale Non-residential Development Plan. Building and parking lot additions Lower Muscatine Road at Mall Drive 26 acres Manufacturing and M1 North (across the CRI and PRR railroad) - residential and RIB South - commercial and C2 East - commercial and M1 West - commercial and M1 Provisions of the LSNRD and Storm Water Management Ordinances. 4/18/79 Adequate sewer and water are available. Public services and sanitation services are available as well as police and fire protection, trans- portation, vehicular access via Mall Drive and Lower Muscatine Road. The topography is level (0-2 percent). r - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES 6/6 ANALYSIS Owens Brush Company is proposing a 67,500 square foot expansion of the existing facility to accommodate space for additional manufacturing and warehousing. The planned improvements also include an expanded parking area for 175 vehicles. The applicant has never submitted an LSNRD plan for the site because at that the time of its initial development, the ordinance had not yet been drafted. The applicant is now required to submit said plan because a building permit is necessary for an addition, as well as for new construction for any tract of land over two acres intended for office, commercial, or industrial development. The staff would suggest that the general requirements be waived for the existing development, with the exception of Section 9.52.3C. But, the specific and general requirements should be met for the proposed development plan. RECOMMENDATION Numerous deficiencies and discrepancies were noted by the Engineering and Planning Divisions. Consideration of the preliminary and final LSNRD plan, therefore, must be deferred until the plan is revised. The staff further recommends that upon revision of the plan correcting the deficiencies and discrepancies noted below, and waiving the general requirements with the exception of Section 9.52.3C, the preliminary and final LSNRD plan be approved. DEFICIENCIES AND DISCREPANCIES 1. The general use of the building should be indicated on the plan. 1 2. ! 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 A typical parking and drive cross-section should be provided. The plan should be fully dimensioned as if it were a working drawing, e.g., the existing building and proposed addition should be dimensioned to property lines, the length and width of the existing building and proposed addition should be indicated, the distance between the new parking area and existing right-of-way should be indicated, etc. The private drive should intersect with Mall Drive at a 90 degree angle. The storage capacity of the storm water detention area should be indicated on the plan. The location of Lower Muscatine Road should be shown on the plan. The location of the sidewalk along Lower Muscatine Road should be shown. The location of city water service should be indicated on the existing site plan. The proposed storm water detention area should be fully dimensioned. The outflow and control structure for the detention pond should be shown. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 3 s 11. The plan does not comply with the Storm Water Management Ordinance, i.e., calculations and construction plans are still needed. 12. Drive approaches should be constructed to city standards for both Lower Muscatine Road and Malt Drive. 13. The legal description does not coincide with the boundary description and should be corrected. f 14. The right-of-way widths for adjoining public streets should be indicated. I ATTACHMENT Location map 1 ACCOMPANIMENT LSNRD plan � Approved by fON 4 R. Kraft, Director Department of Planning and Program Development i l 7 i i , n i f MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101MES ZEA 1 NEWSPAPER'S COPY NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR AN ESSENTIAL CORPORATE PURPOSE) OF SAID CITY, AND THE HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE THEREOF I PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the Council of the City of Iowa Ci y, Iov will 1979o1ata public hearing on the day of rl� Council Chambers of the Civic Cent e) O'clock Washington in the Street, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the Council proposes to take additional action for the issuance of $2,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for an essential corporate purpose of said City, in order to provide funds to pay costs share of the construction and of the local desi I treatment facilities; acquisitign of sanitary sewers and Ion of land therefor and for street right of way; and the construction, reconstruction and repair of street, alley and sidewalk improvements, including without limitation improvements designated as the CBD Alley Project, Grand Avenue Widening, Sunset Street -Benton to Penfro, Scott Boulevard - Phase II, South Gilbert Street Improvement, CBD Streetscape - Phase II, Wastewater Treatment Facility and the River Corridor Trunk Sewer. At the above meeting the Council shall receive oral or written objections from any resident or propertyowner of said City, to the above action. After all objections have been received and considered, the Council will at this meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take additional action for the issuance of said bonds or will abandon the proposal to issue said bonds. This notice is given by order of the Council of Iowa City, Iowa, as provided by Section 384.25 of the City Code of Iowa. Dated this day of _,1 A r v 1979. City Clerk of Iowa lbivf Iowa (End of Notice) -4- ANLERS, COONEY. DORWEILER, HAYNIE 6 SMITH, LAWYERS, DES MOINES, IOWA FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES March 27 , 1979 The Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, met in regular session, in the Council Chambers at the Civic Center, East Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., on the above date. There were present Mayor Robert A �evera , in the chair, and the following named Council Mem ers: Balmer, deProsse Erdahl Perrpt. andyplpPa Absent: Neuhauser and Rohr s I i 1 —1— AHLERS. COONEY. DORWEILER, HAYNIE 6 SMITH, LAWYERS, DES MOINES. IOWA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40I11ES The Mayor announced that this was the time and place for the public hearing and meeting on the matter of the issuance of $2,000,000 General Obligation Bonds in order to provide funds to pay costs of the local share of the construction tiongofolandnthereforitary 47and for ers anstreet and ri facilitieS; acquisi- nd construction, reconstruction and repairgOf street, alleyhand sidewalk improvements, including without limitation improve- ments designated as the CRD Alley Project, Grand Avenue Widening, Sunset Street - Benton to Penfro, Scott Boulevard - Phase II, South Gilbert Street Improvement, CBD Streetscape - Phase II, Wastewater Treatment Facility and the River Corridor Trunk Sewer, an essential corporate purpose, and that notice Of the proposed action by the Council to institute proceedings for the issuance of said bonds, had been published pursuant to the provisions of Section 384.25 of the City Code of. Iowa. The Mayor then asked the Clerk whether any written objec- tions had been filed by any city resident or property owner to the issuance of said bonds. The Clerk advised the Mayor and the Council that no written objections had been filed. The Mayor then called for oral objections to the issuance of said bonds andnone were made. Whereupon, the Mayor declared the i time for receiving oral and written objections to be closed. (Attach here a summary of objections received or made, if any) -2- AMLERS. COONEY. DORWEILER. HAYNIE A SMITH. LAWYERS. DEB MOINES. IOWA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IRCS rae The Council then considered the proposed action and the extent of objections thereto. Whereupon, Council Member Balmer introduced and delivered to the Clerk the Resolution hereinafter set out entitled "RESOLUTION INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATIO14 BONDS", and moved its adoption. Council Member SleProsse seconded the motion to adopt. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: deProsse, Erdahl Perret Vevera Balmer NAYS: none Whereupon, Absent: et�ayorraecTaeed said Resolution duly adopted as follows: Resolution No. 79-133 RESOLUTION INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by law, this Council has held a public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of $2,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for the essential cor- porate purpose of paying costs of• the local share of the construction and design of sanitary sewers and treatment faci- lities; acquisition of land therefor and for street right of way; and the construction, reconstruction and repair of street, alley and sidewalk improvements, including without limitation improvements designated as the CBD Alley Project, Grand Avenue Widening, Sunset Street - Benton to Penfro, Scott Boulevard - Phase II, South Gilbert Street Improvement, CBD Streetscape - Phase II, Wastewater Treatment Facility and the River Corridor Trunk Sewer; and has considered the extent of objections received from residents or property owners as to said proposed issuance of bonds; and, accordingly the following action is now considered to be in the best interests of the City and residents thereof: -3- A HLERS. 3-AHLERE, CCOONEY• DORWEILER, HAYNIE A SMITH, LAWYERS, DEB MOINES. IOWA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES r. -4- AHLERS. COONEY. DORWEILER. HAYNIE & SMITH, LAWYERS. DES MOINES, IOWA r — MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES r101r1ES NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: Section 1. That this Council does hereby institute pro- ceedings and takes additional action for the sale and issuance in the manner required by law of $2,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for the foregoing essential corporate purpose. f 9 Section 2. The Clerk is authorized and directed to S proceed on behalf of the City with the sale of said bonds, to select a date for the sale thereof, to cause to be prepared such notice and sale information as may appear appropriate, to publish and distribute the same on behalf of the City and gacceptable to the Council. PASSED AND APPROVED this 27th day of March , 1979. Mayor ATTEST: i L � Clerk i r. P E i s 1 I 1 -4- AHLERS. COONEY. DORWEILER. HAYNIE & SMITH, LAWYERS. DES MOINES, IOWA r — MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES r101r1ES Council Member Perret introduced the following Resolution entitled "RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR SALE OF $5,500,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS", and moved its adoption. Council Member Balmer seconded the motion to adopt. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: Balmer, deProsS rdahl PPrra+ Vevera NAYS: none Absent: Neuhauser, Roberts Whereupon, the Mayor declared the resolution duly adopted as follows: Resolution No. 79-134 RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR SALE OF $5,500,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City, Iowa, is in need of funds to pay costs of the local share of the construction and design of sanitary sewers and treatment facilities; acquisition of land therefor and for street right of way; and the construe - tion, reconstruction and repair of street, alley and sidewalk improvements, including without limitation improvements Sunset designate tStrh e CD eet tBentonAtoePenfro, Grand Avenue W1 Phase9II, South Gilbert Street Improvement, CBD Streetscape - Phase II, S Wastewater Treatment Facility and the River Corridor Trunk j Sewer, an essential corporate purpose project, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that the City issue general obligation asauthorized nby Section d384r25softthe hCity oCode unt oof$Iowa; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384,25 this Council has held a public meeting and I hearing on M , 1979, upon the institute proposal to bed bonds, and pall eobjections—if any,latoesuch of tCounche ileaction lmade by any resident or property owner of said City were received and considered by the Council; and it is the decision of the 5 1 -5- ANLERS, COONEY, DORWEILER, HAYNIE & SMITH, LAWYERS, DES MOINES, IOWA r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NEs P'l Council that additional action be taken for the issuance of said bonds, and that such action is considered to be in the best interests of said City and the residents thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City, Iowa, is in need of funds to pay costs of acquiring, constructing and equipping a city Public library, a general corporate purpose project, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that the City issue general obligation bonds for said purpose to the amount of $3,500,000, as authorized by Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa; and WHEREAS, this Council, pursuant to Section 384.26 of the City Code of Iowa, did legally call a special City election, fixing the time and place thereof and did legally submit to the qualified electors of said City the proposition of issuing general obligation bonds in an amount not exceeding $3,500,000 for the purpose of providing funds to pay costs of the above described general corporate purpose project, and did give legal sufficient and timely notice of the election and the time, place and purpose thereof; and that said special City election was duly and legally held and conducted on November 7, 1978, all in strict compliance with the law and the orders of said Council and the County Commissioner of Elections, and the affirmative vote on said proposition was equal to more than 609 of the total vote cast for and against said proposition and said proposition was declared duly adopted; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 384.28 of the City Code of Iowa, it is deemed appropriate that the various general obli- gation bonds hereinabove described be combined for purposes of issuance and sale in a single issue of corporate purpose bonds as hereinafter set forth: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: Section 1. That the bonds hereinafter described be offered at public sale, pursuant to advertisement as required by law. Section 2. That the Clerk is hereby directed to publish notice of sale of said bonds for two successive weeks in the Press -Citizen, a legal newspaper, printed wholly in the English language, published in the City of Iowa City, County -6- AHLERS. COONEY, DORWEILER. HAYN IEl SM I TN, LAWYERS, DEO MOINES, IOWA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IaoleEs of Johnson, State of Iowa, such newspaper being located in the County where the bonds are to be offered for sale, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 75 of the Code of Iowa, said notice to state that this Council on the 17th day of April r 1979, at 1:00 o'clock M., will hold a meeting to receive and Fact upon bids for said bonds; said notice to be in substantially the form attached hereto. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 27th day of 1979. March , Mayor ATTEST: Clerk See Official Notice of Sale attached. -7- A HLERS. GOONEY, DORWEILER. HAYNIE S SMITH. LAWYERS, DEB MOIN EE. IOWA P _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IdDINES OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE $5,500,000 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA General Obligation Bonds Sealed bids will be received until 1:00 P.M., Local Time, on the 17th day of April, 1979, at the office of the City Clerk in the Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, for the purchase of $5,500,000 General Obligation Bonds of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. Promptly thereafter open bids will be called for in the Council Chambers at the meeting of the City Council of said City to be then held in the Civic Center in said City. If no open bids are then made, such bidding will then be closed but if commenced, will be concluded not later than 1:30 P.M. on the date of sale. After the best open bid, if any, has been determined, the sealed bids will be publicly opened. All bids will then be referred to the City Council of said City and the bonds will be sold to the highest bidder for cash. Sealed bids will be fully protected and will remain sealed until open bidding has been con- cluded. Said bonds will be payable at the office of the City Treasurer and will be coupon bonds registrable as to principal only, will be dated May 1, 1979, be in the denomination of $5,000, bear interest payable December 1, 1979 and semiannually thereafter on the first days of June and December in each year, and mature serially on June 1 of each of the respective years as follows: MATURITIES - June 1 $500,000 .......... 1982 $500,000 .......... 1986 $500,000 .......... 1989 500,000 .......... 1983 500,000 .......... 1987 500,000 .......... 1990 500,000 .......... 1984 500,000 .......... 1988 500,000 .......... 1991 500,000 .......... 1985 500,000 .......... 1992 None of said bonds are optional for redemption prior to maturity. These bonds constitute general obligations of the City payable from taxes levied upon all the taxable property in the City without limitation as to rate or amount. ' Bidders shall specify the interest rate or rates which the respective bonds shall bear, not exceeding 7%, in multiples of one-quarter or one-tenth of one percent (1/4 or 1/10 of 1%), provided that only one rate shall be specified for a single maturity and not more than three (3) rates may be named. Repeating a pre- viously mentioned interest rate will not constitute an additional interest rate. The highest rate bid for the bonds shall not exceed the lowest rate by more than one percent (1%) per annum. Each installment of interest will be represented by a single coupon on each bond and no supplemental coupons will be permitted. All bids must be for all of the bonds, must be for not less than $5,500,000. plus accrued in= terest from May 1, 1979, to the date of delivery, must be made upon the Official Bid Form and delivered in a sealed envelope marked "Bid for Bonds.!' The bonds will be awarded to the best bidder determined upon the basis of the lowest total interest cost at the rate or rates designated in his bid from May 1, 1979, to the respective maturity dates, after deducting any premium. The bonds will be delivered without expense to the purchaser in Des Moines, Iowa, or Chicago, Illinois, at any mutually agreeable bank or trust company, against full payment in immediately available cash or federal funds. The bonds are expected to be delivered within thirty days after the sale. Should delivery be de- layed beyond sixty days from date of sale for any reason without the fault of the issuer, or except failure of performance by the purchaser, the purchaser may with- draw his check and thereafter his interest in and liability for the bonds will cease. (When the bonds are ready for delivery, the issuer will give the successful bidder five working days notice of the delivery date and the issuer will expect payment in full on that date, otherwise reserving the right at its option to deter- mine that the bidder has failed to comply with the offer of purchase.) Said bonds will be sold subject to the approving opinion of Ahlers, Cooney, Dorweiler, Haynie 6 Smith, Attorneys of Des Moines, Iowa, as to the legality and their opinion will be furnished, together with the printed bonds, without cost to the purchaser and all bids will be so conditioned. Except to the extent nec- essary to issue their opinion as to the legality of the bonds, the attorneys will not examine or review or express any opinion with respect to the accuracy or com- pleteness of documents, materials or statements made or furnished in connection with the sale, issuance or marketing of the bonds. The opinion will be printed on the back of the bonds. JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIRCS W 9 All bids shall be accompanied by a certified check or cashier's check drawn upon a solvent bank doing business in the United States, in favor of the City, In the amount of $110,000. The proceeds of said check will be forfeited as liquidated damages in case the bidder to whom said bonds are awarded should with- draw his bid or fail to complete his purchase in accordance with the terms thereof. Checks of unsuccessful bidders will be returned promptly and no interest will be allowed on any checks. The check of the successful bidder will otherwise be re- turned or applied on the purchase price at delivery at the option of the City. The City Council reserves the right to waive informalities in any bid, to reject any or all bids and to determine in its sole discretion the best bid. The City Council has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the City. For copies of that State- ment, the Official Notice of Sale and Official Bid Form, or for any additional in- formation, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Municipal Finance Consul- tants to the City, Paul D. Speer E Associates, Inc., 55 East Monroe Street, Chicago, Illinois 60603• Telephone: Area 312 - 346-0858. By order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. 1979 /s/ ABBIE STOLFUS City Clerk MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES F'A.. RESOLUTION NO. 79-135 A RESOLUTION IMPOSING WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS UPON VEHICLES TRAVELING ROHRET ROAD WHEREAS, pursuant to State law the City Council may limit traffic upon streets and public thoroughfares for reasons of public health and safety, and WHEREAS, the City Traffic Engineer has determined there exists a hazardous condition upon Rohret Road in Iowa City, Iowa, from its inter- section with Mormon Trek Boulevard to the west City limits in that the pavement on said street will deteriorate due to current and past weather conditions, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that said street portion should have a weight limit imposed upon such vehicles until said weather conditions abate. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that (1) The.following street have a weight limitation of 4 tons imposed upon vehicles traveling thereon: Rohret Road from its intersection with Mormon Trek Boulevard to the west City limits. (2) The City Traffic Engineer be authorized to post signs specifying these restrictions. It was moved by Balmer and seconded by Perret that the resolution as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Balmer x deProsse x Erdahl _ x Neuhauser x Perret x Roberts x Vevera Passed and approved this 27th day of March 1979. aleLt�d'_' Robert A. Vevera, Mayor Attest: Zlec%, • �2, 73 h� _ Deputy City Clerk MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES �jE><C)<IPIm b IPPBOI>b I ")City of Iowa Cites IRVIIEMORANDUM DATE: March 23, 1979 TO: Neal Berlin, City Manager FROM: Dick Plastino, Director of Public Works RE: Weight limitation on Rohret Road Attached is a copy of the resolution regarding imposing a weight limitation on Rohret Road. This should be brought up at Monday's.informal Council meeting. cc:Abbi' a gtolfus Dale Helling MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES RESOLUTION NO. 79-136 RESOLUTION AWARDING BIDS FOR SENIOR CENTER FURNITURE TO BE ACgUIRED WITH FUNDING AVAILABLE UNDER TITLE V OF THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT OF 1965. WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has contracted with Wehner, Nowysz, Pattschull, & Pfiffner, a local architectural firm, to review information from agencies, senior citizens, and the architectural program, and develop recommended furniture and specifications for rooms in the proposed Iowa City senior center, and WHEREAS, formal advertisement for bids was published March 2, 1979, followed by a formal bid opening March 23, 1979, at which time five bids were received, and WHEREAS, the architects and City staff have reviewed and evaluated each bid in comparison with prescribed furniture specifications, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, that the following bids be accepted: 1. the bids of Younkers of Des Moines, Iowa, in the amount of $8,500 for furniture group A -- Madison, and $6,681.50 for furniture group D -- Howe, and $589 for furniture group G -- Peter Pepper, $114 for furniture I -- George Kolvacs, and $839 for furniture group J -- Monarch; and 2. the bids of Saxton Inc. of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in the amount of $3,394 for furniture group B -- Rudd, and $6,476 for furniture group C -- Condi; and 3, the bid of Frohwein Office Supply Company of Iowa City, Iowa, in the amount of $19,890 for furnishing group E - Steelcase; and 4. the bid of Pioneer, Inc. of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in the amount of $697.70 for furnishing group F -- Howard Miller and $565.52 for furnishing group H -- David Morgan. Purchases will be made from successful bidders in accordance with the specifications document "Furnishings and Equipment (I) Senior Citizen Center, Iowa City, Iowa" and the bid document received for said furnishing group from the successful bidder. Using unit prices submitted by bidders, actual quantities of furniture may be altered slightly. Contracts will be awarded expending the total amount of Title V funds, $48,443.00. 627 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES N RESOLUTION N0. ,79-136 Page 2 It was moved by Perret and seconded by Balmer the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Balmer x deProsse x Erdahl x Neuhauser x Perret x Roberts x Vevera Passed and approved this 27th day of March, 1979.97 MAYOR ATTEST: ?/�aer&R • 3k� 7 CITY CL RK MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MO RIES RTCEI7ED S Arrp..",�D MIXGILL DEPplirXZNT 3 Z� l -l9 CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979, by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the 'Owner" and Pioneer, Inc., party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH: That whereas the Owner has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 23rd day of March, 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said plans, specifications and proposal accurately, and fully describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor is willing to perform the work specified: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2. That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a. Addenda Numbers N1 b. Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for Bids. C. Special Provisions d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES 3• That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4.' That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. (Title) Mayor ATTEST: (Title) Cit Clerk Contractor a,) ATTEST: /. JA /A O (Titj Company 0 ficial Awarded Contract for: Group F (Howard Miller) Group HD(David Morgan) $ 697.70 565.52 $1,263.22 TOTAL With the addition in Group F (Howard Miller) of: 1 (one) station master clock #622-532 @ $66.67 = $66.67 $1,263.22 * 66.67 1 329.89 GRAND TOTAL r - _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BY THE UGAL D'Tj'n!'.'ME r" STATE OF IOWA ) COUNTY OF JOHNSON) SS: B On this ,tday of !ej duly commissioned and qu-4ijjua in and for said County andbefore State me, a Notary Public, Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowasoandknown ly appeared G w City Clerk of said City, each being to me personally LQ be the idents 1 persons and officers named in the foregoing instrument, who executed the same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. Notary Public in and for �tc state of Iowa STATE OF 141 COUNTY OF ) SS: I On thist !} day of i Public n amthe County Of A'D', I9 /�I before me, a Notary and er < �—.�— State of., /Q `{ ° y S rotary, o President, zne corporation which executed tea ove and foregoing instrument, w o eing to me # known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument a by me duly ' sworn, each for himself, did say that they are respectively the Pi Secretary of said Corporation; that (the. seal affixed to said instrumenttisnthe seal of said Corporation) (said Corporation has no seal) and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf of the said COrporation, by authority of its Board of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation, by it and each of them voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the day and your last aboa , I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial ve written. Seal g Notary Picublin and or County, ����Y, State of ------ r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 11 PART 1. _ BIDDING RE(�UIREMENTS h. BID 17001Iowa Cit Ci *BID FORM - REVISED RECEIVED Page B -I MAR 91979 • y ty, Council Civic Center Furnishings and Equipment (1) Iowa City, lA 52240 Senior Citizen CL-ntvr Iowa City, IA 52240 Project No. 79U8 The undersigoud, having carefully W,'Its, including Bidding Requirements, examined all contract docu- Conditions of tilt - Contract, Specifications, Addenda and Drawings, era.uined the site, proposes to furnish and having all labor and materials ''ul porlsrm all work required fr.r for the following sum: the above referenced Proj.•cr. FUkt.ISl{INCS GROUP A (Madison) Prr.pased Substitute Manufacturer � -- -- .tin, Fil ISHINGS Gk OUP.B (Rudd) "'"Posed Scbstitute Manufacturer I'LIkNI5H1Ri:S CIIOUP_C (Condi) Propl�..�ed Substitute Manufacturer _...._ _._(>.%�/G.• 31.:,0) 1'111tNISHINGS_ CROUP D (Howe) . 1'rupusvd Substitute Ma no lacturer n D ) I•UItN15111NCS CItuUP—E (StceICasc) Prupoued Substitute Man ufacturer �.'L SS F URN ISIII NGS GROUP F (Howard Miller) Proposed SUbStlCute Manufacturer FUR N1SIIlNCS _ GROUP C (Peter Pepper) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Revi:•.•d a•: )n,iie,ll A in l We II r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■ ■ 1 IM) FMOI - KrVISP:U I'.Igy It-! 1'118r4I s II I NCS Cll o 111 II (David Mo riga n) PI up us ed SuL::t ILuly Pla uul nc to r,I 1•_UIIN_ISIIIN1;S GK0IIV I (Cuocgc Kuv,trs) Pro1)usud Sit Its L11ute Mtutit fit vLitrur _ 1:11IiNISIIINC6 CMUUP .1 (Monarch) Proposed SnIts LILIILe Ma nuiactorer — — --- — — ---------.(s NO._.R/_1D.._on) Unil prlcus for individual items a r u contalnu(I on pokes IS -1 I Iro ugh B - u ul the Hill Form. Thy bidder agreus to abide by Lbe BIddIog Iluqulrvmyuts fu submlLtLlg this bid. It is understood that Utv owner ru- serves the right to accept or reject any or all bids and to acuupt that bid deemed to be in his bust interests. The bLddur agrcus to complete the contract by A1,rePK___AAV (%cQO. I(rr.e i1)L it the fu Mowing addenda uumburs is he ruby avknuw I ed ged: V PA I have altachud the proper bid securlty Lu tills bid. 5I GN A'I'll It l: FIRit NAME DATE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDINES 1'IIkUIt:H1NCS CROUP A (Madison) Sub. I ICN 1 - I.uullge CIIIIIr (1.65EU5) (.--------) Item 2 - 2 Seat Couch (1.65F.09) Item 3 - 3,Seat Couch I•v:o a - 101aIf(Irm Rncker (U0'IE55)( -- —) ICum 5 - Ottoman (13U4A90)( -- —) Itl•.a 6 - Ano Chair Item 7 - Side Chair (C)4A05)( —) Itum 8 - Side Chair (C 1 4Ai:5) (- ___--) It via - Conference 'fable It •,a 10 IaI,le Item 11 Tuhlu Ileal r2 Curktal Table (TO2A02)( Itrw 13 End 'fable (T02A10)( Bunch (13091462)(—__) FURNISIIINCS (:kOUP B (Hudd) Sul,. I Lew I - Lounge Chair (H. B. (MOb431-11)( --_) ]tum - Iwo Seater Sofa (HB) (M0b432-II)(�--) Ilan 3 - Foot Stool Woo, 100-11)(--__) HID FORM - RCVISEU Page H-3 Unit I- '1 ru fur aJ�I 1131,na1 1,1 vCIsIt-wur Uoit price fur ,Il`('L'S X61 I e) r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401fIES -7-L E lien] 4 - Caseguods-Steel£ 5 Cabinet Shelf (II(:226-U)l ) Item 5 - Ili l;h Ba.1V for lB1:I08)( ) FUkNISIIINGS Gk UUP C (fundi) Sit[,. Bill FORM - REVISED Pagc B-4 Unit price for .I tl 111 l 1'1111. 1. _.h lot'Pn s /f' � • 01 / Unit price for f a• w o r_ 1!.i e!• u 5 -- A:6, V/ I tam I - Sula $.__._��J. ✓__. j C(_C ...." Table (1266) ( ) (7581-000)( -r ) Table (12365)( Ite I tow 3 - - Luuage Chat Table (1248R)( ) (753.1-000)( ) ICe,L 3 - Armless Chair $_ /�f •�. GSA__ $_. � 3' C�S� (730-000) .._ Item 4 - Arm Chair - Ralf $��$.OS //p VY back back (732-000)( ) - - •- 11.•m 5 - Arm Chair - Full p �s%,�,..._ S_ �•S�!-c_ Back (734-000)( ) lt.em b - Desk Chair - Full S / "i,3• Z $ a -y3. z Back (738STL57)( ) Iter. 7 - 1)cs1t Chair - Full --- S _ X9. J3 s 3G�• %3 back (739STL57)( ) Item 8 - Side Table $-_-- ... /`-.! J.%.-_ >_... �S Y•.j�_. (3/2626-U-000)( Ilem 9 - Table2, _) (3/'636-U-000)( ) Item 10 Sura Table (J/26SU-B-000)( ) Itrni 11 •Fable $---____.�37.S�3 .39.S•_3 (14742-000)( ) FURN)SIII NOS GROUP 0 (Howe) Sub. i ILem I - Folding Table (1266) ( ) Item :' - Ful ding Table (12365)( ) I tow 3 - FuldIng Table (1248R)( ) r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES +.. - ` ... 1 Item 4 - Folding Table I tvin ` - 'TaI)Ie Truck (TKFS-63) (__—__—) Item i. - Table 'Truck (TKES-6)( —) Item 7.- Table Truck (1'KRT- 46) (_ RID FORM - RLVISEU Fags B-5 Unit price for Unit price for a d d i t 1 un:, l_liure:. frver_yiLcu_.— S _t FURNISHINGS Cknll_P E (Steelcase) Sub.(,'_ tj�'S/1���_1 ..�_Ci.�_!f'/l)E A) Item I - Chair Max -Stacker $__._.�_4'_-60_�.�n..— (472-410)(_'YQ/*1_) I tun, 2 - Cha Ir Dolly for Max- SLat:kvr (472-u)(_y # �. S (c:'�'_• — Item 3 - Dvsk (52600 w/9250 hanlwarL) Item - 5 crccarial ketu n S 52 C 'S% w/ ! uLrP ` ir<• 3 S !��" �1 5 Dusw/ 5.... T-3�'_-�Q--_ 5...._ ttve - )250 Iu,rdwarLjA�&r 30f-4LQL Item a - Credenza (52 66/04 w/ $ _ 5�. •../�._ $ _ ,N •+25u hard.) 369. 5 c/ s__. �9• SY I tvin 7• - Dvsk (52600-62 ,:iooarl $ _ ItvIII ti - (3JSU-OR)(.�r•y.$_� /a��• s s 71•,74 It,•... 4 _ Itrsk --__..,8•.'1G„ - I Le111 10 DoSk $ _—..!%`_35-. G X� liA• 13._s__.....—) (33600-0tt) (/ ) J IILm II M.n•h. d Typewritter Return (33C37)V,2 �U C G Item 12 SucreLarial Posture $ Chair (421-520)(_ J4 -- —'/— -- — — 1tLm 13 Desk Chair S_---, �!�.5^•_�/.-- S_-_ �5..��. 1421-312)( ) V071 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 111 1) FORM - REVISED Page B-6 PURNISHINGS GROUP F (Howard Miller) Sub. Unit p r Ice for Un I E 1) r I ve fur d I E I (ilia c L- s levet I i,m I - (:I.,ck Station Master S- ( I, " 2 S32)•(----) 32 I t v n. 2 - Clock S-3 (622 680)( FURNISHINGS GROUP_G (Peter Pepper) Sill). I t e m I - Literature Rack $ 2.• S (601) Item 2 - Steel Sand Urn and S Waste Receptacle w/ Sifter (21)) (_) rURN I Sfl IN6S GROUP It (David Morg.n) Sub ILurjl Bar Stool (K/216-001)(_ ITHN I S IINCS GROUP I (George Kovacs) Sub t cit. I - Ceramic Lamp ( 2 5 5 1 ) ITH N I.S-H 1 5 GROLIPJ (Mot,.;rch) Suis I turd I — Reel fining couch ( 100 1 143M) I t '! m _, - Reclining Couch ( 2 00 1 ) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MolftES A CONTACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979 by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "Owner" and Saxton, Inc., party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH That whereas the Ower has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 22nd day of March, 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said plans, specifications and sal rately describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor isuwillin to d fully the work specified: 9 perform NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2• That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a• Addenda Numbers #1 b• Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for Bids. C. Special Provisions r _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. i 3. That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and I subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4. That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. By (Title) Mayor ATTEST: 2_k (Title) City Clerk G ATTEST: (Title) (Company Official Awarded Contract for: Group B (Rudd) $3,394.OD Group,C"(Condi with Madison substitute) 6,476.00 $9,870.00 TOTAL with the exception of: Table model 600-26 (Berco) with Art or Formica Standard color top,'self edged, 42" in diameter and oakbase to be substituted. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES REC£IY$D,� APPROVED BY THE LEGAL DEPARTIL'RT STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF JOHNSON) j On this l�lday of , A.D., 19__Zf, before me, a Notary Public duly ommissioned and qualifie in and for said County and State, personally appeared Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa; and City Clerk of said City, each being to me personally known to be the identical 'persons and officers named in the foregoing instrument, who executed the same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. Notary Public in and for the ate of Iowa STATE OF -, �p ) SS: COUNTY OF On this /,,/- day of lL� , A.D., 19 r, before me, a Notary , Public, in and'or_ the County of "'�i�;+�•j• State of 21z—J' President, Secretary, O J , the Corporation w i 'executed the above and foregoing instrument, who being to me known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument, and by me duly sworn, each for himself, did say that they are respectively the President and Secretary of said Corporation;,that'(the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said Corporation) (said Corporation has .no seal) and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf.of the said Corporation,.by authority of its Board 4i of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation,,by it and each of them voluntarily executed. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year last above written.. Notary Public in and for�J County, State of MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES IIA 1111) 1) INC R I;N IRI•I . N:Ia M. MIN FORM t o w.1 (:I t y City G u n l l r i l (:iviv C,•n l.ur low;: t:ily, IA 522411 fi If 1 u FORM - ION 1:a(1) Pal•,,: D- I Pu rn l:;It 1 np•n and I:qu 11,01e111. (1) Selt t ur CIL -i z,- it (;v 111 yr Iowa Cl ty, IA )2240 V ruj eel Ile. /9118 'I'Ita undcrs l gned, hav Iitg ca re l'uI I UXdIIIi nad all runt raCL docu- ments, Including Bidding Requirements, Cnuditiuus of Lhr. Contract, Specification:;, Adduuda and Drawings, and having examined LIle Situ, proposes to IFurnish all lnbur and III itI:•rialr mid perform all work required lur Lhu above relurcnced ProjrrL lot tilt- following Sum: FURNISIIINCS_GROUP A (Madison) Proposed SubstituLu Manufacturer Nine Thousand Three Dollars ($ 9003 .0o) FURNISHINGS GROUP B (Rudd) Proposed SubStiLUtu Manufacturer Three Thousand Three Hundred Ninty Four Dollars (3 394 .090 FURNISHINGS CROUP C (Condi) VI0I)USed SUbStILULU Manufacturer Madison Six Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Six Dollars ($ 6476 llO FURNi SIZINGS GROUP D (Ilowe) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer _ ^ Seven Thousand One Hundred Ten Dollars (;; 7110 .00) FI11011S11INCS GROUP B (Steelcuse) Propm;cd SuhStiLute Manufacturer ($ No Did 1111) FIIRNISIIINCS CRUMP F (Huward Miller) Propoacd Still sl.Itutu Manufacturer ($ No Bid .00) FURNISHINGS (:HOIJl' C (Peter Pepper) Pruposcd Subs tiLutu Manufacturer ($ No Bid .(0) *Rcvisvd du Indicated in Addendum O1. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011IES all) VONN - IMVISt:U Pagv Is -2 FUNN I_SN Itit; S CM ()It I'_11 (David tio, gaoI I'rupu oYd Sl,b:: l.I 111I t' PLlonl:l L'L nl',: i' _.( No Bid FIIRi115111UC5 CRulll'-t (Cvurgc Ruv:lr:.) !'roposcd Sub::tituCc M:nnlfeccurcl. . I•'llN_NI SIII NCS Cimill) .J (Monarch) Vrupused Suh::tiLtILe MunufacLurcr is No Bid ,III)) ...(S.. No .Bid. Du) Unit price:: for individual items are con tamed ue pages It -'J through B -I, of the Bid Form. '1'Iit- 1)1tit] er.ugreell Lo abide by chc Itidd1og kegnirvmrnts Iu suhwll.Liul; this bid. it is undcI- sIoud that I.he Owour rc- scrve:i 1. lie right ro ;Icucpt or rejucL any or all bids and to aacopL LhaL bid deemed to be to his beat InLerests. T I I u bidder agrees to c0nlpJeL0 the uouLrart by May 1980 NumtL of the fo .11wiit :Iddait (I h nur mbes Is hereby arlist OWIOdgad: NLim�ler One 11a Ve aLtached I.he proper bid sucuri ty Lo Ilit s bld. Thomas 4). Saxton S I t,NATUItr:laGlcGli rI'rLI: President Fl llrl NAMP: Sax .ont Inc,.__ An NRI'•SS 2857_Mt_Vernon Road S.E. UA rIt 3/22/79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES FIMNI SII I NGS I:I(UIII'-_I) (Rudd) Sub. _ I Ivnl I - I.uwtgc Chair (11.B.) $ 417.95 (1`100431-11)( I I - Two Soarer Sufa (Ills) $ 735.35 I will 7 - Foot stool $ 170.95 (FI1141011-I1)(. ) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES _...._ ti,. 411.95 ...... 735.35 170.95 It I I, I'MiN I;I:VIShaI I IINN I Sill NGS GROUP A (Mad I sun Sill) . Unit Itrlre tur Iluil prig• Iur ., add it iun:r.1..!!irrr:: tvwt•r, - I t um I - Loull}tc Glui I r $ 170.80 170.80 (Lfi5EU5) --- -- I t vnl 2 - 7 st•:It Couch $ 278.15 _ ti 278.155 - Item J - 3 S. -at Couch- $ --.... 30.15.. $ 430.15 - - -. Item 4 - F]at form Rocker $---1-64..10 -- — -- S 164 19.------ (C04855)(__-) - 1 Loan 5 - ULtomau $ 65.10 - -- -- ... (CU4A90) - ----- Item n - Arm Chair $-_124.55 S (C14F.05)(—__) I LL'nl 7 - Sl du Chair $— 106.25 5.... 106.2`x ... --...... IIum 11 - Sid, Chair $ 102.22 $ 102.22 (C14A05)( ) _.._ _.-.__._..... -- lLum 9 - Conference 'fable $ 192.32 $ 192.32 I L c nl 10 '1':t 6 1 e;. S-_-- 13045(T2 130.45 0 G 10 - - ILeIII 11 •r:,ble$ _ 145.25 25 _ _ .145. 1 L..ol I'' Cock tat 1 Table $ 138.55 $ 138.55 ('I'tl 2 A U 2) (__) I Ivit' I Fnd Table $ ------- 119.70 $ 119.70 (Tnznlo)(—_--) -._ ....._.......... .-- 11-111 14 Bench $ 131.80 131.80 (Bt19W6L)( ) — - -- - . .. _. FIMNI SII I NGS I:I(UIII'-_I) (Rudd) Sub. _ I Ivnl I - I.uwtgc Chair (11.B.) $ 417.95 (1`100431-11)( I I - Two Soarer Sufa (Ills) $ 735.35 I will 7 - Foot stool $ 170.95 (FI1141011-I1)(. ) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES _...._ ti,. 411.95 ...... 735.35 170.95 ,I ' 1 Nlu rulcrl - ra:vl:a:u $ 543.35 $ P•�I:� a-'� Unit prirr fur I1111. pr ire 1 11 1 -- - --- - I IUII, Z Iiw111 4 - C:,::,:I;,..,d—sliull a $ 432.65 r 432,65 - CnDi u,!t Slitt NL70F05 (IIc,220-0)( ) ,318.57 Ilan S - II(gb Rlar $ 98.80.inv $ 98.80 _..... $_, 109.61-_-_-- ( 730-000) ( W5 ) FU NNIS111NCS CNoil P C (Condi) sub. Madison I Iuu, 1 - S f„ $ 543.35 $ 543.35 NL70F13 ( 758 1-00(I) (-_-_—_—) _.. _-- -- -- -- - --- - I IUII, Z - L,nulge Chalr $ $.._ 318.57 NL70F05 _ ,318.57 t Luui 7 - Armloss ('I109.61 IM _..... $_, 109.61-_-_-- ( 730-000) ( W5 ) Icum 4 - Arm Chair - NaIf$ 128.48 $128,48 Dank (732-000)( C14E05 — _) -- — -" ILcm 5 - Arm Chair - Fu 11 $ 126.82$ 126.82 Dauk ( 734-000)( 12CE05 _ I Luu, 6 - Ncak Chair - Full $ 199.25---- $-_--199;25 Ilark (138S'I'1.57)(C15E39 ---$- - _ _—_.. _ I I,•m 7 - 11es1: Chnlr - Full 199.25 $ 199.25 Back (739S'1'L57)( C1_5E39 )--- -- - 11.•m 8 - Sltic 'fable $ 123.49 $ 123.49 (J/z026—D-000)( T02A10 _ Iruw 9 — •Fahlu $ 117.94 $ 117.94 (3/2x'16 -D -00o)( T02B05_—) II.•lit 10 Snfa Tab Le $ 142.95 $ 142.95 (3/2650-u-Ooo)( T02A02 ) IL,•w II 'Pablo $ 142.00 $ 142.00 ( 1 /17 4 2-000)(f20611 ._) FII NN I S I I INGS 1;1,0111' N (Il ow c) Sub. I LvIII I - Vo Id Lug Table I LUIII z — Fol di ug Tab1c S_—_..114_4. S 114.40 112368)( ) II,•lu 't - lnldinl; 'table �_-- .-141,.35.__ $ 141.35 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS Id01RES - 11101 4 - P„Id iup, Tab lc I L III 5 - 'I':,I I,! 'Truck ('I'KFs- 67) (__--- .._. __) I Lein 6 - ']'aItI e ']'ruck ('TKKS-6) ( ) Item I - '1'alle ']'ruck IT9R'1'-4(1) (___ ) Biu FORM Itivl:;I•:u - Chair Max -Stacker $ -------- s-5 II II I I. I 11' I f v 111 I' N l l l t I l f (l' L 111 1' add i 1 I., 1 II i 1•rl•:: (I:wor I, .1 _ . 60.75 $ 68.75 90.37 _... _ $- ..._97.00-- -- $ _ . 97.00... -- $ 126.50_---- --- $. 126.50..- —- FUI(NISItINGS CItOUP li (SLLuICase) sal). No Bid LI val I - Chair Max -Stacker $ -------- $ (47'2-410) (_ _) ----...---- ---------•-- - Ltual 2 - Chair Ilully for Max- $ $ Stacker (472-0)( _--) I tum 7 - Desk (52(,00 w/9250 $ $ hardware) Item 4 - Secretarial Return $ $-- 572 C' '11 w/ --- --- -- - — Item 5 - C(___) l�esh"I?596�i�b�52 w/ $--------------- $-----------•--- 92511 hardwareY ) I I cnl 6 - Credenza (52 N 604 w/ $ $ I I I!al 7 - Uv ;It (52600-62 w/9250 $ S I I VIII It - Desk $ I Lcnl 9 - IJOS 1, $ y ('17600-AII) (------) I lens 10 UvsIt $_.----_-- $ (7 76(10-08) I i um 11 Mach. 6 'I'ypuwri I tur $ Return (.33037)( ) I t elll I }iocro I;it, Iii I Posture $ $ CItaII, (421-520)(__)- ._—......---- ILw01 17 1)etik Chair $ $ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40111ES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ItIII FUNM r.I:V1:,l•II r:.,•,. Il I. 1:iu1NGS 1:8'MI' F (Inward I'lill,•r) :;..L, No Bid Buil pri rr Inl hull priru for dddiL i�nl.l l,. pi.•r.•:: Iow, r 1,ivcc::,,... Ilan I CI..rK SLJ1ion Nar1.•I' F II RN I SII INCS t; It ull l' C (1'e Ler l'ep per) Sub. No Bid I Lem I - Li L c r a L ii re hack $ S (n o I) (------••- --- ) I L.: III - SI I' t' I S nil Ll rn :Ind Lu lie cup tacLe w/ Si1Lor (2 17 ( ) FIIItNISIIINLS CR 0 1) 11 II (David Murgan) Suh. No Bid I L.:m I - Ilar SLut)1 $.. _.. ... ..._...___ .. l K/ 2 1 b- 0 01) (--•._--. ) i VII I:N I SII I N 5 Cltoll_I'.._ 1 . _ (ccorgu Kuvna::) Sub. No. Bid II.:m I - Cc ramIc Lamp I (!SSI)( ) I+uRNI SII INCE CkUlll'-_I (monarch) Seib. - No Bid 1 - 16 -c 1 1111111; couch (101)1 W7M)( ) I l cul ! - R 11 ill ng couch ( nm 1) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979, by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the 'Owner" and Saxton, Inc., party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the 'Contractor". WITNESSETH: That whereas the Owner has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 22nd day of March,' 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said. plans, specifications and proposal accurately, and fully describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor is willing to perform the work specified: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2. That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a.. Addenda Numbers N1 b. Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for.Bids. C. Special Provisions MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. 3. That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4. That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. rr�(Seal) .. (Title) Mayor ATTEST: ATTEST: (Title) City Clerk (Title) G Gcc �c�ox� (Company Official Awarded Contract for: Group B (Rudd) $3,394.00 Group•C"(Condi with Madison substitute) 6,476:00 $9,870.00 TOTAL With the exception of: Table model 600-26 (Berco) with Art or Formica'Standard color top,'self edged, 42" in diameter and oakbase to be substituted. R$CEIM APPROVED BY THE I.ECAL DEPARTIERT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES STATE OF IOWA ) COUNTY OF JOHNSON) SS: On this d�day of dulyommissioned and qualifie in and for�said County andState perme, a Notary Public Mayor of the City of Iowa City,'Iowasoandly appeared to bei be the identical•persons andyofficersClerk ofsaidttheeforegoing Ing to me niers nnt,whoy known named in executed the same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. Notary Public in anfo�the teof Iowa STATE OF ` .V _i ✓ ) COUNTY OF_�`' J ) SS: On this_/� day of �%/n�� Public, 'n and 'for the Countyrof .'....... 19... before me, a Notary /n yJ. . .. y—�i„�, is and State of the —' 'aSecretary_"�fT President, r+ou wn1Cn executed the a ove�and foregoing instrument, w o oeing to me I known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument, and by me duly Secretary coffhimself,or saidCorporationsathata(theesealeaffixedttoesaidhinstrumenttisad nthe seal of said Corporation) (said Corporation has ,no seal) and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf of the said Corporation,. by authority of its Board of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation,. by it executed. and each of them voluntarily IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year last above written. Notary Public in and for County, State of - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rlolnEs I'Alt_P 1 __137110 INC REQUIREMENTS I]_ I:lh FORM Inwn CI Ly Ci it y Ce 11 lie 11 Civic Cont•ur Iowa City, lA 52240 *fill) FORM - kl:Vltil•:I1 Page 8-1 Furnishings and Rquipnu'nr (1) Senior C1L•izen Ceutter Iowa Ci Ly, 1A 52240 ProjecL No. 7908 The undersigned, having carefully examined all contract duc6- munts, including Bidding Requirements, Cundi.tiuns of, the Contract, Spucifica[Yons, Addenda and Drawings, and having examined the site, proposes to furnish all labor and materials and'perform all work required. for the above fur referencud Project the following sum: FURNISHINGS GROUP A (Madison) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Nine Thousand Three Dollars ($ 9003 .00) FURNISHINGS GROUP B (Rudd) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Three Thousand.Three Hundred Ninty. Four Dollars ( 3394 00 FURNISIIINGS GROUP C (Condi) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Madison 'Six Thousand Four. Hundred Seventy Six Dollars 6476 FURNISHINGS GROUP D (Howe) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Se Jen Thousand One Hundred Ten Dollars FURNISHINGS'GROUP E (Steelcase). Proposed Substitute Manufacturer FURNISHINGS GROUP F (Howard Miller) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer FURNISHINGS GROUP G '(Peter Pepper) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer 4L-vised as indicated in Addendum #I. r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111CS (S No Bid .00) ($ No Bid __,(j0) ($ No Bid ,00 FURNISHINCS CROUP H (David Morgan) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer _ FIIRmISHIN1_S_ CRouP 1 (George Knvacs) Propused Substitute Manufacturer _ FURNISHINGS CROUP J (Monarch) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer HID FORM - RRVISHU Page B-2 ($-No Bid ___00) ($ No Bid NH) ($ No Bid .00) Unit prices for individual items are contained on pages B -J through B -G of the Bid Form. The bidder agrees to abide by the Bidding Requirements in submitting this bid. It is understood that the Owner re- serves Lite right to accept or reject any or all bids and to accept that bid deemed to be in his best interests. The'bidder agrees to -complete the contract by May 1980_ Receipt of the fo 1 wing addenda numbers is hereby acknowledged: �umger One L have attached the proper bid security to this bid. Thomas .g. Saxton SIGNATURE TITLE' President FIRM NAME Saxton, Inc. ADDRESS 2857 Mt'. Vernon Road S.E. DATE 3/22/79 r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES IIID F01(M - NVVISRu Page B-3 I'I11(ItISII1NCS_.URUUP A (Madison) Sub. Unit price for additional pieces 7 I em I - Luungc ChAir $— 170.80 (L65EO5)( ) ] t um 2' - 2 Sent Couch $__278.15 $ 430.15 $ 164.10 s 65.10 124.55 $ 106.25 $ 102.22 $ 192.32 $ 130.45 s 145.25 $ 138.55 'I 10 '7n $ 131.80 Unit price fur fever )I ecur: $ _ 170_80 $ _ 278.15 $ _ 430_15 •� $— 164.10 $_ 65.10 _- $_12A`55__ $ 106 25 $ 102_ 22 $_192.32 $ 130.45 $ 145.25 _ $—_ 138.55 $_ 119.70 $— 13}:80 - — FURNISHINGS CROUP B (Rudd) Sub. ___•, _-.-It.nn 1 Lounge Chair (H.B.) $ 417.95 $— 417.95 (M06431-11)( ) T lteln '1 -. wo Seater Sofa (HB) $ 735:35 $ _735.35•__ (M06432-11)( ) I rem 1 - F60t 'Stool $ 170.95 _ $_ 110:95:_ (M06I00.11)( ) I , I I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES (L65EO9)( ) Item 3 - 3 Seat.Couch (L65E13)( ) Item 4 - Platform Rocker '.' (C04E55) ( ) ]tem 5 - Ottoman (GO4A90)( ) Item 6 - Arm Chair ' (C14EO5)( ) Item 7 - Side Chair (C14AO5)( ) item 8 - Side Chair (C14AO5)( ) ltem.9 -.'Conference Table (T21J20)( ) item 10 Table (T2 0C10)( ) item 11 .Table (T02EIO)( ) Item 12 Cocktail Table (T02AO2)( ) ]tum 13 End Table ('r02AlO)( ) I Ll:m 14. Bunch (B09W62)( ) $ 430.15 $ 164.10 s 65.10 124.55 $ 106.25 $ 102.22 $ 192.32 $ 130.45 s 145.25 $ 138.55 'I 10 '7n $ 131.80 Unit price fur fever )I ecur: $ _ 170_80 $ _ 278.15 $ _ 430_15 •� $— 164.10 $_ 65.10 _- $_12A`55__ $ 106 25 $ 102_ 22 $_192.32 $ 130.45 $ 145.25 _ $—_ 138.55 $_ 119.70 $— 13}:80 - — FURNISHINGS CROUP B (Rudd) Sub. ___•, _-.-It.nn 1 Lounge Chair (H.B.) $ 417.95 $— 417.95 (M06431-11)( ) T lteln '1 -. wo Seater Sofa (HB) $ 735:35 $ _735.35•__ (M06432-11)( ) I rem 1 - F60t 'Stool $ 170.95 _ $_ 110:95:_ (M06I00.11)( ) I , I I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES i IIell' 4 - Casegoods-Shelf 6 Cabinet Shelf (II(;226-0)( ) 11 em 5 - Hll;ll llasc for Cast -goods (HGIUS)( ) till) F'11RN - W., ISIiU P:, It L! H-4 Unit price for odditiunnl llecuj, S. 432.65 $ 98.80 FUItNISH1NGS GRDUP C (Condi) Sub. Madison Item 1 - Sofa $ 543.35 (7581-000)(•�E70F13 ) 1'tum 2 - Lounge Chair $ 318.57 (1532-000)( WOF05 j ILein 3 - Armless Cha $ 109.61 (730-000) (tTU05 ) — Item 4 - Arm Chair - Half $ 128.48 Hack (732-000)( C14E05 ) Item 5 - Arm Chair -.Full $ •126.82 Hack (734-000)( 12CE05 ) Item 6 - Desk Chair - Ful'l $) 199'25 Hack (738STL57)( C15E39 ILum 7 - Desk Chair;- Full $ 199.25 Hack (739STL57)( C15E39 Item 8 - Side Table $ 123.49 (3/2626-H-000)( TRAM ) Item 9 - Table $ 117.94 (3/2636-H-000)( T62805 ) Item 10 Snfa Table $ (3/2650-u-000)( T02AO2 _j4P,95 _ ) --- Item 11 Table $ 142.00 (14742-000)(f26611 ) FURNISHINGS L1LOLJ D (Howe) Sub. Itans 1 - Folding Table (1266) ( ) Item 2 - Finding Table (12365)( ) ' Item 3 - Finding Table' (1248R)( ) S 136.95 S 114.40 $ 141.35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES U n I L pride far 432,66__ -543.35 S' 318.57 $_109.61 S_ 128.48 S_126.82._ $___199. 25 $ 199_25 ' S_123:49__ S—_117•.94 $ _ _ _.142..95•. $ 142_00 S•__ 136..-95 $-- 11.4_40---- ] fill) FORM - REV1SHI) Page B-5 ' Unit price for UI11L price fur addiIIona] PJereK fewer �Icrvs Item 4 - Folding Table $—_66.75 — (286A)(— ). Icill 5 - 'fable Truck$_ -90.37 $ 9037 i (TKFS-63)( ) _ .---- f Jtem 6 - Table Truck $_ 97.00 $—_97_00 I( (TKES-6)( ) y Item 7 - Table Truck $— 126.50 $_ 126.50 (TKRT-46)( ,) FURNISHINGS CROUP E (Steelcase) Sub'. NO Bid Irem 1 - Chair Max -Stacker $ $ (472-410)(— Item 2 - Chair Dolly for Max- $ $ Stacker (472-D)( ) i tem 3 - Desk (52600 w/9250 $ .hardware)' ( ). Item 4 - -Secretarial Return $ $ ( ) 52 CC 3qq7 — 1[e�a 5 - dw/ DesQLhl526956152 w/: $ 9250 hardware]_) Item 6 - Credenza (52 N 604 w/ $ $ 1 9250 hard.) ( ).• I tem 7 - Desk (52600-62.w/9250 $ $ hardware) ( ) . Item 8 - Desk. $ $ (33450 -OB)( ) ---- _ •.Item' !J '.- Desk $ S••-•-- (33606-AB) ( ) -...... .. 1Lem 10 Desk (33600-OB)(— 33600-OB)(Item It em11 Much. & Typewritter '.$ $ Return (33C37)( ) ----- 1Lum-12 Secretarial Posture. $ $ Chair'(421-520)( —— ILeni 13 Desk Chair $ $ f i I . (421-312)( ) ------ I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES It 111 FOItPI - I:FVlsr:u Pahl' If -1, FUIc;t15HINGS' GROIN' F (Howard Mll l,: r) Sigh. No Bid _ Unit prl c.e fur Uuit prl cu for addit.iuna] CVS 1,_W❑r-.hi.,Ccs I t,:m I - Glua:k SLntiun M:, :;t ct• $ t1,22 532)(___)— Item 2 - i:Iuck (622 680) I?UItN15111NGSOHUll1' C (Peter Pepper) suh. No Bid 1L¢,n 1 - Liieracure Rack (601.)------ ILum 2 - Steel Sand Urn and Wasce Receptacle w/ ------ Sifter (21.7) (— ) FUItNISII]Nl_S CROUP H•(.D'avid Morgan) Sub. NO Bid 1'LeIII I.- bar Stool '. $ (x/216-001) ( ) ---- — - FURNISHINGS GROUP I.(George Kovacs) Sub. No Bid 1Lum 17- Ceramic Lamp $ $ (2.551)( ) — -- F1114N I Sill NGS CHOMP J (Monarch) Sub. No Bid L Lam 1 - He r.l fining Couch $ $ ( 1001 W3M) (—_) llew Hucllning Couch $ S (2001) ( MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CONTRACT RECEIVED APR? 6 1979 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979, by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the 'Owner" and Pioneer, Inc., party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH: That whereas the Owner has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 23rd day of March, 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said plans, specifications and proposal accurately, and fully describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor is willing to perform the work specified: NOW, THEREFORE, 1T IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2. That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a. Addenda Numbers N1 b. Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for Bids. C. Special Provisions d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 3. That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4. That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. BY �e i��/i ✓= CkSeal ) (Title) Mayor ATTEST: 12�L G�- (Title) City(Title) City Clerk Awarded Contract for: ATTEST: (Title) rrJJJ Company 01V ficial Group F (Howard Miller) $ 697.70 Group H (David Morgan) 565.52 1,263.22 TOTAL With the addition in Group F (Howard Miller) of: 1 (one) station master clock #622-532 @ $66.67 = $66.67 $1,263.22 + 66.67 1,329.89 GRAND TOTAL MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Li i i;u19iI) BY THE LXGAL DEi'ul'.T ■ STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF JOHNSON) On this IL4,Lday of (el) ,, , A.D., 19 7j', before me, a Notary Public duly commissioned and qualified' in and for said County and State, personally appeared Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa; and City Clerk of said City, each being to me personally known to be the identical persons and officers named in the foregoing instrument, who executed the same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. /,. CN1 'S&f j Notary Public in and for a State of Iowa STATE OF SS: COUNTY OF On this &--T" day of A.D., 197 cl before me, a Notary Public in an or the County o �,,,�, ' State ofd � Q President, an (',� SSL Secretary o ( the Corporation w is executo the a ove and foregoing instrument, who being to me known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument 'a�p by me duly sworn, each for himself, did say that they are respectively the Pi fd ht and Secretary of said Corporation;'that (the seal affixed to said instrument is the'seal of said Corporation) (said Corporation has no seal) and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf of the said Corporation, by authority of its Board of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation, by it and each of them voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year last above written. ' \•'10.,.. X.l.n't 1-'(.f. ) Notary Public in and for , County, State of 611CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES • RECEIVED . +B1D FORM - REVISED PARI. I_._'_B1DD_INCREQUIREMENTS Page B-! MAR 91979 I;._ fill) FnkM Iowa City City Council Civic Center Furnishings and Equipment Iowa City, IA 52240 (I) Senior Citizen Center Iowa City, TA 52240 Project No. 7908 The undersigned, having carefully n:.ucs, including Bidding Requirements, examined all contract ducu_ Contract. Spucifications, Addenda Conditions of Lhv e>a.ained the site, proposes to furnish and Drawings, and having :d porf;rm all work required fr:r for the following sum: all labor and materials the above, referenced Projucr. Ukt:ISHINCS CROUP A (Madison) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer FUkR1SHIRCS CROUP B (Rudd) I'r-1posed Substitute Manufacturer FUHNi5111S_ VUC .._. .. UP C _'AO (Condi) hroIt(t.;vo'SubstItute Manuiactw•ur FIIItNI5HIN(:. CROUP D (Howe) j 1'ru1) sed Substitute llanu:acturer I'ORNISIIINaS - GROUP E (SCeelcase) Prupu ed Substitute Manufacturer ._.ses-4....._....— " ($L 91/79` 5./ 00) /. I'IikNItiHINCS_CROUP F (Howard lfiller)---- . Pr up„sed Substitute Manufacturer FURNISHIN0S CROUP 0 (Peter Pe Proposed Substitute Manufacturer 'Revised ar irdical,A in •.fde !i MICROFILMED BY '1 JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES 1401fIES ulu Fogrl - r,r:vlsr:u ruuNlsnlncS tl(uu1) a (David N„rl;n„) I'ru pos vd Snh::l ftuLu rl;nw facto rcr I'IIKN ISH 1 Ni;5_ CKUDP—I (Coorge Kuv•��ra) Prop osud Sub:�tltutu Manul'artu Mer FD NNISIIINCS I;HQl1P J .1_... -' .._ .... ..__.. .. _ (Monarch) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer - ---- -- —_-----------(s No _0g) Dull pricus for lndlvidual items are contufned ou Vagus D -:f through B-6 of the Bid Form. 1'bu bidder agrees to abide by tltc Bidding Requlrrmvuts fu subnilLtfng tills bid. It is understood that till' Owner re- servvs clic rlgbt to accept or reject any or all bids and to accupt that bid deemed to be ill Ills best Lt[crust::. The biddar agreus to complete the contract by A/f2IILA'/ 0D. Ih'cutpt nl the following addenda numbers is hvreby aaknowJudged: U -per '� _R I have attuubud the proper bid security to tills bid. - - S I CNAl 1)1(1' r•il<rl Nnru: . -74 nDUBr:Ss I I)ATII Yd f MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES j BID FORM - RrV1SL:D Page B-3 I'IIkN1&IIINGS GROUP A (Madison) Sob. I:vm 4 - elatform Rocker LlnII prim for (C04E55)( ) Item ��dli r 1„nal vier, s - I tem I - Lounge Chair S _ /' 4, 37 6 - (L65E05)(---) - Item 2 - 2 Seat Couch $ G- .i-,J�•'7,i(- (I.65E09) (C14A05) (_..__.--) I Eem Itvni 3- 3 Seat Couch S //..:I I Z HIANISNINCS GROUP B (Rudd) Sub. Item 1 - Lounge Chair (H.B,) (1,106431-11)( ) I Lem 2 - Two Seater Sofa (BB) (MO6432-11)( ]rem 3 - Foot Stool $ (Up• /Y (MU61DO- 11)(__ ) -- �----- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Ilnit price for fcwc.r__plvrvs-- sZ - s °/3/•.3y s _ . /c-j_'/n_._ 8 I:vm 4 - elatform Rocker (C04E55)( ) Item 5 - Ottoman IIt ,n 6 - Arm Chair (C14E05)(__ ) Item J - Side Chair (C14A05) (_..__.--) I Eem 8 - Side Chair It.:m 9 - Conference 'fable It,•m 1(1 ,]'able Item 11 Table ILURI I'.2 Cocktail Table - (TOJAD2)(_ ._._-) Item 13 End 'fable (TO2A10)(- 'Loin 14 Bunch (B09W62)(`__) HIANISNINCS GROUP B (Rudd) Sub. Item 1 - Lounge Chair (H.B,) (1,106431-11)( ) I Lem 2 - Two Seater Sofa (BB) (MO6432-11)( ]rem 3 - Foot Stool $ (Up• /Y (MU61DO- 11)(__ ) -- �----- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Ilnit price for fcwc.r__plvrvs-- sZ - s °/3/•.3y s _ . /c-j_'/n_._ 8 I r uni 4- Casugoods—Shel f S Cabinet Shelf Irvin 5 - 111);h Hast for Cine -,odds I Ili: 1 0 8) (----- ) FURNISIlINGS GROUP C (Cund[) Suh. Hit) FORM - RFVISEU Page H-4 U n I t price for addir iunal_piecvs Unit price for f.•�e. .r.l'. i Item I - Sufa �..___..�_ S �^-C /- (7581-000)(:---) -� - __SL ltc�, 2 - Lounge Chair $ ID(] Jo3l (7532-UUO)( ) - 1 t,•,;. 3 - Armless Chair (730-000) ] r.vm 4 - Arrn Chair - Halt' $ __LO,U.S! S /(/,;/.Q� 7- back (132-000)(— -._ ..._ ... _- 1 Lem 5 - Arm Chair - Full $ S% �� S 1.S9 Back (734-000)( .mac l t Oesk Chair - Full $ __ �C/3• S -Z ;Back (738S7•L57)(_,—j _tY-_!.-J' 1 r en. i - busk Chair - Full 4X V, `!3 > GrJ Hack (73953'L57)(—___-) Item tl Side Table $- - --._.._.Zs'Y�,,3/.._ >_..._/S1'•.j�_. I( 3/2626-8-000)(_._--) Item 9 -'3'ablc 5----•--/�7.�)z- C S �:�/.n2. (3/2636-8-000)( ) Item 10 Sofa Table g p {/ 2� /• �2/ S ��� �� (3/:650-8-ODO)(__ I tam 11 Table 3 > ' (14742-000)(_— _) --- --•--- FIIHN]SHINGS CROUP p (Howe) Sub, I ten, 1 - Fulding Table (1266) (—_—) ltum ! - Folding Table (1136S)( ) ltew 3 - Fulding Table (1248R)( ) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo1aES Iter. - Folding Table (:'66A) (----) Item 5 - 'fable 'fru[k (TKFS-63)( __) I trm 6 - Table Truck (7kbS-6) (----) Item 7 - Table Truck (T9RT-46)(__ ) FURtrISHINCS CkuIIP E (Steelcase) BID FORM - REVISED Page B-5 Unit price for addit,ona]_pto_ Unit price, for fryer_ ,feces ke ]rem 1 - Chair Max -Stacker (4 72-410) ( ub -4/ —) ]tcn, 2 - Chair Dolly for Max- Stacker (412—D)(_yp-- I t rm 3 - Drsk (52600 w/9250 '- hardware) ( /L.G �•f�+ �1 - ._ . Item 4 - SvervLarial Retu n $` 52 C 37 w/ (h �ucrP - - -- l t •i,. ; - �ct'1�260i 52 w/ s ac '70 ._..__.__. S / �':.��_ hardware)� I[rm 0 ll - rrdenza (52 N�/6044� w/ $ H_SU hard.) ('�S'eU(ri ---- -.`SO.S:._%%-_ _- ----- ----------- - 1 t rm 7.- Ursk (52600-62 , /o^cn $ 369. s'� y 7i(e �• s e% !tell, B - Desk •. > ��/•Y',L -- (33450 -OB _.. . 1 tell) 10 Disk $ (33600 -OB) 13 Item 11 mach. 6 Typewritter $ ///�1,�f7 $ /�c�• j(i Return (33031) _.....-_-- Itcon 12 Secretarial Posture $ /�/• (p r $ /C�.Gf� Chair (421-520)— Item 13 Desk Chair (421-3,z)c MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES BID FORM - REVISED Page B-6 F'Li1;N1SHINCS GROUP F (Howard Hiller) sub. Unit price for Unit price for adJiti...... piece_ fewer _pi-ces — I L, -IL 1 - Clock Station Master $ L,%L .(• $ ��, �� i (622 532).(__ )— Item 2 - Clock (622 680) FURNISHINGS GROUP G (Peter Pepper) Sub. Iter I - Lirerature Rack $_L,� 9-._�l L• $_�—;��7, �7� (601) ( ) % /F- Item 2 - Steel Sand Urn and $__.__.___ S I Waste Rece)La I ---- I C t w Sifter (217) ( ) rURNISHINGS (ROUP H (David Morgan) Sub. lt.:m I• Bar Stool c (K/ 216-001 I'VItNISIINCS CROUP I (George Kovacs) Suh. I tea I - Ceramic Lamp (2551) F.URNISHINGS_(;HOUP J (Moi.jrch) Sul, I t -el 1 - Her.I ln]ng Cnuch (1001 ltdui :' - Rue]filing Couch (2001)( ) r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979, by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "Owner" and Younkers Commercial Interiors, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH: That whereas the Owner has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 20th day of March, 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said plans, specifications and proposal accurately, and fully describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor is willing to perform the work specified: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2. That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a. Addenda Numbers N1 b. Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for Bids.' C. Special Provisions MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- DES MOIRES ■ I d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. 3. That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4. That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. (Seal) (Title) Mayor ATTEST: (Title) City Clerk 3 Awarded Contract for: Group A (Madison) Group D (Howe) Group G (Peter Pepper) Group I (George Kovacs) Group J (Monarch) Contractor (Seal) �I (Title) �.. . Pro,ldent ATTEST: Title Company Offtclal $ 8,500.00 6,681.50 589.00 114.00 839.00 $16,723.50 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES RECBIVED,d APPROVED BY -TRE LEGAL I)VARTUNT With the addition in Group A (Madison) of: 3 (three) NL65EO5 lounge chairs $480.00 1 (one) #T02A1O corner table 114.00 $594.00 $ 594.00 $17,317.50 TOTAL CONTRACT AWARD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES , STATE OF IOWA f ) SS: COUNTY OF JOHNSON) On this 2 1 day of A.D., 19_7L, before me, a Notary Public duly commissioned and qualifieA in and for said County and State, personally appeared d. Vg•,t.� , Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa; and City Clerk of said City, each being to me personally known to be the identical persons and officers named in the foregoing instrument, who executed the'same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. Notary Public in and for t4b/State of Iowa STATE OF Iowa ) SS: COUNTY OF Polk ) On thisl0thday of MD , A.D., 19�L, before me, a Notary Public, in and for the County of " 'Po'1k ..... State of IowaStanlov 11. Krum Fx�vir, , President, an K. 'on J. w tleCorLh Secretes the Corporatiis execute the a ove and foregoing instrument, w o eing to me known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument, and by me duly sworn, each for himself, did say that they are respectively the President and Secretary of said Corporation; that (the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said Corporation) (said Corporation has no seal) and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf of the said Corporation,' by authority of its Board of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation, by it and each of them voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year last above written. Notary Public in And for [ fe County, State of :;p— .r F11CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 111,10 1 - RIDDING RCQUIREMEN'1'S R, ulu Fur, rt 141w.1 Cl ty City Counell Civic Centur luwa City, 1A 52240 +�I;IN FORM - III. .V1SED 0-I FuruISit inp,:, :111-1 Equlpment (I) Soni o Cit i::,•11 Ccul or Iowa City, IA 5°240 Project No. 7908 The uuderslgued, having carefully examined +111 cunlract doeu- ments, Including Bidding Requirements, Conditions of the Contract, Specifications, Addenda and Urawings, and having examined the site, proposes to furnish all labor and mati•riols and perform all work required for Ute above referenced Project i for the following sum: FURNISHINGS CROUP A (Madison) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars —_._( _Ac;nn_nn _.O(j) FURNISHINGS CROUP B (Rudd) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer iPASS ($ PSSS _._ O n ) FURNISHINGS GROUP C (Condi) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Two dollars (S 7,602.00 :00) FURNISIi1NGS CROUP D (Howe) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer *Standard tops Six Thousand Six Hundred Eighty One dollars and 50 cents.. — FURNISHINGS CROUP E (Steelcase) Propusud Substitute Manufacturer PASS o0) FORNISHINGS GROUP F (Howard Miller) I'rupoaed.Suhsei[ute Manufacturer F11itNISIIINCS CROUP C (Peter Pepper) I'rnpased Substitute Manufacturer Five Hundred Eighty Nine dollars *Revised as indicated in Addendum U1. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES t IIID FORM - I:ISVISF:U i Page If -P I'lIKN15Hl_Nf:S (;IIOUY 11 (!)avid Mnrl;.ni) I•nlposYd StIbKLItoLC FIiIIItIIiIL'tlll't•I' A p ----- _ ($ PASS UO s PII 1(N I_SHINCS-CHOIIP 1 (George Kuvarn) -•---. _--------_) ° I'roPesed Substitute Nanulacturer One Hundred Fourtee�llars C ------ • !Lo) F'UKNISNINL'S_(,ItOUY J (Monarch) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer Eight Hundred Thirty Nine dollars --- _ _ (S Unit prices for individual items are contained jjj through B-6 of the Bid Form. on Pales 1{_] I 1'110 bidder agrees [o abide by the Bidding Requircmt•nts in surlvles tIng this the rightto• It accept is or reject understood any Ft or all bids at the Ownerand to accullt Chat bid deemed to be in his beat Interests. � The- bidder agrees grees to complete the contract by 14-16 weeks from date Receipt of the following addenda numbers is heo # 1, by uaknowludlLcd; 1 have -attached the proper bid security to this bid. v I 1:NA'I'U 11 Ii t_ .:.,.`\ ':�Nk�^\Yt\ Jan Stokesbary — — - Commercial Interiors FIRM NAME Younkers AIIIfIiIiSS 7th & Walnut Street Des Moines, Iowa - --._ - 5030650306 '-- - un'rF: 3-20-79 i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HOINES ■ 1111) PUItM - HI>VI51•:U Pnl;t• B -J PIIHNISill NCS t.Itn0P A (Madison) Sub. LIuil. price 'or adJlr conal jriuc_r.; Ilom I - Llnutgu Cb;tIr $ 160.00 Ilett PrICc Iur i vwu r_ ,iccu:: 163.00 $-..262.00 $._ 400. 00 $__158.00 $ 68.00 ---_ $_ 124_00 $_ 106.00_ $_102.00 -_ $186.00 __— $ 130.00 — $ 142.00 136.00 $ 117.00 _ _— $_ 130, 00 $—PASS ___ PIIRNISIIINCS i', Lit? P D (Hudd) Item 2 - ' Seat Couch $ 257_00 .` (1.651`09)(__._.—._—) ) ._...._ ---....- f ILCm 2 - 'tem 3 - 3 Seat Couch $ 395.00 (M06432-11)( ) ' — I[uw ] - Not Stool Item 4 - I'latform Rocker $ 154.00 F (C04E55)( ) --- — Item 5 - ULtoman $ 65.00 ;. RAPIDS -DES 14011JES (CU4A90)( ) Item 6 - Arm Chair $_119.00 (CI4E05)( ) i Itaill 7 - Side Chair $ 102.00 (C14A05)( ) -- Item 8 - Side Chair $ 98.00 (C14A05)( ) — 1Lem 9 - Conference Table $ 180.00 (T2JJ20)( ) Item 10 Table $ 124.00 (T20C10)( ) Item JJ Table $ 137.00 - (TO 2E)0)( ) I Lent 12 Cocktail Table $ 131.00 (T02AO2)( ) — -- Ituna 13 End Table $ 114.00 (TOLIA10)(_--) Item 14 bunch $ 124_00 (1109W62)( ) -- Ilett PrICc Iur i vwu r_ ,iccu:: 163.00 $-..262.00 $._ 400. 00 $__158.00 $ 68.00 ---_ $_ 124_00 $_ 106.00_ $_102.00 -_ $186.00 __— $ 130.00 — $ 142.00 136.00 $ 117.00 _ _— $_ 130, 00 $—PASS ___ PIIRNISIIINCS i', Lit? P D (Hudd) Sub. _ Item I - Lounge Chair (II.B.) $ PASS --� (M(16431-11)( ) — f ILCm 2 - Two .Seater Sofa (RB) $ t 3 (M06432-11)( ) ' — I[uw ] - Not Stool $ s ( i i (1.1061110-11)( ) �---- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES Ilett PrICc Iur i vwu r_ ,iccu:: 163.00 $-..262.00 $._ 400. 00 $__158.00 $ 68.00 ---_ $_ 124_00 $_ 106.00_ $_102.00 -_ $186.00 __— $ 130.00 — $ 142.00 136.00 $ 117.00 _ _— $_ 130, 00 $—PASS ___ Item 4 - Casegoods-Shelf 6 Cabinet Shelf (11(:26-0)(___) l Ium 5 - Illlth Busc for CascguuJ5 (IIG1l)8)( ) 11111 FORM - 1111WISI!11 Page B-4 Uuit price for ndJJ lJon_il plore�: $ _ PASS PASS Unit prier for fewer piet, vH - $ PASS PASS FURNIS111NCS CI(0UP C (Condi) Suh. Item I - Sofa $ _530.00 (1581-000)( ) Itum 2 - Lounge Chair $ 296.00 $__305_00— (7532-000)( _ (7532-000)( ) -- Item 3 - Armless Chair $�153G00 $_160_00___ (730-000) ( _) ltum 4 - Arm Chair - Half $ 153.00 $_160.00 Buck (132-000)( ) Item 5 - Arm Chair - Full $ 129.00 _ $ 136.00 Back (734-000)( ) Ituni 6 - Desk Chair - Full $ 201.50 $ 209.00 Back (738STL57)( ) Item 7 - Desk Chair - Full $ 225.00 $ 232.00 Back (739STL57)( ) Item 8 = Side Table $ 110.00 $---115. 00 (3/2626-B-000)( ) ltum 9 - Table $ 125.00 $_ 190._00 (3/2636-B-000)( ) Itum 10 Sofa Table $__ 147.50 -_ $ 1.52.00 (1/2650-B-000)( ) 1tum II Table $ 285.00 $ 293.00 ^_ (14742-000)( ) Fit RNJSIJINCS CII(1UP D (Bowe) Sub. STANDARD TOPS itow I - Folding Table $ 127.00 $,__ 130.00 _ - (1266) ( ) Itum 2'- Folding Table $_108.00 $___112.00 (1236S)(_) I LVIII 3 - Folding Table $ 131.0 $. 135.00___ (1248R)( ) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES Item 4 - Finding Table (: 8 b A) (- _.___ ) Item 5 - 'i'abJe 'Truck ('!•KFS -63) ( ) Itcw 6 - 'fable Truck ('TKI:S-6)( ) Item 7 - Table Truck (TK1t'f-46)( ) Iglu FnkM - IIGL'ItifD Page D-, Ilei[ prlt'i for _uldl[lunal t)1.i.c.a Unit price for fvwt. r .h lct_r:: $_ 67.00 _ $ 70.00 $_ -91.00 _ - $- 95_00 S 97.50 --- --- S__102.00 S_ 123'00 _ $ 128.00 F^UIJN1SHINCS OiJOUI' E (SteelCase) Sub. f lten' 1 - Chair Max -Stacker S _ (472-410)( item 2 - Chair Dolly for Max -S- Stacker (472-D)( I I tem 3 - Desk (52600 w/9250 S- hardware) ( ) Item 4 - Secretarial Return$ 552 C 37 wjy/ I tt'Ill S - De sk h?5jdgi§6 W/ $ 9250 harciwarej ) — Item 6 - Credenza (52 N 604 w/ S— 9250 hard.) ( Item 7 = Desk (52600-62 w/9250 $_ hardware) ( ) item 8 - Desk S J (33450 -OB)( ) - Itrm 9 - Desk S 03600 -AB)( 11 em 10 Desk S i (33600 -OB)( ) — Item Jl Mach. 6 Typewritter $ J,? Return (33C37)( - Item 12 Secretarial Posture $ Chair (421-520)( - i l tell! J3 Desk Chair S (421-312)( ) --- 2 X f PASS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMES $ PASS S�S HH) FORM - 1:1:VISIiU Pagu M -b FIIIUIISIIINGS GROUP F (Howard MIIIcr) Sub• UnIL prieu fur Uult pcicc tur additlonnl�Jeurs - I- E. lcrs pr- ILcw I - Clock Station Mustur rl (622 532)( ) ltcin 2 - Cluck $'--_NNN ___-. $ \t\.,:__„ (622 b80)( ) FURNISHINGS GROUP G (PeLer Pepper) Sub. Item 1 - Literature Rack $ 117.00 (601) ( ) ILem 2 - Stuel Sand Urn and $_ 71.00 $,75_00___.__ Was Le Receptacle w/ Slfcer (217) ( ) FURNISHINGS GROUP 11 (David Morgan) Sub.__- ILem L- Bar Stool $_pass - (K/216 -001)( ) I•ORNISIIINGS GROUP I (George Kovacs) Sub. 1 Lem 1 - Ceramic Lamp $ 57.00 $_61.00_ (2551)( ) . FURNISHINGS CROUP J (Monarch) Sub. ILem 1 - Reclining Couch $295_00 $_ 307.00_,^_, ( 1001 W3M) (__) item 2 - Reclining Couch $_ 2.49_00 $_,255.,00.- _____ (2001)( ) FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 4th day of April, 1979, by and between the City of Iowa City, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as the "Owner" and Frohwein Office Supply Co., party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor". WITNESSETH: That whereas the Owner has heretofore caused to be prepared certain plans, specifications and proposal blanks, dated the 22nd day of March, 1979, for Furnishings and Equipment I, Senior Citizens Center, Iowa City, Iowa under the terms and conditions therein fully stated and set forth, and Whereas, said plans, specifications and proposal accurately, and fully describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor is willing to perform the work specified: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED: 1. That the Owner hereby accepts the attached proposal of the Contractor for the work and for the sums listed therein. 2. That this Contract consists of the following component parts which are made a part of this agreement and Contract as fully and absolutely as if they were set out in detail in this Contract: a. Addenda Numbers N1 b. Notice of Public Hearing and Advertisement for Bids. C. Special Provisions FIICROFIIMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES d. Proposal e. This Instrument. The above components are complementary and what is called for by one shall be as binding as if called for by all. 3. That payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract. 4. That this Contract is executed in three (3) copies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the date first written above. By -e4< (Seal) JTitle) Mayor ATTEST: >7 (Title) Ci!y Clerk Awarded Contract for: Group E (Steelcase) $19,890.00 TOTAL Contractor Seal 8 Title) ATTEST: (Tit e)�Lc uL�i1 tom. ompany Offi�T RECEIVED A APPROVED BY THE LEGAL DEFART9M y-ip -,7e, per_ r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF JOHNSON) duly Oommission� e� d andyqualified n and for�said Count��dbefore me, a State, personallyyPublic appeared e .civVILA— , Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa; and _ , City Clerk of said City, each being to me personally known to be the identical oersons and officers named in the foregoing instrument, who executed the' same under and by virtue of the authority vested in them by the City Council of said City, and each for himself acknowledged the execution thereof to be his voluntary act and deed for purposes herein expressed. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notarial Seal at Iowa City, Iowa, the day and year last above written. Notary Public in and for tFT State of Iowa STATE OF COUNTY OF ) SS: IJ�I:h15o1� ) On this n day of JILL A.D., 19 J!� ,before mea Notary Public, in an or the Coun y o h'n Suri , State of anT ' President, Secretary, o , ugal!l Co. the CO I ration w icI execute t e a ove and foregoing instrument, w o DeVng to me known as the identical persons who signed the foregoing instrument, and by me duly sworn, each for himself, did say that they are respectively the President and Secretary of said Corporation; that (the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said Corporation) j and that said instrument was by them signed and sealed on behalf of id the saCorporation, by authority of its Board of Directors, and each of them acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Corporation, by it and each of them voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my Notarial Seal the day and year last above written. Notary Public ih and for Dye County, State of _i Ou� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 BIDDING REQUIIt l.MLNTS u. 11111 Fokrl luwu Clty City. Council Civic Gvniur lowa City, IA 52240 *1111) FORM - kIiVISPaI Pale B-1 Furnlshtnl;s sad Equipment (1) Senior Ci.tizc❑ Lout rr Iowa City, JA 52240 Project No. %9()8 The uodursignud, having carefully examined all cuniract 410CLI- mvutS, including Bidding Requirements, Conditious of thv Contract., Specifications, Addenda and Drawing::, and having exumiued the site, proposes to furnish all labur and materials and perform all work required for the above referenced Projuct for thy following sum: FURNISI1INCS_GROUP A (Madison) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer -- ($ .00) FURNISHINGS CROUP B (Rudd) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer (S OO) . FURNISHINGS GROUP C (Condi) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer I — (S .00) FURNISHINGS CROUP D (Howe) Pruposud Substitute Manufacturer f Fl1RNIS1111L(,S CROUP E (Steelcaue) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer -... — _ ---($-- '19,890. 111 1-.11NNISHINGS CROUP F (Howard Miller) Prupused Substitute Manufacturer _.x(10 ) FURNISill NGS GROUP C (Peter Pepper) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer ° This price is in effect until the next price increase from Steelcase which is anticipated in the last quarter of 1979 or the first quarter *Revised as indicated in Addendum U1. of 1980. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t1DIRES I_URNISIII NCS L'ROUI' lI (David Morgan) _. Pruposcd SUbStILLiIL• Planutacturur I+111<N15111NGS cit UllP I (George Kovacs) Proposed Substitute Manufacturer PUNNJSIIINCS CROUP J (Monarch) Pruposed Substitute Manufacturer 1111) PONM - NI?VI::ED Page U-2 Unit prices for individual items Lire contained on pages U-3 through B -b of the gid Form. Thu bidder agrees to abide by tite Bidding Requlrcments in I:ubmitting this bid. It is understood that the Owner re- serves the right to accept or refect any or all bids and to accept thnt bid deemed to be in his beat interests: The bidder agrees to complete the contract by July 1, 1979_ _ Nuceipt of the following addenda numbers is hereby uludgud: Addendum No. 1 1 have attached the proper bid security to this bid. 1 � S ICNATV NI! T ITIX President j FJNPI NAME FROHWEIN OFFICE SUPPLY c0, (An Iowa Corporation) - ADDNESS 215 E,Washington St. -Iowa City, Iowa DATE March 22, 1979 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t40ItIES 111 1) FORM - I(I:V ISI!U Page 11-3 FIINN•ISIILNCS GROUP A (Madison) Sub. FURN15111NCS GROUP IS (Rudd) Sub. Ilam I - Lounge Chair (H.B.) $ (M06431-11)( ) ILeIII '_ - Two Seater Sofa (RB) $ 0106432-11)( ) IlcIII 7 - FOOL Stool $ (1(10100-11)( ) — MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES III)II. price (ur Unit priro lur a tI III 111)I1Jl I)11t 1t 1_)i IatWl•I' Il cl'a•): Item 1 - Luuuge Cl)iIr $ lluln 2 — 2 Seat Coucll "---- (1.65EO9) ( ) — - ILum 3 - 3 Seat Couch $ ------- $ ( L 6 5 E 1 3) ( ) -'- — - — Item 4 - PlaLform Rocker (GO 4E55) ( ) — --•------ Item 5 - Ottoman $ $ (C04A90)( ) — ILem 6 - Arm Chair $ $ (C14EO5)( ) —•------ Item 7 - Slde Chair $ $ Item E - Side Chair $ (C14AO5)( ) $ — ---- 1 Lem 9 - Conference Table $ (T21J20)( ) $ Irent 10 Table $ (T20G1O)( ) $ ---- Item 11 Tuble $ (T02EIO)( ) $ heel 12 Cocktail Table $ (T02AO2)( ) $ --------- IIunl 17 End Table $ (T 0 2 A 10) (—.—) $ ---- --- 11.u111 14 Bunch $ (1109W62)( y FURN15111NCS GROUP IS (Rudd) Sub. Ilam I - Lounge Chair (H.B.) $ (M06431-11)( ) ILeIII '_ - Two Seater Sofa (RB) $ 0106432-11)( ) IlcIII 7 - FOOL Stool $ (1(10100-11)( ) — MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Ilan 4 - Casugoods-She.If d Cab111L•t Shelf (II(:226-0)(__) J t um 5 - II I l;h BaSc for CaSrguods (11CI118)( ) 1 FUI(NISHINCS CROUP C (Condi) Sub. Item 1 - Sufa $ (7581-000)( _) Item 2 - Lounge Chair $ (1532-000)( ) IteOil 3 - Armlr.ss Chair $ (730-000) ( ) Item 4 - Arm Chair - Half $ . Back (732-000)( Item 5 - Arm Chair - Full $ Back (134-000)( j Item 6 - Desk Chair - Full $ Back (738STL57)( heal 7 - Desk Chair - Full $_ Back (739STL57)( Item 8 - Side fable $ _ (3/2626-B-000)( ) l tem 7 - Table $ (3/2636-B-000)( ) 1Cuui 10 Sofa Table $ (3/2650-B-000)( ) ltum 11 Table $ (14742-000)( ) _ FUHNISHINGS GROUP D_ (Howe) Sub. Item 1 - Folding Table (126b) ( ) Folding Table (12365)( ) ltcit, '1 - Fulding fable ( 1111 if O( ) fill) FORM - RIiVISliO Fane H-4 Unit price Cor uddltlonaf 1�I�•r.uti Unit: price fo'r ICwur lll'-h $ I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES I Lem 4 - F u I d lug 'Fable (286A)(__ ) I Lem S-- Table Truck (TKPS-63)( ) Item 6 - 'fable Truck S 34.75 (TK ES -6) ( l Ium 7 - —) Table Truck (•1'KHT- 46)( ) 141 n I'OItM - Itl•:vlsl•:u Pa 1% L. li-5 Unit price for n ddltlnnaI �lur'r❑ S $ S Unit prlrc for fou r•r lrlur-r_--.. .ti PURNISIIINCS CROUP E (Steelcase) Sub. Item 1 - Chair Max -Stacker $ 34.75 (472-410)( ) ------- S 34.75 Item 2 - Chair Dolly for Max- $ 90,00 Stacker (472-D) ( 90,00 1 tem 3 - Desk (52600 w/9250 $ 363.00 • hardware) ( )--------•-- S 363.00•_ -- Item 4 - Secretarial Return $ 236.50 236.50 Cop 37 w/ ( ) $-- Item 5 qq52 - 11�sk hT51ig.56=52 w/ 471.00 9250 hardware] $ $- 471.00 . Item 6 - Credenza (52 N 604 wl $ $41.00 541.00 9.150 hard.) ( $ 1 t cm 7 - Desk (52600-62 w/9250 $ 410.00 hardware) 410.00 _^ - - ltew R - Desk S 218.25 (33450 -OU)( ) } 218.25_-- 1Lem 9 - Desk$- 267.00 (33600 -AB)( ) -•---_._.. $ 267.00 7 Lem 10 Desk $ 223.25 (33600 -OR) ( ) — ---• $�23.2$__ I LL`rll 11 Mach. b Typewritter $ 162.00 Return (3 3 C 3 7) ( ------- $-. 162.00 Item l2 Secretarial Posture $ 117,00 Chair (421-520)( _) --- 4__117.00-- 1 turn 13 Desk Chair $ 149.00 (421-312)( ) — ---- $ -149.00 These prices are effective until the next price increase - from Steelcase which anticipated in is the last quarter of 1979 or the first quarter of 1980, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES NN 9 0 II -6 VIINNISHINGS C.RIIIJI, F (Iloward Miller) Ih, i 1 price I'll Unit priru ler :n1Jlt I o 1) it j 1 t ejll j I: I k S L It M A u r (622 5 3 1; I L cal 2 t 6 2 2 680) ...... it N 1 .9 11 ljG'S _j,L)U 11 C (PeLLr Puppvr Still ILCM I - Literature Rack N)O 0 I Lem 2 - Steel Sand Urn and $ Waste Receptacle W/ Sifter (217) FUItN1SHINGS GROUP H (David Morgan) Sub. ILLm I - Bar Stool (K/216-001)( _FURNlSjIlNGS CROUP I (George Kovacs) Sub. item I - Ceramic Lamp $ (2551) FURNISH]NGS GROUP J (Monarch) Sub. Item I - Reclining Couch $ (1001 Item 2 7 Reclining Couch (2001)( IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES Aad t I r.u.r �� �• CIVIC CENTER CIlUEWA U240IDN Si. —// IOWA CRY, IOWA 5}210 1I0.75d.1000 March 28, 1979 Tom Slockett Johnson County Auditor Johnson County Courthouse Iowa City, Iowa Dear Mr. Slockett: At their regular meeting on March 27th, the Iowa City Council amended the FY79 Budget as shown by the attached proceedings: 2 copies of City Budget Amendment & Certification Resolution 1 copy of Certificate of Publication from Press -Citizen 2 copies of Proposed amendments outlined by Finance Director Yours very truly, Abbie Stolfus, CMC , City Clerk cc/Finance _-11 Johnson Co., owa MAR 2 �- 1979 COUNn'nJO1TOR MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES • CIT BUDCI lh1ENDh1ENT AND CERTIFICATIL 'RESOLUON 0 To the Auditor of ................. JOh)14011 . , .. County, Iowa, and to the State Comptroller: The Council of the City of IOIUa. City in said county (counties) met on ..... ... Mmch 20...... 19 79 , at the place and hour set in the notice, a copy of which accom. Paries this certificate and is certified its to publication. Upon taking up the proposed amendment, it was con- sidered and taxpayers were heard for or against the amendment. The Council, after hearing all taxpayers wishing to be heard and considering the statements made by them, gave final consideration to the proposed amendment(a) to the budget and modifications proposed at the hearing, if tiny'. Thereupon, the following resolution was introduced: RESOLUTION NO..... 7.977.1.37 ... A RESOLUTION AMENDING TIIE CURRENT BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING .JUNE 30, 19 79 (AS AMENDED LAST ON, 19. ) ............. . Be It Resolved by the Council of the City of . Iowa City .... , Iowa: Section 1. Following notice published ILInACh 15 _. , 19 79. , and the public hearing held . hla Ach 90 .. 19 79, the current budget (as previously amended) is amended as set out herein. Reason: . . .................. . .......... . ........................... Reason:..... PROGRAM TOTALS FROM 14 TO: 16 Community Protection d FUND.... ... .................... ...... FUND...... As Certified or Amount of As Certified or Amount of Last Amended on Change Amended To: Last Amended on Change Amended To: 1. Total Beginning Cosh Balance Polley and Administration 195 049 5.498J5 22 3 424 963 2. Non -Property Tax Income 30 668 691 2.664.656 3. State -Shared Revenue 4. Property Tax Asking 6. Total Resources 6. Less, Working Balance (Reserve) _ 7. Net Resources for Expenditures S. Total Requirements 9. Community Protection 10. Human Development Il. Home & Community Environment 12. Policy and Administration 13. Total Expenditures Reason: . . .................. . .......... . ........................... Reason:..... PROGRAM TOTALS FROM 14 TO: 16 Community Protection Human Develo ment Hame &Community Environment Polley and Administration 195 049 5.498J5 22 3 424 963 5,772,463 30 668 691 2.664.656 7 Passed this . ....??th....... any of .... ........ March79 1 Attest: Vote (list by names) Mayor � Ayes- Balmer, deProsse. Erdahl, Perret , Vevera Abse -pt: S/............ se`t..n..:..0',. oara+:_.Neuhauser. Roberts city clerk .... Nays: none I hereby certify the above transactions to be a true copy of the proceedings of the city council and the resolu- tions passed in the above matter, March 28 79 ..................... ............. .19 ......... S/ ........... ... 7�'r��.:.�%:...,�c.....juv4�.......... City Clerk ! -An overall increase in the budget or n major change in the proposed transfers between programs overall will — require a new notice and hearing. GzQ MICROFILMED BY O JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES I I t'urm 8601: UlevLea 101'11 I ruu, , <u.,,<, n., <murcn, mu AMENDMENT Oh CURRENT CITY BUDGET N O T I C E The Council of the City of ......... .Iowd..Ci.ty.. .......... in ........... ....._..Johnson ......... ............ ._......_..County, (mlme(s) of county or counties) 3 Iowa, will meet at.. Ci v.i.0 _Center ............. _ .at 7:30 PMon..... __.... ... .March..20....... ........... 10..79...., .I ,place of meeting) (hour) (date) for the purpose of amending the current budget of the city for the fiscal year ending June 30, 10_7_2, by changing estimates of revenue and expenditure appropriations in the following funds and programs and for the following reasons: Reason: ...... PROGRAM TOTALS FROM 14 TO: 15 Reason: . . ..... ........ Community Protection FUND. ............ _._......_ ...... ....... .... .......... .. As Certified or Amount of Last Amended on Change Amended To: ' FUND. .. As Certified or Amount of Lost Amended on Change Amended To: . Total Beginning Cash Balance 3 195 049 5 498 350 22 609926 2 2 0 nAdj 3,424,963 5,772,463 Non -Property Tax Income 22664,656 State -Shared Ile a[ . I'roprrty Tax Asking . Total Resources _Lass, working Balance ( Reserve) Net Resources for Expenditures_ . Total Requirements . Community Protection Bumnn Development Home & Community Environment Policy and Administration Total Expenditures Reason: ...... PROGRAM TOTALS FROM 14 TO: 15 Reason: . . ..... ........ Community Protection Human Development home & Community Environment Policy and Administration 3 195 049 5 498 350 22 609926 2 2 0 nAdj 3,424,963 5,772,463 30,668,691 22664,656 There will be no increase in tax levies to be paid in the current fiscal year named above. Any Increase in expenditures set out above will be met front the increased non -property tax revenues and cash balances not budgeted or considered in this current budget. This will provide for a balanced budget. City cle Note: Explain the source of any additional monies and the reason for the need to Increase or decrease appropriation. If amendment includes change in appropriation for more than two funds, use additional fund bones for informa- tion required within the bold lines. Instructions: Publish only the specific funds amended. The above form of notice may be one column wide and may include one m• more funds. It must be published not less than four (4) days nor more than twenty (20) days before the hearing, provided that, in cities of less than 200 population and in such cities only, such notice may be posted in three public places. After the public hearing the council shall adopt by resolutions the amend- ment its finally determined which action shall be made a matter of record. For detailed information, sce Chapter 384, division 11, Code of lown. Cer(ifira(ion of Publicalion 1 hereby certify that the above notice was published (posted in three public places :is established by ordinance) in Iowa City.Press-Ci tizen. .. ... on.. ..March 15.,' ....... 10.79... (tame of newspaper) / �///7� City Clcr MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101nE5 rte., MICROFIVID BY JORM MICROLAB rFDAP PAPP:,,,. a It, I'll •. ity iL• ` ry y, 4 1M �� � .'{. i�'i� 1 '�'i� F h.,T �I 4 � Y' r, DATE: March 23, 1979 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Material in Friday's Packet Copies of letters to Senator Culver and Congressman Leach regarding SMSA status for Iowa City. 631 Memorandum from Carol deProsse regarding trip to Washington, D.C. b3 2 Copies of letters from the City Manager to Applegates Landing and the Brown Bottle regarding the no -smoking ordinance. b 3 3 Memorandum from the City Manager to the State legislators regarding transit funding. 6139 Copy of letter from the Transit Manager to Andrea Mauer in reply to letter on the consent calendar. (,3,5- Memoranda ,3,S Memoranda from the Director of Public Works: a. East Side Cambus Route 6 3 b. Sidewalk in the 1100 Block of North Dubuque G37 Copy of letter from the Director of Public Works to Hy -Vee regarding traffic signal conduit interconnect. /039 Letter from Iowa City Community School District regarding crossing guards. 6 -31 Memorandum from the Finance Director regarding G.O. Bond Issue. 6 y 0 Memorandum from Paul Glaves regarding CBD Street Improvement Project, Phase II 6141 Second quarter reports for the Departments of Public Works and Planning and Program Development. Io H 2 Mayor's Youth Employment Program monthly report for February 1979. 693 Letter from Johnson County Regional Planning Commission regarding meeting with legislators. 6y9 Pleet-iTlcrrroti III m ount�li�gtbTi31—P13iirtl 51on. Agenda for March 27 meeting of Resources Conservation Commission 6 4,5 - Article: Balanced Budget Fallacies 6 y 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I4011jEs CITY CSF IOW/-\ CITY civic CH- l R 4I( ) Lvv/si ur.Il. it >I I :>I IOWA CIN, KAAAA ')2)4(!) March 14, 1979 The Honorable John Culver U.S. Senator 206 Federal Building 101 First Avenue, S.E. Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401 Dear Senator Culver: I am writing on behalf of the City Council and the citizens of Iowa City for the purpose of expressing our sincere gratitude for the interest and effort you have given us regarding the possibility of our being desig- nated a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. After a disappointing special census in 1974, we were even more dis- heartened to learn that the most recently developed criteria for SMSA designation, as originally proposed, seemed.to make our situation hope- less. However, more recent modifications of these criteria appear to render our present position quite favorable. We appreciate the attention you have given us concerning this matter. We feel you have represented us well. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Robert A. Vevera Mayor jml/15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40RVES 63/ I CITY CSF IOWA CITY r-'.IVi<; i:(f�1f E R dl�,� L �Pll�; ;l lli`I' �I� If�.l ;,! IC)V'✓/t �,�� �( �r �Vdl� `�%%�i'� (.�I'�j ;;5� 1r��; March 14, 1979 The Honorable James Leach U.S. Representative 505 Iowa State Bank Building Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Leach: Thank you for your recent letter and attached communication from Juanita Kreps. The contents therein would seem to confirm the real possibility that Iowa City may finally be designated a Standard Metropolitan Statis- tical Area in the near future. You are well aware that this has been our goal for some time. We were very disappointed after the 1974 special census and even more disheartened when the latest criteria for designation were originally proposed. We are now extremely pleased to find that those criteria have been modified and that our prospects have become quite favorable. On behalf of the City Council and the citizens of our city, I wish to express our sincere gratitude for the attention you have given us and for the time and effort you have put forth in our interest. You have represented us admirably in this matter. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Robert A. Vevera Mayor bj MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES IIOINES G3/ City of Iowa Cite; MEMORANDUM Date: March 23, 1979 To: City Council From: Carol deProsse Re: Trip to Washington, D.C., March 15-16 Made by Clemens Erdahl and Carol deProsse On Thursday afternoon Clemens and I visited with Representative James Leach. We discussed the dissatisfaction of the City Council with the procedures involved in the placement of Freeway 518. Representative Leach asked for a packet of background information to be sent to his office and Clemens and I indicated that we would send this and keep him informed of the matter as it progresses. Leach suggested that one of his aides attend our Friday morning meeting with the DOT. We did not accept this offer, feeling that we wanted as much candor as possible at the meeting and that this would most likely occur with as few people present as possible. On Friday morning we visited with Mortimer Downey of the Federal De- partment of Transportation. Mr. Downey is in charge of planning and programming for the Federal DOT, directly under the service of Mr. Brock Adams, the Secretary of Transportation. Also in attendance at that meeting was Tom Kubos from the Intergovernmental Affairs Office. Al- though Clemens and I initially began to discuss the procedures involved in the decision of where to place Freeway 518, and our dissatisfaction with those procedures, the conversation quickly turned to the whole policy of the Federal government as it now relates to the placement and construction of freeways. The Federal DOT feels that the evidence is clear that freeways by and large have not had the positive impact that many people believe them to have had. It is the feeling of the Depart- ment of Transportation that freeways can have a beneficial effect and that they can support the community's transportation network, but that this has often not been the case in cities across the country. When we began to talk about why the City Council was interested in a more westerly alignment, based on factors involved in our comprehensive planning process, we found them to be extremely knowledgeable with respect to our arguments and, therefore, sympathetic to our point of view. We had taken with us copies of our Comprehensive Pian as well as maps showing the original DOT alignment of Freeway 518 and the proposed Iowa City westerly alignment. They indicated to us that it it not possible to simply pick up the telephone and talk to Mr. Kassel and say "change the alignment of Freeway 518." The Federal government needs some way to become involved in the project that would allow them to effect some kind of change. They need to be able to review the project because of some irregularity in the application of Federal regulations or some other mechanism, such as an inadequate environmental impact 632 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mo1MEs O statement. This posture is consistent with Federal involvement of other freeway projects similar to ours in other cities across the country such as Dayton, Ohio, Rochester, New York, and Richmond, Virginia. They indicated to us that these communities were trying to do much the same as Iowa City, that is to change the proposed location of these freeways. Mr. Downey indicated that it was probably too late to do anything about the situation of Rochester, New York, that they were meeting that after- noon to discuss the Dayton, Ohio, situation, and it looked as though they probably would be effective in changing the location of the freeway around the Richmond, Virginia, area. When we asked them how the Federal government might become involved in this review process (i.e., what steps we needed to take to get their involvement), several suggestions were put forth. Initially, Mr. Downey indicated the need for involvement of other Federal departments. Spec- ifically, he mentioned the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD is very interested in the whole issue of freeway construction as it impacts policies and programs of that department. They have seen, over the years, freeway construction disrupt their housing programs, under- mine their initiatives in the development of downtown commercial areas, and interupt other kinds of programs that HUD oversees. He gave us the name of a woman in the Department of HUD to contact and urged us to do that fairly rapidly. Another department that he believed would have direct interest would be the Environmental Protection Agency, par- ticularly as this department relates to the new sewage plant construction that Iowa City has planned. Again he gave us the name of a gentleman to contact in EPA. When he asked what the status of our environmental impact statement was, I informed him that it had been approved at the district court level. Further discussion on this matter indicated that although the impact statement had received court approval, it may not be an adequate impact statement due to the fact that it did not address environmental concerns for the entire corridor of Freeway 518, but rather for the segment of Freeway 518 that will be located in Johnson County. Since Mr. Downey seemed to be so interested in the status of the EIS and the fact that it might not be satisfactory, I asked him whether or not the Federal govern- ment would see any benefit to possible litigation on the part of the City challenging either the adequacy of the EIS or the failure of the original alignment of 518 to conform with the policies outlined in our Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Downey indicated that this would be the best "handle" that the Federal government might have for involvement in this issue because of the time that this would buy for their department to become involved in a review process. Additionally, Mr. Downey suggested the involvement of our congressional representatives, particularly Senator Culver because he sits on the Public Works Committee. This meeting was very satisfactory. Both Clemens and I felt that the Federal government was interested in our problem, primarily because of history showing that freeways have had intense negative impacts on the residential and commercial development of cities. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEM RAPIDS•DES MOINES Later that afternoon Clemens went to meet with a representative from the Environmental Protection Agency. This meeting was primarily a public relations effort, suggesting that close cooperation between the City and EPA, rapid approval of our grant, and construction of our sewer facility would be a model that could be used for other communities of our size throughout the country. At the same time Clemens was meeting with EPA, I was to be meeting with UMTA. I was two minutes late to my meeting and when I arrived at the Secretary's desk the people that I was to meet with had departed for lunch. At 3:00 in the afternoon I met with Mr. Morris Cohen of the Health, Education and Welfare Department. Mr. Cohen and I discussed the pos- sibility of obtaining funds for our senior citizens center. He indi- cated to me that they were operating at an appropriations level of last year's effort and that due to inflation this was actually a 10% decrease in available funds. Therefore, he did not see any new programs or additional monies becoming available for senior citizens centers in the near future. However, he did suggest that we apply for discretionary funds and that he would send me the rules and regulations regarding the application of these funds when they were published in a month to six weeks. I asked him whether or not he thought it would be worth the effort of Iowa City to apply for these funds since we would compete for them nationally, and he indicated that because our project seemed so innovative (primarily because of the building in which we were housing it, its downtown location, and the fact that we were trying to couple it with low cost housing), that it would be worth our effort to compete for some discretionary funds. Based upon my conversation with Mr. Cohen and pending receipt of the regulations, my recommendation would be that we apply for discretionary funds. Both Clemens and I felt that the trip to Washington was productive. I would suggest that the City Council make contact with people from EPA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development regarding the align- ment of Freeway 518. I would further suggest that the City Council continue this kind of contact in the future feeling that the personal effort involved is beneficial to the City in the long run. cc: Hugh Mose Julie Vann Dick Plastino jm3/12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES I n CITY OF IOWA CITY C:IVIC C:EfJIER 410L WAS IINGIUN Sl. IOWA ("'IIY 1(.?WA 52240 (319)364-180D March 20, 1979 Mr. Gilbert I. Kelley, Manager Applegates Landing 1411 South Gilbert Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Kelley: On April 11, 1978, the City Council of Iowa City passed an ordinance which prohibits smoking in designated places. The ordinance requires at least 25 percent of the permanent seating area be designated as a no -smoking area in bars and restaurants. Our office has received a number of complaints that your restaurant has not complied with this ordinance by designating no -smoking areas. Non- compliance of this ordinance by restaurants and bars is noted and taken into consideration by the City Council when applications for renewal of beer and liquor licenses are submitted. I am enclosing a copy of the no -smoking ordinance for your information. Please bring your restaurant into compliance as soon as possible so that I may notify the City Council of your corrective action. Sincerely yours, Neal G. Berlin City Manager is cc: City Council City Clerk MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 6 3j r CITY OF ('I\lC' ('I NII 1 /II() L. WA';1 III�I(;1( )N ;;I March 20, 1919 IOWA CITY If )WA (.11 Y h ,VV/%, l,21�1C1 354.13Ck) Mr. Douglas Carlo, Manager Brown Bottle 114 South Clinton Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Carlo: ! On April 11, 1918, the City Council of Iowa City passed an ordinance which prohibits smoking in designated places. The ordinance requires at_least 25 percent of the permanent seating area be designated as a no smoking area in bars and restaurants. Our office has received a complaint that your restaurant has a very small no -smoking area and that smokers are often seated in that designated area. I am enclosing a copy of the referenced ordinance so you may check to i determine whether or not your restaurant is in compliance with the require- ments. Noncompliance of the no -smoking ordinance by restaurants and bars is noted and taken into consideration by the City Council when applications for renewal of beer and liquor licenses are submitted. Sincere yo yours, Neal G. Berlin ! City Manager is cc: City Council City Clerk I' r I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40I1JES City of Iowa City MEMORAND JM Date: March 20, 1979 To: Senator Small, Representative Hibbs, Represetative Lloyd -Jones From: Neal Be�Vin, City Manager Re: Transit Funding Several weeks ago we discussed the problems Iowa City has been having with the Transit Division of DOT in theallocation of transit funding. Since that time we have discussed with Ken Dueker and Dave Forkenbrock of the Institute of Urban and Regional Research their Participation in a recommendation to the Transit Division which would change the transit grant allocations. They are proposing a formula allocation which will .take into account operating cost, operating revenue, ridership and revenue miles. This formula will place incentives upon the level of accomplishments and will eliminate most of the problems we presented to you. The adoption of the formula will provide assurance of financial assistance from one year to the next and increase the allocation to Iowa City. Apparently, the Transit Division is seriously considering adoption of this formula. For the foregoing reasons, it appears then that it would be desirable for Iowd City to continue to work with the Transit Division and urge adoption of this ormula. Also, we received word from the Office of Revenue Sharing that the latest population estimate will make Iowa City and University Heights eligible for Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area designation and Section V funding through UMTA. With these two events, I believe it would be appropriate for us to see where the DOT program heads in the months immediately ahead. If it becomes clear that we need your help, we will call. Thanks for your assistance. bdw cc: City Council Dick Plastino Hugh Mose MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 63W March 13, 1979 Ms. Andrea Ilauer 1015 Onkcrest Street I Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Ms. Hauer: i Thank you for your letter of March 7, 1979. During the winter, our buses had severe problems operating on schedule during the afternoon peak period. To alleviate these problems, we altered some routes, including the West Benton bus. However, as the weather warmed, Street conditions improved and passenger loads decreased, greatly reducing the need for these various "shortcuts". Recently we have had a number of inquiries such as yours, and several drivers have also brought the matter to our attention, indicating that there is now adequnto time to make the West Benton schedule on it's original route. Therefore, we intend to return the West Benton route to it's original alignment effective next Monday, March 19th. I trust this will solve the problem which prompted you to write. Thank you again for your interest in Iowa City Transit. I trust we can continue serving you in the future. Sincerely, i HAM: jw Hugh A. Hose Transit Manager MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 6 3s' City o9 Iowa City d Date: March 19, 1979 To: Neal Berlin and City Council !J From: Dick Plastino, Director of Public Works rC Re: East Side Cambus Route -- Council ReferraR ' Council had wished to know the ridership on the east side Cambus route. i Scheduling and routing of this transit run is shown on the attached map. Please note that the east side loop operates after 10:30 P.M. Ridership counts are as follows. The week of February 5 -- 12 riders. The week of February 12 -- 44 riders. The week of February 19 -- 102 riders. The week of February 26 -- 110 riders. Average number of riders per evening -- 17. cc: Hugh Mose jm1/35 63,G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES 1401NEs Clint Jessup Ar— r--_ Lv. 6:25 6:55 6:48 7:03 7:10 7:26 7:33 7:48 7:55 .8:11 8:18 8:33 8:40 8:56 9:03 9:18. 9:25 9:41 9:48 10:03 10:10 10:46 East' 11:11 11:46 Side 12:11 10:46 11:46 To Hawkeye Route HAWKEYE APTS./EAST SIDE LOOP Evening Only Stadium Park ------- Hawkeye------- Arr. Lv. Ct. Park Dr. 6:33 6:35 6:42 6:44 6:46 6:56 6:58 7:05 7:07 7:09 7:18 7:20 7:27 7:29 7:31 7:41 7:43 7:50 7:52 7:54 8:03 8:05 8:12 8:14 8:16 8:26 8:28 8:35 8:37 8:39 8:48 8:50 8:57 8:59 9:01 9:11 9:13 9:20 9:22 9:24 9:33 9:35 9:42 9:44 9:46 9:56 9:58 10:05 10:07 10:09 10:18 10:20 10:27 10:29 10:31 11:18 11:20 11:27 11:29 11:31 12:18 12:20 12:27 12:29 12:31 East Side Loop Church Burlington Burlington Dodge Dodge Gilbert 10:53 11:00 11:05 11:53 12:00 12:05 EAST SIDE [o�op BOWERY r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Stadium Park Ar— r--_ Lv. 6:53 6:55 7:16 7:18 7:38 7:40 8:01 8:03 8:23 8:25 8:46 8:48 9:08 9:10 9:31 9:33 9:53 9:55 10:16 10:38 10:40 11:38 11:40 12:38 Clinton shingto 11:11 12:11 1:111 all k... y •3 .i�. 3 } Y vi Date: March 23, 1979 To: Neal Berlin and Ci y Council From: Dick Plastino� Re: Sidewalk in th`e Block of North Dubuque - Council Referral At the present time wate�d pond behind this sidewalk. This occurs because a large length of Dubuque Street drains to the low point and then runs across the top of the sidewalk into the river by Kimball Road. This is how it was designed many years ago. The Street Division will clean up the build up of mud on the river side of the sidewalk and this will alleviate the situation for a time. A work order will be written to the Street Division to correct this situation this spring. bdw4/1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES 637 D CITY OF CIVIC CENTER- 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. h March 22, 1979 Jim Meyer 106 North Grand Chariton, Iowa 50049 IOWA CITY IOWA CITY IOWA 52240 (319) 354.18GO Re: Traffic Signal Conduit Interconnect, Iowa City, Iowa Dear Mr. Meyer: Several months ago I informed you and Mr. Pearson that the City Council wished for Hy -Vee to absorb all costs due to the construction of an additional intersection on Highway 6 between Keokuk and Gilbert Street. At that time I stated that Hy -Vee would be responsible for the cost of buried conduit to interconnect the three traffic signals on this stretch of Highway 6. A few weeks ago I reminded you that the Council looked to Hy -Vee for funds to complete the paving of Hollywood Boulevard from its present dead end to the new intersection. I At this point in time the construction plans for this project indicate the paving for Hollywood Boulevard but they do not indicate the traffic signal interconnect. It will be necessary to indicate this conduit on the plans and specifications prior to further City participation in this J process. The Council tried to make it crystal clear that all costs associated with this project would be borne by Hy -Vee but apparently the City staff has failed to convey this properly in all instances. We regret any inconvenience this may have cuased your firm. If you have any questions about this, please contact either myself or Chuck Schmadeke. Sincerely, #ilcdri. Plastino of Public Works bj2/17 cc: Jim Brachtel Chuck Schmadeke Gene Dietz Neal Berlin City Council MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1 "1 RECEIVEWi ," 2 3 1939 IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT David 1.. Cronin Sutxrintendent 21 March 1979 Neal Berlin, City Manager Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa Dear Mr. Berlin: 1040 William Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319 — 3383685 This is written in response to your letter of February 1, 1979, regarding the City Adult Crossing Guard Program. Your letter indicated that the City Council believes that this program should be administered by the school district. This belief was based in part, according to your letter, on a survey of other major cities in Iowa which revealed that very few cities contribute as much to the adult crossing guard program as Iowa City. I have received an opinion from the district's legal counsel which suggests some problems with the City Council's position. It is my understanding that counsel can find no legal authority for the school district to enter into the adult crossing guard business. It would seem that street crossing guards are a part of a community's traffic control system which would most likely be a function of the police department. I would think an adult crossing guard program would have to be the responsibility of the agency having jurisdiction over the street. I have also visited with school district staff in Clinton, Mason City, Ames, and Bettendorf and find that an adult crossing guard program exists in each of these communities. Further, it is financed and controlled by the city in each of these instances. May I suggest that we meet to discuss this matter further? Please contact me to establish a mutually convenient time. Sincerely yours, J« �V t David L. Cronin cc: Members, Board -of Directors Don Borchart, Attorney MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES n0111CS 639 TO: FROM: RE: t,Ity of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE' March 21, 1979 City Council/City Manager Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance KU G.O. Bond Issue The attached lists those projects to be funded from the proposed $5,500,000 G.O. Bonx Issue. The schedule for marketing of the Bond Issue is as follows: March 20 Resolution setting public hearing for Bond Issue for March 27 (Formal Council Meeting) March 21 Publication of notice of hearing March 27 Public hearing on issuance of bonds (.Formal Council Meeting) Resolution directing advertisement of bonds adopted by City Council (Formal Council Meeting) March 30 Notice of Bond sale puslished for first week locally and in 'Bond Buyer' April 6 Notice of Bond sale published for second successive week locally April 17 Bond bid opening, special meeting of City Council to adopt resolution authorizing Debt Service Levy Week of May 21 Deliver Bonds and receive proceeds The City is well within its Debt Margin as total outstanding debt including this issue will be: Outstanding Debt as of 05-01-79 $ 7,622,000 This Bond Issue 5,500,000 $ 13,122,000 And, the City's Debt Margin is computed as follows: Total Assessed Valuation $ 446,476,080 5% Debt Limit (State Code) x .05 $ 22,323,354 8% Debt Limit (City Fiscal Policy) x .80 Total allowable Debt $ 17,658,683 The public hearing held on March 27, 1979, will cover only $2,000,000 of the Bond Issue. The $3,500,000 financing for the Library Building Project has already received approval of the voters in the election, thus the hearing will not cover this project. ,pyo MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRCS PROPOSED $5,500,000 BOND ISSUE LIBRARY BUILDING $3,500,000 The purpose of this project is to provide for the construction of a new two-level building of 46,850 square feet. This project has already been approved by the voters. The total cost includes computerization ($300,000) and furnishings ($270,000) and making the building accessible to the handicapped. CBD ALLEY PROJECT 10,000 The purpose of this project is to provide for upgrading and re- placement of alleys in the Central Business District (CBD). Due to the extensive improvements for City Plaza (a pedestrian mall) the alleys now serve as major goods delivery areas. The project cost estimate includes removal and replacement of deteriorated pavement, removal of encroachments, and modest aesthetic improve- ments including security lighting. This phase of the project provides for design fees. Construction will begin in FY81 at an additional cost of $116,000 which will be funded from a future bond issue. GRAND AVENUE WIDENING 10,000 The purpose of this project is to widen Grand Avenue east of Byington so two full lanes of traffic could turn from Byington onto Grand Avenue. At the present time Byington Avenue is two lanes one-way but is bottle -necked down to one lane at the inter- section with Grand Avenue. SUNSET STREET, BENTON TO PENFRO 30,000 The purpose of this project to to complete the inside two lanes of Sunset Street. This street will be an arterial street connect- ing Highway 1 to Benton and Melrose. After completion of Sunset Street, Wylde Green Road will be terminated in a cul-de-sac and returned to a residential access road. SCOTT BOULEVARD, PHASE II 200,000 This project will provide a 31 foot wide roadway from American Legion Road to approximately Court Street. This portion of the project provides for the purchase of land while construction amounting to an additional $450,000 will occur in FY81. Scott Boulevard/Phase I will provide a 31 foot wide roadway from Highway 6 to American Legion Road and is scheduled for construc- tion in FY81 at a cost of $850,000. Both Phase I and Phase II construction costs will be funded by a future bond issue. Phase I and Phase II projects provide for construction of second- ary arterial streets. According to the Comprehensive Plan, these streets serve a dual function of circulation and access. Phase II will also provide a permanent street surface on the top of the proposed storm water detention struction over the east branch of Ralston Creek. FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES -L.� SOUTH GILBERT STREET IMPROVEMENT The purpose of this project is to realign and pave South Gilbert at Highway 6 and 1.1 miles south. The City's last bond issue (August, 1978) included funding for this project in the amount of $413,000. The amount included in this bond issue for this project will provide the remainder of local funding needs. CBD STREETSCAPE, PHASE II The purpose of this project is to provide streetscape inprove- ments on Washington, Clinton, Burlington and Capitol Streets adjacent to blocks 83 and 84. The redevelopment of the CBD (Central Business District) and construction activity on blocks 83 and 84 will cause a need to repair or replace major portions of Washington and Capitol Streets. Parking ramp con- struction will necessitate replacement of sidewalks on Burling- ton and Clinton Streets. Because the modulars have been located in the right-of-way, major repair/replacement has been deferred. Total cost estimate is $1,500,000 and bonds in the amount of $500,000 have already been sold for this project. WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY The purpose of this project is to provide for improvement to the collection system and for the construction of a new sewage treat- ment plant. This improvement will bring the City's sewage system into compliance with State and Federal laws that regulate the operation and maintenance of sewage collection and treatment systems. The August, 1978, bond issue included $615,000 for this project. The $200,000 from this bond issue will provide sufficient local funding for the project through FY80. Included in this initial phase is land acquisition ($500,000) which is non-elibible for Federal funding. Federal and State assistance up to 80% of the remaining project cost is expected. It is anticipated that this portion of the G.O. Bond Issue will be abated by sewer revenues. The total project cost is estimated to be $34,000,000 with con- struction and funding needs continuous through FY83. RIVER CORRIDOR TRUNK SEWER This improvement provides for the construction of a $4,000,000 trunk sanitary sewer from the present sewage treatment plant to Taft Speedway. The existing east and west side trunk sewers are currently over -loaded and require immediate relief for present and future loads to prevent discharging of raw sewage into the Iowa River. This trunk sewer will also provide sani- tary sewer for some areas on the north side that are unable to develop now because of the lack of sewer. This Project is eligible for Federal and State assistance of up to 80% of cost. The August, 1978, bond issue included $400,000 for this project. The $250,000 from this bond issue will provide sufficient local funding through FY80. It is anticipated that this portion of the G.O. Bond Issue will be abated by sewer revenues. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRCS $ 300,000 1,000,000 200,000 250,000 Date: March 22, 1979 To: City Council From: Paul Glaves, Development Coordinator Re: CBD Streetscape Improvement Project Phase II The staff and consultants have carefully considered the schedule for the design and construction of the CBD Streetscape Improvement Project - Phase II. The recommended schedule for this project is attached to this memorandum. The recommended project schedule breaks the entire project into three design and construction packages rather than two, as was initially considered. Package number one will be comprised of the underground utilities and street paving on Capitol and Washington Streets. Package number two will include sidewalk paving and amenities on Capitol, Washington, and Burlington Streets. Package number three will include utilities, street paving, sidewalk paving, and amenities on Clinton Street. The recommended schedule calls for a construction start on Capitol Street in mid-June, with the street paving completed by September 15 to coincide with the beginning of occupancy of the parking ramp. Washington Street construction will proceed at approximately the same time that Capitol Street construction is occurring. The installation of sidewalk paving is scheduled to occur after the completion of the street paving. The construction of the Capitol and Washington Street sidewalks, adjacent to Old Capitol Center is scheduled to occur in the fall, after Old Capitol Associates has completed work on the adjacent walls. The installation of any amenities has been scheduled for next spring. The removal and replacement of Clinton Street has been scheduled to begin early next spring with completion early next fall. Also attached to this memorandum is an additional schedule which sets forth two options which were considered by the staff. Both of these other options pose serious difficulties, and are accordingly not recommended. It would be possible, from a construction standpoint to work on both Clinton and Capitol Streets simultaneously. If this option were pursued Clinton Street would be torn up approximately July 1, and would be repaved by the end of October. Sidewalks would be installed by mid-December. This option is' totally undesirable from the standpoint of maintaining access and traffic flow in the CBD. With Clinton Street and Capitol Street torn up simultaneously, north -south traffic flow would be impossible for some period of time when Madison Street is segmentally torn up for the river corridor sewer project. 6 e-// MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 i The second option examined by the staff, and rejected, calls for beginning the Clinton Street removal and reconstruction immediately following the completion of the street paving on Capitol and Washington Streets. This would allow Burlington Street, Capitol Street, and Washington Street to function as a bypass around the interrupted segment of Clinton Street. This eliminates the access and transportation problems encountered with the first option, but calls for the paving of Clinton Street during the months of December, January and February. This schedule would call for Clinton Street to be torn up during the football season and over Christmas. This would seriously disrupt business activity, in addition to requiring more costly winter construction. Based on these factors the staff strongly recommends that the schedule delaying the removal of Clinton Street until next spring be followed. Unless instructed otherwise by the City Council, we shall proceed with three design and construction packages as depicted on the recommended schedule. bdw4/12-13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES I401NES sr; ewa] l o yJ A C\ C `Z C8D T-VlRnA6 C_T .• ...l. lvllVl lta L -mo CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROItIES ■■■■■■ iiia �■■■■■■■■■■ _... _ - ■■ CCC MIAMI ■mm■■■■�■■■■r■■■■■ .• ...l. lvllVl lta L -mo CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROItIES '11,4 �i Mu^^e a. - Co Q�lo\� bJo�1n .��ov� A- (II¶I�1TTjjj -1 111111 I I I l l l I I I 3-- O%n�O v,- ,&._,rmvssn eD� - �d4.v kS `4 (�w.c.ri�F\ts 51TEetl %%du3 \X% sr AMeh\AY:LS nlbnvrlLRtu BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES PRo�EcT Sc.tiE'nv..�F IOWA C.BO —?NZm,SCX JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES ANN Wsm ..0 ME NO ANN ANN NINE INNINEINNINEINEINE NINE ONE ANN ..�...■ ��� ■.EN■ C JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES ECSCH'�E �.Ctl'PROV EMEN-T 'PRD.jE C.T "� l�.AS E —C'�{ O Mu �� �ccrs�e�� xmoEa Nwu e�w �scs�d�v�,�� klCauclti moacu I aaatl._ d1w�t Z... "..r CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIIIES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: STREETS Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To reduce citizen complaints through preventative programmed mainten- ance. 2. To improve cleanliness of streets through revised sweeping frequencies. 3. To obtain in-depth analysis of street systems operations by September 1978. 4. To construct and renovate eight modulars at service building by June 1979. Work Completed: 1. FY79 v. FY78 shows a reduction in complaints of 53.5%. 2. Level of service is approximately the same in FY79 as it was in FY78. 3. Division has acquired costing data. Productivity has been doubled in certain areas such as concrete repair. A preventative maintenance program which includes both structural repairs such as asphalt overlay and preventative maintenance programs such as street sealing has been developed. 4. Three modulars have been renovated. Analysis: 1. Preventative program maintenance permits time projections for project completion and catches problems before complaints are made. 2. Experiencing many mechanical breakdowns with the old sweepers making the establishment of revised frequencies undependable. 3. Implementation of the preventative maintenance program will allow stabilization of work programs. 4. Some additional work on the modulars will occur but completion of all eight is not possible due to monetary restraints. Expenditures Budget Year-to-date % 6000 241,752 125,002 51.7 7000 153,005 134,389 87.8* 8000 132,860 152,611 114.8* 9000 43,000 89,723 208.7* Total 570,617 501,725 87.9* *Due to the severity of the winter experienced so far, no time has been available for budget analysis. The snow removal budget is over budget and escalating rapidly. 6yz MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DECISION UNIT: TRANSIT QUARTER: SECOND FY79 Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To build off-peak ridership through increased transit marketing. Emphasis will be placed on radio and newspaper advertising, group presentation, and special promotions to be conducted by June, 1979. 2. To maintain schedule adherence through better road supervision by September, 1978. 3. To reduce the frequency of accidents and the dollar amount of damage claims and to reduce citizen complaints thorugh more comprehensive driver training by June, 1979. 4. To pursue Federal nrants for two-way radios, replacement buses, bus stop signs and shelters, and a transit garage feasibility study by September, 1978. 5. To renovate existing bus barn by increasing parts storage, installing ventilators, and cleaning and painting by June, 1979. Work Completed: I. In the second quarter transit ridership was up 17.4% over the same quarter last year. Although we have continued to promote off-peak ridership, a large part of this increase appears to have been in peak - period, work -trip usage. 2. In general, schedule adherence has been good, although severe winter weather during December caused most buses to run late for several days, and the increased passenger loads at rush-hour have consistently overburdened peak -period schedules. 3. Unfortunately, the number of accidents involving City buses increased sharply with the onset of winter. The accidents, however, were generally minor, with substantial property damage resulting from only one of the collisions. With the exception of several isolated incidents, complaints of poor public relations have been rare, but no comparison with last year's statistics have been made to date. 4. The UMTA Section 3 Capitol grant application was essentially completed during the second quarter, but final submission was delayed pending approval by the City's legal staff. 5. Work commenced on the bus barn ventilation project, but by December 31 the installation was nowhere near complete. Other bus barn improvement projects were deferred due to winter weather. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES Expenditures Budget This Quarter FY to Date % 6000 $545,462 119,195 220,209 40.4 7000 111,114 1,287 7,452 6.7 8000 284,823 86,531 153,751 30.4 9000 58,040 67,876 82,477 142.1 Total $999,439 274,889 463,889 46.4 n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES 1401NES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND DECISION UNIT: TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To reduce signal and street light corrective maintenance call outs by 10%. 2. To develop and implement systematic scheduling of signal and street lighting preventative maintenance. 3. To improve cross street identification with large street name signs at major signalized intersections by September, 1978. 4. To modernize electrical system for Park Road Bridge street lighting system by June, 1979. 5. To relocate vehicle detector loops at intersections where deficient installations exist, by October, 1978. 6. To install plastic arrows in turn lanes in lieu of painted arrows by September, 1978. 7. To provide a program of traffic and accident analysis to determine trends and problems and propose corrective action. Work completed: 1. Corrective maintenance call outs reduced by approximately one third. (This may be a seasonal event.) 2. Approximately 10% of total divisional effort is devoted to this. Preventative maintenance is on schedule. 3. 75% of target intersections are converted. 4. No work completed; scheduled 3rd or 4th quarter. 5. Two intersections completed, 5 left to complete. 6. Fifteen lanes converted, 10 left to complete. 7. Program ongoing on schedule. Expenditures Budget Year -to -Date % 6000 141,902 59,880.66 42.2 7000 102,063 51,093.06 50.1 8000 126,621 68,728.68 54.3 9000 32,493 6,381.00 19.6 Total 403,079 192,218.61 47.7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES NOINES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DECISION UNIT: ENGINEERING DIVISION QUARTER: SECOND FY79 Fiscal Year Objectives: I. Remove subdivision review from a crisis basis to a systematic schedule with a response time for initial review of: preliminary plats (5 working days); construction plans (10 working days); and final plats (5 working days). 2. Design and reconstruct intersection of South Gilbert Street and Highway 6 Bypass including Gilbert Street to Sand Road by November, 1978. 3. Perform field work, coordinate R.O.W. Acquisition, and prepare plans and specifications for Scott Boulevard between Highway 6 and Muscatine Avenue in a completed form and ready for bidding by March, 1979. 4. Complete routine maintenance contracts prior to September, 1978, for the following projects: landfill excavation; asphalt resurfacing project; and concrete repair. 5. Schedule construction activities such that a minimum of one full-time inspector devotes 85% of time inspecting subdivision construction for quality control. 6. Complete second phase of microfilming process for Engineering Records by July, 1979. 7. Develop a time keeping system to determine how divison budget is spent among construction projects, subdivisions, citizen requests, etc. Work Completed: 1. No change. 2. Plans and specifications approximately 95% complete. 3. No action taken yet. See analysis. 4. Asphalt resurfacing project completed - October 1, 1978. Landfill excavation will be skipped this year since adequate space is still available. Concrete repairs are being done by Street Division. 5. Depends on outcome of item 7 above. 6. No action taken. See analysis. 7. 12 months of records available. Analysis: 1. This goal was much too ambitious for an individual division. It is believed it would take Council set guildelines to developers on submission dates to avert the crisis situation being experienced. 2. Due to IDOT decisions, this project has had significant delays - primarily due to R.O.W. acquisition. A spring, 1979 construction start seems attainable. 3. This project is behind schedule approximately six months. Additional work items, plus delays in the Gilbert Street project have been the primary cause for this. Also, as an internal priority, the division will begin work on the Riverside -Benton Intersection prior to Scott Boulevard. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES 4. Landfill project was rescheduled due to other priorities and the fact that landfill space is available. 5. Information on this item should be available for the 3rd quarter report. 6. Delays in obtaining contract experienced in Finance has precluded even the first phase of filming. However, this has not caused any particular problem in the division and both phases of fliming should be completed by the end of the fiscal year. 7. Analysis should be ready for the 3rd quarter report. Expenditures Budget Year -to -Date % 6000 201,087 94,684 47 7000 9,586 2,366 25 8000 16,228 9,714 60* 9000 --- 164 -- Total 231,153 107,175 46 *Equipment rental charges now charged to 8000 accounts. 7000 accounts will show less expenditures. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To change schedule of division head meetings from random occurrence to bi-monthly meetings for idea and information exchange by July 1, 1978. 2. To change solid waste equipment from two man vehicles to one man vehicles to lower cost per ton for refuse collection by May, 1979. 3. To hold meetings for division employees on a quarterly basis for information exchange by July, 1979. 4. To provide educational opportunities for division heads for the purpose of upgrading skills in public communications, productivity, management/union relations, and technical aspects of Public Works. Work Completed: 1. No action taken. 2. See Refuse report. 3. No action taken. 4. Attendance by Street Superintendent, Traffic Engineer, Water & Sewer Superintendent, Transit Manager and City Engineer at seminars and conferences. Analysis: 1. Sufficient contact by phone and in person on a daily basis eliminates need for meetings. 2. See Refuse report. 3. Adequate time not available for Public Works Director to meet quarterly with seven divisions and 140 employees. 4. Public Works division heads are high caliber managers. Coordination and level of ability are high. Expenditures Budget Year-to-Oate % 6000 43,067 21,668 50 7000 850 399 47 8000 4,740 4,250 89* 9000 --- 9,917 -- Total 48,657 36,234 74 *Modulars on Clinton are being moved and charged to this budget. It is an unbudgeted expenditure and will be covered by a budget amendment later. r - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: LANDFILL Fiscal Year Objectives: I. To ensure revenues equal expenses. 2. To continue compliance with state landfill regulations. Work Completed: 1. Landfill volumes have dropped approximately ten percent since dumping fees were instituted. Sale of the old landfill compactor will allow revenues to keep pace this year. 2. All inspections have passed with only minor notations of noncompliance. Analysis: 1. Steadily rising fuel, repair, and personnel costs will probably require an increase in dumping fees for FY80. Major commercial haulers were told of this possibility several months ago. 2. It is felt that the improved compaction methods being utilized will prolong the life of the landfill. 3. Our compaction efforts have been improved since the first part of November 1978 when an operational change was made to assure better compaction. Expenditures Budget Year -to -Date % 6000 81,920 42,906 52.4 7000 25,254 9,727 38.5 8000 46,530 20,523 44.1 9000 80,000 14,615 18.3 Total 233,704 87,771 37.6 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: REFUSE Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To obtain a one man side loader designed for one man operation and put it into operation on a trial basis by September 1978. 2. To evaluate a pilot program of aluminum and steel cans recycling and turn it over to private contractor by October 1978. Work Completed: 1. The vehicle which was to be placed in operation November 1978 was delivered not in accordance with specifications and a considerable delay has developed in receiving a replacement unit. It appears at this time that earliest such a vehicle can go in operation would be the last of February or first of March 1979. 2. Program economics - completely unfeasible at this time. Expenditures Budget Year -to -Date % 6000 174,951 87,199 49 7000 13,237 1,881 14 8000 86,222 56,968 66 9000 4,995 30,995 620* Total 279,405 177,043 63 *Equipment replacement fund charges are high due to high cost of garbage trucks ($55,000 per unit). MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IeEs MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: POLLUTION CONTROL Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. Provide input in planning and designing new treatment plant. 2. Clean 15 miles of sanitary sewer with reoccurring problems by July 1, 1979. 3. Set up preventive maintenance program for storm water detention basins by July 1, 1978. 4. Expand televising program to include new subdivisions as well as continuing to televise problem areas by July 1, 1978. Work Completed: 1. Facility plan has been submitted to E.P.A. and I.D.E.Q. 2. We have cleaned 6.6 miles of sewer since July 1, 1978. 3. This program has been set up and is functioning. 4. We have televised 2,300 ft. of sanitary sewers in new subdivisions. We have televised and grouted approximately 500 ft. of existing sewer that was creating problems. We televised additional footage of sanitary and storm sewers to identify probelsm. We expended most of our FY79 televising budget on these projects. We have not televised any additional sewers in the 2nd quarter but plan to televise and grout a problem area during 3rd quarter. Analysis: We believe we are progressing well with our objectives. The amount of sanitary sewers cleaned decreases during the cold months and will increase with the coming of warmer weather. Expenditures Bud et Year -to -Date % YTD 6000 261,556 128,642 49.2 7000 64,035 21,599 31.3 8000 133,525 61,199 44.9 9000 24,400 6,008 25.0 Total 483,516 217,528 44.9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES ■ MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS (WATER) QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To flush all City owned hydrants by June, 1979, to remove sedimentation from the system. 2. To install 1,000 Outside Remote Readers by June, 1979. A total of 5,700 have been installed and approximately 6,000 more will be installed. 3. To complete UR -14 Water Main Project by October, 1978, by constructing mains on Washington from Clinton to Capitol and on Capitol from Washington to Burlington. 4. To continue to treat all water to meet State of Iowa Standards. Work Completed: 1. Flushed all dead end hydrants which represent approximately one-third of the hydrants that are in the water system. 2. Fifty-five percent of the outside remote readers have been installed. 3. UR -14 Water Main Project for October, 1978, has been delayed until May of 1979, due to grades and location of new buildings. 4. We are meeting all State of Iowa regulations. Analysis: 1. Water usage was down about 10% for second quarter of FY79. 2. Installation of water mains in sub -divisions is completed for the season. Expenditures Budget Year -to -Date % 6000 344,562 161,132.75 46.76 7000 241,627 74,107.00 30.67 8000 243,649 102,743.53 42.169 9000 270,228 220,787.00 81.70 Total 1,100,066 570,741.00 51.82 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES .-. MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DECISION UNIT: EQUIPMENT DIVISION QUARTER: SECOND FY79 Fiscal Year Objectives: I. Establish night shift preventive maintenance program for both transit and general equipment facilities. 2. Gain and maintain financial control of the division. 3. Establish daily operator inspection procedure. 4. Reorganize the division and delegate some supervisory responsibilities to "working foremen." 5. Establish an effective and controlled parts inventory. Work Completed: 1. Established PM program on night shift for all but Parks, Cemetery and Police departments. Those departments will be incorporated (Police on a test basis) at the beginning of FY80. 2. Progress has been made in that equipment has been identified which is costing more than the rental charge will pay for. This equipment is primarily in the refuse and streets divisions and adjustments have been recommended to Finance. 3. Procedures have been established but not followed (see analysis). 4. Accomplished with superior results. 5. Inventory established but control has been very difficult in current facilities (see analysis). Analysis: Major objectives which are not on schedule are: 1. Financial Control- Major cost over -runs in refuse and streets division equipment. Analysis to be complete by end of January. 2. Operator Inspections. Not being done. Operating deficit has been discussed briefly with Finance and Public Works director. Will discuss with them in great detail as soon as all December receipts and expenditures are totaled. Every Division Head should have a system, subject to inspection which insures that operators maintenance is performed and that vehicles are kept clean and free of corrosives. Anything less than this will not adequately protect our equipment investment. Parts support of all equipment is vastly improved but still not controlled in the fashion that it should be. The whole inventory will be verified and put on cards at the time we move it into the new building (estimated June 1979). MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401HEs "*N MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT QUARTER: SECOND DECISION UNIT: ADMINISTRATION Fiscal Year Objectives: ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES 1. To enable all decision units within the department to meet their objectives as enumerated in their decision packages. 2. To foster a higher level of supervisory and administrative performance by all division heads. 3. To identify and obtain additional federal and state funding. 4. To ensure that all federal program requirements are met in a timely manner. 5. To facilitate activities which will enhance the local tax base. 6. To facilitate the completion of the Iowa City Senior Center. 7. To provide for effective implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 8. Coordination of State and Federal programs. 9. To efficiently prepare, research and background reports and analyses for various ad hoc projects as assigned by the City Manager or as requested by boards, commissions, or the City Council. 10. Coordinating plans and policies with adjacent local units of government. 11. Maintaining liaison with community organizations. Work Completed: 1. At this time the divisions are essentially on schedule on high priority projects. Downtown redevelopment is on schedule, the significant parts of the CDBG and Small Cities application are on schedule, current planning is on schedule, and economic development is behind schedule. 2. At this point division heads are performing at a higher level than they were last year. 3. The Small Cities Grant application was completed and submitted. 4. Federal requirements are being met in some areas, however record keeping and project monitoring is lagging because of current under- staffing. 5. No significant actions have been taken relative to local tax base enhancement, however the facilitation of downtown redevelopment could be considered as an activity which is meeting this objective. 6. The Iowa City Senior Center is slightly behind schedule at this time. 7. The Comprehensive Plan is being used for decision making by the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission. 8. State and Federal programs are being coordinated. 9. Work is currently being done on proposed new standard metropolitan statistical area definitions as well as research on the possibility of a special census in Iowa City. Also during the early part of the quarter additional staff time was spent on the alignment and design of proposed Freeway 518. 6412 - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 10. Work is being conducted on a continuous basis with the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission, University of Iowa administration, and the Johnson County government. 11. Work has been done with the Committee on Community Needs, the Chamber of Commerce, persons residing in the Small Cities project area, and those in the northside neighborhood. Analysis: Detailed commentary on the abovementioned projects is provided in the departmental operating division decision units which are a part of this report. Generally, the highest priority projects are on schedule. At the present time there is a need to fill the four vacant planning staff positions and it is anticipated that this will be done within the next six weeks. Economic development activities will be facilitated by this higher level of staffing. Downtown redevelopment (Urban Renewal) continues to take more time than is planned, however in that this is the City Council's number one priority project it will continue to be given the amount of time necessary to ensure that it be carried out in an expeditious and efficient manner. The Small Cities application will be completed in January as scheduled, however in that this is a competitive application, the funding of the project will depend upon how many communities in Iowa and Nebraska submit more competitive applications. At this time routine CDBG activities have not taken place because of short staffing. Since October, Bill Keating and Debra Martzahn have spent nearly 100 percent of their time on the Small Cities application. This has resulted in Paul Glaves being virtually the entire Economic Development Division staff. This type of "crisis orientation" has resulted in the delaying of routine tasks as the staff is continuously switched from one high priority -crisis area to another. The workload in the department has continued to be very heavy in the past quarter, and it is anticipated that this intense workload should slacken somewhat by the end of the third quarter. At this time many of the previously deferred activities will receive additional emphasis. Expenditures Budget This Quarter % YTD 6000 7000 8000, 9000 Total 31,906 1,550 11,575 45,031 9,329.86 73.69 1,202.14 10,605.69 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40IRES 48 11 17 39 MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT QUARTER: SECOND DECISION UNIT: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Fiscal Year Objectives: ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES: _ 1. a. To insure full compliance with the provisions of the 12 redevelop- ment contracts including design reviews, time schedules, and other terms and conditions. b. Complete City Plaza by October 31, 1978. C. Complete the Block 83 parking structure by August 31, 1979. d. Complete the planning for Washington and Capitol Streets by December 31, 1978; start construction by April 1, 1979; and complete construction by August 30, 1979. e. Complete plans for the Block 64 parking structure by April, 1979; begin construction by August, 1979; complete construction by September, 1980. f. Perform all Design Reviews within the 40 -day periods specified by contracts. g. Lease at least 25 percent of available City Plaza lease space by June 30, 1979. 2. a. Develop economic development strategies and policies for City Council consideration and adoption, by December 30, 1978. b. Establish a program to assist the Chamber of Commerce and other community groups which are seeking to facilitate economic development in Iowa City by December 30, 1978. C. Establish an ongoing program to provide information, evaluation, technical data, and other assistance to firms which may be seeking to locate or operate in Iowa City, by June 30, 1979. 3. a. Evaluate all capital improvements for impact on and conformance to community development plans and policies. b. Coordinate the Capital Improvement Program evaluation to maximize the analysis of information concerning competing capital projects. C. Provide technical assistance to the Manager and Council in evaluating and establishing priorities for capital projects. d. To acquire or dispose of land as directed by the City Council in a timely manner and consistent with applicable state and federal regulations. Work Completed and Analysis: Downtown Redevelopment: The downtown development program is proceeding as planned, with no major problems. The amount of staff time required for this activity, remains higher than originally estimated. The most time consuming activity is the coordination of projects where public and private development interfaces. Most notable is the coordination required to ensure workable designs of Old Capitol Centre, the adjacent parking structure, and the surrounding MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- DES 1401NES r, CBD Streetscape Project, Phase II. While the parking ramp construction is proceeding as planned, design work on Old Capitol Centre and the streetscape project has lagged slightly behind schedule. The multiple interests involved (City, University, Old Capitol Associates, other downtown merchants, three transit systems) makes project planning extremely time consuming. Accordingly, the completion of the design for the street- scape project did not meet the projected date. Design review activity is proceeding well. A system of notification of the Design Review Committee when building permits are sought which involve CBD facades has been established. The major problem area currently being encountered is the application of the Building Code to the interface area between the parking ramp and the enclosed shopping center. As problems have been encountered, it has been desirable on several occasions to seek amendments to the Code. Downtown development activity is expected to increase next quarter, as City Plaza, and several private developments undergo construction. i Capital Improvements Program: The Development Division briefly reviewed all capital projects submissions presented during budget preparation. All projects were reviewed for consistenan. The levl of rviw ws not extensive cdue �partly toth the thehlevel eoflstaffing andepartlyetoe thea short time frame available. In future years, the time spent in this review i should be increased. I Real Property Acquisition: The division has begun the required actions to acquire the South Gilbert Street realigned right-of-way. The appraisal process is in progress. I Acquisition negotiations will begin in the third quarter. Economic Development: This activity has suffered due to lack of staff time, as pointed out in s detail in the First Quarter Report. Some additional data collection has occurred but no analysis of the data has yet taken place. General ii The staffing problems noted last quarter are in the process of being solved. The Planner/Program Analyst I positions have been reclassified. The vacant and new positions are being advertised. Interviews will occur in early February. As soon as the division is at full strength, with the added employees, most of the backlog of duties can be taken care of. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id01NEs MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT QUARTER: SECOND DECISION UNIT: PLAN ADMINISTRATION Fiscal Year Objectives: 1. To review, analyze and prepare recommendations on all applications submitted for rezoning, subdivision, site plan, and variance approval making a determination whether development proposals compliment or conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Prepare appropriate amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and implemen- tation ordinances to reflect any changes in the City Council's development policies with respect to new developments or a misunder- standing of the implications of the plan upon adoption. 3. Monitor development activites including: (a) advising developers of the impact a development may have upon the Comprehensive Plan; and (b) maintaining a current data base with which to amend the Comprehen- sive Plan to reflect a change in trends and conditions. Work Completed: The above objectives are of a continuous nature in the plan administration decision unit and are occurring essentially on schedule throughout the fiscal year. Analysis: Subdivision plat submissions, rezoning applications, Large Scale Residential and Non -Residential Development plans have been reviewed to determine whether proposed developments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and ordinance requirements. This review and processing has been done in a timely manner although there have been numerous submissions filed and thorough analyses prepared. Approximately 75 percent of Don Schmeiser's time has been devoted to the drafting of a new zoning ordinance. This activity was not an objective of this decision unit at the time of budget preparation. The objective was to prepare appropriate amendments to the implementation ordinances rather than to actually develop the ordinances, however because of the amount of time required for completion of the Comprehensive Plan this item is being conducted at this time. Although most of the staff's time has been consumed by the above activities, technical assistance to the City Council, City Manager, boards and commis- sions, and other departments has been provided upon request. Amendments to the existing Zoning Ordinance have also been prepared including revisions to the Tree Regulations, provisions for fences and hedges, assistance in developing new provisions for non -conforming uses, buildings and lots. Finally, accurate base maps of the city have been completed which will enable the staff to compile current base information to reflect changes in developmental trends and conditions. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOItIEs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MO VIES MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT QUARTER: SECOND FY79 DECISION UNIT: CDBG PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Fiscal Year Objectives: (summary) 1. Citizen Participation: Plan and implement a citizen participation program. 2. Program Administration: Schedule activities to encourage timely erf pormance, monitor project performance, plan FY80 goals and objec- tives, budget FY80 funds, complete fifth year grant application. 3. Planning: Develop information recovery system for planning data, prepare environmental review records for each project, plan comprehen- sive strategy suitable for Small Cities Grant application. 4. Program Development: Develop neighborhood site improvements program in four neighborhoods, plan interior spaces for Senior Center, plan for management of Senior Center, budget resources for Senior Center, and schedule activities to facilitate grand opening December, 1979. Work Completed: 1. Citizen Participation: A citizen participation plan was submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for both the five year "hold - harmless" program and the new Small Cities program. Preparing the fifth year grant application, the Committee on Community Needs (CCN) held two public meetings to gather program proposals and an additional meeting to prioritize these proposals. In addition, the City Council held one public hearing for the purpose of reviewing previous CDBG activities, a second to gather input for FY80 programs, and they have scheduled a third to allow citizens the opportunity to review the grant application. As a part of the Small Cities Grant applica- tion, the staff mailed a survey to all area residents and the CCN and the Ralston Creek Coordinating Committee (RCCC) held a public meeting to discuss the project proposals in detail with area residents. The City Council held two public hearings in addition to the public hearing for the other CDBG programs. 2. Program Administration: Staff time limitations have prevented monthly performance statistics from being gathered for each of the CDBG programs as stated in the objective, however, procedures for monitoring CDBG Division employees' performance have been established, thereby improving the level of supervision and productivity. Staff time limitations have included the development of a plan to implement a more effective filing system for CDBG information, as stated in the objectives and required by HUD. Likewise, quarterly file updates for each program compliance activity have not been completed. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES riDlaES FY80 goals and objectives for each CDBG program have been drafted and will be discussed with the City Council on February 5, 1979 --one month after time periods stated in the objective. Carryover and encumbered CDBG funds have been rebudgeted to facilitate the objective of encumbering 60 percent of the CDBG funds by June 30, 1979. Grantee Performance Report budget information projects that 68 percent of the funds will be encumbered by that date. The fifth year grant application is currently being drafted and will be in the Council packets February 2, 1979. This activity is progres- sing on schedule. 3. Planning: The information retrieval system was not established by January 1, 1979 as scheduled. Staff time limitations allowed only for initial topic definition and a cursory literature search to be completed. Environmental Review Records (ERR) for housing rehabilitation, code enforcement, energy conservation, and neighborhood site improvements were updated. The north and south branch Ralston Creek ERR's were completed. The Senior Center ERR will be completed following more detailed development of architectural plans. The architectural barrier removal -sidewalk curb cut program has not yet begun. Staff time limitations have prevented any analysis of individual program cost effectiveness. The neighborhood along the lower reaches of Ralston Creek was analyzed and a comprehensive revitalization strategy was developed. The Small Cities Preapplication will be submitted to HUD on January 25, 1979. 4. Program Development: Staff time limitations did not allow the citizen input process to generate CDBG site improvement projects in four neighborhoods, however, the northside neighborhood projects were identified. Information gathering meetings for three other neighborhoods are scheduled in the March through June time period. Staff time limitations have prevented budget analysis and recommenda- tions for the development of the Senior Center. The County has not been asked to budget FY80 funds at this time because there is not yet'a solid basis for establishing their level of funding. Likewise, the management and operations plan has not been completed. The Ecumenical Housing Corporation's (EHC) inability to receive HUD's approval for the preliminary proposal with conditions, for the 202 housing project has delayed progress on the Senior Center interior design and floor plans. Ms. Bette Meisel was hired to continue working with the Council of Elders to coordinate their involvement in program development, furniture and equipment selection, and the development of a management plan. These efforts have led to senior citizens becoming more supportive of the project. During the Univer- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES i t 7 f sity spring semester, another social work student has volunteered his time and will possibly explore the interest of other Johnson County communities in participating in the Senior Center. The objective states that activities should be scheduled to facilitate the Senior Center grand opening in December, 1979; this objective will not be met based upon the above delays. Analysis: In view of the resources available, the staff has performed in a very productive manner. Most tasks have been completed in a timely manner in spite of understaffing. The primary disadvantage of long-term short staffing is that routine activities which were temporarily delayed tend to be permanently put off, thereby creating a situation which utilizes extensive time, effort and money in resolving audit findings and leading program files. Monthly monitoring of activities is not taking place, quarterly monitoring of compliance activities is not taking place, and analysis of program cast effectiveness has not yet been initiated. The short-term impact of this type of program administration will not be easily recognized, however the long-term impacts could be significant. It is anticipated that once full staffing levels are achieved the major emphasis will be on remedying the aforementioned deficiencies. Expenditures Budget This Quarter % YTD 6000 114,000 23,903.71 40.9 7000 3,500 286.27 25.7 8000 36,500 8,051.02 42.6 9000 11000 - 16.5 Total 155,000 32,241.00 40.8 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOIRES ■ a MAYOR'S YOUTH EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM 1810 Lower Muscatine — Box 2477 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 Phone: 351-1035 To: Iowa City City Council ��LD From: Marylee Dixon, DirectolV�' Mayor's Youth Employmeftt Program Re: Monthly Report - February The Mayor's Youth Employment Program employed a total of thirty-four enrollees throughout the month of February. Two enrollees were added to the Mayor's Youth Program nations. during the Month. There were two termi- Following is a breakdown of the Mayor's Youth jobsites and the number of enrollees participants in each area during the month of February. New sites being utilized are marked with an asterisk (*). Job Classification Work Site Number of Youth Clerical City Manager's Office I City of Iowa City Finance Dept. - City I of Iowa.City Hawkeye Community Action I Mark IV Community Center I Purchasing - C.of I.C. I United Action for Youth 2 Custodial Coralville Central I Kirkwood School I Northwest Jr. High I Oxford Elementary I Regina High School I Southeast Jr. High I West High School I Library Aide Coralville Public Library I Iowa City Public Library I Solon High School Library 3 Teacher's Aide Friends of Children's Museum 2 Headstart - Benton Street 2 *Willowwind School I *Early Childhood Development 1 Maintenance Worker Equipment Dept. - City of I.C. 1 National Guard I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES 6y 3 cont. Job Classification Work Site Number of Youth Animal Caretaker Iowa City Animal Shelter 1 Greenhouse Worker University Botony Dept. 1 Patient Escort Mercy Hospital 3 Dietary Aide Dietary Dept.- University 1 Hospital Studio Aide *Synthesis Youth Arts Workshop 1 Goals: I. To conduct follow-up on enrollees, discussing work performance, school attendance, and related problems. 2. To provide i�nformation to enrollees in reference to securing jobs in thdrivate sector. 3. To recruit additional participants fo rMayor's Youth Program. a. Because the Mayor's Youth Program did not run at full capacity during September and October; Approximately 8 new enrollees will be recruited during the month of March. b. These new enrollees will be able to work the regular 10 hrs. a week until the completion of the Program of May 31, 1979 Methods: 1. The Director and Assistant Director will visit jobsites and conduct "on-going" evaluations of enrollee performance by meeting with the jobsite supervisors and enrollees. 2. Evaluate enrollee skills and abilities in relation to availability of jobs in tehprivate sector. 3. Contact social service agencies within Johnson County to encourage referral. a. Agencies to contact include, Lutheran Social Services, group homes and schools. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES johnson ounty 91MIO regional planning. commission 0 10/2 south dubuque street. iowo city. iowo 52240 (319)351.8556 March 15, 1979 Mr. Neal Berlin, City Manager Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa 5224 2 0 1979 KAory C Neuhouser ^n•�..�. Emil L BmrrJt Dear Mr. Berlin: The Johnson County Regional Planning Commission is sponsoring another meeting on current state legislative issues for State legislators, local elected officials and the general public on Saturday morning, i April 7, 1979 from 10:00 to 12:00 a.m. at the Coralville City Hall. The purpose of the meeting is to provide a forum for state and local elected officials and the general public to discuss the issues that are of most interest to the Iowa City -Johnson County area and that are presently being considered by the State Legislature. The meeting will be chaired by the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission. In this regard, we would like you or your City Council to identify the highest priority legislative items for your city and inform our office i of you choice by Friday noon, March 30, 1979. We will then advise our legislative representatives to prepare information on these items. Please contact our office if you have any questions on this matter. sincerely, 11 l L. Brandt Executive Director cc: State Legislators ELB/tdm i t 6 vq MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES AGENDA RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 27, 1979 --,:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM 4:30 - Approval of the minutes of the March 16, 1979, meeting. 4:35 - Heat Loss Identification Project, report on problems and discussion of alternatives. 5:00 - Computer anaiysis of City building energy use, John Houck. 5:30 - Gasoline shortage. 6:00 - National Energy Act. 6:30 - Recycling possibilities report and publication costs report. 6:45 - Other business. 7:00 - Adjournement. r FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 5YS r,•'nn. Balanced Budget Fallacies By W.u:rsa W. HELLER In an era of dissatisfaction with big gov- ernment, hightaxes, and stubborn Infla- tion, it is not too surprising that the Gallup Poll shows a six -to -one majority favoring a balanced-budget amendment to the Consti- tution. And it must be a strong temptation for elected officials—if they want to be re- elected—to do a Jerry Brown and embrace such a proposal. But this Is one case where the majority is simply wrong—not in seeking some curbs on government, for that Is their In- herent right In a democracy—hut In seek- ing to do so by putting the federal govern- ment In a fiscal straitjacket. This Is a clear-cut case where responsible political leadership consists in leading voters out of the valley or error and seeking better and sounder ways to achieve their goals. Since the major thrust for the balanced- budget amendment land some of Its half- : siblingsi comes from a misinformed pub- lic. It may be useful to examine some of the fiscal fallacies that seem to underlie public thinking on this subject. Fallacy Number one: "Individuals• families, and households have to ran a bal- anced-budget — so why shouldn't Uncle Sam?" People forget that typically when i they buy a car or a boat, or, most ob. viously. a house, they are doing anyth' but running a balanced budget. A' they run deficits—often huge deft• live to current income. So tlr' Uncle Sam to adhere to a rip' standard that they don't selves. Papacy Number 1: the first fallacy is a s� something like this (homeowners• corpora debts. but Uncle Sam his debts without end The surprising—tc' truth Is that In the peat I. the federal debt It growing major form of Ing table shows, the fen less than three times U. r I9ro, while consumer Ina.•• nearly 14 Ilmes, mortgage corporate debt 12 times, ano debt 13 limes. Even with the unprecedented ruts': federal debt in the face of two recesslmn In the 1970s, the doubling of that debt since 1970 Is just about matched by The rise of state -local debt, while corporations, con• sumers, and homeowners have expanded their debt at a considerably faster rate than Uncle Sam. Postwar Growth of Major Forms of Debt (billions) Type of Ratio of debt 1951 1978 1978 to 1950 Consumer Installment S 22 S 299 13.6 times Mortgage (1.4 family homes) 45 732 16.3 Corporate '(non-fln'cl) 71 834 11.7 State -local 22 390est. 13.2 Federal (In hands of public) 217 611 2.8 dNP . 286 1110 7.4 Soynes: "Economic Reports of the President"; "Economic Indicators"; Fed- eral Reserve System Flow -of -Funds esti- mates. None of this Is meant to justify the pres- ent level of federal deficits or debts nor to suggest that the federal' debt poses no problems. But the foregoing figures do serve to put the federal debt In perspec- tive. Fallacy Number Three: "State and lo- cal governments have to live by the bal- anced-budget rule, so why shouldn't Uncle Sam?" -•^'e; and localities have to Eat• '•-+nnually,-except /or 4 they can borrow. Punting throws s It should) .4e federal "aye with e differ- !ptfor ne economy Into thereby throwing more uw vat o�cutting tax rev- enues ev enes and tingunemployment compen- sation, food stamps, and similar entitle- ment expenditures, thus throwing the bud- get even more out of whack A dog chasing Its own tall comes to mind. Fallacy Number Four: "Uhllke private and state -local deficit financing, federal deficits are a major, perhaps even the me. jor, source of Inflation." Both analysis and evidence fall to support this proposition. Except where federal deficits pump more purchasing power Into an already IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS H0111ES Board of Contributors Taking the very stuff of democratic self-determirul- tion out of the hands of legislative bodies and freez- ing them into the Constitu- tion would dilute and cheap- en the f undamental law of the land. prosperous or overheated economy, they do not feed Inflation. When the economy Is slack or In a recession, when there are Idle workers and idle plants and machinery to be activated by additional demand for goods and services, tax cuts or spending hikes that enlarge the deficit help the econ- omy get back on its feet. In other words, there are both destruc- tive federal deficits and constructive dell• clts, depending on the state of the private economy. What we should seek Is fiscal discipline — avoidance of waste, Ineffi- ciency, boondoggling and unnecessary gov emment programs—but not at the cost of strangling the federal government In Its at- tempts to serve as a balance wheel for the national economy and an Instrument for avoiding that greatest of economic wastes. namely, Idle workers, machines and facto. ries. Even a cursory Inspection of the data on deficits and Inflation slaws little relation between the two, for example: —Mliton Friedman reminds us that 1919.20 produced "one of the most rapid In. flatlons" In U.S. history when the budget was running a large surplus, while 1931.33 s w "one of the most extreme deflations &ad In history" when "the federal gov emment was running a deficit." —From 1959 to 1965, federal deficits were the order of the day yet price Infla• tion was little more than 176 a year. —In the face of huge deficits In 1974.76, Inflation dropped tram over 12% to less than 6%. Fallacy Number Five: "Well, even If deficits aren't as bad as we thought. the federal budget is out of.control, and the only way to get It under control Is to slap some kind of a constitutional III on It.— Once again• the facts run to the con- trary. As a proportion of the gross national product, the budget Is being reduced from 22.67. In 1976 to 21.2% In 1980. As against 12.2% annual Increases in spending for 1973.78• the rise from 1979 to 1980 will be only 7.776. And according to the Congres• slonal Budget Office staff, President Car• ter's proposed 5531 billion budget for 1980 'falls 620 billion short of the amount that It would cost simply to maintain current ser- vices under current law. i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB rnnr unrl;i5.ai ^,�I'u, RETAKE OF PRECEDING DOCUMENT JORM MICROLAB TARGET SERIES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IioIIIES 0 Balanced Budget Fallacies By WALTER W. HELLER In an era of dissatisfaction with big gov- ernment. high taxes, and stubborn Infla. tion, It is not too surprising that the Gallup Poll shows a six -to -one majority favoring a balanced-budget amendment to the Consti. tution. And It must be a strong temptation for elected officials -if they want to be re- elected -to do a Jerry Brown and embrace such a proposal. But this is one case where the majority is simply wrong -not In seeking some curbs on government, for that Is their in. herent right in a democracy -but In seek. ing to do so by putting the federal govern. ment In a fiscal straitjacket. This is a clear-cut case where responsible political leadership consists In le Ing voters out of the valley of error and seeking better and sounder ways to achieve their goals. Since the major thrust for the balanced. budget amendment land some of Its half. siblings) comes from a misinformed pub. Ilc. It may be useful to examine some of the fiscal fallacles that seem to underlie public thinking on this subject. Fallacy Number One: "Individuals, families, and households have to ran a bal- anced-budget - so why shouldn't Uncle Sam?" People forget that typically when they buy a car or a boat, or, most ob- viously, a house, they are doing anything but running a balanced budget. At limes, they run deficits -often huge deficits-rela- live to current income. So they are asking Uncle Sam to adhere to a rigid and austere standard that they don't observe them- selves. Fallacy Member Two: Closely related to the first fallacy is a second one that runs something like this; "We consumers ,homeowners, corporations) pay back our debts, but Uncle Sam Just keeps piling up his debts without end." The surprising -lo some even jolting. - truth Is that In the period since World War It. the federal debt has been the slowest growing major form of debt. As the follow. Ing table shows, the federal debt today Is less than three times the size It was In 1950, while consumer Installment debt Is nearly 14 times, mortgage debt 16 times, corporate debt 12 times, and state -local debt 13 limes. Even with the unprecedented run-up of federal debt In the face of two recessions In the 19769, the doubling of that debt since 1970 Is Just about matched by the rise of state -local debt, whlle corporations, con• sumers. and homeowners have expanded their debt at a considerably faster rate than Uncle Sam. Postwar Growth of Major Forms of Debt (biflons) Type of Ratio o/ debt 1950 1978 1978 to 1950 Consumer Installment S 22 $ 299 13.6 times Mortgage (1.4 family homes) 45 732 16.3 Corporate (non-fln'd) 71 834 11.7 State -local 22 390est. 13.2 Federal (in hands of public) 217 611 2.8 GNP 286 2110 7.4 SMtes: "Economic Reports of the President"; "Economic Indicators", Fed. eral Reserve System Flow-o6Fumd esti. mates. None of This Is meant to Justify the pres. ent level of federal deficits or debts nor to suggest that the federal' debt poses no problems. But the foregoing figures do serve to put the federal debt In perspec. tive. Fallacy Number Three: "State and lo- cal governments have to live by the bal- anced-budget rule, so why shouldn't Uncle Sam?" True, stales and localities have to bal- ance their budgets annually, except for capital outlays, for which they can borrow. But federal budgetary accounting throws current and capital outlays (as It should) Into the same pot. So balancing the federal budget means matching total outlays with current tax revenues, which is quite differ• ent from the balanced-budget concept for states and localities. Let me underscore another decisive dif. ference between state and federal budget Impacts: A state or local budget can be balanced by tax hikes or spending cuts without jarring the whole U.S. economy. The federal budget cannot. If the national economy starts to slide, joblessness rises, Income and profits fall, and the federal budget automatically goes Into deficit as revenues shrink and spending rises. Try to balance it by boosting taxes or forcing cuts in spending, and the result will Inevitably be to draw that much more purchasing power out of an already soft and sluggish economy. This would send the economy Into a deeper tailspin, thereby throwing more people out of work, further cutting tax rev. enues and boostlng unemployment compen. satlon, food stamps, and similar entitle• merit expenditures, thus throwing the bud. get even more outOt whack A dog chasing Its own tall tomes to mind. Fallacy Number Poor: "Uhllke private and state -local deficit financing, federal deficits are a major, perhaps even the mo )or, source of Inflallon." Both analysis and evidence fall to support this proposition. Except where federal deficits pump more purchasing power Into an already ryla',4 i(, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIOS•D(S tmn)ES Board of Contributors Taking the very stuff of democratic self-determina- tion out of the hands of legislative bodies and freez- ing them into the Constitu- tion would dilute and cheap- en the f waamewal law of the land, prosperous or overheated economy, they do not feed Illation. When the economy is slack or In a recession, when there are Idle workers and Idle plants and machinery to be activated by additional demand for goods and services, tax cuts or spending hikes that enlarge the deficit help the econ- omy get back on Its feet. In other words, there are both dettruc. live federal deficits and constructive defi. cits, depending on the state of the private economy. What we should seek Is fiscal discipline - avoidance of waste. Ineffl. clency, boondoggling and unnecessary gov. ernment programs -but not at the cost of strangling the federal government in Its at. tempts to serve as a balance wheel for the national economy and an Instrument for avoiding that greatest of economic wastes, namely. Idle workers, machines and facto. ries. Even a cursory Inspection of the data on deficits and Inflation shows little relation between the two, for example: -Milton Friedman reminds us that 1919.20 produced "one of the most rapid In. Batlons" In U.S. history when the budget was running a large surplus, while 1931.33 s�w "one of the most extreme deflations craned In history" when "the federal gov. ^vtment was running a deficit." -From 1959 to 1965, federal deficits were the order of the day, yet price Infla. tion was little more than 1% a year. -In the face of huge deficits In 1974.16, Inflation dropped from over 12%, to less than 6%. deficits aren't as bad as we thought, the federal budget Is out of -control. and the only way to get It under control Is to slap some kind of a constitutional lid on It." Once again, the facts ran to the con. trary, As a proportion of the gross national 26%, ct, the in 976budget to 21.2% Int 199800. As aguced ainst 12.2% annual Increases In spending for 1973.78, the rise from 1979 to 1980 will be only 7.7%. And according to the Congres. slonal Budget Office staff, President Car. ter's proposed $531 billion budget for 1980 falls MO billion short of the amount that it would cost simply to maintain current ser. vices under current IRw. ._A Quite apart from the numbers, the pop- ular clamor for "getting the budget under control" seems to Ignore two Important facts: —For the pant four years, the Congreu has' been operating under a new budget procedure that' has brought vastly more discipline and responsibility Into the bud• get process. In other words, the mecha- nism for getting the budget under control Is already In place and Is working. —Both the White House and the Con - gross have heard and heeded the message implicit N Proposition 13, calls for conrtl• tutional budget limits, and the like.' Whether one lilies It or not, budget ouster. try Is the political order of the day. Fallacy Numbs Sin: "The balanced- budget mandate Is it simple, sure-fire way to force the White House and Congress at long lest to match spending and tax reve- mes„ The dmpl aapppproach e truth ls that this, simplistic beset Mth slinply pn8lbidve dlMCultlnls of defrmltlon: admWstratlon and evakbn. A mandate to balance taxes and expen• ditures first has to define them. Don Include outlays of goeW Security sad Wifiway trust funds? lit dkin't until IM) Does It Include lendlna activities? if Joan programs wwW' be ivaAe tYtg loop holo. Imagine the Pbundia('.iraien two centuries ago trybg to draw a dividing line betweet'bn•budget„ and "Off lifts" ex, ppeenndltures. No lenan authority than HOM'MLtarlty IA*'Joha.M0des has MW that "it would be so sap; b►, eM tun Adminbkring the mandate would be a nightmare. In January each year, the President submits a budget'for a fiscal yearn the unexpected�eighteen mesths later. Givethe economy. ues may wtwists ell tall belof oww the forecast path. Imagine the eorambie to bOust the budget a revenues mbbebaved orr farnr�� shifts ocedrnd In the cab o programs, Medicare, coal of living Wustments In BMW, security. benefits, and so on. It does not take too mr uch Imaglnatbn to foresee Cangtru, caught iu the balanced• budget vise, shaving some expenditures off Into the private sector'le.g., by requiring enl ore Industry to surcpport lying f work• y relying more on Weber farm price supports am acreage ad-addes sed Ises on fedesal deficiency psymens. So.masy exceptions, exclusions, and special emergency provisions would be necessary to make the amendment worka- ble that It would no longer be meaningful. The dnelten of the amendment would find that they were writing a prescrlpllon-.for congressional action, not a constitutional mandate. A meaningful amendment w!oold not be workable, and a workable amend- ment would not be pueaningful. Even If some magic formula could be found to hold the government's nose to the balanced budget grindstone, It would be an affront to responsible democratic govern- ment to do so. The essence of that govem- ment is to adapt economic, social, and other policies to the changing needs of the times and t change a Will of the 44w- ity. It is the lob of Constitution to pro- tect basic human debts and define 'the framework of our seltgovemance. Taking the very stuff of democratic self•determl• nation out of the hands of legislative bodies and treating them into the Constitution would not only hobble our ability to govern ourselves but dtlute and cheapen the funds - mental law of the land. Given that the constitutional'apprbuh Is unwise, unworkable and unworthy of democratic self•¢ovemment, - one hopes that the White House and Congress will work out a statutory solution that will be responsive to the public will without Imgo - Ng destructive shackles on their ability to govern, Mr. Heller it Regents' Professor of Eco- nomics at the University of Minnesota, for• mer chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Presidents Kennedy and Johnsouu and a member of ike Jowmalk Board of Contributors. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs•DEs IIOINEs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB Fnno varrJz. a •10INI, 1 MATERIAL DISTRIBUTED AT INFORMAL DISCUSSION OF 3/26/79 1 Copy of Resolution on Urban Interstate Highways, including an article, "A U -Turn for Beltways" Memo from CDBG Prog. Coord. re Senior Center Furniture - Award of contract for furniture to be acquired with Title V funds Memo from Sophie Zukrowski & Angela Ryan, Staff Assistants to the Iowa City Human Rights Comm. re proposed changes in the Local Non- discrimination Ordinance (Human Rights Ord.) Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study (this item is placed directly behind this meeting folder) i I i I 1 FIICROFIL14ED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES RESOLUTION 0111 URBAN INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS WHEREAS Brock Adams, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation, announced certain new policies on February 13, 1979 which will guide future capital investments of the Transportation Department; and WHEREAS these new policies are consistent with the Urban Conservation policies of the National League of Cities in that they seek to limit the adverse effects of highway construction projects, pro- vide for the joint development of an appropriate mix of transpor- tation modes, provide a method for determining the impact of such projects on city economies, jobs and energy efficiency, and propose to assure the maximum public benefit from these public investments in transportation projects; and WHEREAS urban interstateibeltway projectsywh;chserve as£ringl,roads:' •iaround'urbanized"areas;have had an-adverse'.effeet'on cit es -by promotingceconomic development outside central'cities;which, confl'i:c.ts iithq urban .r'evitalization'<'efforts 'and 1 THEREFORE Bh..,IT--RES07�ED that thdiNaturalGResources,gteerilig.Ccmmittee THEREFORE,,,, '-- r and.:the73Trarisportation; Public •Safety and°tCommunication's'•`;Stee'ring Committee of the National League of=..Cities'commend.-Secretary Brock Adams ,for:. -these new policies which recognize -;the adverse impacts of'ur$anVainterstate beltways that rang urb'an>zedaareas and the CommitteesAend'or`sentiis^<announced%policy'%th'at'"beltways will-be?rfrowne3'on.", _ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Committees urge Secretary Adams to pro- mulgate regulations to implement these new policies that will apply'to all interstate beltway projects for which construction has not yet been completed. v APPROVED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES STEERING COMMITTEE AND THE TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMUNICATIONS STEERING COMMITTEE AT THE 1979 CONGRESSIONAL - CITY CONFERENCE, MARCH 9, 1979, WASHINGTON, D.C. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CHAP RAPIDs•Drs m itiEs e0s, ��i9l�WaYS '-Tou Tin 2 of 211 *17;7111P I/S NATIONAL!OVRNAI. 3 la -9 mvrss�zncu:a�,ra,wa _`- •w%w—•--�-- - • cyton, Ohio, is in a quandary m'cr its proposed bells% and time is running (out. Should city officiate for Transport jinn Swre:my Brock Adams for final upprocul construction of the asphalt ring around Dayton that's ban she drawing hoards for 19 %ctrs•!Or should hies urge him to h the project flare.. -r? Dayton's indecision may be unique among cities. There's question in the minds of officials in Richmond, Va., Roches[ X.1'., Danbury, Conn.. STaul. or a half-dozen others: Thee a using every legal trick and political device to stop con%tructi of belnvays and similar highway projects in their outlying arc: And Adams, along with Housing and Urban De•elopmc (HUD) Secretary Patricia Roberts Harris and Douglas Conde. administrator of the Environmental Prntecsion Asen IEPAI• are helping them. Hos, times h:se changed since the Dayton bcltyay was fir proposed in 1958. In those days, beltways seemed such a goad idea that big -cit mayors %s'cre scramhling for the federal funds to construct then Bu[ the circumferential roads that were built to relieve urba traffic congestion also helped relieve the cities of jobs, rens trade and middle-class taxpayers. "We desig;wd beltways that, like circular magnets, dre, people and businesses and jobs novas from [tic center of to wn, Adams said in a Feb. 13 speech at Harard University tha acknowledged the "increasing evidence that a preponderance' of the S80 million federal investment in urban Irmsportatio since World 1Var I I' %%as hadly %prnl—invested inn way that di not build cities but destroyed them." In that same speech, Adarns annnunecd a fivrpoini program to put federal transportation funds to wort: in [lie inicrest n urban revitalization. Point one includes this declaration: "Itchums will he frowned on dams intends to carry out this policy by subjecting urban rJ highs:typn%iects to cxhtrtstivcanalysis of Wririmpac[ aaJ of all allcrnaliwcs before federal money is invested. As drafted imwe%er, the proposed rule %ynu1J not afl'cct Da%lon. Rich.. mond, Ituchester or the other cities %with bcll%%:ty prnjecls under wow. ' there's still IimetoehangeIlie rule. hmvever. lly.:upub!i%h;•J last Drccmhcr in the redend Rrgfurr. and the I'rnnsportu;ion Deparnmenl has not decided on its final language. D;ttmi and the other cisic, arc pressing Adair-toexpand Ilse olein include projects not yei coutple[ed.'fhe a:ui%pnrtatiot eomntillec urthc \ational League of Ci[ics adopted a resolution to Thal effect on Match 5, In the mcantim.r. the eitiesare looking In Ii PA and I I L:D for help in k(;ltm. amsnrtetioo ud their MM.p'>. FIV% has Iiglrlencd file mh.!n impact requirements of its cuvirour.lcmel impact %tatemews, and HUI1 11 narking will: 61oh%ideal colics that %:Ck its help. In about Ill ca we so hit. HUD his asked fur urhan impact anahtcs of praP,,scol brh o,n e. In the rase of Richmntid. Ihy combined pnnldiog of ill:1). Tr:mapnrtation awl F11A Ied un \Iarrh 6 to Ihy first formal ay. meeting in 10 years between the city council and the cmerning css boards of I lenrico and Chetcrficld counties, nccarci i (hrough of which the hgltwa,: ,will run. Constnictinn of Itichmondb on hcltx:•ly i% so far 3101:, 111,11 i; is t:nlik ly the p:s„ ec[ cal: he all stop, ed. bill Virginia and the surrorrdwgjnrisdi,.:ioasarcnmw negotiating on snme kind of eomp:nsatimi for the inner coos, no such as recnue sharing. (Sc: AV, 718178, p, 1075.) er. rc %,v hat about Dayton? The fate of i:s bel:nay none rests%ti;h On Y.' Adana,uhocanapprovcordisappro%c heciivironmen- us, tat impact statement that would permit construction to begin, nI Mindful ofhis ncwfive-point urhanpolicy, Adanisisinclincd to M. reject the impact statemcw. Hu%R•yrr. he wv1113 to fellow t : e•wvishesnftheeiteadministrationandtheregmnaltrmsportalt coordinating commiRce. ion st The suhurban-dominated regional group, which has backed the highway all alone because it would create jobs and provide y economic stimulus for the region, is pushing hard for approval. n. The eilyudministration iswm•ering.Tn•oycanapo.shortlynfter n various research groups began to report on the dan:aoe caused it ecmral-eitycennomicsbycircumferentialhigII%vgs,theDayton City Commission passed a resolution oppnsin3 the project. v Eleven months later. following state treasportation department hints that its stand would.icupaidize other federally aided city t road prujccs, the eommisdnn rc%crsed itself. • The copy is still on record favoring the beltway. bill several city n commissioners are fighting it. In a six -pare letter to Adam. nn J the proposed alternatives analysis rule. commissioner Patricia hl. Roach said unahse: shrew that "a significant number of the 'nen' employment oprw1unitics which %%•ill bede%cluped in the f 1.675 corridor wvill be as a result of their relocation out of the center cit v." So %%by is [Ise city administration suppoolting they highway;' Itoach anti other Opponents contend that Dayton husineswmen, who have acquired land along due proposed bcllwAvcorridorand would lose millions ofdollarsifthepro; I were dropped, ha%e poll tremendous pr:ssure on city offici;ds. The hchw•ay's backers inside and outside city government maintain that now emplognent uPponunitics crcatcd b% the mad would come front usher area.; of the cotnury and would spur the cnmorn) of the entire region. Dowllios%n Dayton is hound to benefit, they argue. 'Ihat Ica, es Adams in die middle. Econnmic aiialyscs of highways by the Utban hwi:vte, the Ilrookings Institutinn, the hand Corp. and n!I:ers suggest than file behway wnuid hurt thccenter city, and Ad;rns iscumrniticd III urban rcvitalizat ion• Rill the 'I ransp.-mition Dcpartnient i% ;den ce,ln1:1ired to metrolwhian tcgiou:d ptauning. and the re9inral group cants the brh%;n•. Ard for C:uncr ,W miui.raw,n is cowil:ined In goyim! localitic% more illa wo•iec in uta deci%hms an 61cr l aid 111:11alfwct them. Should Adams merridr the elacted local official, even it some anal% 1, w::y livy are misguidcd.l Soh ing the urban pmhlcot in this cmnur• is far hunt i1 r!rar. cu[. straichblomard prnpmnion. p MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES rJOINCS --Cit}y ®4 Iowa Citi` 1 DATE: March 26, 1979 TO: City Council FROM: Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator•,.J.✓ RE: Senior Center Furniture --Award of contract for furniture to be acquired with Title V funds In September 1978, the City of Iowa City was awarded $53,234 of federal Title V funds available under the Older Americans' Act of 1965 and $38,666 of State Senior Center funds availalbe from the Iowa state legislature. r = )2L -M In accepting the Title V, we agreed to award the contracts for purchasing the furniture and equipment prior to March 30, 1979. Complying with this agreement, a resolution will be added to the March 27, 1979 City Council agenda during City Manager's business. Wehner, Nowysz, Pattschull, & Pfiffner, the project architects, have expanded their architectural contract to provide interior designs and furniture selection services required in order to expend the Title V funds within the alloted time. The architects submitted furniture and equipment recommendations and specifications to the City on March 5 to be bid in a formal bid process. The Advertisement for Bids was published . in the Press -Citizen on March 2, 1979. At the bid opening on March 23 five bi ss weaved -- four prior to 10:00 a.m. and one late bid at 10:07. The architects have analyzed the bids received and their recommendations are presented on the attached sheet. bjl/9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES H 1 I The Architects Office Wehner, Nowysz, P attschull and Pfiffner 201 dey building, Iowa city, Iowa 52240 FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT (1) SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER --INDICATES ARCHITECT'S RECOMMENDATION FURNISHINGS GROUP A — MADISON ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE YOUNKERS^ SAXTON FANDREL PIONEER FURNISHINGS GROUP B - RUDD ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE SAXTON-', PIONEER FURNISHINGS GROUP C - CONDI ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE SAXTON (SUBSTITUTE MADISON)-: YOUNKERS PIONEER i FURNISHINGS GROUP D - HOWE ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE YOUNKERS^ SAXTON PIONEER FANDREL i i I roland wehner William nowysz richard pattschull John pfiffner i Iim schoenfelder enjamin chait members of the american Institute of architects BASE BIDS ($10,037.00) $ 8,500.00 $ 9,003.00 $ 9,189.00 $ 9,220.41 ($ 3,356.00) $ 3,394.00 $ 3,428.18 ($ 6,728.00) $ 6,476.00 $ 7,602.00 $ 7,716.32 C$ 7,681.00) $ 6,681.50 $ 7,110.00 $ 7,170.42 $ 7,334.00 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES TOTAL $ 8,500.00 $ 3,394.00 $ 6,476.00 $ 6,681.50 TEL. 319-338-9715 I r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES -2- BASE BIDS TOTAL FURNISHINGS GROUP E - STEELCASE ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($19,415.00) PIONEER (SUBSTITUTE GF) $17,477.95 FROHWEIN': $19,890.00 $19,890.00 FURNISHINGS GROUP F - HOWARD MILLER ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($ '516.00) PIONEER:: $ 697.70 $ 697.70 FURNISHINGS GROUP G - PETER PEPPER ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($ 526.00) YOUNKERSI: $ 589.00 $ 589.00 PIONEER $ 641.37 FURNISHINGS GROUP H - DAVID MORGAN ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($ 248.00) PIONEER:: $ 565.52 $ 565.52 FURNISHINGS GROUP I - GEORGE KOVACS ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($ 118.00) YOUNKERS $ 114.00 $ 114.00 PIONEER $ 185.75 FURNISHINGS GROUP J - MONARCH ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($ 802.00) YOUNKERS:1 $ 839.00 $ 839.00 TOTAL - ARCHITECT'S ESTIMATE ($49,427.00) TOTAL - BID PRICE $47,746.72 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES City of Iowa CK MEMORANDUM Date: December 5, 1978 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Sophie Zukrowski and Angela Ryan, Staff Assistants to the Iowa City Human Rights Commission Re: Proposed Changes in the Local Non-discrimination Ordinance This report has been prepared to facilitate the City Council's review of proposed amendments to the City's Human Rights Ordinance. These changes have been necessitated by extensive amendments to Chapter 601A, the State Civil Rights Statute, of both the substantive provisions and the procedural aspects. After discussion with the staff, the Commission recommends the amendment of the ordinance to incorporate all of the substantive provisions which will be contained in Chapter 601A. As you are aware, a local ordinance must be consistent with state law. With regard to some procedural aspects, it is the opinion of the Commission and staff that certain provisions were intended to be applicable only to the State Civil Rights Commission and relate to administrative concerns rather than due process. The report is presented in two sections. The first section explains the proposed additions and changes in the Human Rights Ordinance. The discussion of each item is keyed to your draft copy of the ordinance. The second section of the report discusses the changes in the State Statute which are not being recommended by the Iowa City Human Rights Commission for inclusion in the ordinance. Staff members will attend the informal Council meeting to answer any questions you may have. A copy of the amendments to Chapter 601A, the Iowa Civil Rights Law, has also been provided for your information. Subsequent copies of the ordinance will be renumbered to conform to the Code of Ordinances, City of Iowa City. PART I: ADDITIONS AND CHANGES TO THE LOCAL NONDISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE Reference Page from Local Ordinance Changes 1. Page 3 Add to 10.2.2A: "to determine the . merits" Although this is an implied and assumed power of the local Commission, the amended State Statute includes this specific language. 2. Page 4 In 10.2.3A: replace the current language "...who have passed the age of majority" with the amended State Statute language of "age 18 years or older, unless that person is considered by law to be an MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES 2 adult." The revised language more clearly establishes who is protected on the basis of age. 3. Page 6 Revise M1 under: "D. Exceptions." The "Exceptions" section specifies what actions are not discriminatory in employment. The current ordinance language, which is lined out, has been replaced with the expanded State Statute language. This exception permits a religious institution to maintain as a criteria for employment qualfications based on religion if related to a religious purpose. 4. Page 6 Add new N6 under: "D. Exceptions." This paragraph is the amended State Statute language and permits state and federal programs that benefit a specific age group to the exclusion of other age groups. For example, I interpret this section to allow employers the flexibility, which is proposed under the federal Age Amendments of 1978, to reduce insurance benefits for workers beyond the age of 65. 5. Page 6 Add new N7 under: "D. Exceptions." Again, this is the amended State Statute language. A clarification of this language has been requested from the Executive Director of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission but not received. As this paragraph reads, it is permis- :_ sable to discriminate against an employee who is age 45 or older in employment apprenticeship programs. 6. Page 7 Add new section "D" to 10.2.5. The amended State Statute now specifically prohibits discrimination against tenants and property buyers because of the protected basis, such as race or national origin, of the tenants' or buyers' visitors. 7. Page 7 Editorial change: "Exceptions" relettered from "D" to "E". 8. Page 8 Add new letters "B" and "C" under 10.2.7. Most of the language in "B" and "C" comes directly from the amended State Statute. However, "of the Code of Iowa" was added as clarification in "B." Sexual orientation as a protected category was also added in "B" and "C" since the City ordinance provides this protection in credit transactions while the State Statute does not. FIICROFILMED BY JORM MIOROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES 3 Paragraphs "B" and "C" are basically an elaboration of what constitutes an unlawful credit transaction. Section "C" extends the definition of credit to include life, health and accident insurance. 9. Page 8 Editorial change: "Exceptions" relettered from "B" to "D". 10. Page 9 Revise "B" under 10.2.10. The amended State Statute will allow an individual to file a complaint of discrimination up to 180 days after the discriminatory act occurs. 11. Page 9 Add to 10.2.11A: "within 20 days." The amended State Statute requires that a copy of the complaint be served to the person charged within 20 days after a complaint is filed. 12. Page 12 Add new letter "B" under 10.2.13. The current ordinance does not have a letter "B if This section gives the Commission the option to file the conciliation agreement in District Court as a consent decree. Failure to comply with the conciliation agreement would be contempt of court. 13. Page 15 Delete 10.2.16A. I 14. Page 16 and 17 Add new section "A" to 10.2.16. Section 10.2.16A(a) expands the number of remedies available to the Commis- sion. Remedial action is not limited to the items specified. Please note #8, which will allow compensatory damages for humiliation in addition to icourt and attorney costs. Section 10.2.16A(b) extends the remedies which may be sought. Under this j section, if the Iowa City Human Rights Commission found probable cause to II believe discrimination occurred by a responding party who was either operating under a license or as a contractor, the Commission could certify the finding to either the licensing or contracting agency. The licensing and contracting agencies could initiate further action. However, once a finding of discrimination is certified by the Commission, the finding is binding on the agency. For example, if a sex discrimination complaint had been filed against "Ajax Construction" which had a contract with the City including a nondis- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MDIREs crimination in employment clause, and the Commission found discrimination occurred, the Commission could certify that finding to the City administration. The City could then proceed to withhold funds until corrective action by the contractor had been taken or terminate the contract completely. Section 10.2.16A(c) indicates that certifying a finding of discrimination to the appropriate agency can be taken in addition to other remedies. 15. Page 18 Delete the current "B" under 10.2.16 (Section is lined out) and replace with new "B." This amendment clarifies the procedure for dismissing a complaint after a public hearing where no discrimination was found. PART II: AMENDED STATE STATUTE PROVISIONS NOT RECOMMENDED BY THE IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION FOR INCLUSION IN THE LOCAL ORDINANCE. Provision 16. Right to sue release. The amended State Statute permits the Iowa Civil Rights Commission to issue, under certain circumstances, a right to sue for the individual complainant. Once a right to sue letter is issued, the enforcement agency's investigation stops. The individual can proceed with a private action in District Court. There is no comparable provision in the local ordinance. Although the Iowa City Human Rights Commission strongly feels this is an important right for the individual complainant, the Commission did not recommend the inclusion of this provision in the local ordinance for two reasons. First, the amended State Statute and the State Commission's administrative rules do not address what impact a local release would have on a state or federal investigation. (A clarification has been requested from the Executive Director of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission but not received). If the local Commission issues a right to sue, a state or federal investigation may be jeopardized and the rights of the individual more seriously damaged than if no right to sue is available at the local level. Secondly, since all local complaints are reported to the State Commission, the complainant could request a right to sue letter from the State Commission. Only in those limited circumstances where protection from discrimination is not afforded by the State Statute, such as sexual orientation, would the complainant not be able to receive a right to sue letter. However, a complainant has the right to retain a private attorney during the course of the complaint. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mltu[S It is the Iowa City Human Rights Commission's opinion that, at this time, due to the ambiguity of this provision in the State Statute, it would not be advantageous to pursue a right to sue provision for the local ordinance. 17. Areas of Coverage. The state defines the powers of the state Commission in greater detail than the City. However, the Commission feels our language is sufficient. 18. Initial Finding of Cause. Under a major change in the Statute, the Iowa Civil Rights Commissioners will no longer make the initial finding of probable cause or no probable cause. A hearing officer will make the determination of cause after an investigation by a staff member. If the hearing officer finds cause to believe discrimination occurred, a State Commission staff person will attempt to conciliate the complaint. If the complaint is not conciliated, a'State Commissioner will then serve as a public hearing officer. The Iowa City Human Rights Commission does not propose modification of its current procedure. Currently, the staff conducts an investigation. Those Commissioners assigned to a particular complaint determine whether discrimination occurred. The same Commissioners then attempt to conciliate the complaint if a finding of discrimination was made. If the complaint is not successfully conciliated, the complaint may proceed to public hearing. A Commissioner, who has no knowledge of the facts of the complaint, will then serve as the hearing officer. The legal staff's opinion to the Commission was that it would not be necessary to change the current procedure. 19. Conciliation Bypass. The amended State Statute also provides that the Executive Director of the State Commission, with approval by a Commissioner, can bypass conciliation after 30 days, under certain circumstances, and proceed to public hearing. The City ordinance provides that if conciliation fails after 90 days, the Conciliation Team will report the failure to conciliate and recommend, what further action should be taken, including proceeding to a public hearing. The two procedures are substantially the same. 20. Referral Relationship. Finally, the amended State Statute provides for a referral relationship between local Commissions and the State Commission in addition to a deferral relationship or no formal relationship. Referral and deferral relationships must be approved by the State Commission. Currently, the Iowa City Human Rights Commission has no formal relationship with the State although the local Commission notifies the State of the status of all complaints filed locally. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MO nus 6 Under a deferral relationship, the State will wait for the local Commission to conduct an investigation; the local Commission may investigate a complaint, make a finding, and close a complaint. However, its finding and resolution are not binding on the State Commission. Under a referral relationship, an individual may file a discrimination complaint with only the State Commission or the local Commission. The individual may not file the same complaint at both levels. If the complaint is filed with a local Commission, the finding is binding on the State Commission. The State Commission could not reinvestigate the complaint. The Iowa City Human Rights Commission is not pursuing a referral relationship with the State Commission. The Commission feels that a referral relationship might restrict the complainant's ability to obtain a remedy. Furthermore, the Iowa City Human Rights Commission has not received proposed administrative rules regarding referral relationships, although requested, to fully evaluate the relationship. In addition, it is not clear what the effect of a referral status would be on our relationship with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In summary, the proposed changes are intended to make the City ordinance consistent with Chapter 601A, the State Civil Rights Law. We recommend the adoption of all of the substantive changes and the adoption of those procedural changes which seem applicable to local Commissions. Since certain provisions are ambiguous with regard to their applicability to local Commissions, we will keep you informed of any interpretations which may merit your consideration. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140I14ES M MICROFILMCD BY JORM MICROLAB MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION MARCH 26, 1979 INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION: March 26, 1979, 1:35 P.M. in the Conference Room at the Civic Center. Mayor Robert Vevera presiding. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Balmer, deProsse, Erdahl, Perret, Vevera. Absent: Neuhauser, Roberts. STAFFMEMBERS PRESENT: Berlin, Helling, Brei, Schmeiser, Boothroy, Hayek, Brachtel, Minter, Kucharzak, Vann, Kraft, Glaves, Dietz, Daley, Kron. TAPE RECORDED: Reel N79-11, Side 1, 1022 -end & Side 2, 1-434. APPLICATIONS TO PLANNING AND ZONING COMM. Boothroy, Schmeiser. 1022-1280 Ralston Creek Village Prel. & Final LSRD 1. Developer to provide continuation of sidewalk through drive & back to existing sidewalk and also sidewalk access on their property extending to Burlington Street. 2. Granted special use permit by Ed. of Adjustment for parking by Ralston Creek subject to approval by IA Natural Resources Comm. i3. A 1970 agreement & easement allows developer to locate building on existing trunk sewer creating undesirable situation for City. Public Works will research the history of this matter and present to Council. 4. Proposed building is one foot out of water if 100 -year flood should occur. I Owens Brush Co., Pre]. & Final LSNRO 1280-1329 — 1. Plan includes 6700+ sq. ft, of building expansion & upgrading of i parking facility. 2. Developer will voluntarily comply with proposed new tree ordinance. 3. Matter will be submitted for Council's approval after receipt } of stormwater detention agreement and dedication for water main. 1 Vevera left 1:55 P.M. Mayor pro tem Balmer presiding. i AGENDA - COUNCIL TINE - COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 1329-1667 1. Additions to agenda - City Manager stated a Res. Imposing Weight Restrictions on Rohret Road and a Res. Awarding Bids for Senior Center Furniture will be presented for Council consideration. i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I Page 2 Council Informal March 26, 1979 Vevera returned 2:00 P.M. 2. Erdahl inquired about formulation of ditch cleaning & weed cutting policy, City Mgr, stated it had been taken care of. 3. Perret questioned status of County participation for support of Senior Center. City Mgr. will check into. 4. Vann & Kraft were present to explain bids received for Senior Center Furniture as outlined in memo distributed. LEGAL DEPARTMENT Hayek. 1667 -end. Freeway 518 1. As a result of discussions with Federal officials in Washington, D.C. by deProsse & Erdahl, the City Attorney felt the City has legitimate concerns for litigation based on IDOT's environmental review of the easterly alignment, the segmented nature of the environmental review and the failure of the environmental review to take into account the findings and planning in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Due to the present Legal staff's workload, the City Attorney recommended that the City hire outside counsel in connection with any future litigation concerning 518 alignment. Balmer noted opposition to litigation at this time, as many citizens are in favor of Freeway 518. 3. deProsse distributed the Res. on Urban Interstate Hwys. which was approved by the Natural Resources Steering Comm. and an article, "A U -Turn for Beltways" from the National Journal. 4. The majority of the Council agreed to pass a motion to pursue the hiring of an attorney for litigation at tomorrow night's formal meeting. Legal Staffing 1. Discussion of obvious backlog of H.I.S. cases. One possible solution might be for the City to seek outside counsel to help with backlog using Federal funds (CDBG) for H.I.S. 2. As the Legal Department is presently interviewing applicants to replace former Asst. Atty. Kushnir, and Asst. Atty. Bowlin has indicated he will be leaving in Dec., 1979, the City Attorney recommended that the City hire two new assistants now. The fourth Asst, could help with the temporary backlog and would be trained by Dec. There is a possibility of using some Federal funds. 3. The City Atty. would also like to designate the position of lst. Asst. City Attorney, who would have some administrative power. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOINES Page 3 Council Informal March 26, 1979 4. There was Council consensus to hire two attorneys now and to establish position of 1st. Asst. Atty. Senate File #406 1. The City Atty. explained that the purpose of this bill was to exempt nursing homes & care facilities from property tax. 2. He opposes this bill and would like Council backing. 3. A motion will be made at tomorrow night's formal meeting. Model Lease 1. Erdahl asked for status of model lease and was advised that Asst. Atty. Ryan is still working on. 2. Erdahl will meet with Asst. Ryan for discussion. Recess - 3:00 P.M. NON-DISCRIMINATION ORDINANCE Pat Brown. Side 2, 1-72 1. Our present Human Rights Ordinance is inconsistent with the new State law. 2. Council consensus to use different word than "discriminate" on Page 6 of current Ord., #7 under "D. Exceptions." PPD QUARTERLY REPORT Kraft, Vann, Glaves 72-215 1. PPD has recently hired six new planners to replace vacancies which have existed for some time, including two new vacancies. The new planners will start working at various dates. One position is designated as area planner. PUBLIC WORKS QUARTERLY REPORT Dietz, Brachtel, Minter, Daley, Kron. 215-434 1. Although acquisition of right-of-ways has taken longer than expected, the Gilbert St. Relocation Proj. will be started this year. s 2. Actual construction an Riverside/Benton Proj, is scheduled to begin in 1980, r -o -w acquisition may start this year. Possibly i application for FAUS funds can be made. } 3. A refuse truck that was unacceptable was delivered to the City from a dealer. An additional item was placed on the truck which E made the tire size, axle capacity, exhaust system, and 10 other items either off -balanced or wrong. 4. System failure of traffic lights at Washington & Clinton intersection was caused by a small part popping out of place. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Page 4 Council Informal March 26, 1979 5. Progress report on Maintenance Building. 6. Transit load is down 20% yet is still ahead of last year. Staff is currently working on bus rescheduling. 7. The P.W. construction schedule will be set for informal discussion, material will be sent through the packet. 8. Discussion of alley clean-up. Letters sent to people who have violated code by leaving refuse cans out on street. 9. Staff should prepare press releases stating that people can now sign up for rock for their alleys. Project will be done in May and June. The City will bring the rock and grade the alley, and the people will pay for the rock. Meeting adjourned 4:00 P.M. i i I e a a as i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401NES City ®9 10%,va City MEM®RAN®UM DATE: March 23, 1979 TO: City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Director of Planning 6 Program Development RE: Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study Enclosed please find the copies of the Northside Neighborhood Preservation project which were prepared under an HUD Innovative Grant. This project is scheduled to be discussed at an informal Council meeting in the future. DRK/ssw Enclosure I tEI,l �iA 3-27-79 MIV,�� s MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I(flm Iv11Cl��il.l�ft MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES t� The research and studies forming the CITY OF IOWA CITY basis for this report were conducted Pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- City Council ment (HUD). The statements and Mary C. Neuhauser t conclusions contained herein are Carol deProsse those of the grantee and do not John Balmer necessarily reflect the views of the David Perret U.S. Government in general or HUD in Robert Vevera, Mayor particular. Neither the United States Clemens Erdahl nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- Glenn E. Roberts pressed or implied, or assumes re- Pat Foster• sponsibility for the accuracy or com. Max Selzer• pleteness of the information herein. Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen f Ernest W. Lehman t Patt Cain - Jane Jakobsen p Richard Blum, Chairperson i John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff t S Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner �(( t Past Mayor t { ' Past Council Members ' Past Chairperson a THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Protect Leader r i A complete list of the reports in this t series appears on the Inside back cover. I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r.� HUD Innovative Projects Grant NO. B -76 -SI -19-001 (FY 1976) IMPACT EVALUATION: PRINCIPLES, PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES Douglass Lee June 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 14011JES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. Results are summarized and the study described in report number 16, Final Report. The Impact Evaluation report seeeks to explain what impact evaluation is and why it is needed, using the context of an older urban residential mixed-use neighborhood. More than anything else, impact evaluation is an organizing concept; most of the pieces which are assembled in this report are familiar in other contexts (such as comprehensive planning and environmental analysis), but the synthesis constitutes a significant departure from current practice in planning. Considerable effort has gone into developing and testing the component parts of impact evaluation, over a period of years and in a variety of situations, but it will remain empty potential unless it is nurtured in practice at the hands of sympathetic professionals. There is no magic in impact evaluation, simply a challenge. It is hard to single out only a few of the staff who contributed to this report, through substantive background research and through repeated critical review of my drafts: Vicki Williams, Gary Lozano, Kevin Laverty, Tim Pluck, Jerry Thompson, Bill Keating, and Tony Koyzis all helped in major ways. Kevin wrote the initial draft for the impact linkages and optimal controls sections, Gary prepared several MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40I1jE5 F drafts that have been incorporated into the Measurement and Evaluation section, and Vicki managed a major rewrite of that same section. I am indebted to many other people as well, for stimulating discussion and comment, but the work stands as merely a beginning. DBL ii PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40I11ES CONTENTS FOREWORD i INTRODUCTION 1 Principles 4 Neighborhood Quality 7 Is the North Side Worth Saving? 11 WHAT IS IMPACT EVALUATION? 13 Impact Evaluation Review Procedures 13 Impact Measurement And Evaluation Guidelines 21 Impact Linkages 45 WHY IS IMPACT EVALUATION NEEDED? 55 Optimal Land Use Controls 55 Control of Negative Impacts 55 The Range of Land Use Control Strategies 58 Problems Inherent To Zoning 63 The Preferrability of Impact Evaluation 70 REFERENCES 72 APPENDICES 78 A. Evaluation And Control of Air Pollutant Impacts 79 B. Evaluation And Control of Noise Impacts 88 C. Calculation of. Storm Runoff And Flooding Potential 100 iii FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES INTMI)WTION The purpose of an impact evaluation is to state, in as clear and as meaningful terms as feasible, what difference a particular action (e.g.,construction of an apartment in the North Side) will make if it is taken (a permit issued). This purpose has two components: - (Impact) Articulate the consequences of one choice versus another, .in whatever units or terms are suit- able (land paved over, traffic generated, noise and dust created, etc.) and quantified to a degree that seems appropriate. - (Evaluation) Suggest values to be placed on each of the consequences, to the extent that these can be derived from valid standards, economic markets, public preferences, etc. Accomplishing the first component requires an understanding of how cause and effect are related (impact linkages), and some methodologies for making this knowledge operational. The second component must ultimately be resolved in a political arena, but there are many sources for exhibiting such values as have been revealed by previous choices. Impact evaluation is comprehensive in scope, but selective in detail and the depth to which analysis should be carried. Checklists and sophisticated methodologies are useful references, but choice of which impacts to evaluate and how precise the estimates need to be should depend upon the decision under consideration. usually, most impacts can be judged as insig- nificant from cursory review, and additional refinement of important impacts -- beyond some rough estimates -- will not alter the basis for choosing among alternatives. The amount of effort directed at impact evaluation should be comensurate with the potential consequences of the choice being made; decisions about major land use changes should be informed by thorough study of impacts, while minor changes can be accepted or rejected on the basis of: very brief analysis. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES t10111Es ■ e i 1 TABLE 1 CATEGORIES OF NEGATIVE IMPACT AIRBORNE 1. suspended particulate matter 2. trash and litter 3. smoke 4. odors and fumes 5. toxic pollutants and pathogens 6. noise WATER BORNE 1. runoff 2. standing water 3. silt and debris 4. toxic pollutants and pathogens ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS 1. slippage -prone soils 2. earthquake stability OTHER PHYSICAL 1. vibration 2. structural undermining 3. physical dangers 4. interference with other activities 5. heat 6. animals 7. fire hazard NON PHYSICAL 1. light, air, and breathing space infringement 2. glare 3. unsightliness 4. Privacy and life style conflicts 5. fright, mental depression, and anguish 6. offense to morals `a ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES 1 F M Neighborhood impact evaluation concentrates primarily on the issue of whether or not a proposed change would be compatible with the neighborhood, or contribute to neighbor- hood quality, i.e., whether property values of affected parcels would increase or decrease as a result of the proposed change. The types of negative neighborhood impacts, listed in table 1, emphasize impacts on the natural environment (air pollution), on the built environment (flooding, struc- tural undermining), and direct impacts on persons (noise, smoke, unsightliness, light). All impacts are evaluated with respect to their ultimate impact on human beings. In general, it is easier to measure or estimate impacts than it is to place values on those impacts, and it is easier to answer narrow questions (clow much runoff will accumulate from a 10 -year storm?) than to answer the questions of inter- est (How much damage will be done by flooding? Is the proposed development compatible with the neighborhood?). With the aid of some methodology and guidelines, however, useful answers can be constructed to the important questions in most situations. The intent is not only to separate proposed changes which will enhance the quality of the neighborhood from proposals which will damage neighborhood quality, but to establish conditions under which any particular proposed change would be accepted. Zoning is one technique for setting conditions of acceptability, but -- as will be discussed in a later section of this report -- current practice of zoning is rarely effective in protecting older mixed neighborhoods such as the North Side. Evaluation also depends upon the viewpoint of the eval- uator. While neighborhood protection is the dominant orien- tation of impact evaluation as presented here, the interests of the community as a whole and various subgroups within it should nonetheless be balanced: - Property owners want the free enjoyment of their own property protected while also retaining the maximum number of options for future use i.e., they may want to be secure homeowners and unfettered developers at the same time. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140114ES - Residents, renters, homeowners, absentee owners, and merchants all have something at stake and deserve proper consideration. - It must be acknowledged that the benefits to the community as a whole of some proposed neighborhood change (e.g., higher density redevelopment) may out- weigh the desires of the neighborhood residents, but j this does not obviate the need to accomplish the change expeditiously and to pay full compensation to individuals who may be injured by the change. It is thus the intent that impact evaluation serve the criteria of both efficiency (the total benefits of each action exceed the costs resulting from it) and equity (no individuals gain at the expense of others). Either public or private sector decisions can be reviewed utilizing the ) framework of impact evaluation, but the concepts of neighbor- hood impact evaluation presented below focus mainly on de- velopment actions initiated within the private sector. PRINCIPLES The impact evaluation approach to neighborhood preser- vation and enhancement is derived from two major premises: 1. Control of Negative Externalities. A properly functioning market has the potential for producing the socially optimal allocation of resources, but the pri- mary source of market failure in the neighborhood context is the presence of negative externalities. These are the same as the negative impacts listed in table 1 or the nuisances discussed in report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control.. If there is no mechanism M restraining negative externalities, property owners are encouraged to treat neighborhood amenities as free. A raw parking lot may reduce the value of the home on the adjoining property, but the parking lot owner does not take this into account. If externalities could be fully internalized by each property owner, land use de- cisions would be socially "correct" without additional constraints. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES 2. Minimum Public Intervention. The least amount Of public intervention into private markets that will re- sult in adequately low levels of externalities is the most desirable amount of intervention. Minimum interfer- ence allows maximum flexibility in the resolution of land use conflicts, which in turn leads to the most efficient solution to each individual conflict, By i controlling the externalities directly, and only the externalities, individual property owners are given the greatest ].attitude to take actions which are both socially and .individually desirable. Impact- evaluation is a means for identifying the real or potential negative externalities that an action may create, and selecting the least restrictive control strategy that will control the externalities. One of the results of this strategy will be to permit neighborhoods to evolve their own unique and recognizable characteristics, while balancing in- dividual tastes and preferences, neighborhood welfare, and overall community benefit. iFor example, consider a hypothetical apartment building proposed for a residential area. Some of the possible impacts, as indicated in table 2, include obstruction of sunlight, unsightliness from the design of the building, the lack of space around the building, parked cars, runoff, heat, glare, trash, dust, storm j litter and noise. The path of transmis- sion of the impacts from the source (the apartment building) passes through such intermediate or associated activities as j the parking lot, storage and movement of vehicles, and tem- porary storage of trash. For each source, link, or impact a control mechanism is suggested (in parentheses), ranging from 'r prohibition of apartment buidlings (zoning) to mandatory storm water detention facilities. Unsightliness from a lack Of open space can be corrected by minimum usable open space requirements; dust can be reduced by paving the surface of. the parking lot; several negative impacts of cars and parking lots can be ameliorated by landscaping and other screening; and trash storage problems can be corrected by suitable control measures and design standards. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES R TABLE 2. SELECTED NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF AN APARTMENT BUILDING impact producing intermediate activity activities (land or impact use) linkages impact effect on recipient arkin ) LIGHT (height, bulk, place- ment UNSIGHT- LINESS (open space, design, coverage DUST (paving) APART- p g MENT RUNOFF (deteBUILDING tion) - (prohibit HEAT apartment (land - building) scaping �\ GLARE (screen) \ VEHICLES/ LITTER \(screen) NOISE (design) 'TRASH LITTER (storage) UNSIGIiT- LINESS (storage) G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IREs lack of sunlight af- fects plants, human health, energy consump- tion in Winter reduced pride in neighbor- hood, unpleasant visual experience discomfort to eyes, nose throat; extra cleaning; wear: impeded vision flooding, damage to pro- perty, inconvenience, fear additional discomfort in Summer discomfort to eyes, impeded vision reduced pride in property, cleanup effort distraction, stress, loss of hearing, impeded con- versation, sleep reduced pride in property, cleanup effort reduced pride in neighbor- hood, unpleasant visual. experience Of greatest significance is the observation that there are many ways to control the negative impacts of apartment buildings without prohibiting them entirely. A similar kind of analysis could be done for grocery stores, rooming houses, bar and restaurants, and so on. When only the impacts are controlled -- not the land use -- socially beneficial activi- ties are allowed to occur where they would otherwise be pro- hibited. The decision as to whether they are specially worth- while or not is left to the private decision maker, constrained only by the need to eliminate all significant negative externalities. NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY Attempts to define or measure neighborhood quality typically rely on observable attributes of the neighborhood: private investment in improvements, public investment in in- frastructure, the demographics of the resident population, geographic location, services available, zoning, etc. Since our purposes are different from those of the usual study of property values, we will adopt another definition -- one which.is almost tautological -- and state that neighbor- hood quality is the demand for land in the neighborhood, in uses which are compatible with the existing character of the neighborhood. Lack of demand means that prices are falling in real terms and owners have a strong incentive to disin- vest, hence quality declines because the neighborhood is not desired. Demand for incompatible land uses (which may or may not currently exist in the neighborhood) does not necessarily imply low quality, but does imply a change in the quality of the existing neighborhood. Neighborhood quality, then, is reflected in the prices buyers are willing to pay for the services which the neighborhood currently offers. 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES neighborhood quality maximum compatible development typical neighborhood cycles maximum negative externalities cumulative development over time Figure 1. TEMPORAL PATTERNS OF NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOINES Over time, numerous small-scale actions are taken that add to or detract from the aggregate quality of the neighbor- hood. Under ideal conditions, each increment of activity or development creates mutually positive benefits for itself and the neighborhood, as represented in figure 1; homogeneous single-family developments generally fit this pattern. Under worst possible conditions, each increment detracts from all the previous development. A typical older urban residential neighborhood frequently goes through cycles something like the middle curve in the diagram. The significant- feature of this model of neighborhood quality is that it proposes that quality is the outcome of a series of incremental decisions taken over a period of time, rather than the result of attributes that are all observable at one point in time. An important implication, and the primary focus on the North Side study, is that any attempt to affect neighborhood quality must do so through these one -by -one decisions; long range plans and zoning maps may have some influence on the incremental decisions, but these instruments rarely are effective in shaping neighbor- hood quality. Impact evaluation is proposed as a general strategy for controlling neighborhood quality through the evaluation of incremental changes in neighborhood land uses. Both existing land use incompatibilities as well as potential changes in land use need to be addressed in any comprehensive solution to neighborhood protection. The concepts and methodology for impact evaluation are the isame in either case, but the regulatory approach for addressing existing land use problems is different enough ` from the review of proposed land uses that the two contexts are covered in separate reports. In the case of existing incompatibilities, largely private actions under a modified concept of: nuisance law appear to be the best mechanism for correcting or ameliorating existing problems, and the 9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES rationale is presented in Report No. 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control_. The present report will take as its context the review of land use changes in an existing neighbor- hood,as they occur or are proposed. If a new land use is compatible with an existing neighbor- hood, then it creates positive externalities for its neighbors, or is at least neutral; an incompatible use creates negative externalities. The specific nature of these externalities or impacts is discussed in greater detail farther on in this report. The net effects of all impacts is reflected in demand for property in the neighborhood, as indicated by property values, and we can consider four general cases: 1. Mutual compatibility. The new land use increases the value of existing land uses, and its own value is enhanced by its presence in this neighborhood. 2. Negative externalities with negative net benefits. The new land use creates costs or decreases in value for its neighbors which are greater than the benefits internal to the new land use. If the new land use were forced to internalize these impacts, then it would not be a profitable or worthwhile activity. When land use falling in this category is allowed to exist, a transfer of value (wealth) occurs from the previous land uses which suffer the negative externalities to the new land use, and there is a net loss to society. 3. Negative externalities with positive net bene- fits,retaining existing neighborhood character. In this case, requiring the new land use to internalize its nega- tive impacts results in the elimination of the transfer cited in the case above but still permits the land use to occur. By controlling the externalities, the land use is made compatible with the neighborhood as it exists, and the new land use is still worthwhile and profitable. The intent of impact evaluation is to .identify the negative externalities and establish standards under which each development proposal. is acceptable to the neighborhood in which it is to be located. 4. Negative externalities with positive net bene- fits, but only under redevelopment. The final. case is one in which it would be socially beneficial to substantially change the neighborhood character in a relatively short span of time, typically through redevelopment. This is not an easy determination to make, especially since market signals are often weak in such cases, but the important condition to impose is that all parties affected are ade- quately compensated for any losses which they suffer as a result of the change. Instead of controlling the 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIMES externalities, injured property owners are awarded damages, frequently to the extent that the redeveloper acquires title to the property. Some owners will be compensated adequately through private market transactions, but many will not be, and these are often those least able to absorb losses. Thus a decision to change the character of the neighborhood through redevelopment should be very self-consciously taken, after careful study and evaluation. IS TIIG NORTH SIDE WORTH SAVING? The fourth case points up the need to make an explicit binary decision each time a land use decision is reviewed: either the neighborhood is socially worthwhile overall and is to be protected, or else it is to be redeveloped. If the former outcome is agreed upon (collectively, e.g., by the city council), then impact evaluation is an approach which pro- vides information about whether new development will add to or subtract from the existing neighborhood. Should redevel- opment be preferred, then it is essential that a program be developed by the appropriate local agency and approved by the ;poli=ical process that will ensure that the redevelopment takes place within a reasonable time frame and without injury (uncompensated losses) to residents and owners in the neighbor- hood. Simply permitting the major change in character to occur (e.g., through higher density zoning) is almost always destructive by itself -- both inefficient and inequitable -- so a positive program of redevelopment is required if windfall gains and losses are to be avoided. The North Side neighborhood offers examples of how property owners are adversely affected when incompatible higher intensity uses are allowed but not controlled. "Worth saving" does not mean the neighborhood should be preserved as is, in a frozen state, in perpetuity. The choice is one of retaining the essential character of the existing neighborhood and constraining change that occurs to be compati- ble with that character (perhaps allowing the character to evolve over time), or explicitly stating that the existing character should be replaced by some other. For the North 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS•DES MOUICS Side, this choice is largely between a mixed residential character which retains most of the existing structures -- many of which are or were single family residences -- in the near term, or redevelopment for three-story walk-up apartments. Higher densities could also be considered, including elevator apartments. Some portion of the neighbor- hood might be programmed for redevelopment, with protection afforded to the remainer. A conclusion of this study is that the North Side has more than enough positive values to outweigh the negative impacts it has suffered, and that no alternative redevelop- ment of the neighborhood is sufficiently attractive to warrant the destruction of these positive values. We have documented many of the positive attributes (as well as the negative) in report number 10, Impacts Survey 1978, and in the Historic Structures Inventory, report number 4. Com- munity services, both public and privately provided, are described and evaluated in report number 7, Community Faci- lities. Little effort has been directed at enumerating the characteristics of the resident population beyond what is available in censuses (see report number 16, Final Report), but it is apparent from readily available observation that the neighborhood exhibits a rich blend of singles, couples, fam- iles, children, elderly, blue and white collar workers, poor and affluent, and, to a more limited extent, ethnic diversity. These resources appear to us to be far more valuable than anything that would, in all likelihood, replace them. Assuming, then, that the neighborhood is worth protecting, the task for an impact evaluation process is to ensure that - incremental changes fall under ei.ther case one, mutual. compa- tibility, or case three, positive net: benefits with negative externalities controlled. For case one situations, they simply need to be identified oS Such; for the more general. case, potential negative impacts need to be estimated and steps taken or conditions imposed that will ensure compati- bility. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES RO RIES / FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES WHAT LS IMPACT EVALUATION? The review procedures, impact assessment methodology, and impact linkages presented in this section comprise an attempt to explain the substance and nature of impact eval- uation by explaining how it is done. The review procedures proposed draw from procedures already in effect, in Iowa City, and are meant to be similar to them in style and structure. Impact assessment methodology has reached a fairly high state of development in a relatively short period of i time, although it has rarely if ever been applied to neighbor- hood land use problems; our efforts at adapting this metho- dology (selecting from it, more accurately) resulted in the measurement and guidelines section below. Finally, impact linkages are important both for illuminating impacts and for designing control strategies. IMPACT EVALUATION REVIEW PROCEDURES l As mentioned above, correcting existing negative impacts can be approached from a nuisance law perspective, supported by some reinforcing regulatory policies. This report addresses the problem of controlling changes in a neighborhood, as they occur, and the review procedures suggested provide an insti- tutional frame work within which impact evaluation can be i implemented. A different set of procedures might serve the impact review function better; our procedures are offered 1 simply as a starting point for consideration. As conceived i here, impact evaluation procedures would be applied through a an overlay district -- perhaps like an historic district -- designed to achieve compatibility of new development within the designated existing neighborhood. 13 / FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1. Application for Building Permit. Any property owner required to apply for a building permit would submit information about the proposed project to the building inspector, in sufficient detail to allow for an evaluation of the possible neighborhood impacts of the project. Minor projects would call for little information and analysis, whereas major ones might demand more information. In the initial stages, it is up to the judgment of the building inspector to determine whether adequate information has been provided to be able to estimate neighborhood impacts.1 The more minor the proposed project, the less effort would be expended on impact evaluation; below a "threshold level", no evaluation at all would be undertaken. For such applications, issuance of the building permit would be contingent simply upon compliance with building codes, housing codes, and zoning regulations. The threshold level might be defined as the g y g i g passing of an one of the following conditions: 1Throughout the presentation of the proposed review pro- cedures, emphasis is placed on stating precisely the criterion to be used for making a decision, rather than a specific decision i rule. For example, the amount of information that must be gen- erated (whether supplied by the applicant or produced by the building inspector) should be "adequate... to estimate neighbor- hood impacts." In practice, detailed guidelines and checklists can be used by the inspector's office and routinely followed. Later on we refer to "nearby" properties and "affected properties"; again, operational guidelines can be promulgated administratively for helping to identify exactly which properties fall into these categories. Affected properties may normally mean "within 200 feet" or "abutting", but to define "affected" as"within 200 feet" is specious precision. Reasonableness is required in the application of any regulatory procedure, and adequacy -for -a - given -purpose is a more reasonable criterion than a mandated check- list of items. The frequent confusion of precision (lack of vagueness) with specificity (automatic and inflexible decision rules) is a major source of onerous over-requlal-i.on. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101rIEs (a) An additional dwelling unit .is formed either by conversion or addition; (b) A change in use is requested 2; (c) An addition of greater than 100 square feet is proposed; (d) Demolition of an existing structure of greater than 600 square feet is requested. 2. Notification to Affected Property Owners. Notice of the application (and perhaps some specifics of the proposal) should be mailed or delivered to nearby property owners who might be affected by the project.3 Owners thus notified should be informed that they have access to all information submitted by the applicant as well as pertinent information generated by the office of the building inspec- tor. Additional information may also be submitted by the f affected owners, and included in the evaluation. This i procedure for notification of affected property owners is parallel to the one used in Iowa City for Board of Adjust- ment proceedings, is the impact evaluation procedures would simply expand that notification process to include the other types of application listed in step one above. I 3. Preparation and Circulation of Impact Report. I The building inspector (or some other designated official) would be responsible for ensuringthat potential impacts are estimated and evaluated, and a report is issued 2A change in use conceivably might not require a building permit; in these procedures, it is assumed that whatever the na- ture of the approval required, it could be centralized in the building inspector's office. i 3Residents who were not property owners might also be included in the notification process, although clarification is needed concerning what property rights tenants would pos- sess in these proceedings. j l; MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•D[S MOINES within an acceptab_e length of time.4 Additional information could be requested from the applicant by the building inspector, perhaps at the behest of poten- tially affected owners. After the inspector reviews the Possible impacts of the project and determines whether or not they warrant the imposition of restrictive con- ditions or the refusal of a permit, the report would be Published and circulated among affected parties. The report would contain the estimates of relevant impacts, conclusions concerning their acceptability,recommenda- tions for approval or denial of the permit, and conditions, if any, to be placed on approval. With major or controversial applications, meetings among affected parties may take place and several ver- sions of the preliminary report may be prepared and circulated before the inspector's report is issued. In simple uncontested cases, the report may consist of nothing more than one or two pages of negative declarations 4The building inspector has been chosen in the pro- cedures as the lead agency simply because that is the Office which issues building permits in Iowa City, We recognize that this office is not currently set up to carry out impact reviews, and attention would need to be given to deciding whether to augment the inspector's Office to include impact review functions or to create some other organizational arrangement. As with current review procedures, deadlines would be imposed at each step to ensure that the application is reviewed in an expeditious manner. Thirty days Might be mandated for the preliminary report, which would automatically become accepted as the final report if no appeal were made within nine days, etc. An applicant could modify his or her. propnsal. as ncgaLi.ve impacts came to light, or withdraw it and start again, depending upon she magnitude of the changes called for.. Guidelines for estimating impacts are provided in a subsequent sone tion of this report. 1.6 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROL.AB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES concerning impacts. Where performance or design standards have been developed, these could be applied directly; otherwise, resolution of each negative impact would be worked out in the specific context. In any event, the report should be appropriate in substance and detail to the potential impacts of the proposed project. An impact evaluation report is comparable in nature to both a staff report prepared in reponse to a rezoning application and an environmental impact assessment; the former tends to focus on compliance and consistency with the comprehen- sive plan, while the latter is subject to a tendency toward excessive level of detail due to legal pressures for "adequacy".5 Issuance of a building permit must be based upon a finding, by the building inspector, that the project applied for will not create significant negative impacts, i.e., it will be compatible with the neighborhood. This criterion implies a need for two kinds of information: j (a) Estimates of the impacts the proposed project will have on its neighbors, and (b) Normal levels of these impacts that currently exist in the neighborhood or levels which pro- perty owners in the neighborhood can reasonably E expect- to find. i Sone possible way to avoid litigation over "adequacy" and the associated delay and cost of report preparation is to mandate both the notification procedure and the preparation of the report, but leave its content to the discretion of the building inspector. If there do not exist sufficient Pres- sures -- political, and professional, or administrative -- to call forth a reasonably competent impact evaluation, inserting additional requirements in an ordinance is not going to improve things to any significant degree. If a presumably competent professional (e.g., the building inspector) abuses discretionary authority, the remedy is to replace the official not to force correct behavior through legal. action. 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOu+ES Significant negative impacts means that the dif- ference between (a) and (b) is both substantial and negative with respect to the neighborhood. The role of the building inspector is that of identifying negative impacts and securing abatement of them before issuing a permit. 4. Review and Approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission. All completed applications might come before the Planning Commission, or only those flagged by virtue of being contested, being recommended for approval, involv- ing the expenditure of public funds, or some other screen- ing criterion.6 A public hearing might be required for all reviewed applications, or for only those meeting some threshold test. Presumably, the Commission would always have the option to review an application if it so desired. After considering the information in the building inspec- tor's report the Commission might accept the recommendation, reverse it, accept modifications agreed upon by the applicant, impose additional conditions, etc., in much the same way that subdivisions or planned development projects are 6Procedural details have not been elaborated here because there are numerous workable arrangements, and the choice among them is largely a matter of taste. For example, all recommend- ations of -the inspector might be automatically accepted after some brief period of time unless the applicant, some number of affected property owners, or some minimum number of Commis- sioners requested review. For these applications, the time for review would be extended and no bui.ldinq permit would be issued until after the Commission's approval. Adjacent property owners also might request that title to the applicant's property or an easement (historic, or open space, or partial development rights) be publicly acquired; this expenditure of public funds would have to be approved by the City Council, but the Planning Commission could review this request at the same time it re- viewed the application for a building permit. An example that occurred in the North Side was the request to purchase a parcel for addition to a park, in response to development proposals for the parcel; it was then up to the Council to determine what was the best expenditure of City park funds. Even if the developmentis permitted, however, the neighbors should have the right to expect a compatible project. IB MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES reviewed. Normally, the issue before the Commission should be the values to be placed on the impacts and neighborhood qualities identified in the inspector's report. Since all parties have had full access to the same information base and have had an opportunity to contribute to it, the "facts" regarding the nature and extent of negative impacts and the characteristics of the neighborhood should be fairly complete at this stage. The Commission may wish, in the process of considering a particular application, to re-evaluate the standards and guidelines being applied or the way in which they are applied. 5. Appeal to City Council. The review period for the application could be extended by an appeal to the legislative body, at the request of the applicant, or .i of a proportion of affected owners (as with rezoning cases under present Iowa City regulations), or at the Council's request. The basis for review could be much the same for the Planning Commission, the main difference i being that the Council is empowered to enact policy and make value tradeoffs in situations affecting the community as a whole, including the expenditure of public funds iwhere that appears to be the most satisfactory resolution of the conflicts embodied in a particular application. i 6. Appeal to the Courts. Approval of the applica- tion b the council would result in a y permit being issued, unless a party with standing to sue requested and secured an injunction from a court of law. Appeal might be for I7An injunction would be difficult to obtain unless there was flagrant abuse of the procedures and guidelines, and bond would probably have to be posted to cover potential damages from excess delay. After an extensive and widely accessible review process has been conducted, there is considerably more presumption of legitimacy than there is under current- practice in which the court is often the first point of review for controversial develop- ment. I i9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FI0111[S damages only, in which case an injunction would not be j requested. The grounds for appeal could include improper adherence to administrative procedures, application of improper procedures, vague or inadequate guidelines or standards, capricious exercise of discretionary authority, and uncompensated injuries to either the application or the affected property owners. 7. Penalties for Non -Compliance. Land use review procedures can frequently be circumvented by acting precipitously, as in demolishing a structure overnight or by proceding without notice and presenting authorities with an accomplished fact. By placing primary emphasis on the abatement of negative impacts, there is less to be gained by constructing something without approval, but flagrant disregard of mandatory procedures should also be punishable by fines which are steep enough to make the expected costs of avoiding review procedures complying. Penalties should be greater than the cost of comensurate with the magnitude of the decision at stake, and could include punitive damages where there is cause. The above procedures are not intended to be much different from land use regulatory procedures now in effect in most communities, including Iowa City. other than the impact eval- uation guidelines themselves (many of which have direct parallels in zoning ordinances), all of the proposed procedures are being used in some form for some purpose. One major objective is to bring all types of applications -- rezoning requests, building permits for additions, conversions, and demolitions, even subdivision approval -- under the same set of procedures and apply the same neighborhood compatibility criterion. Another major objective is to bring certain kinds of unreviewed development (e.g., a demolition and subsequent increase in land use intensity, permissible according to the zoning classification) under some ki.nd of scrutiny; much of the destructive redevelopment that has taken place in the North Side has been subject- to little or no review. Finally, zn MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nolfl Es it would be possible to streamline review procedures within the proposed format so that legitimate and desirable develop- ment could proceed with minimal delay. An important share of land use decisions involves esti- mating what the impacts of a particular project will be, from information contained in plans and descriptions and relying upon the developer's statement of intent. The impact review in this kind of situation can serve two functions: 1. Aspects of the design which are likely to lead to problems can be modified before the develop- ment occurs, so that the result does not inherently create adverse neighborhood effects. The guidelines then become a checklist for ensuring that the project does not have any built-in deficiencies. 2. Approval of any project or building permit carries with it the conditions that the guidelines will be satisfied in practice; if this does not occur, j either the municipality or affected property owners may sue for damages or compliance. Special conditions can additionally be imposed on specific projects, with the same enforcement sanctions available. The methodology outlined in the next section serves both of these functions, and the intent behind the evaluation of each impact is sufficiently transparent that any potential developer should be able to predict whether his or her pro- ject will meet the neighborhood compatibility criterion. i IMPACT MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION GUIDELINES This section outlines a set of methodologies for esti- mating and evaluating what is intended to be an exhaustive list of potential negative impacts. Only neighborhood effects are included, which means that fiscal impacts, market (some- • times called "economic") effects, and changes in the need for public facilities are ignored; these other kinds of impacts are important in many contexts, but less significant at the parcel level. Neighborhood impacts are predominately environ- mental impacts, to include both aesthetic and physical effects, 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES hmlrlES on humans and man-made structures as well as the natural environment. A great deal of work has been done in areas which overlap the area of neighborhood impact evaluation, but there is nothing directly oriented to neighborhoods. En- vironmental impact assessment has accomplished much in an amazingly brief time period, although the methods are gen- erally designed for larger impact areas than parcels or even neighborhoods. Impact analysis of land development is even more recent, and our report draws heavily upon that literature (notably the work of the Urban Institute), but the scale is again somewhat larger than ours. Performance standards and design standards have been in use for some time, and some of the literature supporting these techniques is applicable, but this work tends to view the problem through a single narrow window. Thus the outline presented below is a first synthesis of neighborhood impact evaluation tools and concepts, and is far from complete even with respect to the existing state of the art. For each type of impact, seven aspects are covered. A description summarizes the major characteristics of the impact being considered. Direct and indirect potential sources are listed, followed by the types of damage that may be caused by the impact. For instances in which it is desirable to directly observe the magnitudes of a particular impact already in existence, a paragraph on measurement proposes be done; if the potential source of- imactsis how this can posed than existing development, or it is preferable toocalculate )1Cr impact magnitudes rather than, or in addition to, observing them, a paragraph on estimation lists methodologies for that purpose. Normative guidelines are suggested, both conceptually (the basis for establishing an "ideal" level) and operationally (the criterion or reference standard that might be used). Finally, references are noted which offer greater technical depth on the particular types of impact being considered. The list of impacts covered is the same as in table 1. 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIEs 1. Suspended Particulate Matter Description. Solid materials ground up fine enough to be transportable by air under normal weather conditions. Sources. Dust from unpaved parking lots, dirt or gravel roads, driveways, open lots or fields; ash from inciner- ators, open fires, fireplaces, heating, and other com- bustion; rubber and asbestos particles from automobile and truck traffic; lead and other heavy metals from a variety of sources including streets; plaster and other dust from demolitions and construction. Damage. Asbestos is carcinogenic, and lead and other heavy metals are toxic. Otherwise, particulate matter results in various kinds of annoyances and discomfort: extra cleaning effort, specks in eyes, dust in hair, unpleasantness of outdoor areas subject to dust, gritty taste in mouth. Measurement. Sampling at various locations on potentially affected property under variety of source and weather conditions. Components can be disaggregated after sampl- ing if so desired. Estimation. General relationships have been constructed for a few common sources such as streets. Wind direction and velocity are the major items of information needed besides the characteristics of the source. Guidelines. The amount of particulate originating on a site should not exceed ambient levels and should not interfere with normal activities in the immediate neighbor- hood. Performance standards can be established where need- ed, but high levels of precision are probably not needed; in general, residential areas should be cleaner than commercial areas, which should be cleaner than industrial areas. References. Keyes, Dale, Land Develo Estimatinq Impacts. !nt and the Na' tral Environr (see references for Toxic Pollutants -Airborne) 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 6I0ItIES Trash and Litter Description. Broken, discarded, or worthless things, refuse,ru bish scattered in a careless manner. Sources. Paper, cigarette butts, fast food wappers and containers, packing materials, cardboard boxes, beer and soft drink bottles and cans, plastic implements and con- tainers, etc., may be moved from one property to another by the wind. Common sources include improper storage and disposal of trash, and areas of unkempt appearance that encourage litter (i.e., weedy, unmaintained lots where cans and bottles collect, and unpaved parking lots where auto users dump their ashtrays.) Damage. Unsightliness of littered property, possible health hazards (barefoot child stepping on rusty can), costs of clean -up -litter projects an image of apathy, low resident confidence, and deterioration, which encour- age further neglect and indifference. Measurement. Volume and rate can be estimated by col- lecting the trash and litter that have accumulated down- wind from the property in question, over a given time period. More elaborate measurements could be obtained by means of collecter screens located along the downwind property line. Estimation. Trash and litter problems are probabalistfc functions of the amount of trash generated th trash or refuse, and storage food packaging and cigarette of litter, while household w about unless animals are the which receive items in bulky of trash if controls are not , e type of or control practice. Junk filters arc major components �t garbage is seldom strewn cause. offices and stores packaging are likely sources adequate. Guidelines. Trash orginating on a site should be fully controlled, with disposal and collection designed to en- tirely eliminate accidental spillage and indifferent usage. Barriers should prevent casual litter from leaving the property where it originates, programs should be required to cican up litter (e.g., trash receptacles near sources of take-out food), and design of activities Should discourage littering. I 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3. Smoke Description. Vaporous matter arising from something burning and made visible by minute particles of carbon suspended in it; any vapor, mist, fume, etc.,resemblinc smoke. Sources. Heating and power generating facilities, in- dustrial processes, open burning of materials. Damage. Health effects (interferes with respiratory functions, causes eye irritations, other annoyances and discomforts), unpleasant odors, nuisance and aesthe- tic effects, accelerated deterioration of buildings and materials, scattering of sunlight to produce haze. Measurement. Industrial measurement standards, typically associated with opacity and the size of smoke plumes, have been well developed (i.e., Ringelmann Smoke Chart). Estimation. Unless a proposed activity includes combustion (e.g., incineration) as an integral component, there is little reason to estimate smoke characteristics, as opposed to direct measurement of them. Guidelines. Smoke in residential areas should not exceed ambi— ent levels; in general, smoke control technology is such that no source need create objectionable emissions unless the community wishes to make an exception. EPA Source regulations are designed to eliminate smoke pro- blems: all new point sources are required to install appropriate control equipment. Segregation of smoke producing activities, the centralization of heating and power facilities, the disposal of waste by means other than burning, and general bans on burning leaves and trash have all contributed to reduction of the problem. References American Public Health Association, Planning the Neighbor- hood. Kudlich, Ringelmann Smoke Chart. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES 4. Odors and Fumes Description. Characteristic of a substance which makes it offensive to the sense of smell. Sources. Paper mills, sewage plants, meatpacking plants, feedlots, etc. are readily indetifiable sources of repugnant odors. At a neighborhood level, traffic fumes, bacterial decomposition, female ginkgo trees, etc., might be the target for control. Damage. Ranging from mildly distracting to thoroughly objectionable, odors and fumes reduce the value of a residential front porch, restrict outdoor activities, and create a general nuisance and annoyance. Measurement. The extent to which odors are objectionable can depend on whether they are localized or widespread, of short-term duration or long-lived, constant or inter- mittent. In addition, the extent to which they present a problem depends on intensity, distinguishing quality, and acceptability. Techniques for measurement range from subjective evaluations by panels of experts to objective assessment made by analytical devices such as scentometers. Guidelines. Odors should be kept within the bounds of what a reasonable person with normal taste and smelling sensitivity would find acceptable under the circumstances References Keyes, Land Development and the Natural Environment, pp. 38-40. Des Moines Register, "The Stink Over Odor Regulations," September 26, 1976. Des Moines Register, 11DEQ to Make Second Bid to Set State Odor Regulations," April 29, 1.976. American Public Health Association, Planning the Neighborhood. Milles, J.L., et al., "Quantitative Odor Measurement.11 Leonardos, G., et al., "Odor. Threshold Determination of 53 Odorant Chemicals." Leonardos, G., et al. "A Critical Review of Regulations for the Control of Odors." Sullivan, F., and G. Leonardos, "Determination of Odor Sources for Control." 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 5. Toxic Pollutants - Airborne Description. Harmful or unwholesome impurities that contaminate the air. Sources. waste from internal combustion engines (lead, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen), asbestos dust from bake linings, industrial and commercial processes. Damage. Health hazards (carginogenic and toxic accumu- lations within the body), visual aesthetics (opacity and shading of atmosphere), unpleasant odors, scattering of sunlight, accelerated deterioration of structures and materials, soiling of fabrics, buildings, clean-up costs. Measurement. Sampling stations or monitoring devices can be designed for each type of toxic agent. The most meaningful analysis would compare pollutant distribution and population distribution by time of day or week (i.e., the number of commuters exposed to rush hour traffic emmissions). Estimation. For industrial and commercial processes, the quantity and type of fuel consumed or raw materials can be multiplied by appropriate emission factors (pollutants per unit of activity). Vehicle emission rates are a function of the number of trips per hour, average speed, and trip length. Wind speed and direction are calculated into dispersion formulas. Guidelines. Ambient concentrations of various air pol- lutants can be compared to federal (and other) exposure standards. Sources which have a carcinogenic or accumu- latively toxic effect on humans should not be permitted at all or only under very controlled circumstances. References Waldbott, George, Health Effects of Environmental Pol- lutants. i Keyes, Dale, Land Development and the Natural Environment: i Estimating Impacts. Hagevik, George, et al., Air Quality Management and Land Use Planning. McCormick, R., Air Pollution Measurements. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of Air Pollution Monitori.na Equipment Operated by State_ and Local A eg ncie 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Waddell, Thomas, The Economic Damage of Air Pollution. Environmental Protection Agency, Guide for Compiling a Comprehensive Emission Inventory. Jacobsen, Willis, Automotive Emissions. 6. Noise Description. Loud, objectionable or disagreeable sound or sounds. Sources. Motor vehicles, radios and stereos, loading and unloading materials and containers, garbage pick-up, bark- ing dogs, and individuals making undue noise in a variety of ways, can be seriously objectionable under certain circumstances. Damage. Excessive noise levels can cause hearing impair- ments, sleep interference, and interruptions of tasks such as studying, listening, converstation, etc. Studies have also shown that noise distractions and irritations can lead to psychological stress (reflected in blood pressure, heart rate increase, and dilated pupils). Vi- bration may accompany noise. Measurement. Noise measurement has received a great deal of attention from a variety of viewpoints and the techniques are well established. Mechanical measuring devices such as sound level meters are readily available and easily utilized. Guidelines. Noise should be maintained within ambient levels for the type of area and the time of day. Decibel, magnitude, frequency, and other standards have been established for what these levels should reasonably be, and they can be modified to suit the circumstances. For example, normal traffic noise may be tolerable during the day, but frequent grinding of gears, screeching of tires, and honking can disturb the sleep of residents at night. References (See Appendix B) American Public Health Association, Planning the Neighbor- hood Keyes, Land Development and the Urban Environment: Esti- mating Impacts. 28 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011IEs City of Berkeley, "Noise Element" Kryler, Kane, The Effects of Noise on Man Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Pro_tec Public health andWelfare with an Adequate Margin of Starr, Edward, "Measuring Noise Pollution" Bolt, Baranek, and Newman, in Noise Assessment Guidelines: Technical Background Schultz, Theodore, in Noise Assessment Guidelines: Technical Background 7. Runoff Description. The part of the rainfall that is not absorbed directly by the soil but is drained off in rills or streams. Excess runoff may lead to erosion and flooding. Sources. Natural storms and snow melt, compounded by urban development which covers portions of the landscape with impervious surfaces, thereby preventing water from percolating into the ground and accelerating the rate at which it runs into streams. iDamage. Erosion and sedimentation, siltation in wetlands and streams, turbidity in lakes and rivers, water pol- lution, damage to property (landscaping, basements, equip- ment), physical injury and loss of life as the result of flooding. Measurement.Runoff from the 5 -year storm (or whatever standard is agreed upon) can be calculated on the basis of the characteristics of the impervious and semi -impervious surfaces on the site. A "worst case" set of conditions could be something like three days of soaking rain fol- lowed by a very hard but brief downpour. Holding capacity and outflow rates for detention facilities can also be calculated, if these facilities are required. Estimation. A wide range of empirical formulas relate The amount of runoff to the drainage characteristics of the area (slope, soil type, vegetation), the average intensity and duration of rainfall, velocity of flow, the land use characteristics, and the design of the storm water management. See Appendix C for an example. ?g MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Guidelines. Runoff from a site should seldom be greater (depending upon the level of protection desired) than the portion of the storm water management system or subsystem (i.e., streams and drainage) that can be al- located to that site. Wherever a constraint lies (i.e., a stream culvert that limits flow), all properties within the same watershed or basin should be assigned a portion of the capacity on an equitable basis. Another guideline is that runoff from a site should not exceed the rate which would occur if the site were in its natural state; this guideline may not be suitable for circumstances subject to high or especially low probabilities of natural flooding. The current philosophy is to retain storm runoff temporarily in convenient locations as close to where it falls as possible, thereby limiting the rate of flow to that which is within the capacity of the drainage system. References (See Appendix C) Barlett, Surface Water Sewerage. Urban Land Institute, et al., Res Keyes, 1 Environment: Thurow et al., "Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands." Water Resources Engineers and the Hydrologic Engineering Center, Management of Urban Storm Runoff. —_--_-____-__— Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Management for Urban Runoff. Brater, E., and J. Sherill, Rainfall -Runoff Relations on Urban and Rural Areas. S. Standing Water Descr_ i2tion. Temporary or permanent ponds of stationary water. Sources. Inadequate drainage, poorly planned storm water management, natural and constructed ponds. M 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Damage. Hazards for vehicles and pedestrian, killing of plants and animals, basement flooding, source of odors, breeding ground for mosquitoes and other pests. Measurement. Depends upon nuisance or hazard being evaluated. Visibility, barriers to prevent accidental contact, and location will affect the severity of the hazard; odors tend to be the result of anaerobic de- composition, although runoff may wash in odor -producing materials. Temporary water can be analyzed using the methodology of storm water management. Estimation. Same as measurement. Guidelines. Standing water should not create hazards, contribute to health problems, or otherwise create conditions that normal persons would find objectionable. 9. Silt and Debris I Description. Earthy matter consisting of fine particles of rock and soil suspended in, transported, and deposited by water. i Sources. As stormwater flows over surfaces, it picks up pollutants and carries them downstream. Soil erosion, and dissolving minerals in the natural ground cover, fertilizers, animal fecal matter, and organic material are all likely sources. Water flow on parking lots, roofs and streets carries petroleum products, trash, dust fall and debris from motor vehicles into the drainage system. Damage. Accumulation of materials in undesirable places; water pollution, trash, silt, and plant materials clog up drains and grates and fill in basins. Silt becomes a source of dust, particularly if deposited on public right- of-ways. Clean-up costs must be borne by a community if a desirable and healthy environment is to be maintained. Measurement. In addition to the information used to esti—'mate amount and direction of runoff, knowledge of possible sources of silt and debris will also be needed. Estimation. Predicting amounts of transported silt and debris s -less important than controlling runoff and identifying and controlling potential sources of materials that might be washed away. Guidelines. Materials transported and deposited by water should not bo of sufficient quantity to require clean-up or create nuisances. 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIrIES References Urban Land Institute, Residential Storm Water Management. (See references for Runoff) 10. Toxic Pollutants - Waterborne Descripattion. Harmful or unwholesome impurities that con- tamin—' e the water. Sources. Most of the same pollutants that can be air- borne can also be waterborne (i.e., lead, asbestos, petroleum products, insecticides, other chemicals, bac- teria and other pathogens). Industrial processes, waste treatment plants, agricultural technology, and motor vehicles are common sources. Damage. Health hazards, decreased utility of water sources for recreation, aesthetics, ecology. Measurement. Water pollution components to be measured include suspended and dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen, toxic materials, and the physical characteristics such as color, odor, turbidity, and temperature. Standards and measurement techniques are or can be developed for each type of toxic material as well as for point and non -point sources. Estimation. Net changes in effluents to each body of water likely to be effected; computation of the dispersion and interaction of the new pollutants with existing conditions; estimations of the number of people likely to be affected; ecological changes; changes in the highest safe uses and in aesthetically tolerable uses. Guidelines. Waterborne pollutants should not be a hazard to health, especially in situations where the health hazards would not normally be expected (i.e., carcinogens washed into backyard gardens). Socially desirable levels of "clean" water should be maintained for aesthetic, recrea- tional, and ecological purposes. References Jordening, David, Bstimating Water Qualit Benefits, Bishop, Doyle, and R. Aukermann, Water for. Selected Recreational Uses. (2ua].ity Criteria Sarton, James,et al., "Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminates." 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES I ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES Vitale, Anne, et al., Total Urban Water Pollution Loads: • The Impact of Storm Water. 11. Slippage -Prone Soils Description. Movement of a mass of rock, earth, or artificial fill on a slope. Sources. Forces exerted on earth material, due to unstable characteristics of the soil, weakness in the bedrock, inappropriate construction or other causes. Damages. Uneven subsidence of structures, destruction of property and loss of life from mudslides. Measurement. Soil sample borings can be analyzed for stability. Estimation. The hazard potential of a development site Zan be determined from geologic and hydrologic evidence and from records of past landslides or subsidence episodes in the area or in other areas of similar topographic, geo- logic, hydrologic, and soil characteristics. Background factors (critical angle of natural slope and type of vegetation), energy factors (amount of precipitation and fire potential) and special factors (presence of swelling clays and adverse geologic structures) should all be incorporated. Guidelines. Slippage -prone soils should be avoided, unless proper stability is achieved by engineering works. Regional landslide hazard maps can be prepared and development chan- neled to safer areas. References Eckel, E., Landslides and Engineering Practice. Building Research Advisory Board, Methodology for Delineating Mudslide Hazard Areas. 1 Sorenson, et al., Landslide Hazard in the United States: A Research Assessment. California Division of Mines and Geology, "Mudslide and Landslide prediction." e ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES 12. Earthquake Description. Shaking or trembling of the ground. Source. Deformation in the earth's crust, volcanoes. Damages. Property damage, loss of life. Measurement. Seismically active or potentially active zones can be identified by a geologist and mitigating measures designed by an engineer. Estimation. Past records of seismic activity combined with geological information such as fault lines, soil type and depth, bedrock type, and water conditions. Estimation of expected damage depends on the location, design, and construction of structures. Guidelines. Known earthquake faults can be avoided in construction, and special building codes have been developed to mitigate damage from seismic activity. References U.S. Department of Commerce, "National Seismic Risk Map." National Bureau of Standards, Building Practices for Disaster Mitigation. Press, Frank, "Earthquake Prediction." Scholtz, Christopher, "Toward Infallible Earthquake Pre- diction." i 13. Vibration Description. Force which causes quivering or trembling motion in matter; oscillation. Sources. Traffic, especially heavy trucks, construction equipment, heavy machinery, heating and air conditioning components. Damage. Health effects ranging from mild irritation to stress fatigue, and property damage results from accele- rated deterioration of materials and structures. Measurement. Vibration is much like noise in that it can be readily measured using relatively simple equipment. But unlike noise, there are only isolated incidences of 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIICS I 14 vibration problems and these are most likely to be transportation -related, heavy truck, traffic in parti- cular. Guidelines. While vibration could be controlled by the enforcement of a performance standard, this type of control is most applicable to private vibration -producing sources, e.g. heavy industrial plants. Since such uses are not likely to locate in the North Side and since existing vibration problems stem from through truck traffic on public roads, controls might be arrived at limiting truck weights and axle loadings according to type of street. Road construction design standards are intended to ameliorate such problems through specifications of materials, roadbed infill requirements, width of right- of-way, etc. !However, it is not likely that Dodge and Governor Street were either orginally designed to cur- rent standards or intended to handle the amount of through truck traffic that they now do. The possibility of reconstructing these streets so as to ameliorate the vibration impacts is remote, so other means of controlling this impact in the North Side must be sought. Another level of control is embodied in the zoning approach, i.e. the prohibition of activities and/or land uses. Through truck traffic should be rerouted onto streets designed to handle it without generating excessive spillovers, and the location of land uses con- trolled so as to prevent any increase in heavy truck traffic on streets where vibration is a problem. Structural Undermining Description. Vertical collapse of the ground, destabili- zing Sources. Underground runinq, overpumping of water and depletion of the water base, excavation, cavern formation, improper deep foundation construction on an adjacent site. Damage. Damage to structure and/or foundation, uneven subsidence of structures. Measurement Nngineering advice would be needed to de- termine whether proposed construction or other activity may have structural effects on other properties, and whether adequate precautionary measures have been taken. 35 MICROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Guidelines. Activity on one site should not lead to detectable soil shifting or structural damage on an adjacent site. 15. Physical Dangers Description. Presenting a hazard; something that could be potentially physically harmful or risky unless dealt with carefully. Sources. Traffic, ditches, obstructions and overhangs, wire fences, falling objects, moving equipment, upheaved walkways, etc. Damages. Injury to a casual passerby, especially hazardous to children and the elderly. Measurement. The major effort is to identify potential sources of physical danger and design controls that will reduce the hazard (i.e., suppress traffic speed or volume) or eliminate it. Guidelines. Abnormal or preventable dangers should be controlled and probability of injury kept within acceptable levels or standards. 16. Interference with Other Activities Description. Any activity, action, or obstacle that hinders Er intrudes upon the use or enjoyment of another person's property or a public right of way. Sources. Activities on one property which obstruct access or egress to another property, interfere with normal traffic on streets, obstruct sidewalks, create sprays of water, blasts of air, falling, flying, rolling, or bound- ing objects, or have other deleterious affects through physical interference with normal activities. Damages. Interference with activities, decreased enjoyment of outdoor areas, possible physical injury or property damage. Meaurement. Assessment depends upon accurate description of the relevant activities and the nature of the inter- ferences. Guidelines. Residential activity should not suffer physical interference beyond a level normally expected under rea- sonable conditions. For instance, an occasional ball entering a nearby backyard would not be out of line in a 116 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOMEs neighborhood, but nightly baseball games routinely pelting balls on a neighbor's porch could be viewed as excessive. Design standards used simply as examples of good practice can ensure that garages are not too close to alleys, placement of structures allows for fire fighting, etc. 17. Heat Description. A marked or notable degree of hotness; ca siu ng substances to rise in temperature. Sources. Sun reflecting off a large open parking lot or wall, heat generated from motors or other mechanical devices. Damage. Physical discomfort, accelerated deterioration of paint, etc., increased to cooling costs. Measurement. Heat can be readily measured, and impacts estimated relative to baseline conditions. Estimation. Predicting heat impacts requires different techniques depending upon the conditions; evaluation of how much deviation from ambient levels is acceptable is somewhat judgmental, but the differences ought to be detectable to a normal person. Guidelines. Construction or use of a property should not significantly raise ambient temperatures on nearby properties. ( 18. Light, Breathing Space, Greenery '( Description. That area of a neighburhood that is not built upon; green spaces and landscaping between and surrounding structures. Sources. Yards, gardens, trees, open meadows, fields, parks, walkways, are all sources of open space. Excessive lot coverage or off-street parking space, tall and bulky structures that are inadequately landscaped and obstruct views threaten to usurp open space uses. Damages. Because greenery and open space perform such valuable functions as reducing pollution, saving energy (via shade and window screening), increasing privacy, and generally making life more pleasant (aesthetics, recreation space, etc.),inadequate provision of these amenities has detrimental economic, social and psycholo- gical impacts. Loss of a view or perceptions of 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES crowdedness can affect property values and the desira- bility of a neighborhood for future growth and investment. Measurement. Calculating shadows by time of year and time of day is not difficult, nor is there any task to measuring distances between structures, but determining acceptability is heavily dependent upon judgment. Estimation. Where changes in land use are anticipated, estimates can be made of the percent and absolute change in greenery and usable open space on the development site (i.e., the number of trees or plants to be lost or gained). Presenting photos and sketches of the scenery before and after development could be useful for this purpose. Guidelines. Existing setback requirements can be utilized as guidelines for developing areas, but the application of setbacks in built-up areas should not be mandatory since specific conditions might call for greater or lesser setbacks. Probably the general pattern of spacing within a neighborhood should be consistent, and height, bulk, and coverage constraints can be used to help achieve adequate spacing. Many delightful neighborhoods have no space at all between buildings (on the sides), while less desirable neighborhoods have plenty of space. In some sense, there must be "enough" space for the type of neighborhood (i.e., urban versus suburban) and the arrange- ment of structures should make best use of that space. References Shafer, L. et al.,"Natural Landscape Preferences: A Predictive Model." Leopold, L., "Landscape Esthetics." Pitch, J., "Experimental Eases for Esthetic Decisions." Craik, Kenneth, "The Comprehension of Everyday Environment." Schaenman, Philip, and Thomas Muller, Measuring Impacts of Land Development: An Initial Approach. 19. Glare Description. To shine with or reflect a harsh or uncom- fortably bright light. f] MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES 20 Sources. Large open parking lots, cars, glass -walled office buildings. Damages. Reflected light can be distracting, unpleasant, and irritating to the eyes, reducing the value of windows and porches for views and relaxation. Measurement. Light sensitive devices are usable for measuring light reflection and/or glare, but there should be little difficulty in practice in assessing the reflection compatibility of a proposed structure with its neighbors. Guidelines. A general rule of thumb is that amounts of reflected light should be more or less symmetrical; a residence with lots of yards and trees and no -reflective surfaces should reasonably expect to have a neighbor with similar characteristics, while a glass -walled office building should be grouped with other highly reflective structures. Where symmetry is not feasible, the glare -producing activity should provide visual buffering. Unsightliness Description. Not pleasing or comely to look at; unattrac- tTive, ugly, an eyesore. Sources. Weeds junk, inoperable automobiles, parking lots, cars, trash cans, peeling paint, dilapidated structures, clumsily designed additions, incompatible architectural styles, obstrusive colors, etc. Damages. The aesthetics and general character of a neigh�rhood affect people's attitudes, which in turn affect property values, and the desirability of an area for future growth and investment. The character and image of a living environment can have untold affects on social and psychological development. Measurement. Because it is largely a matter of aesthetic taste, the control of unsightliness requires general consensus about what is sufficiently undesirable in a particular context to warrant regulation. Where the prohibited or mandated characteristic is clearly specified, measurement is simply observational; for the more subtle considerations of historic compatibility, for example, some expert judgment may be necessary. Estimation. Numerous factors relevant t attr� vencss or unsightliness include patterns, and the relations of buildings 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS 1401NES o daytime visual colors, textures, to each other and to the terrain. However, it is the overall effect, including the movement of people and vehicles, that completes the picture. Guidelines. Although precedent exists for banning or mandating activities on the basis of aesthetics, it is generally necessary to enumerate each objectionable item and state the threshold at which it becomes objec- tionable. For example, guidelines can state that a certain percent of a lot not covered by structues must be preserved as usable open space, which does not include parking; inoperable or "junk" autos may not be stored out of doors; grass or weeds greater than 6" in height may be mowed by the city at the owner's expense; parking lots must be screened with landscaping or suitable fencing; excessively poor maintenance may result in warnings and inspections, with orders to improve designated deficiencies. Control of such characteristics as architectural style or range of colors on exterior walls requires a higher -than -normal agreement upon conformity; actions taken by the public sector in historic districts and by the private sector in new developments with restrictive convenants reflect this. Any level of aesthetic control is possible as long as there is widespread or unanimous agreement, or compensa- tion is provided where the restrictions result in sub- stantial reduction in use of property. References Schaenman, Philips S. & Thomas Muller, Measuring Impacts Land Development: An Initial Approval (See references for Light, Breathing Space, Greenery) 21. Loss of Privacy and Lifestyle Conflicts Description. Any situation which permits an undesirable T: of observation by others,lack of confidentially or seclusion; any inharmonious behavior or way of life that causes tension between individuals. Sources. Placement of buildings in such a way that ped- estrian traffic is encouraged to short --cut across someone else's backyard, a living room picture window looking into 40 FIICROFILMED RS JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIILS a neighbor's bedroom, two walls of windows placed eyeball -to -eyeball ten feet apart, a balcony hanging over someone's porch, a tacky apartment next to a victorian cottage. Damages. Discontentment, tension, unfriendliness, loss of privacy and lifestyle conflicts, reflected in decreased regard for the neighborhood and declining property values. Measurement. Thorough review of site plans, elevations, landscaping, etc., within a process which permitted affected parties to bring up whatever arguments they thought rele- vant. n Guidelines. Although these impacts are most difficult to measure and impose controls upon, people should not be inconvenienced, disturbed, or bothered if there is a reasonably easy way to avoid the disruption. When trade-offs are involved between one property owner and another, it should be up to the community to determine where the balance will be struck. References Schaenman, Philip S. & Thomas Muller, of Land Development: An Initial American Public Health Association Committee Hygiene of Housing, Planning the Neighborhood. Christensen, Kathleen, Social Impacts of Land Development. Krieger, Martin H., "Social Indicators and the Life Cycle." 22. Other Impacts I The list of impacts reviewed above covers those neighbor- hood and environmental impacts that can be regarded as negative externalities, and therefore subject to direct control. Other impacts may also be of interest, and relevant to land use development decisions: positive externalities or the loss of positive externalities; secondary and tertiary effects which k are transmitted through normal market processes; consumption of and demand for public facilities; and gains or losses in the municipal budget. The substance of these impacts is described below, and examples provided, but a presentation of the metho- dology is outside the scope of this study. 41 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo1r1Es Positive Externalities. Under the concept of land use control expounded in the North Side study, the removal or amelioration of an eyesore or nuisance (i.e., the elimination of a negative externality) should be mandatory, and can be achieved through regulatory means or private nuisance actions. Removal of a negative externality is thus not a positive externality, but simply a correction, or return to neutral. A positive externality is a contribution to neighborhood quality above what could normally be expected under the circumstances. For example, a new development or rehabilita- tion of an existing structure may be of such quality of design, landscaping, historic value, etc., that it significantly increases the level of amenities that characterize the neighbor- hood. Since these external benefits add to the value of the neighborhood, there may be cause to reward behavior which produces positive externalities or at least offer incentives to do so. Grant programs, in which persons are provided with the means for improving their property, are one of the most direct forms of encouragement for positive externalities. Such programs are typically limited to homeowners earning less than some threshold level of income, and the programs may be difficult to tailor to specific objectives such as historic restoration, landscaping, and architectural design; a vehicle for encouraging positive externalities does, however, exist. Other devices include historic district designation, public purchase of easements for purposes such as open space, pedes- trian,walkways or rest areas, and advisory design review. For any specific development proposal, an acceptable balance may be struck by trading off some negative externalities in ex- change for some positive benefits. Loss of Positive Resources. A resource (e.g., a well- maintained historic structure, mature trees, a colorful garden) under private ownership may add to the value of the neighbor- hood, but the owner should not be made to retain such a 42 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS IIOIIIES i i resource without compensation when doing so is not in the interest of the owner. To take an extreme case, it is in- equitable to demand that a property owner restore and main- tain an historic single-family structure when the best use of the site would be forty apartment units. Several compensatory mechanisms can be considered: assess the property at its present use until that changes; dedicate development rights to the municipality in return for present - use assessment; purchase development rights from the owner; or acquire the property for public ownership and rent it to a tenant who will agree to restore and maintain the structure. Similar types of arrangements could be made for purposes of preserving other kinds of positive resources. Market Impacts. A change in the type and price of housing is likely to have an effect on the demographic and income characteristics of the residents, and a change in the quality of retail space is likely to have an effect on commercial tenants. Increases in accessibility may shift the relative prices which different activities would pay a particular location, leading to pressures for land use change. It is not possible to say a priori whether these secondary effects (market impacts) are good or bad, and there is no rationale, in the absence of evidence of market failure (such as negative externalities or monopoly), for obstructing such changes. Nonetheless, the impacts may con- cern policy makers and there are circumstances under which public intervention is justified. Public Facilities. Adequacy of public facilities is often cited as a basis for rejecting new development, but the criterion is not as simple as it may appear on the surface. The public sector has taken the responsibility for providing certain facilities and services; it should do this to the extent and where they are needed, collecting revenues from 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES users and taxpayers according to agreed-upon rules an observation that . Therefore, Public facilities are inadequate may simply adequacy and the correct response must be assessed in mean that it is time to provide more of them. The determina- tion of each specific case. In an older built-up neighborhood like the North Side, most public facilities are already in place but may be in need of replacement. An elementary school which is under- utilized but has many years of useful life remaining represents excess capacity; additional schoolchildren residing in the neighborhood would be desirable from viewpointa public facilities . An old and constricted storm drainage system provides a limited capacity, in which each neighborhood parcel has an implicit share; consume more than its sit is important that no property system and cause damage hare, since this will overload the to other properties. Streets pos- sess a capacity for parking that is essentially fixed; ideally, an increase in demand should result in an increase in the price of parking, affecting all potential packers equally. Each of these considerations may lead to a preference for one alternative over another, but they do not provide a direct basis for land use controls. Fiscal Zmn Another criterion occasionally used would result to evaluate development used is the net revenue which � to the public fisc Cost -revenue studies are easy , e.g „ the city budget. execute well. y to execute, but difficult to Because the benefits of many public goods and services are common to many individuals and groups, it is necessary to allocate joint costs on some equitable basis, but the conceptual rationale for one algorithm versus another is often subject to considerable debate. Thus fiscal impacts may be of valid concern, but they are hard to in- terpret. 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES IMPACT LINKAGES Measurement and evaluation of impacts are described in the preceding section, and procedures for reviewing impacts in the section prior to that. This section is meant to help identify potential impacts by presenting some of the typical relationships between categories of land use and the types of impact that may be generated. Although emphasis throughout is on the potential negative impacts of land use, the objective is to ameliorate or eliminate the negative impacts rather than condemn any specific land use as inher- ently undesirable. Controlling negative impacts may be more difficult for some land uses than for others, but this does not mean necessarily that the former should be pro- hibited. Besides serving as a checklist of potential impacts, the analysis of impact linkages also yields insight as to the best control mechanism. Table 2 above shows several examples of connections I between a land use (apartment building) and its potential j impacts. This is a portion of a linkage tree, which normally contains (as abstracted in figure 2) a source (land use) and ia set of impacts. Between the source and the impacts are any inumber of possible intermediate "activities" that serve to transmit the impacts from the source of the recipient. The connections between the source, the activities, and the i impacts on recipients are referred to as impact linkages. Labeling the source as a type of land use is simply a means for aggregating sources into categories which have I similar linkage trees. Further refinement of linkage trees might result in more intermediate activities, more precise description of the linkages, and more narrowly defined land uses, but the examples offered below constitute a start on those land uses that have been found in the North Side. 45 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES td OIRES LAND USE ACTIVITIES I IMPACTS Figure 2. GENERALIZED LINKAGE TREE 46 / IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES For each of the linkage trees exhibited (figures 3-10), a "worst" case is assumed by using a single-family residence as the implied recipient of the impacts. Other land use recipients might suffer lower levels of the same impacts or be unaffected by sonic of the impacts. Positive external impacts are not mentioned, although the benefits of some activities -- e.g., pedestrians -- will generally outweigh any negative impacts. Positive benefits usually take care of themselves, whereas negative impacts are more likely to need special attention. Land uses included in the figures are multi -family, hospital, school or church, park, service station, supermarket, neighborhood commercial, and streets. By using the impact linkage trees in an impact evalu- ation review process, information will be gained about link- ages that have not yet been thought of and ways discovered for controlling or ameliorating the impacts. Learning would accumulate rapidly with experience in identifying and estimating impacts, and the process would tend to be self- correcting. Negative impacts could be anticipated before they occured, and measures for dealing with them developed and improved. i t t i i 1 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1401NES (new construction) or unsightliness Building light (bulk, loca _� privacy tion, design) Building Construction — noise (new construct dust tion only) noise PrafficPollution danger runoff /glare larking loth unsightliness dust heat litter On -street glare parking unsightliness Pedestrians privacy noise Tenantslife styles conflicts animals Trash unsightliness (storaglitter collection) noise odor Figure 3. Multi -Family Land Use Impact Linkage Tree 0 ku MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CLINIC runoff Buildings unsightliness \ light and air privacy noise Traffic pollution dust danger runoff /glare Parking Lotk unsightliness dust heat litter On -Street unsightliness Parking glare privacy Pedestrians noise Mechanical noise Equipment _ unsightliness Signs unsightliness unsightliness Trashes-- toxic pollutants noise Chemical and toxic pollutants Biological Waste Figure 4. Semi -Public Land Use Impact Linkage Tree 49 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES P noise pollution Traffic dust danger interference with other activities runoff glare Parking Lotunsightliness dust heat litter unsightliness On -Street glare Parking interference with other activities privacy Pedestrians �litte litter animals Trash litter —� unsightliness noise Sports and smoke Picnic Activi interference ties glare (lights) Figure 6. Park Land Usc Impact Linkage Tree 50 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IRES GASOLINE SERVICE STATION unsightliness Buildings light and air —privacy noise Traffic�dangerion \danger dust runoff Parking dust Area pollution and Apron unsightliness \ heat glare litter Repainoise Activities fumes Signs unsightliness fumes Service fire hazard Activities pollution Trash and unsightliness Solid Waste litter unsightliness Oil and toxic pollutants Chemical odors Waste fire hazard i i Figure 7. Service Station Land Use Impact Linkage Tree. 51 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES unsightliness Buildingsrunoff light and air noise Traff(custoc�dust (customers--��danger and delivery) pollution runoff dust ParLarking `�_ unsightliness Pollution heat SUPERMARKET glare litter privacy Pedestriansnoise litter litter �- unsightliness Trash odor (storage an _ noise collection) ,animals (vermin) Figure 8. Supermarket Land Use Impact• Linkage Tree. 52 r _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140RIES NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (Grocery, Restaurant, Store) Building unsightliness light and air Equipment noise odor unsightliness Signs unsightliness Retail noise Operations privacy litter Pedestriansprivacy noise noise .Traffic dust (customers, pollution deliveries) danger dust unsightliness glare Parking Lot pollution litter heat runoff glare Off-Streetunsightliness Parking interference litter Trashodor unsightliness � unsightliness toxic pollutants Figure 9. Neighborhood Commercial Land use Impact Linkage'Tree. 53 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP IDS- DES MOVIES interference glare / noise Traffic danger \pollution litter dust unsightliness Roadway�_ runoff standing water dust On -Street - glare Parking unsightliness Figure 10. Street (Transportation) Land Use Impact Linkage Tree. a 54 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES WHY IS IMPACT EVALUATION NEEDED? Support for the proposal that impact evaluation should be a primary means for regulating land use is derived from i two independent viewpoints: an attempt to design optimal land use controls from a clean slate, as if there were none to begin with; and review of the problems that are inherent in zoning administration and enforcement. The first viewpoint leads to the conclusion that present land use controls are tied to a highly authoritarian and centralized decision making structure that is unsuited to the political system as it exists in the U.S., and that ideal land use controls would involve far less intervention into private decision making than present controls. Problems in zoning administra- tion -- despite a superficial rationality to the comprehensive { planning and zoning framework -- are not readily correctible �{ when it comes to older mixed neighborhood. Impact evaluation f is offered as a workable alternative. i i a OPTIMAL LAND USE CONTROLS A two -prong approach is taken for designing optimal land use controls. The first part takes off from impact 1 linkage concepts and investigates the various ways in which negative impacts can be eliminated, ameliorated, or miti- gated, and how the choice should be made among these. The second prong reviews the range of regulatory options, from minimum interference with private market activities to maximum replacement of private decision by public sector ' determination of land uses. Control of Negative Impacts From the generalized linkage tree shown in figure 2, it is obvious that negative impacts can be controlled either directly, indirectly through intermediate activities, or in- directly through the land use itself. 55 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DEs MOLNEs Impact Noise can be reduced by insulating the house of the affected property owners, by landscaping and structural buffers located on the affected properties, by similar buffering on the source property, by containing and { insulating the source of the noise, by reducing the amount of noise emitted by the generating activity, b l activity associated with the source land use,pand lb the prohibit- ing the land use. If the noise source is trucks, for example, impacts can be reduced by protecting affected properties, by placing buffers around paths that trucks take, by imposing noise emission standards on trucks, by prohibiting or limit- ing the hours of trucks, or by prohibiting land uses that may involve trucks. Or, for another example, take litter. The litter can be ' picked up when it lands on someone else's property, it could be caught by a screen around the source property, it could be prevented by a reliable trash enclosure, it could be prevented J by prohibiting trash generation, or it could be prevented by prohibiting land uses that generate trash. Similar alterna- tives could be proposed for glare, pollutants, runoff, odors, etc. In each case, it is possible to control only the impact itself, with secondary effects on other activities, or it is Possible to control some activity associated with (or equal to) the land use, thereby controlling the impact indirectly. Direct control of light impacts could be done through standards for casting shadows on neighborhood property. Un- sightliness could be evaluated in each context, and/or reduced by a partial enumeration of items generally regarded as un- sightly. Direct control of externalities that are primarily risk (slippage -prone soils) could be achieved by mandatory damage insurance, paid for by the owner of the potential source of damages. 56 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140n1ES E i Activity Control. Instead of reducing the unsightliness of automobiles by requiring screening around places where they go, either automobiles or the parking lots that hold them could be prohibited. From figures 3-10 it can be seen that many restrictions can be placed on intermediate activities which will effectively eliminate the negative impact but without substantially inhibiting the land use. Signs and parking lots can be limited in size, hours of delivery or operation proscribed, heights and bulk of buildings can be constrained, and storage of certain chemicals prohibited. For some of these activities, direct control of the impact (e.g., the design of automobiles, the danger aspect of traffic) is not feasible, and more indirect means must be relied upon. Land Use Restriction. At the other end of the spectrum, various categories of land use may be prohibited. Where the variety and intensity of expected impacts of one land use on another are sufficiently severe, there may be no reasonable conditions under which the land use would be acceptable in a particular location. One can imagine a matrix of land uses arrayed against each other, with each cell indicating the overall compatibility of the two respec- tive land uses based on inherent negative impacts. Three groups might be delineated: pairwise combinations of land uses that are usually acceptable with each other, combinations which may or may not be compatible depending upon specifics, and combinations that are irremedially incompatible. Land use restriction (zoning districts) rely on being able to assign all land uses into the first and third of these groups, when in fact it is the middle group that is by far the largest. It is clear that the farther away from the impact itself the control is applied (i.e., to activities and land uses), the greater is the number of activities and land uses that may effectively be prohibited. in order for a zoning ap- proach to sucessfully eliminate all possibility of signifi- cant negative externalities occurring, most land uses would 57 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES 1101RES 1 have to be prohibited from locating next to low density residential uses. The preferred restriction is always the one which most directly focuses on the impact; in- direct controls become preferable only where the administrative costs of implementing a direct control are greater than the costs of limiting choice beyond what would be minimally necessary to efficiently control impacts. A distinction can be made between the stage in the transmission between source and recipient at which a control measure is applied, and the target precision with which the measure controls the negative impact and nothing else. Where along the path of transmission an impact is suppressed is largely a matter of convenience, although the closer to the physical source the control is applied, the more easily contained the impact is likely to be (noise, dust, pollutants, etc., tend to disperse away from the source). Target precision, however, is always desirable, but must be balanced against other factors such as administrative costs, control feasibility, and political preferences. The Range of Land Use Control Strategies As an ideal against which to compare actual regula- tions, land use decisions could hypothetically be made in a perfect market through which all parties affected by a particular proposal negotiate a settlement that is accept- able to all. To initiate such a market process, the only requirement would be wear definitions of the property rights of each affected party. All negative externalities would be included in market transactions, and would therefore no longer be external. A successful regulatory process is defined as one which would achieve the result of internalizing negative impacts in the above sense. BE / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MO RIGS i The optimal control strategy, then, is one which succeeds in .internalizing negative impacts but interferes the least in other actions and decisions.8 Figure 11 attempts to portray this idea graphically. Too little regulation means that at least some negative externalities are left outside market mechanisms and therefore unresolved. Too much regulation means that private actions are arbitra- rily constrained, eliminating or preventing some land use decisions that would otherwise be socially beneficial. The optimum (aggregate welfare, or net social benefits) is reached when externalities are fully internalized but nothing else is directly controlled. 1. Define Property Rights. At the lowest level of intervention, the role of the public sector would be to i state (and enforce) that each property owner has the right to undertake whatever activities he/she desired on his/her property, so long as no other owner was adversely affected. When an owner contemplated an activity which might create negative impacts, he/she would be faced with the decision of whether to eliminate the negative impacts before they crossed a property line, to purchase an easement from another owner for the purpose of permitting the negative impact, or to move to another site where an impact ease- ment might be more cheaply obtained. Owners whose property 8Internalizing negative impacts does not mean that they are all reduced to zero. The correct level for a negative impact is reached when the total of damage costs (which rise with the magnitude of the nuisance), avoidance costs (which decline with increasing magnitude of the nuisance) and administrative costs are at a minimum. Since damage costs, especially, are difficult- to measure and may depend upon community values, the correct level for a negative impact can rarely if ever be determined by purely technical means. The virtue of encouraging resolution through a market -like process is that the correct level for the externality is automatically accomplished. See Sllickson (infra) for more discussion of this point. 59 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES unresowea minimum increasingly land use constraints and rigid and conficts Incentives constrained that will resolve solutions conflicts level of Public intervention Figure 11, OPTIMUM LEVEL OF REGULATION 60 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id01I1ES value depended upon very low levels of negative impact would only be willing to sell easments at a very high price, whereas owners with a high level of need to create negative impacts would tend to cluster together. 2. Arbitration. An augmented role for the public sector would be the adjudication of land use conflicts in cases where private parties could not voluntarily reach an agreement. This role might also include the function of condemnation of negative impact- easements where the social benefits would clearly be high but a particular property owner refused to sell. 3. Performance Standards. After a private bargain- ing process had gone on for some time, natural zones of varying impact levels would arise. The public sector could then identify the zones and articulate the standards for each type of impact that had evolved in each zone. In addition, standards could be proposed for (or imposed on) zones where none had yet- been determined. The benefits of this public sector role would be a shortening of the time (and attendant inefficiency) needed to evolve natural standards, while the disbenefits would be the possibility of excessive rigidity in maintaining obsolete standards or imposing incorrect ones. Performance standards can also be set, within broad ranges, on the basis of public health factors. Once established, the performance standards would reshape property rights to include any activity which did not exceed the standards. 4. Design Standards. In situations where it may be more feasible to specify the physical arrangements that will neutralize or eliminate adverse impacts, these arrange- ments may be imposed as conditions for property use. Any parking lot would have to be paved and screened if located near residences, and all structures would have to be at least five feet from any property line to allow for light 61 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORTES and air. Both performance and design standards arbitrarily constrain individual choices in that they do not allow the standards to be violated even in instances where the damage is insignificant or where the source property owner is willing to pay damages adequate to compensate the affected parties, but standards may serve as a satisfactory approx- imation where more direct controls are not feasible. The major advantage of design standards is that they allow for systematic routine solutions to frequently encountered problems, but the ease of obtaining a resolution must be weighted against the loss of flexibility. Design standards impose the manner in which a solution is achieved, which jperformance standards do not. I • 5. Permitted Land Uses. As mentioned above, even very minimal control on negative externalities would lead to natural zones of various types, and some of these might be partitioned along land use categories. A service of the public sector might be to delineate and describe these land use zones, and perhaps propose or forecast the likely uses and performance standards for various areas, purely for market information purposes. The most likely natural zones would be single family residential areas, and probably heavy industrial zones, but most other areas would probably be mixed. An even more active public sector role would be repre- sented by a set of zones based upon an ideal arrangement of land uses, determined by an optimization or social benefits at some point in the future. Such a determination is not technically feasible, but it is presumably the intent behind comprehensive plan making. 62 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140IMES 6. Public Acquisition of Property Rights. At the extreme end of the scale of level of public intervention, some or all property rights can be acquired or defined as public, and the public sector given the right to determine what activities will take place in various locations. Parks, schools, scenic easements, development rights on agricultural land, and historic casement are some examples of direct land use determination by the public sector. At present, streets and highways are the major category of publicly held urban land, and the concept of allowing most land use decisions to be made by the public sector would require a major reorientation with regard to private rights in the minds of most U.S. citizens. PROBLEMS INHERENT TO ZONING Because the ideas and institutional structure have been around for some time, citizens and politicians tend to look to comprehensive planning and zoning for solutions to land use problems. The debate is typically along the lines of those who express the opinion that there is no problem and hence no need for regulation, on the one hand, versus those who perceive a problem and expect to solve it through zoning, on the other hand. Property owners adversely affected or threatened by development or neighbor- hood change naturally turn to zoning as their protection. Previous failures of zoning to serve their needs are recog- nized, but the frustrations are seen as the result of poor administration and evil forces arrayed against them, rather than any inherent deficiencies in zoning, and no alternative has appeared more attractive. The primary purpose of this report is to provide enough information about an impact 63 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES evaluation approach to obtain for it a serious consideration, but it may be worthwhile to also point out some of the problems with making zoning work in a neighborhood such as the North Side.9 1. Zoning Exhibits a Ratchet Effect. When the zoning classification is changed to a higher intensity of use, for whatever reason, it is next to impossible to return the classification to a lower intensity. whether rational or irresponsible, any anticipation of higher intensity uses as reflected in zoning designations in the past becomes a constraint for the indefinite future. Even if no change actually occurred under the higher zoning, "downzoning" is hard to sustain; if some development does take place in the interim, then such changes must become spot zones or non -conforming uses, either of which are unsatisfactory from the property owners' point of view. Zoning can be adjusted upward (toward less restriction) relatively easily, but efforts at downward ajustment are rarely successful in the face of any opposition to them; once the gate is opened, everyone inside has been vested with a right to pass through, whenever they choose to exercise it. S 9Three major works critical of zoning are Robert ! Nelson, Zoning and Property Rights; Robert Ellickson, "Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls;" and Bernard Siegan, Land Use Without Zoning, Each of these differs in its viewpoint and its conr.l.usions, but two themes are rein- forced in all of them: (1) The weaknesses of zoning are fundamental to the institution rather than super- ficial flaws in administration; and (2) regulation of land use, to whatever extent this is undertaken, should be designed to be much more compatible with private market processes. G4 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 2. Regulations are Almost Never Applied Retroactively. Since zoning ordinances are justified on the basis of lead- ing to orderly development in accordance with a long range plan, both must be in place before development occurs. Very few older neighborhoods were guided by plans and zones, and even fewer adhered to them with any consistency, so the time for zoning has virtually passed. Were it not for the limitations created by this general approach, many specific provisions (e.g., for screening between incompatible uses) could be validly applied to existing development, without regard for when it was originally constructed. The reasons for lack of retroactivity are not hard to see. After a building has been constructed or properties laid out, the benefits of requiring setbacks and land use changes are relatively small in comparison to the costs of compliance. The public purpose served is not great enough to warrant the intervention required to achieve it. Once construction takes place, then, zoning can do nothing to change it; mistakes are not only accepted, they are protected. Zoning focuses on one momentary point, and then leaves the field. Because of the narrow focus, the weakness in the con- trol instrument is exacerbated by enforcement of it. Instead of addressing the question of whether or not a particular land use is socially desirable or compatible with the neighbor- hood, the administrative issue is whether or not the offending development can be "grandfathered." Enforcement officials tend to lean over backwards to accept the argument that any particular development preceded, or was "committed" prior to, the regulations. 3. Rigidity Weakens Enforcement. Regulations which can be administered without- using judgment or discretion must be written in a highly specific and rigid manner; such regulations, as a result, are unlikely to be suitable 65 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES in every case in which they are applied. Setbacks, for example, may be generally useful for maintaining space for light, air and movement, but there are bound to be situations in which the rigid enforcement of a setback requirement serves no public purpose whatsoever, or the purpose served is of far less value than the costs of complying with the regulation. Rigorous enforcement, then, means that situations in which the regulation clearly serves no purpose must be pursued as vigorously as situations in which the regulation clearly does serve a purpose. If the proportion of beneficial applications to total applications is high, and the complaints likely to arise from non-compliance also high, enforcement is reasonably likely; when enforce- ment o_ a regulation is Pointless number of cases, enforcement issY going goiing tg to be. weak. In no small part this is due to the awkwardness of trying to justify the regulation in cases where a reasonably intelligent 4 Person would not attempt to do so. 4, Exact Boundaries are Arbitrary. While the intent of zoning -- to reduce negative impacts by segregating land uses -- has some validity, the exact boundary of a zone is almost always, in some degree, arbitrary. Thus, there is always pressure to expand, at the margin, zones which are more profitable to property owners into zones that are less profitable. For a large area of homogeneous land use (usually single family dwellings), the boundary effect is small in comparison to the protection offered by the zoning classification; where there is a mixture of land uses, the boundary effect becomes very large in re- lation to the area protected. What might be called "precision zoning" cannot work very effectively in older neighborhoods because both the pressures for change and the boundary effect problems are maximized. The arbitrariness of the exact edge of a distri.cl: 66 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES h10RIES C is reflected in the ease with which rezonings can be obtained by demonstrating that other properties in the same circumstances have the desired zoning classification. Justifying the precise location of a district boundary is inherently impossible, and the finer the number of clas- sifications the more impossible it becomes to "hold" the line. If the object is to prevent any further change in the neighborhood, then historic district designation should be provided or all future development rights deeded to the municipality, or some other blanket device that freezes development at a point in time. Such a policy is seldom optimal for the community as a whole or even the neighborhood, however, and the general case needing atten- tion is the one in which development and redevelopment are allowed to occur in response to market forces and the aging of the capital stock. No matter how consistently and intelligently applied, precision zoning cannot guide future development in mixed, built-up neighborhoods. 5. Gradual Transition is Awkward to Control. Zoning can have the effect, under the right conditions, of creating an area of homogeneous land use and protecting that land use over time. however, if zoning is not applied before any development takes place, if there are strong pressures for land uses different than the one designated, if the policy makers in the community change land use policy at any time, if officials are less than totally rigorous and consistent in their enforcement, or if the zoning designation is in any way suspect in the legal sense, zoning quickly breaks down as a control. In short, zoning can only create a highly fragile equilibrium, under ideal circumstances, and it is rarely successful (in the face of counterpressures) in practice. G7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES M011JES III areas which are and have been changing, may have a limited effect in reducing density zoning (not neces- sarily socially desirable) and ma ment for bufferin y impose modest 4 against incom require - cannot guide or Pa tible uses, but contain gradual redevelo zoning this would require rezoningPment because °Al land, in small y small amounts of increments over contiguous cannot be defended time. Such zoning in court (Spot boundaries zoning, and not y be ratified consistent with The Plan), nor can the P politically, 6. Zen -does not Control if zoning desi Ne ative Impacts. gnation and enforcement Even are many negative were perfect, there another not effects of one property upon that are prevented It is true that ideal or ameliorated by Y zoning. effects below g can reduce many of the what they might have been in the absence Of any controls at all, but many impacts remain because they are controlled, if at all, only indirectly. Legally permitted development may still create invasion of Privacy, noise and danger from ugliness autos and motorcycles simply due to • and destructive activities. compatible insensitive site planning and in- 7- Incentives Exist zoning approachthefor Non -Compliance. Under the oach of the before -the -fact the -fact imposition re is little that Of °on - a Previous decision or can be done to reverse either ille an action already taken, hence, gal or questionable actions are likely to be taken without asking for Permission .i.n the form or a permit, the certain knowledge 4 -hat nothing in the action. Nonwill be done to rcav,rs� than compliance. n-compli.ancr• i,s'mply easier and cheaper Once a building or addition has been constructed, or an historic structure demolished, the benefits of applying zoning-tyPe re than the costs, so it gulations are far less is almost never done. The more 68 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs illegal the action and the greater the negative impacts on surrounding property, the greater is the incentive to take the action hastily, in secrecy, and without com- pliance with codes. The penalties from such actions are seldom more than the equivalent of a "late" fee, trivial in comparison to the exported costs or damage done. 8. Incentives Exist for Non -Enforcement. In any political system, there is a bias in favor of those who are relatively few in number and each have a lot at stake (in this case, the developers and builders) and against those who are many in number but who have only a small stake in any particular outcome. The regulated minority tend to outvoice the protected majority, especially since many members of the majority tend to identify with the regulated minority until they themselves are adversely affected. Then, of course, they demand protection, but there is seldom much that can be done at that point. A building inspector who aggressively pursues a policy of rigid enforcement incurs at least the irritation of the property owners and builders who are restricted by city codes, and may of these individuals are likely to complain to administrators and politicians. The result is likely to be an overruling of or at loast a compromise with the building inspector, unless the council has clearly established a desire for consistently aggressive enforce- ment and is willing to take whatever heat is generated. Lacking astrong mandate for enforcement, a sensible building inspector will balance the intense opposition of those being regulated against the weak or absent support for enforcement, and choose the path of least resistance. It is an unusual building inspector who has either the staff or the mandate to spend much time in the field checking on building activity to ensure that it is in compliance. field work takes time from other activities 69 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs and the result of such efforts are simply to arouse ire amongst those caught in violations; it is seldom apparent to the violator what the purpose of the restriction is, and even when the violation was intentional (i.e., the person knew of the regulation and ignored it) the reaction is usually one of self-righteous indignation. 9. Compliance is Preferred Over Judgment. Admini- strative policy is usually interpreted, in local governments, to require that a person in the position of building inspec- tion exercise no discretionary judgment whatsoever. Admin- istrators feel that they are safe from attack only if they are following unambiguous and inflexible decision rules in administering or enforcing some policy. Where discretion is available, the official will tend to select the path of iminimum effort or minimum controversy, which, as has been i noted above, is almost always on the side of weak enforcement. R Policy makers accept this state of affairs because they i (a) feel that administrative discretion is more often used to undermine legislative policies than to support them, and (b) do not want to be attacked because of the poor judgment Of a low or middle level official. The result is that officials look only for compliance, and ignore problems or impacts which may be created by a land use but are not subject to direct regulation. THE PREFERRADILITY OF IMPACT EVALUATION While there is no guarantee, there is some reason to expect that an impact evaluation approach will alleviate at least some of the problems that have plagued zoning in its application Lo older mixed-use neighborhoods: W 70 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HIVES 1 1. Boundaries are of much less significance under impact evaluation, since the criterion used is neighborhood compatibility rather than conformance to zoning district specifications. This means that there would be little or no pressure to shift boundaries for exploitive purposes. 2. Standards of performance can evolve gradually over time, in the same location, rather than in discon- tinuous jumps. 3. Those who chafe under land use regulation can complain about the level of standards set under impact evaluation (and this level should be subject to debate), but they will not have cause to object to arbitrary re- quirements. Enforcement will still be required, but City Officials will be in the position of sustaining an agree- ment (of what constitutes compatibility) rather than imposing senseless regulations. 4. Impact evaluation is more likely to be self - enforcing, since affected parties will have opportunity to express their objections while the development proposal is under review. Zoning tends to encourage objection by court injunction and legal "technicalities." 5. Compliance with impact evaluation solutions should be higher, because property owners will learn that liability does not end with construction. If adequate compatibility is not achieved, compliance with agreed-upon standards can be enforced (or nuisances abated) after the developments f has taken place,10 C t r lONuisance law is sometimes thought to fill the gap left by zoning in regard to the control of negative impacts, but it fails for reasons which are presented in report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. 71 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES 1 i REFERENCES i i Aldare, Jerrold R., "Neighborhood Boundaries." PAmerican Advisory Service RePOf 1crals41DecemberChicag1960. Society A�of Planning Hygiene American Public HePlanninsothelth tNeighborhoodion Committee on the Chicago:Public of Housing. AdministrationService,Service, 1960. Andrews, Richard B., ed., Urban Land Use policy: The Central City. New York: The Free Press, 1972. Barlett, Ron1ld6E., Surface Water Sewerage. New York: John ald Wiley, ces of Development: Bergman, Paul A., "Assessing in the Consequen Clearwater, Forida's EnvironmentallComment,CU ban1ty Landmpact Institutee(Oct beru1976), pp. 10-13. Bishop, Selected Doyle W., and R. Aukermann. water Quality Criteria for Selected Recreational Uses, Research Report No. 33. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Water Resources Center, September 1970. Bolt, Baranek and Newman, in Noise AssessmeDe artmentnOf Housing nical Background. Washington, P and Urban Development, 1972. off on ;I Brater, E-FandaRuralnd eAreas.J Dincinnatt E_nvironmentalsProtec- tion Agency, Office of Research and Development, May 1975. Ing Building Research Advisory Board, MethodoDoC .fONaDionalaAcademy Mudslide Hazard Areas. Washing9to�n, of Sciences and Engineering, California Division of slide Prediction, pp. 136 - Mines and Geology. Mudslides and Lan California Geology, 25 (June 1975), Castle, Gilbert H., III, "Evaluatinq the Saint Charles Communities Maryland. Urban Land Institute (October 1.976) Social Im acts of Land Development. The Urban InstituL•e, Sep Impact of a New Community: Environmental Comment, PP- 13-16. Christensen, Kathleen. Washington, D.C.: City of Berkeley, "Noise Element." Master Plan. California: undated 72 MICBOFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INEs Berkeley Craik, Kenneth H., "The Comprehension of the Everyday Environment," Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 34 (January 1968), pp. 646-658. Cunniff, Patrick F., Environmental Noise Pollution. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977. De Chiara, Joseph and Lee E. Koppelman. Site Planning Standards. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1978. Department of Commerce. National Seismic Risk Map. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Science Services Administration, Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1969. Dodge, Marcia C., "Modeling of Photochemical Smog," Science, (March 1973), pp. 1259-1260. Eckel, E.B., Landslides and Engineerin Practice. Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Board, 1958. Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (September 1976). Environmental Protection Agency. Information on Protect Public Health and of Safety. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Mana ement for Urban Runoff. Washington, D.C. EPA, December 1974. Environmental Protection Agency, Guide for Compiling a Comprehen- sive Emission Inventory. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: EPA, June 1972. Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory of Air Pollu Monitorina Aatn;nmonr �+-•.,, i11a yre rarK, Nortn c:arolina: Technical Information Center, 1971. Fitch, J.M., "Experimental Bases for Esthetic Decisions," Environ- mental Psychology, ( ), pp. 76-84. Graf, William L., "The Impact of Suburbanization on Stream Net- works." Final Report- No. 14. Iowa City: Institute of 1 Urban and Regio 1 Research, University of Iowa, June 1976. lHagevik, George, et al., Air Quality Management and Land Use Planning. Washington, D.C.: Praeger, 1974. Hendler, Bruce, "Caring for the Land.Planning Advisory Service Report No. 328. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, June 1977. 73 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Iowa Department of Soil Conservation, Soil and Water Conser- vation in Urbanizing Areas. Iowa Department of Soil Con- servation. Jacobsen, Willis E. Automotive Emissions. Jago, William H. and Richard R. Lieberman, "Using a Planning Model to Assess Urban Design Impact: Waikiki." Environ- mental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), p 8-10. Jordening, David L. Estimating Water Quality Benefits. Washing- ton, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, August 1974. Kendig, Lane, "Performance Zoning: An Update on Euclid," Plan- ning, 32, 10 (November 1977), pp. 18-21. Keyes, Dale L. Land Development and the Natural Environmental: m�4inrt Tmnacts. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, Krieger, Martin H., "Social Indicators and the Life Cycle". t Socioeconomic Planning Sciences Research 6 (1972), pp. j 305-317. Kryter, Karl D*The Effects of Noise on Man. New York: Aca- demic Press, 1970. Kudlich, R. Ringelmann Smoke Chart, Information Circular No. 7718. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, August 1955. Langriay, Lynn, "Architecture: The Glass Menagerie," Newsweek April 26, 1976, p. 89. Leonardos, G., et al., "A Critical Review of Regulations for the Control of Odors," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 24 (1974), pp.456-468. Leonardos, G., et al., "Odor Threshold Determinations of 53 Odorant Chemicals," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 19 (1969), pp. 91- Leopold, Luna B., "Landscape Esthetics," Ekistics, 29, 1973 (April 1970), pp- 7. Marsh, William M. Environmental Analysis for Land Us1978d Site Planning. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, McCormick, R.A. Air Pollution Measurements. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: Environmental Protection Agency, National Environmental Research Center, February 1972. 74 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES McLean, Mary, "Zoning Buffers: Solution or Panacea." Planning Advisory Service Report No. 133. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, April 1.960. Milles, J.L., et al., "Quantitative Odor Measurement," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 13 (1963) pp. 467 - Muller, Thomas, "Assessing the Impact of Development." Environ- mental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976,)7 pp. 2-5 Muller, Thomas, Economic Impacts of Land Development: Housing and Property Values. Washington, D.C.: Muller, Thomas FiscaI l Impacts of Land Development: Washington, ba D.C.: The Urn nstitute, 1976. Myers, Phillis and Gordon Binder, An Issue Report -- Neighborhood Conservation, Lessons from Three cities. Washington, D.C.: The Conservation Foundation, March 1978. Mylroie, Gerald, "Community Design Review Procedures," Practic- ing Planner (April 1976), pp. 25-28. National Bureau of Standards, Building Practices for Disaster Mitigation. NBS Building Science Series No. 46: Washing- ton, D.C.: NBS, 1973. Oakland City Planning Department, Design Resources in the Oak- land Central District. Oakland, California, 1963. Perloff, Harvey, "Life Styles and Environment," ASPO Planning, (June 1973). Pimental, David, et al., "Land Degradation: Effects on Food and Energy Resources," Science (October 8, 1976), pp. 149-155. Press, Frank, "Earthquake Prediction, "Scientific American, 232 (May 1975), pp. 14-23. --- Promise, John, "Sound Cooperation: First Phase of an Areawide Environmental Noise Study," Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, D.C., June 1975. Public Affair Counseling, "Dynamics of Neighborhood Change," Real Estate Research Corporation, San Francisco, California, 1976; also NTIS. Roberts, Polly, "Making Dollars and Sense out of Fiscal Impacts Analysis." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp. 5-F-- 75 -8.- 75 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101tIES i 1 Sartor, James D., et al., "Water Pollution Aspects of Street Surface Contaminants," Journal of Water Pollution Control, ntrol � 1 (March 1974), pp. 458-967. ' I Schaenman, Philip S., Using an Impact Measurement System to Evaluate Land Development. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, September 1976. Schaenman, Philip S. and Thomas Muller. Measuring impacts of Land Development. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1976. Scholtz, Christoper N., "Toward Infallible Earthquake Prediction,, - Natural History, 83 (May 1974), pp. 54-59. Schultz, Theodore J., in Noise Assessment Guidelines: Technical Background. Washington, D.C.: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Research and Technology, 1971. Shafer, L.E., et al., "Natural Landscape Preferences: A Predic- tive Model," Journal of Liesure Research, 29, 1973 (April 1970), pp. 1-19. Siegan, Bernard Land Use Without Zoning. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath, 1972. So, Frank S., David Mosena, and Frank Bangs, "Planned Unit Development Ordinances," Planning Advisory Service Report Number 291. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, May --l973. Sorensen, John et al., Landslide hazard in the United States: A Research Assessment. Boulder, Colorado: Institute of Be avioral Science, University of Colorado, 1975. Starr, Edward A., "Measuring Noise Pollution," Spectrum, 9, 6 (June 1972), pp. 18-25. Sullivan, F., and G. Leonardos, "Determination of Odor Sources for Control," presented at the conference on Odors: Evaluation, Utilization, and Control, New York Academy of Sciences, October 1973. Thurow, Charles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley, "Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A Practical Guide for. Local Administrators, Parts ]. and 2," Plannin Advisory Service Reports Numbers 307 and 308. Chicago: American S ciety Of Planning Officials, June 1975. Urban Land, Urban Land Institute (June 1977). 76 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Urban Land Institute, et al. Residential Storm Water Management: Objectives, Principles, and Design Considerations. Wash- ington, D.C.: ULI, 1975. Vitale, Anne M., and Pierre M. Sprey, Total Urban Water Pollution Loads: TheImpact of Storm Water. Rockville, Maryland: Enviro Controls, Inc., 1974. Wadell, Thomas. The Economic Damage of Air Pollution. Washing- ton, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, May 1974. Waldbott, George L. Health Effects of Environmental Pollutants. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, _1973- Water 973.Water Resources Engineers and the Hydrolic Engineering Center, Corps of Engineers, Management of Urban Storm Runoff. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, May 1974. Webb, Dorothy, "Designing the City," Nations Cities (1977), reprinted by the U.S. Department of Housing d Urban Development Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development. 77 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES APPENDICES N V& MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Appendix A. EVALUATION AND CONTROL, OF AIR POLLUTANT IMPACTS Certain substances, whether emitted from human -made or natural sources, are considered air pollutants to the extent that they adversely affect the health and welfare of humans. The "ambient" concentration of such substances (meaning their concentration in the surrounding atmosphere to which people, plants, and other receptors are exposed) thus can become a matter of public concern. Often, public intervention is required because the costs of pollution are not included in the source's cost but, rather, are "exported" to others in the form of property damage, physical discomfort, reduction in health etc., Table A-1 contains a list of substances that are commonly considered to be air pollutants, along with.their major sources. While most of these pollutants are produced to some extent by natural processes, of concern here are human - related emission sources and these are usually grouped into three types: (1)op int sources are those which are stationary, can be readily identified and located, and usually are substantial contributors to total pollutant loads in the atmosphere (e.g., power plant smokestacks); (2) area sources are either sources of considerable areal extent (e.g., a large unpaved parking lot) or combinations of small, difficult -to -identify stationary or mobile sources averaged over an area (e.g., residential structures); and line sources are transportation corridors through which mobile sources pass and, over time, can be represented as a continuous source in the shape of a line. The ambient concentration of any pollutant depends on the quantity emitted and the degree of dispersal, which takes place when pollutants mix with surrounding "clean" 79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES I ` Table A-1. MAJOR AIR POLLUTANTS AND SOURCES POLLUTANT MAJOR SOURCES Carbon monoxide (CO) Transportation, industrial processes Nitrogen oxides (NoX)Transportation, space heating/ cooling, power generation Hydrocarbons (HC) Transportation and industrial processes Photo -oxidants (Ox) See nitrogen oxides and hyrocarbons Particulates Power generation, space heating/ cooling, industrial processes, soil erosion Sulfur oxides (Sox) Power generation, space heating/ cooling, industrial processes Heavy metals, radioactive Power generation, industrial agents, others i processes 1 80 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40114ES i I volumes of air. one factor affecting dispersal is wind speed, since the greater the speed the faster the removal from the source and the greater the dilution. Another factor is the mixing depth, which is the vertical distance from the ground to the inversion layer or area of warmer air aloft; this volume represents the air available for pollutant dispersal. The lower the mixing depth, the lower the dispersal of a given amount of a pollutant. Considerations to keep in mind are the scale at which these factors affecting dispersion operate and the amount of control that can be exerted over them. Mixing depth is not likely to vary appreciably across a single community and, in any case, is not a phenomena over which man has much control. Wind speed and direction, however, are determined both by large -area climatic effects and by micro -level man -created factors such as topographical features and structures. "Concrete canyons" created by rows of closely spaced tall buildings are examples of the latter. Air Pollution Impacts The effects of air pollution on human health and welfare have been categorized as follows: 11 1. Effects on health (morbidity and mortality) 2. Effects on other living organisms (which then impact upon man) 3. Effects on materials (e.g. soiling and corrosion) 4. Aesthetic and nuisance effects (e.g. odors and smoke plumes). 11 Keyes, Land Development and the Natural Environment: Estimating Impacts. m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140IMES 0 Although many studies have been conducted in an attempt to determine the health hazards presented by exposure to various suspect pollutants, there remains much uncertainty; Table A-2 summarizes what is currently known about air pollutant -health relationships. It should be remembered that any one individual's likelihood of experiencing these health effects is dependent not only upon the level of exposure but also upon his/her present health, genetic susceptibility, duration and frequency of exposure, presence of other pollutants, and a host of other factors. The precise effects of pollution upon vegetation and materials is just as complex a phenomenon as human health effects and the available knowledge is just as limited and probabilistic. Aesthetic and nuisance effects, while perhaps more easily identified, pose the problem of determining their seriousness. Table A-3 summarizes the available knowledge concerning these effects. The Environmental Protection Agency has established ambient air quality standards identifying the levels of Pollutants at which adverse effects become serious. These standards are expressed as "primary" and "secondary." The primary standards are designed to protect human health and were established by identifying the lowest concentration for which health effects have been observed and then reducing this level by a safety factor. The secondary standards are designed to eliminate damage to vegetation and materials i i and to control aesthetic effects. These standards are indicated in Table A-4. 82 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES '!'able A-2. A SUMMARY OF HUMAN HEALTH-AIR POLLUTANT RELATIONSHIPS' 1SUSCE"IRLF,--_- I•111.LUTAN'1' MAJOR SOUR C'h:5 IfEAia'II EFFECTS 1'OI'I II.A'1'I ONS ' - -- ---- —_ -- COMM M:h'T'S • Carbon 'Transportation, indualr i:J Reach with hemoglobin re. Persons with cardiovascular monoxide processes I'a,l knowledge was based on study ducing mrntal auenliveness, disease ;roother, d oth of high exposure for short periods phyNlal eAerllon. and cox with health Yo Young individual,. acerbaling cardiovascular New data Show possible health hh • disease symptoms effects fur susceptible persons at Co levels in the blood found in urban Populations. NIIf11ge0 I mO5pllrtahUO, Spa Ce Ileilf Interfere with respiratory Persons with respiratory or oxides (NO.) ing/cuoling, . Conclusions are bused on limited power functions producing long. cardiac disease, the young generation term (chronic) diwnse and the elderly exposure of healthy adults to low Joxcs, cxmnsive animal studies, symptoms and only limited data relevant to ambient conditions. Ilydro- 'Transportation and incus- See phut...oxidams ties holo. . _--__----- carbons trial processes P oxidams Indirectly polluting through lhGpro- I (DCI duction of photochemical oxidants upon reaction with NO and No, in the presence of sunlight. ('halo. See nitrogen oxides and Interfere with respiratory Persons with chronic res i--- oxidants hydrocarbons functions and cause eye ---_--_-- is the must common r u'r diseases, especially (O,l y P Y ( irritations bronchial type d the ype and the key indicator for asthma phutouxidants. Health effects are haled on limited and inadequate data. j Particulates'' Power generation, space Interference with respiratory Persons with respiratory dis. JI heating/cuuling, industrial 'lobe effects of particulates arc dim. functions, ussihle cnmrihu- t f P lhaC, the youngand the l Processes, 5011 efOSIUn lion Ill lung cancer elderly cull IO from IbUSG Of sulfur JiuxiJe, dioxide, i $altar PUw'ef generation, space Little effect in the pure gas Pl'fYUnS with 1'HlilralUry Of Oxides (SOA) lleating/coolblg, industrial form; similar effects Sulfur dioxide is readily converted as par. cardinvnscuhlr disca+e, the processes liculates when combined to SO, and then to sulfuric acid fit young and the elder) with than Y particulate). Determining which effects are du< solely to SOI is dificuh. Ileavy Power generation, industrial Specific In each pollutant Specific al each pollutant j nulals, processes Pollution from these agents can be radioactive intense or the source, but tends not agents, to be widespread. j others` 1 a. Information In Ihls table Is biased primarily lin the following references: National Academics of Sciences and Engineering, op. cit„ vol. 2: Health hJ%errs If Air Pollution: W:Jdhon, up, cit.; J. I), Williams, el at.. Jme'llorr Air Pollution .Stray, flrule 11 Prrjrcr Report, E W. 1jects nfAir Pollulion (Cincinnati, Ohio: Public Henllh Service, U.S. Department of Ilcalth, IiJucatiun, and Welfare, December, 1966). b. Particulates, ;dsn known its aerosols, life either solids cel fine liquid droplets which vary by size, shape, and composition. Sulfuric acid formed from SOI is one of the most hiolugically significant particulates. Some partiadates such as Just can alone, but become lelhul transport agents when toxic he rather innocuous considered gases are adsorbed to their surfaces, taken from Keyes, op. cit. W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Table A-3, A SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTION EFFECTS ON VEGETATION, (AESTHETIC AND NUISANCE MATERIALS AND MAN" CONCERNS) POI.IXIAS'1• YF.OtrKf10S ,MATERIALS -------- AF.S`fHF-nCS7NUISANCE.S Carbon monoxide None -- WO) None None Nitrogen oxides Reduction in glmvth of i lams with(Nox1 d es andbroad Icves (e.g.. beam• mmatuc) Creation of:l brownish coloring in Paints urban air ' Pholu.uxiJants Severe reduction in growth and even. (Nunc call", the cracking of rubber (Oat lu:ddcathoflndyvcgctablcs. fieldand ;u,d'he ;scelrrucd detcrioraliun Ozone has a distinct although n I of forage crops. shrubs. Ouit and forest nylon. rayon. Jyes,:md paints Icrrihly Offensive odor beef caused by on,m;md I'ANI, Hydrocarbons None .. fHCI None '— N None Parlicul:ncs Reduction in plant growth by physical toiling tl'lahria and builJin •s - bb,cka •e of light w is and--________ E F hen deposited un curr,uior, of metals when combine) lad surface Cholion of smoke plumes, scattering of sunlight to hate with Su, pnducc and color- fill sunses. and forniation of hydro. _ -----------..... _ Sulfur oxides Reduction in growth or plants with scupie nuclei to produce fog __—_ _--_—__–_---- Corrosion ill' iron metals. accelerated ISOxI broadleaves Scalleringofsunlight toproducellatc, deterioration ufbuilding sione•coran, production Of unpleasant Odors Paper. leather. Paints:md other _____ liuishes Others'' Floride causesugcnn:mwge It Inishilg of metals hyhydrogen field crops (and Hydrogen sl fidc produces Mlinnds) su:lfde extremely unpleasant odors n. The information in this (able is lake, primarily fn,n 11uhlic Ileahl, Scrvicc, the f;'/G•rtr rf,l it I'nlhrrinn (Washington, D.C.: Department of Hc;dlh, liduc lion. and WelLec. 1'167). b• Pcroxyacylnitr le. an oxidation product of hydnMarhoox. U. ti. C. Other Pollutants, such as hydrochloric acid and anunouio• my prcseol in small quantities un;, mJion:d lysis and are not discussed. Table A-4. NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR DUALITY STANDARDS PRIMARY SECONDARY , ST'AN'DARD STANDARD PERIOD OF---_.___ _. ... _-.-- I POLLUTANT Mf:,\Si1HEMh:N'rV{ym' PPM --_--------— Irwin, 1'P,AI I. Carbon m,noxiJe (CO) R hours 1 hour 1, 4(Llxxl 7y HyJrocurh,ns (HC) Innnmclhanc) 5:une Same Same Saltle 3 hours I(41 7. Nitrogen dioxides (NOJ 0.24 Year Sante Same 11N) ILOS 4. 1'hotuchemical oxidants 10.1 1 hour Same Same U41' 5. Sulfur oxides (SO,) d Year Same Some NII ILM0I1 :4 hours 16x None None 0.1.1 6. TTolul suspended parliculacs 1 LSI'1 hours None None None None .. 11.3myear. 0•% - 75 _ 60 :4 hour :MI _ — l.5y0 _ (I _ SOURCU: Fr,h-nd Rrximv, Vol. 36, No. R4 (April 7u. 11071). __— _. NOTES: Concentrations are averaged torr each Period of mc:,.Memeul. I'he annual 'LSI' concenlrahon is it geumehie mean of :4.111jr samples; ;dl other concer,tr lions are authmrtic '24 man v:ducs. SlanJarJs fill periods ill hours .n Icss may not Ire ckcecded more than once per ycm. 84 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Measurement of Pollutant Levels The units of measurement for air pollutants are micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) and parts per million (ppm). The precise method of ascertaining the type and quantity of emissions depends upon the type of source (point, stationary area, mobile area or line). The EPA and, to a lesser extent, the U.S. DOT have developed guidelines, analytical procedures, and mathematical models for use in evaluating emissions. For point sources, the most accurate method for evaluating pollutants is to place a monitoring device in the effluent stream. This method is, however, often impractical due to the high cost of monitoring every smoke- stack of every firm and power plant in an entire metropoli- tan area, and alternative, indirect, methods have been developed. One such more practical approach is based on the quantity and type of fuel consumed or raw material used. Aggregate emissions are determined by multiplying these indicators by the relevant emission factors (pollutants per unit of activity), which also take into account any emission control device that might be in use. Since many area sources are actually groups of point sources (e.g., pollution from a large residential development), direct monitoring of every point is once again often imprac- tical and the above indirect method is often used and averaged � over the area. Alternatively, small point sources (individual homes) indifferent subareas can be sampled to determine 1 overall pollutant levels. r While moving sources are often depicted as lines, in ( their evaluation they are often considered as area sources over which the pollutants are uniformly distributed. To produce these areal pollutant levels, data on street capacities, traffic volumes, and sometimes vehicle mixes (both type and age) are used to calculate vehicle miles of travel at various MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES speeds at various times of day. EPA and DOT emission rates and procedures can then be used to determine pollutant levels. Direct Control of Air Pollutant Impacts A means of directly controlling the negative externality of air pollution would be the establishment of performance standards regulating emission levels. However, the feasi- bility of establishing such standards .is very closely related to the measurement problems encountered with the various types of sources. The performance standard approach seems to be quite applicable as a means of controlling point sources of Pollution and, in fact, many such federal and state standards now apply to industrial uses. A monitoring device at the i smokestack, exhaust, or effluent stream can accurately J establish the emission levels of various pollutants, and these levels can be made subject to established maximums. Areal and line sources, however, introduce the problem of assigning responsibility for exceeding ambient pollutant levels to individual sources. For example, while with noise impacts it is relatively easy to identify which of, say, a stream of cars is causing the ambient noise level to exceed the enforced standard, it would be impossible to monitor and assign responsibility to sources of vehicular air pollutants with such accuracy. This problem, along with the aforementioned prohibitive cost of monitoring, leads one to conclude that means other than direct control through the performance standard approach must be utilized. I j Indirect Control of Air Pollutant Impacts Design standards, while more inflexible as a means of controlling negative externalities, do, in the case of air quality, represent a more feasible approach than perfor- mance standards (except for point sources). Many such 85 X_ - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110INES 7M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111CS design standards, e.g. in auto engines and mechanical equipment, can only be established by state or federal governments and thus shall not be considered here, others however, such as the design of parking lots, are under local control and can be enforced to ameliorate air quality impacts. The zoning approach, i.e. prohibiting particular uses, may also be a reasonable way of controlling air quality impacts. For instance, the ban on all outdoor burning may be ttie only practical way to avoid the air quality problems resulting from trash and leaf burning in a residential neighborhood. Various models have been developed to predict the pollution levels, mostly transportation related, of proposed development. However, after reviewing the available studies evaluating air quality in Iowa City, it is unlikely that development in the North Side will produce air pollutant levels exceeding federal standards. The Air Quality Survey, Iowa City, Iowa was conducted in 1971 and 1972 by the State Hygienic Laboratory and although } a few pollutant levels in the downtown area exceeded federal standards these findings were qualified by point- ing out that testing was done on a "worst case" basis and most of the problems could and would be ameliorated. In 1976, the State Environmental Protection Agency monitored ambient carbon monoxide levels on Riverside Drive at a busy intersection and found that the levels were insigni- ficant. It is that agency's conclusion that Iowa City is i simply too small and "open" to generate traffic -related air quality problems. i i 7M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111CS APPENDIX B. EVALUATION AND CONTROL OF NOISE IMPACTS Noise can be defined as objectionable or disturbing sound(s). Establishing a framework for noise control necessitates quantification of the impacts to the degree feasible, incorporation of subjective factors, and estimation of the noise impact likely to result from a given activity. A range of controls can be applied, but performance and design standards are generally the most suitable. Components Sound can be described according to several factors, and these may go through modifications in traveling from the source to the receiver. Each of these factors and modifications may have some influence upon whether or not the sound creates an objectionable impact, i.e., can be regarded as noise. 1. Loudness. Sound is viewed conceptually as traveling in waves, with the height of the wave representing the amplitude of the sound, or its intensity. It is possible to measure this acoustical energy, and the standard measure for doing so is referred to as the decibel (dB). The dB scale is both relative (the reference sound pressure is 20 micronewtons per square centimeter) and logarithmic; form- ally, dB = 20 log P Po where P= the observed sound pressure and Po is the reference norm. One consequence of this measure is that a sound 20 dB greater than another produces ten times as much acoustical energy, while a sound 40 dB greater than another contains 100 times as much energy. Figure B-1 shows the relationship between various decibel levels and common sounds. I I M / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401IIES 9 I ( LOUDNESS RAN(II'. flu(1f)MMON SOUNDS I Mcamwed m Smucc o1 Indlalcd D"lanvel .Sound .Source MIA Rrspnnlr(SYlrria 150 Carrier heck Jet Operation I411 Painfully Lund { 111) Limits Amplified Speech Jet 'Illkcotr CIN) feel l 1211 r 0iseulhe9uc iAuto horn IJ feet) Maximum Vocal Effort Riveting machine - 1111 i Jet 'Takeoff C1N10 (cell Shun (0.5 feel) Ilp N.Y. Subway • Station Very Annoying )teary Truck (50 feel) 90 hearing Damage IN hour%) I'netmutic Drill OR feel) jNo Annoying t preighl 'rutin (50 feet) Freeway Trlffic (50 feet) 70 Telephone Use I)iflicull Inrusive i Air Conditioning Unit CII (cell - fill i Light Aulu Trdfic (t(I feel) flu I)uiel Living room 1 Iledrumn JII Linea). { Sort Whisper 115 reel) 30 Very Quiet 6 Rroadcavling Studio - ?11 (backgunmd Icvcll f 10 Just Audible >f II Threshold of hearing ,1 SOURC'li: Cboncil on Environmental Qu:dily, /inrirunmrnlal 2> 011afk'. Thr F7rl Annual Reporl ( Washington, D.C.: CEQ. August. 19701. i r' Figure B-1. DECIBEL RANGE OF COMMON SOUNDS 89 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 7I011IE5 1 Loudness, however, is a perceived attribute of sound, rather than a directly measurable attribute. As it turns out, there is a systematic relationship between perceived loudness and actual intensity: an increase in 10 dB is perceived to be a doubling of loudness, and a 20 dB in- crease appears four times as loud. Human hearing can register sound levels from zero to about 140 dB. 2. Pitch. The other directly measurable component of the sound wave is frequency, state in vibration per second. The range of frequencies audible to the human ear extends from 20 Hz (Hertz, or cycles per second) on the low end to about 20,000 Hz on the high end. Because the ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies, some frequencies sound louder than others even though they embody the same acoustical energy; to correct for this, the dB rating can be weighted according to the pitch of the sound. The standard for this weighting is called the A -scale, and the adjusted loudness measure is known as the dBA scale. This is the commonest direct measure of sound intensity. 3. Recurrence and Duration. Low to moderate volumes Of street traffic generate noise levels that vary consider- ably within a time period of an hour, but the fluctuations are not abrupt and the type of noise is familiar. Other things being equal, the more frequently a noise occurs, or the longer it occurs, the more objectionable it becomes. Several adaptations of the dBA rating can be employed to account for fluctuations in loudness: the L10 level is the dBA which is exceeded ten percent of the time under a given set of conditions; the Loq scale time rider mittent noise in equivalent consnter- eq terms. Others can be designed as necessary, but judgment- can be easily used to select a sample of readings that are representative of the noise conditions prevalent at a particular location. 90 MICROFILMED OY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IMEs I 4. Time Profile. Noises may be more objectionable at certain times of the day than at others, simply because of the activities that are normally engaged in at different times. Daytime noise levels can be relatively higher than evening, nighttime, and early morning levels because the same noise is less likely to interfere with play and work than with sleep and quiet conversation. This compatibility aspect of noise has been designed into the Ldn (day -night) weighting. Alternatively, different standards can be established for different times of day. 5. Background Noise. The perception of noise is also affected by ambient noise levels. Any noise will stand out against a perfectly quiet background, and sudden sharp noises { are more noticeable if ambient levels are low. Low level ! noises that might otherwise be distracting can be masked by manipulating the level and quality of background noise, j and this is sometimes done in offices and other interior environments. For residential neighborhoods, ambient levels are likely to follow a diurnal pattern, thereby accentuating the penetrating quality of loud sounds at night. Heavy trucks are an irritation during the daytime, but can be severely disruptive at night because of the generally quiet background in Iowa City at night. i G. Reflection and Absorption. Structures, vegetation, parking lots, etc., can either reflect sound -- echoing or concentrating it -- or absorb sound. Trees do not have a great deal of effect in reducing sound levels, but vegeta- tion is visually attractive, can be used to hide the source { from sight, and can add a slight rustling to background noise that makes other noises less objectionable. Distance is the primary means for attenuating sound, but physical barriers can be used to absorb and reflect noise harmlessly. i 91 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es 7. Patterns. Familiar and random noises are generally less disturbing than noise which has a systematic pattern, but this is sometimes a matter of taste. A loud sharp noise which recurs at requal intervals becomes especially stress- ful because the noise is intensified by anticipation. This can occur when large volumes of arterial traffic are broken into regular platoons by sequenced traffic signals. Loud low -fidelity rock music may be painful to some and enjoyable to others. The general principle to be followed as much as possible is that noise should not be imposed on others without their consent. Noise Measurement Sound level, or loudness, of noise can be readily measured with a sound level meter while frequency can be imeasured with an octave band analyser. Most sound level meters are equipped with an "A" weighting scale to express the noise in terms of dBA's. Therefore, since the L10, Leq, and Ldn measures are all expressed in terms of dBA's, the sound level meter alone would suffice as a measuring tool. However, it might be desirable, especially in industrial areas, to evaluate sound level in dB's and frequency in Hz separately and, for these purposes, combined - function meters are available. Simple tests, involving measuring the distance at which conversational speech becomes inaudible, may often be adequate. Infrequent sounds of short duation often cannot be measured accurately with a sound level meter and, for that reason, a separate mc;-suring tool called an impact noise analyser was developed and is available. Impact noises can be defined as those whose peak values fluctuate more than given number of decibels (often G) from the steady values indicated on the sound level meter when set at fast response. Figure B-2 illustrate some typical meters, which range in price from roughly $250-3,500. 92 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MD RIES 2215 ' �ii3'0�tiiu • a 208 2219 2706 to revent rs Type 2215 precision Seund'r Level "'Sir, to, switches lu can tent Iswitctlling.lOulpuI [orre. and Octave Analyser, is a etc. Operates from single 1,5V al- menl with vele;.) uln:-Winded apem0 ml,. Inr corder, precision s11londIis'•ITho, snurnlhrq:Vol Mill fit. le:nher airy cary..gType R 14 aseiwillelpistolIgr'paban- frequency 1'Ia[or ils wi 11 nd IANSIIS IP 4.1C 1197197 po DINS Irtfor joeri! put Adaptor rUA 0208,1and Windscreen UA sion solum level voters. II has built OA. 0237. and C w0191111.g rletWO, a Ilnrt;,, uvulr. and tave 225.1 DIN c4565111and ANSIVSIII. 111If:lass 111, having eentn: huquell, r; Innn 31.5fV ur 16kHx. land ;it ur an..ly.,r. A wrulhu:d signals). The 2215 .s ugnpP.:d wdh a Con denser Microphm": Type 4165, which grv.:5 4 a boplL•aey rang.. bom 20H[ In 70k11/ Todakl tdaecthlrendnllg nl s...Olt b:vto el �nd Ill. quencY, Iha altumu'IudlsVl,ryrrll n' vwndows centra Imqunncy on Ill' mewl scab: Th.: un hn (in a,.1,11 true RMS, without approxunellnn, nn :h In( 30dB scale. There is medoad warring, :mil a push-button altrmu:ow gmc5 a 1a'A cnnvO men) 10118 ship nl Ib.• n+rle..aml" 1'n'•"' 60dB DC nulppl nnrt Af. mopol ler :rcrr der. Cable A001 A7 allows nmu4e control of the pmtahlit Leval Ilocurde. ; 3ol1 lel semi .vo0m:nir, :uvdym.; Oper ales bum four 1,5V hnucIle : Il(. lyn„ r C IAA cells). Delrvun:d m Icalher can wing carr will' wrist strap. Mrrfnphun., TVp'• •116!1. and Windscreen IlA 0237 Type 2206 Precision Sound Level Muu:r c; a smoll sired ioctrumnm !or precis sound level mr-asunnoerll It conforms with IEC R179. DIN 45633 Paul 1. nod ANSI S1.4.1971 Iyou SIfOr llrI•cr:i0n s0un.1 b•vol miners. Equipped will it Canderlsrr Mrcrm phone Type 4148 and a "I"" all ud^n 118kHx.tl and its I Oyi°rnic.l rango"Iroml 39 ur 135dB(A). 11 has a hwat nmrb,. and toll' in A. and C- W( h6ng nrtwurks. AUInnlallr Indication of thr :atCnualN S•Itrtlg 111 II`a metro scale, aids diroel reading "I xumtlnv fast con eni mt1slhift of Fiji l.•i Ilur:�,p1.'JI Type 2208 Noise Event Meter is similar to T 2206. but conforms with IEC R 123. DIN 45634, and ANSI S1.4.1971 Type 52 nr gunoral Purpose sound level metars. frlrr�lrly,d wllh a Poaoribuiric Microphone type 4117, o has a boqueacy range from 2rl H[ to fOkHx• p°Id contains dyne rrange from A -weighing 32 to 130 itB1A1 Only and has oo 10 Pushbutton attenua- mr Thr n+'ter can be switched to hold the mat, RMS love 0t the nwasured sound, and the level held can be stored. This is Ideal tot measuremonl of I(alfic noise. or short (1111111011 noises. Delivered in leather r-auy.ng case with pistol -grip handle, wrist seep, Mic.Ophnnn Type 4117. and Wind- se:rr•r:o UA 0707. By replacing Type 4117 with Input Adaptor UA 0208 and Condon. aa, Microphone Type 4148. the same sumdardc as for Type 2206 can be fulfilled. Type 2219 Sound Level Metal is a handy joule mstrumnnI for Ihu less demand. mq suuml level measurements. It conforms w4h II!1: 11 173, DIN 45634 anSI d AN lit •i 1971 Typ.. S7 for genre nl Purpusc sound level rm,tcrs. Equlpped will, a 1/2' fnndanser Microphone Type 4125 it has o flcouancy range from 5 W l0 12,5kHx, and a dymunic range from 35 Io 130 d81A1 It has it bunt -m A -weighting network. Auto. ma!r: Ind c;dinn nl to, nl wnualor selling on Ihi! n•.rl•r 5<alp nv15 der ill rexdiny of sound Icuels. The nu;In:Irlaol, wO:gb.ng only 3507 will Oath" ,is, .s very simple to oyer• roe will, ono hand. II operates Irum Iwo 9V bniter,es, IEC TYpe CF22. Delivered in tr•mhm e.nrying case with wrist slraP. Com d,nl,er Mi,:rophonn Type 4 12 5. and Wind -UA 0.150 Figura 3-2. SOUND LEVEL METERS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101tIES Other than through the various indices already mentioned, there is no way to directly measure the compatibility of noise. Because of this, it is often required in the evaluation of noise nuisances that the following two factors (or something similar) be considered: (1) whether the nature of the noise is usual or unusual, and (2) whether the origin of the noise is natural or unnatural. For example, a muffler -equipped lawn mower operated during the daytime might produce noise which, which above normal noise levels, are generally considered acceptable in a residential environment. Performance Standards The way to directly control the negative externality Of noise is to establish the performance standard (noise limit) applicable at the noise generator's property line. And, even though noise is a multifaceted problem which resists reduction to a few simple rules of thumb, recommended maximum sound levels for various outdoor areas and indoor activities have been worked out. Table B-1 shows some noise standards that have been developed by EPA, along with estimates of the consequences of accepting these levels of noise. In part, the consensus on acceptable levels is derived from a survey of numerious previous studies which recommended maximum standards for a variety of conditions. Some of these results are shown in Table B-2. On the basis Of highway noise, 65 dBA has been found to be the level which effectively prohibits all telephone communication and Office work.12 12SimoneYanov, "Evaluation of the Effects of Motor. Vehicle Noise Regulations on Population," in Transportation Research Board, Special Report Number 152 94 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEnAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES E Table B-1. A SUMMARY OF HUMAN HEALTH AND NUISANCE RELATIONSHIPS TO ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE" APPROXIMATE SETTINGS "'HERE NOISE LEVELS NOISE LEVET tit' ARE LIKELY PROBABLE EFF'EC'TS ''-45d11 Urban residential lindomst Speech itacrrlpllon indoors (interruptions of normal conversations al distances up to mcters) % 5511 Urban residential rnldoars) Speech interruption outdoors (Interruption of normal conversation% at distances up to i meler%) r4F111 Urban residential and residential nearairpon Iunldours) Average community reaction: C'omplainis and threat% of legal action :71h111 Industrial seting, (indoors) and very noisy urban Hearing las residential hmtdoans) it. These thresholds are based on the summary findings of the Environmental Protection Agency in Injimmarion in Lerch a f F.nrirnn• menlul Nom, ... (Washington, O.C.: EI'A, Match. 1974). It. Thew noise levels are approximations and may be subject it, change given variations in such factors as the frequency of noise and the intermittency of occurrence. These are outdoor day -night noise level averages, or average levels for twenty-four hour periods with night noise given increased weighting due to its sleep interruption characteristics. source: Keyes, p. 106. 95 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IaDIREs RESIDENT Table B-2. RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOUND LEVELS IN VARIOUS SPACES Nl.11aM:f 31441 kst nsEF u_ri ufnl KQ'TE]- JI4No uav• NL)! S%IT,.I:R. ('/.E('l1O- HIRR1S BFROM BER(\F.K 1.ARREVCE VAN ON {SIINJF DESI.S()T 1,MTER TOK)'(1 tSSR BERNth IN)I:LLE H(RJIr RFIlIV41:R SNERf\ LAND SLOVAM4 Hap I4T3 INT 114,21 1462 IhJ IMT MIT 1111 Irl INI 111= HTJ IVJ ION IDT ana aDl nD( JDa 04 &A ae• pe{ pD( eDa 04 Jet eeA dht dh% dh% eKa 133! N Almf••d JU 11 JIHO JB M IILJT RESIDENT 1!a! 1}nl !! Nl.11aM:f 31441 JILVI u_ri ufnl I1 -N JI4No uav• NL)! 'C Wrnm 3144,1 +1 -NI JO l'LI••mem lu0 y n IIuO II 4,.W 1iMAr%n qu! m Radrrom 1411 )! 11a! 23 JU 23_11 4p t3 4-47 l!-45 J! It,! 9 15-45 40 LI•inf R•vm 133! N Almf••d JU 11 JIHO JB M IILJT b :l 33-J3 40 Arynmenl 3�1 n-lll VI u 4n 13.1a Is (DYIiM1 14-4' 111 11-311 JII-,: 11_41 JII 11w(1 tafa 1-14L A. ta_JJ 11.311 klartJ YYJ•.. 31-1! tR 13 UJT 11.41 A140 J: 33-Y1 41. COSMERCI %L UH: !!_J! 15_41 1M1ulr H-+0 N Jp !!_JB IXJ: Rl,walll 11L 11 31 NI -HI AI J0.35 19,A IJ 4:4: 4lw 43_IU 41 AI -10 31 Ri%Art 01h<l lllla !11 p110 IIIJmuul :1_43 41413 Ia ERif All.. M-Jl J14J3 JILII M W ... II041. GercrJ uC.:r +•_>• 110. 41.11 JILNI NI 14-4,3 V4.) !4441 W 4}9 43-!! a41 N :! .0 40 31-40 1N 30-14 IVIf('S10.HL 1!a! 1}nl !! Nl.11aM:f 31441 JILVI u_ri ufnl I1 -N JI4No uav• NL)! 'C �L�1 3144,1 +1 -NI JO l'LI••mem lu0 y n IIuO II 4,.W 1iMAr%n qu! m 4:-4! Jt_91 J: laln ,N tit, %I.IN 1-t3 1017 311 IL.•ry:v1 . -_• m +: }411 NI CRY %110% _ -- Almf••d JM10 In -1_I4 Spw M VI C.mlu•ium !14D0 !U At DITORI('tl ------ 40 15 u 4n DU (DYIiM1 IIHr. 111 11-311 !3 -dr C..m R'T 1-14L A. Jlu! 41411 klartJ YYJ•.. :3-Lv A. - _ :0.10 11x1 I'll UH: !!_J! 15_41 1M1ulr H-+0 N Jp !!_JB IXJ: (It TSIDL --_- - :!-J! 19,A IJ S.N'r 4: (flN.n J!-JU IIIJmuul ERif All.. 9-10 IU IR ySUIIRCE:EP1.1.1.,11... n.,nLr.rO •q Ln. n. n.+. mJ! Awn ... II041. from Keyes, p. 110. 10-15 Jn 1!a! 1}nl !! N -n! 31441 JILVI u_ri It I1 -N JO NL)! 'C 3144,1 +1 -NI JO 12,41 1!-J! JLJD Jt_91 J: laln ,N 11 1-t3 1017 311 JIHI J: J! :< 411 JII JM10 In -1_I4 -a_!! !!_JII !14D0 !U I! 11.33 40 15 u 4n DU r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIORIES 1}nl N -n! u_ri M.-pl NL)! 'C 3144,1 JO 12,41 JLJD Jt_91 J: 1017 J(LJt JIHI J: 411 :< 34-4' JII JM10 In -1_I4 -a_!! !!_JII !14D0 !U nU DU N 11r !3 -dr 43_31 Je UH: !!_J! 15_41 1! IILJ: 1!-411 !!_JB IXJ: :I-ln :!-J! 1,)-11 IJ 11 4: ll.40 J!-JU !104 9-10 IU IR :1JJ 10-15 ): 14 -It :w4 V :! .0 40 31-40 1N 30-14 3-45 a 31 l! 1 l3 314141 4! ap,J41 V4N1 r -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIORIES 1 1 Instead of setting numerical standards for each and every situation, a more flexible approach is to state formally (e.g., in an ordinance) a general criterion -- noise generated on one property will not be such as to interfere with the reasonable use and enjoyment of the property of another -- and simply use the numerical standards as guidelines, to be followed to the extent they are applicable to the specific instance. In practice, this approach need not differ greatly from one in which the numerical standards are formally adopted, but a general criterion allows flexibility in those few cases when a higher or lower standards would be clearly more suitable. While the flexibility may add slightly to administration, i it greatly reduces the arbitrarianess of, the regulation. Path of Transmission Modification: The measurement of the sound level of the traffic source is generally made at 16 M or 60 feet from the edge of the roadway. Sound levels decrease with distance, being 6 dB(A) lower for each doubling of distance for a single vehicle (point source) or 3 dB(A) lower for each doubling of distance for a stream of traffic (line source). Path of transmission modification, or buffering, has some applicability to the problem of traffic noise impacts on residential neighborhoods. The first group of such 1 measures includes barriers, landscaping, and depressed roadways. Of these three, tall barriers (10-12 feet) are the most effective noise levels. However, the barriers ( themselves would create a visual and psychological impact on a residential neighborhood. Landscaping can reduce noise levels only by 2-3 dB(A) unless it consists of broad areas of dense vegetation, so that trees which would ameliorate the visual impact of traffic would do little to reduce levels. A roadway depressed 10 feet would reduce 97 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES noise somewhat less than even a short (9-6 feet) barrier. While such design would be desirable from an aesthetic Point of view, it is probably considered expensive. The second group of path -of -transmission modification measures includes design standards for structures adjacent to street and highways, basically to avoid the creation of reverberation chambers, large reflecting surfaces, etc. The applicability to an existing residential neighborhood is limited. Emission Controls I One way to achieve compliance with property -line Performance standards is limitations on the sound that may be emitted from the source. Lawnmowers, motor vehicles, and construction equipment may be regulated in this way; the possible shortcomings of this strategy the costs of meeting the standards may exceed ethe lbenefits t (a defect of any performance standards), and second, the circumstances under which the uncontrolled noise would be objectionable might be only a small proportion of the total usage of the equipment. If emission standards are respon- sibly promulgated and do not attempt to solve all possible problems with a single instrument, such standards can serve to greatly reduce excessive noise in urban areas. Mufflers, tire disign, and other measures to control noise at the source tend tobe-cost-effective for a large share of poten- tially objectionable noise from vehicles and equipment. Emission standards, however, are best undertaken at the national, and somct:imes the state, levels. Municipalities can seldom impose higher standards, but they can support Politically the imposition of suitable standards and Pagres- sively enforce those in effect-. Many trucks, cars, and motorcycles presently exceed permissible limits without being apprehended, and this is correctible. Also, national 98 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs i standards are currently under development and review, and neighborhood interests should be expressed in this process.13 vehicle mix can work as source control, in that one truck in a traffic stream generates the noise equivalent of approximately twenty automobiles. 13Anexample of analysis at the national level of noise emission standards, although not reflective of the most recent activity, is the Transportation Research Board, Special Report Number 152. M / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DCS 1401NES Appendix C. CALCULATION OF STORM RUNOFF AND FLOODING POTENTIAL Flooding from storm runoff is the net result of three groups of factors: the amount of rainfall within a given period; the characteristics of the terrain upon which the rain falls; and the rate at which the runoff can be carried away. The North Side is relatvely flat and thus subject to extensive ponding during the ocassional intensive storms i that occur, and the storm drainage system is inadequate due to design and age. The methodology presented below by jway of example is adapted to the neighborhood scale from techniques commonly used for storm drainage design in small watersheds. The block shown in Figure C-1 contains a storm drain near the center of the block, which is its low point. During a hard rain, the storm sewer becomes overloaded and runoff ponds in the alley and the yards of the two properties to I the south, until the water reaches a depth of about three feet and begins overflowing to the south. The problem can 1 be generally described in terms of the hydrographs shown j in figure C-2. If most of the rainfall is absorbed where I it lands, or held temporarily and allowed to run off slowly, 1 the flatter hydrography would apply. In this case, the rate of flow at the discharge point (the storm drain) never exceeds the capacity of the drain. More common in urban neighborhoods, rain lands on impervious surfaces such as roofs and parking lots and runs off quickly. This accelerates the runoff and produces a shape such as the sharper hydrograph in the fiure, and leads to a flooding problem. 100 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F u 0 5 BLOCK 59 contour line 3 elevation above drain in feet north GILBERT LIMN Figure C-1. BLOCK CONTOURS AND STORM DRAINAGE rlu>«I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOINES 3 0 w 0 m high percent impervious surface discharge rate \ low percent impervious Figure C-2. RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS 102 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INE5 time f 1. Meteorological Data The 10 -year storm (i.e., a severity of storm which is expected to occur one in ten years) for the Iowa City area is 4.6" in twenty-four hours. If the rain fell more or less evenly over the entire time period, such a storm would be of no major concern to residents of the block shown in the map. Unfortunately, the problem is the more frequent occurrence (once a year or so) of storms dropping 3-4" within the span of an hour. We will take 3" in less than one hour as the basis for our example. 2. Surface Characteristics Shape and permeability are the primary features of interest. Table C-1 shows some typical ranges for runoff coefficients (the proportion of rain landing on a surface which becomes runoff, i.e., is not absorbed). From the map and the table, the following aggregate coefficient for the block can be constructed: runoff weighted type of surface percent of block coefficient average impervious (roofs, paving 70 .95 parking) 785 permeable (grass, vegetation) 30 .40 Thus a little less than 808 of the rain which lands on the block will eventually arrive at the storm drain. These figures are rough estimates, and they assume that all surfaces are already saturated with water; normally the coefficients would be lower, especially for lawns. 3. Runoff Generated The size of the block is 320' from sidewalk to side- walk, so 1" of rain will result in 103 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I Table C-1. IMPrRAIPA011.11Y FA( FORS Factor k4clor Type if surface M 7)•peofsurface (1o) Urban areas, where the heavy clay soils 70 paved areas are con• average soils 50 siderablc 100 light sandy soils 40 Other urban areas, average 50-70 vegetation 40 residential 30-60 steep slopes ]Do industrial 50-90 1lousing development at playgrounds, parks, etc. 10-35 10 houses per hectare 19-20 General development— 20 houses per hectare 25-30 paved areas 100 30 houses per hectare 33-45 roofs 75-95 50 houses per hectare 50-70 lawns—depend ing on slope and subsoil 5-35 source: Bartlett, Surface Water Sewerage . 104 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 II I 1 1 13 x 320 x 320 x Of runoff at the drain that amount. 4. Discharge 785 = 6700 cubic feet Two inches will produce twice Because the storm sewer is a least a hundred years old, its capacity has not been recorded and is unknown. Additionally, the sewer serves a number of drains in the North Side that are at higher entrance elevations, so the effective capacity available to the block in question is even more obscure. Prom past heavy rains, however, it appears that a storm of the intensity under study over- loads the storm sewer in about fifteen minutes, reducing its capacity to zero (it is possible, but unlikely, that water comes out of the drain during the peak of a storm). When not overloaded, we will assume that the drain can handle about 10,000 cubic feet per hour. 5. Ponding The volume of water contained by a portion of terrain depends, for a given depth, upon the shape of the land under water. To calculate the exact volume would be em- pirically tedious, although a sufficiently detailed contour map is the only source of information needed. An adequate approximation can be obtained, for the example block, by imagining the area around the drain as a funnel or inverted cone, with some portion obstructed by solid material (trees, hillocks, building); the volume is then, V =1 IT r 2 h where r = the average distance from the center of the pond (approximately over the drain) to its edge, and h = the depth at the center. By introducing two factors, one 105 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES k (=h/r the slope of the side of the cone) and the other a (the proportion of the volume of the cone not filled by water), the volume formula can be solved for r and h: r 3V nka h = rk From the map, rise -to -run (the k factor) can be estimated as four feet in one hundred, or .04; the a factor is estimated to be 308, or 0.30. With these values, various sizes of ponds can be tabled. radius depth V (cubic feet) r (feet) h (feet) 10,000 92 3.7 8,000 86 3.4 5,000 73 2.9 I At about three feet in depth, the pond will start overflowing to the south, so the above estimates indicate the storage capcity of the pond at about 5,000 cubic feet. Such a pond covers the area shown on the map. 6. Storm Profile With the above background information, we can construct several possible scenarios by which to illustrate the impact iof a short but severe storm on this block. To take one, suppose that 3" of rain falls in 45 minutes, with slightly more intensity toward the end. During the first inch (about 15 minutes) the ground absorbs water and the storm drain handles the runoff adequately. As the second inch starts, I the surfaces become saturated and the drain capacity reduced to zero, so that a pond begins to form. After 5,000 cubic feet have accumulated, overflow starts to take place while 106 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i i; 2 Iw ,the storm continues. Forty-five minutes and three inches of rain later, a large volume of water is flowing between the two houses out into Jefferson Street, but the rain has stopped. Shortly thereafter, the storm sewer capacity returns to normal and the pond is gradually emptied. The profile just described can be portrayed by a graph such as the one in Figure C-3. Cumulative volumes are shown, for both inflow and discharge -- whether through the storm sewer or by overflow. Maximum storage volume is attained when the rate of inflow (the slope of the inflow curve) just equals the rate of outflow, and this volume reaches 6,000 cubic feet according to the diagram. These curves contain a good deal of guesswork, but the calibration can be improved by repeated experience. 7. Corrective Measures As an indicator of the severity of damage from flooding, the maximum storage volume is related to three types of im- pacts: (1) The larger the volume of water, the greater the amount of silt, debris, and toxic substances washed from paved areas and deposited on lawns; (2) The greater the depth of the water, the greater the water pressure and dur- ation of that pressure, with attendant flooding of basements and need to protect materials and equipment that can be damaged by water; and (3) The greater the overflow, the greater the scouring effect of the water and hence the greater is the erosion and damage to vegetation. Any measure which will reduce the maximum storage volume will serve to ameliorate the effects of excessive rainfall. There are generally two strategies. One is to increase the capacity of the storm sewer, which accelerates the runoff and exacerbates the problem downstream. Current practice of storm drainage design has swung away from this approach, although it might be feasible to increase the 107 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NINES ponding pond maximum pond begins overflows storage drained volume rainfall ceases overflow ceases ,tion Figure C-3. CUMULATIVE INFLOW AND OUTFLOW / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES time sewer capacity in this case. The second strategy is to slow down the runoff, flattening the hydrograph as shown in figure C-2. Flat rooftops can be used to store a moderate amount of water, releasing it slowly after the storm is over. Similar techniques can be used on parking lots. If half the water falling on the parking lot in the northwest corner of the block could be held behind curbs and small berms for a period of half an hour or so, the peak storage volume could be reduced by about 2,000 cubic feet, or 258. The storm profile would then look like the dashed curves in figure C-3. If similar techniques were applied throughout the neighborhood, the limited capacity of the storm sewer could be used more effectively and flooding again reduced. The object is to hold the water temporarily in some place where it won't do damage, instead of letting it accumulate to the point of flooding. 109 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES I I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the Institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 f kr F / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114E5 xi (MM rA(jl,()l "m The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart. ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Ferret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer* Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain•" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members '• Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass 8, Lee, Jr., Project Leader A A I A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. I I HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) LAND USE REGULATION AND ADMINISTRATION Gerald Thompson March 1978 revised May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement". The awards was made to the City of Iowa City and the work carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. One of the major problems in the North Side seemed to be an inability to prevent demolition and new development that were detrimental to the existing neighborhood. At its extreme, this process amounted to destruction of a single family residence of historic and architectural interest and its replacement by a three- or four-story apartment building that covered most of the lot with building and the remainder with open parking. Some of the results of this process are documented in report number 3, Land Use Intensity, and historic structures are inventoried in report number 4. The incompatible developments appear to be scattered throughout the neighborhood, and the impact on adjacent properties has been clearly negative. In an attempt to locate the crux of the problem, a review of existing land use regulations and administrative procedures was undertaken, to find out how land use controls actually worked as well as how they were supposed to work. Our conclu- sions were that many of the negative impacts were not regulated under the typical zoning types of controls, that existing regulatory instruments were not applied to some of the problems I to which they could be applied, and that some of the regulations, for a variety of reasons, were not rigorously enforced. This report seeks to pinpoint places in the review process where changes detrimental to the neighborhood are allowed to pass, and to explore ways of improving the regulations and their administration. i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOIIIES Many helpful comments and suggestions on the preliminary version of the Land Use Regulation and Administration report were received from members of the staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council. Some of the written comments are included as an appendix to this report I and in report number 13, Community Participation. These comments have helped us correct many errors and misconceptions, but any that remain are the responsibility of myself and the author. Dave Koehser made a substantial contribution in re- writing portions of the text. DBL ii FI ICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MO RIES L CONTENTS FOREWORD i ~ SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 THE PRESENT REGULATORY SCHEME 2 Legislative Decisions 2 Rezoning 3 Subdivision Approval 7 Planned Area and Large -Scale Residential and Non -Residential Developments 10 Quasi-judicial Decisions 11 The Zoning Ordinance and the Board of Adjustment 11 The Building Code and the Board of Appeals 14 The Housing Code and the Housing Appeals Board 14 WEAKNESSES IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE CONTROLS 17 Unreviewed Development 17 Uncontrolled Negative Impacts 18 Limited Access for Residents to the Development Decision -Making Process 20 Lack of Neighborhood -Oriented Incentives for Developer 21 Difficulties of Coordination of Related Land Use Controls 24 CORRECTIVE MEASURES 26 Modification to Existing Regulations & Procedures 26 Consolidate Land Use Controls 27 Improve Enforcement of Existing Regulations 28 Institute Conditional Issuance of Permits 30 Upgrade Notice and Hearing Procedures 31 Additional Control Mechanisms 35 Impact Assessment Ordinance 36 Residential Performance Standards 47 Site Plan Review Ordinance 48 Planned Development Incentives 51 iii ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES APPENDICES A. Department Community Development B. City of Iowa City Affidavit for Initiative 56 C. or Referendum Petition Procedure for Amendin the 57 g Z Code of Iowa Cit Zoning Ordinance O D• Procedure for Subdivision A p Pplication 61 E. Appeal to the Board of Adjustment F• Interpretation, Variance Exception Special 65 Use or G. Administrative Process for Enforcement of the Housing Code 67 Chapter 9.30.3 Iowa City Municipal Code H. Iowa City Staff Comments on the Final Draft Report 68 .REFERENCES AND RESOURCES 69 71 iv / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110 RIES SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The typical regulations do not adequately address used to control land use the problems of existing neighborhoods. Land use controls applied to older neighborhoods are weak in some areas and leave gaps in others. Generally, these deficiencies consist of the following: - Regulations do not Provide fo certain t r. review of types of redevelopment in existing neighborhoods. Negative impacts produced by certain land uses are not addressed by the regulations. - Procedures limit citizen access to land use decision-making. - The land use regulatory system provides no incentives for developers to consider broad neighborhood concerns. - The volume and organization of the regulations applicable to land use control make administra- tion difficult. Recommendations for improving the effectiveness Of land use controls involve both modifications and additions to the present regulatory system. The pro - Posed changes include: 1) The consolidation of land use regulations and to improve enforcement tand lto make ve tthe sregulations easier to understand. 2) The use of current controls such as permit issuance as a vehicle for more compre- hensive control. 3) The improvement of notice and hearing pro- cedures for all land use decision processes. 4) The addition of an evaluation of impacts, residential performance standards, and site plan review to the present land use regulatory system. 5) The use of regulations and procedures which Provide development incentives and reflect neighbor- hood concerns. 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IdOfNtS THE PRESENT REGULATORY SCHEME As outlined in the state enabling statute Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa, land use decisions in Iowa City are made by either a legislative or a quasi-judicial process. Applications for amendments to the zoning ordinance, for approval of development requiring subdivision, or for approval of planned area or large scale (equal to or greater than 2 acres) developments require legislative action. The interpretation of the zoning ordinance, the granting of variances and special use permits, and the settling of grievances against administrative officials and their deci- sions call for quasi-judicial rulings. i Legislative Decisions Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa requires that the City Council develop and adopt a comprehensive plan before deciding on the initial placement of zones and the establish- ment of zone boundaries. The comprehensive plan is a design for the orderly growth and development of the city and the enhancement of the quality of life for its residents. In drawing up the plan, the Council takes into consideration many of the aspects associated with various types of land use. All changes in zoning and all proposed development must be in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The legislative decision-making process involves the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. While the Planning and zoning Commission has no actual authority to make law, it must review all land use applications requir- ing legislative action and forward its findings along with a recommendation to the City Council. The Council makes final decisions on all such applications. The decisions of the Council may or may not concur with the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1. Rezoning. Rezoning is the changing of the zone classification of a particular parcel of land. The area involved may be as small as an individual lot or as large as several acres. Since all zones are established by the city zoning map, rezoning requests are, in effect, propo- sals to amend the map. Potential applicants for re- zoning might be a developer wishing to build multifamily units in a low-density zone, a neighborhood attempting to reverse a trend toward disinvestment followed by high density redevelopment, or the city trying to correct past errors in zoning or to plan for future needs. The rezoning process is of particular importance to an already established neighborhood such as Iowa City's North Side, since rezoning can change property values and greatly disturb the existing characteristics of the neighborhood. Rezoning requests are formally initiated with the filing of a standard application form (see Appendix A) with the city clerk. A $100 (one acre or less) or $200 filing fee must accompany the form. The clerk stamps the application with the date of receipt, files one copy, returns one to the applicant, and sends one to the Department of Community Development. The current planning staff of the Department of Community Development reviews and analyzes the proposed amendment and then forwards it to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Iowa City Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.10.32, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission to prepare a recommendation on the rezoning request within 45 days of its receipt by the city clerk. Additionally, the Code of Iowa requires that the Commission hold a public hearing on rezoning applications, although the exact specifications for such a hearing are not spelled out. Normally, the Commission holds an informal public discussion. If, however, the proposed amendment in- volves either a substantial change in the comprehensive plan or the enactment of a new zoning ordinance, a formal public 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DCS IIOIREs A hearing is convened. After all interested parties have been given a chance, either informally or formally, to air their views on the rezoning proposal, the Commission meets in formal session to formulate its recommendation. This recommendation, along with the minutes of the formal .meeting, are then sent to the City Council. In making its decision on the proposal, the City Council considers the application itself, the Department of Community Development staff report, and the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Also, the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance requires that the Council hold a public hearing on the proposed amendment and publish notice of this hearing in a newspaper of general circulation at least 15 days prior to its scheduled date. The Council must take final action on the rezoning request within 60 days after the date for the public hearing has been set. The request must have been considered by the Council at two meetings prior to the session in which the final decision is made. Section 380.3 of the Code of Iowa allows the Council to waive this requirement by a 3/4 vote. In such cases, an application may receive final approval after the public hearing and one reading before the Council. The City Council may render a favorable decision on the rezoning request if: 1) the comprehensive plan is in accord with the use for which application is made; 2) the present zone is temporary (e.g. a holding zone or a moratorium on building) and property owners now have a definite use for the land; 3) the zone in question is near a zone which allows the desired use; 4) the original zone was a mistake and is now recog- nized as such; 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES 5) the present zone unreasonably burdens property and is not in the public interest, or, the public interest would not be affected by the proposed change; or 6) circumstances have changed since the initial classification of the zone so that rezoning would now be in the public interest. Final approval of the rezoning request requires a simple majority vote of the City Council unless the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation is un- favorable or a protest is made by the owners of 208 or more of: 1) the area of the lots included in the proposed zoning change; or 2) the area immediately adjacent to or within 200 feet of the proposed change. In such cases, the Iowa City Zoning ordinance, Chapter 8.010.32 (B), requires a 3/4 majority vote of the I•� Council for approval of the application. (See Figure 1) Any rezoning decisions made by the City Council may be appealed to Iowa District Court on the grounds that the Council acted beyond the scope of its powers or in an arbitrary and capricious manner. Two special processes exist under which rezoning proposals do not require the final approval of the City Council, but are instead placed directly before the people. These processes, called legislative initiative and referendum, are provided for by Chapter 362.4 of the Code of Iowa and by the Iowa City Home Rule Charter. i Under the initiative process, citizens may petition for a rezoning. A petition to initiate an ordinance must contain signatures of 258 of those qualified voters who voted in the last election but not less than 2500 such signatures. If these conditions are met, the proposal contained in the petition is placed on the ballot at the next general election and needs only simple majority approval to become law (see Appendix B). 1.9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CIDAR RAPIDS•DES raOnlLs M FIGURE '1 PROVISIONS FOR PROTEST OF PROPOSED REZONING The above drawing depicts a 320' x 320' block con- i taining four 150' x 160' lots. The entire block is pre- sently zoned R3A, but the blocks to the south and west are zoned M. The owner of lot 4 wishes to construct a 32 -unit apartment building on his property and is requesting that the entire block be rezoned to R3B. A protest requiring an extraordinary majority vote of the Council for approval of the rezoning request may be made by either: 1) The owner of either lot 1, 2, or 3 or any combi- nation thereof. (The total area included in the proposed change = 96,000 sq. ft. Four lots x 24,000 sq. ft. per lot. 208 of 96,000 sq. ft. _ 19,200 sq. It. Since each lot = 24,000 sq. ft., a protest filed by one or more of the property owners on the block would be sufficient to trigger the extraordinary 3/4 majority requirement.) or, 2) The owner or owners of at least 52,000 sq. ft. of the land within the hashed circle but not including the area of the proposed change itself (i.e., lots 1, 2, 3, and 4). (The total area included in the protest zone = 260,000 sq. ft. Four corner blocks @ 17,000 sq, ft. each = 68,000 sq. ft.; 4 adjacent blocks @ 48,000 sq. ft. each = 192,000 sq. ft.; 68,000 sq. ft. + 192,000 sq. ft. = 260,000 sq. ft. Since 208 of 260,000 sq. ft. = 52,000 sq. ft., a protest filed by the owner or owners of at least 52,000 sq. ft. of land within the protest zone would be sufficient to trigger the extraordinary majority requirement.) 6 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140IRE5 The referendum differs from the initiative only in that the proposed change originates with the City Council rather than the public. As with the initiative, the proposal is placed before the electorate at the next general election and requires only a simple majority for passage. Under both the initiative and the referendum processes, the proposed rezoning must affect at least two acres. No i public notice or public hearing is required, since the elec- tion is viewed as a viable substitute for these procedures. Court rulings have generally upheld the validity of the ini- tiative and referendum although the processes as they apply to Iowa Ciy in particular have never been challenged. The various rezoning procedures are summarized in Figure 2 and in Appendix C. 2. Subdivision Approval. Any landowner wishing to subdivide property into three or more parts must obtain the approval of the City Council. Approval of subdivision applications is a two-step process: preliminary approval must be granted before an applicant can request final approval. The preliminary process begins when the applicant files an application form and a preliminary plat with the city clerk.2 The clerk sends this material to the Department i I 1City of Eastlake V. Forest City Enterprises, 96 S. Ct. 2358 (1976). 2The applicant often presents a sketch plat to the Department of Community Development and the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to formally submitting an appli- cation. Any suggestions made will be incorporated into the plat at this time in order to avoid unnecessary delay once the process actually begins. 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i FIGURE 2 AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE i i APPLICANT* ♦ CITY CLERK DEPT. OF COMMUNITY *PLANNING & ZONING�CITY COUNCIL 100 -AMENDMENT i DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CITIZENS' INITIATIVE/REFERENDUM** ♦CITY CLERK *GENERAL ELECTION *AMENDMENT *an applicant may be a developer, citizen interest group, the Planning & Zoning Commission, or the City Council. **petitions containing signatures of 25% of qualified voters who voted at the last previous election but not less than 2500 signatures. Iowa City Charter 7.07B(k) limits rezoning by this method to areas greater than two acres. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NCS of Community Development, which reviews it and distributes copies to other city agencies and the school district. After each of these units has reviewed the proposal and, in some cases recommended changes, a meeting is held with the applicant to inform him or her of the needed revisions. The Department of Community Development then refers the application and the revised preliminary plat to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission may suggest further changes before drawing up its recom- mendation. The application, the preliminary plat, the staff and agency reports, and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation then go to the City Council. The Council examines the preliminary plat and, if all requirements have been met and all requested changes made, passes a resolution granting preliminary approval. This resolution is effective for 18 months unless extended by the Council. Final approval involves essentially the same process and the same amount of time. In addition to filing a final plat, the applicant must submit legal papers showing that the title to the land is free from judgments, attach- ments, liens, back taxes, and other encumbrances that might interrupt development. Also, the city and the appli- cant must agree on arrangements regarding public improvements. Applicants dissatisfied with the Council's action may file an appeal in Iowa District Court within 20 days following the passage of the final resolution. If a subdivision application generates no controversy and all requirements for preliminary and final approval are met initially, the City Council may grant both simul- taneously in order to save time and avoid red tape. Subdivisions procedures are summarized in Figure 3 and in Appendix D. .- 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES Days 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 90 95 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 FIGURE 3 Schedule for Approval Process: Subdivisions, Planned Area Developments, Large-scale Residential/Non-Residential Developments. sketch plat (optional) Department of Community Development and Planning & Zoning Commission preliminary plat filed with city clerk agency review * applicant information meeting; agency comments submission of revised plat; basis of staff report I informal Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; * changes recommended formal recommendation by Planning & Zoning Commission sent to City Council k resolution by City Council on preliminary plat final plat filed with city clerk I gency review: City Engineer & City Attorney "7 -applicant information meeting; agency comments * . ---submission of revised plat; basis of staff report informal Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; * ✓changes recommended formal recommendation by Planning & Zoning Commission sent to City Council I ''lam resolution by City Council on final plat * points where revisions to plat are suggested or required 10 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS.DES MDIRES 3. Planned Area and Large -Scale Residential and Non -Residential Developments. Standard applications for these developments must go through the same approval procedures as applications for subdivision. (See above and Appendix D). The contents of the existing and pro- posed site plans which must be submitted for approval differ slightly with the various proposals. A compari- son of these requirements makes the differences apparent (see Figure 4). Quasi-judicial Decisions Quasi-judicial decisions are made by the Board of Adjustment, the Board of Appeals, and the Housing Appeals Board. The Board of Adjustment handles cases related to the Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Appeals rules on matters connected with the Building Code, and the Housing Appeals Board resolves disputes arising from the Housing Code. The decisions made by each of these bodies are based on arguments presented before them. Decisions ap- ply to particular individuals and have immediate effect. 1. The Zoning Ordinance and the Board of Adjustment. Section 414.7 of the Code of Iowa authorizes the Board of Adjustment to interpret, grant variances from, and make special exceptions to the Zoning Ordinance, provided any action taken is in accordance with the general purpose of t the ordinance. The Board of Adjustment has the power to: 1) reverse, modify, or affirm decisions of administrative officers; 2) grant conditional or special use permits; or 3) grant variances. A variance will be granted only if it can be shown that there will be no adverse effect on the neighbors or the public and that the property in question possesses certain 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES FIGURE 4 ELEMENTS OF SITE PLAN I. Existing Site Plan (Location Map) includes: name, north point, scale, date, streets, utilities, outline of tract. t I II. Development Site Plan (Preliminary Plat, Final Plat) A. Legal description, acreage, name B. Name and address of owner C. Date of preparation D. Name of preparer: owner's attorney E. North point and graphic scale F. Contours G. Locations of existing lot lines, streets, mains H. Layout of blocks with dimensions and order I. Location, dimensions, names of proposed streets J. Grades of proposed streets K. Cross section of proposed streets: curb/gutter L. Layout of proposed water mains and sanitary sewer M. Drainage of land: storm sewers, culvert, etc. I N. Location of buildings on tract; uses and number of units 0. Location of dedicated areas P. Height of present and proposed structures Q. Distances between buildings on/adjacent to tract R. Land within tract to be developed later; time frame S. Transportation and parking facilities T. Methods of buffering U. Overall density V. Location of proposed open space 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RE5 Elements Required C O .,J N �i Ga U) a a w� ✓ J J J ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ J J ✓ V J J J ✓ v ✓ ` ✓ �� ✓ V, J ✓ ✓ ✓ J v/ o� characteristics. These characteristics consist of unique- ness, conditions imposing unnecessary economic or personal hardship on the owner, and practical difficulties which prevent use of the land consistent with the zone. Anyone aggrieved by a decision of the building inspec- tor with regard to the enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance or any officer, department, board, or bureau of the City of Iowa City adversely affected by such a decision is eligible to file an appeal with the Board of Adjustment. Presumably, an appeal may be brought by persons whose property is affected by the building inspector's decision or failure to make a decision; thus neighbors experiencing negative effects of an allegedly illegal land use on adjacent or nearby property would have a right to be heard 1 by the Board of Adjustment. The appeal process begins with the filing of an appeal form (See Appendix L') with the city clerk. This form is sent to the Current Planning Division of the Department of Community Development for review and analysis. The appeal and the staff report are then forwarded to the Board of Adjustment. The Board is required to hold a public hearing on the appeal and must send a letter notifying each property owner whose land is within 200 feet of the affected property of the pending appeal and of the date set for the public hearing. The names of the affected property owners are to be supplied by the person seeking the Board's review. The hearing is conducted in a formal manner. Interested parties are permitted to argue in favor of and against the appeal and then are given a chance to refute each other's arguments. In the interest of time, the Board may limit discussion to new issues and information. After the hearing has ended, the Board remains in open session and makes a ruling on the appeal. The Board of Adjustment's decision is final unless an appeal is made to Iowa District Court within 30 days. This process is summarized in Appendix P. 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 2. The Building Code and the Board of Appeals. The Iowa City Building Code3 regulates new construction and sets specifications for materials and methods to be used in order to insure housing quality which meets minimum standards for health and safety. All builders must apply for a building permit prior to beginning construction. The city building inspector will issue a construction permit after reviewing the builder's proposal and finding that all standards applying to the proposed project have been met. Failure to obtain a building permit prior to beginning development and con- struction activity may result in considerable difficulty for the builder later on. The city will not grant final acceptance to a newly -built structure through issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless all rele- vant requirements of both the zoning Ordinance and the Building Code have been satisfied. The Board of Appeals is made up of citizens of Iowa City with backgrounds in architecture and construc- tion. The Board typically hears cases in which the building inspector has denied a builder's application for a permit. Both the complaintant and the building inspector appear before the Board. The Board of Appeals may affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the building inspector. If the building inspector denies an application for a permit and the Board of Appeals upholds this decision, the builder may be required to tear down any construction which has occurred and may be charged with a misdemoanor. 3. The Housing Code and the Housing Appeals Board. The Iowa City Housing Code regulates conditions in 3Iowa City Municipal Ordinance No. 77-2859. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES existing housing. The recently revised Housing Code contained in Chapter 9.30 of the Iowa City Municipal Code meets or exceeds the minimum requirements for local housing codes as established by Chapter 413 of the Code of Iowa. The Housing Code sets standards for such things as minimum lighting, heating, ventilation, equipment, and space needs. The Code also provides specific criteria for determining when a dwelling is unfit for human habitation and requires the housing inspectors to make annual inspections of all multifamily dwellings and rooming houses. Violations of the Housing Code are most often dis- covered through these annual inspections or through systematic surveys conducted by the housing inspector. Occasionally, complaints about existing housing condi- tions are received by the city; these generally come from neighbors rather than tenants. Once it has been determined by the housing inspector that a particular dwelling unit is in violation of the Housing Code, a iletter is sent notifying the owner of the violation and requesting that the owner rectify the deficiencies by making the specified corrections within a certain period of time. The owner has 10 days after the letter is sent to file an appeal with the Housing Appeals Board. A peti- tion for a hearing before the Board must be filed with the housing inspector and the hearing should take place within 30 days of the filing. The Board may affirm, reverse, or modify the housing inspector's actions. In order to prevent further appeals by the property owner, the Housing Appeals Board also establishes a strict timetable for subsequent procedures. The violator is given reasonable time to correct the deficiencies. If, 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111ES within this time limit, appropriate action is not taken, motions to placard the dwelling and vacate the premises will occur as specified in the Board's original ruling. The time limit may be extended upon a showing of good faith effort by the owner to comply with the Code. In certain circumstances, noncompliance may present such a hazard to the public's health or safety that immediate compliance is deemed necessary. An emergency order to correct will be issued. If the emergency order is not followed, the housing inspector may cite the violator for a misdemeanor and may petition the District Court to enjoin occupancy by suspending or revoking the owner's rental permit or rooming house license. All decisions of the Housing Appeals Board are final barring appeal by the owner to District Court. This procedure is summarized in Appendix G. 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES WEAKNESSES III EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD LAND USE CONTROLS Although the City of Iowa City has general ordinances regulating land use, the system of control as it applies to existing neighborhoods is weak. The weaknesses for the most part stem from a lack of comprehensive regulation and from procedural obstacles to effective implementation. In neighborhoods like Iowa City's North Side, where the likeli- hood of conflicting and incompatible development is great, a weak land use regulatory system can result in undesirable consequences. This section examines five major areas of . weakness in the present system of land use control as it applies to existing neighborhoods. Unreviewed Development The Zoning Ordinance sets out requirements for such things as permitted density, setbacks from lotlines, maxi- mum heights for structures,and minimum number of parking spaces. The Building Code establishes standards and specifications pertaining to construction of new buildings. The building inspector monitors construction and reviews development site plans to insure compliance of a Project with the applicable provisions of both the Zoning Ordinance and the Building Code. If all requirements are met, the project continues to completion without review by the Board of Adjustment, Planning and Zoning Commission, Department of Community Development, or City Council. This system has both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, property owners should be allowed to use their land within the confines of existing regulations without experiencing undue interference from the city government; on the other hand, city policy makers and owners of pro- perty near the development site should be informed of 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401rICs development occurring which may produce adverse impacts. A formal process to inform policy makers of unreviewed development impacts does not exist. The comments of neighbors who may be adversely affected by a particular development are not solicited and nearby property owners may not be notified of the builder's intent to develop a parcel until the project is underway. In most cases, the situation just described will be perfectly harmless, but in some percentage of cases it will result in adverse effects on and injury to those j living nearby. Additionally, if the developer is not made aware, either through citizen input or local government i review, of the possible ramifications of a particular project, feasible construction and development alterna- tives may not be fully explored. Because potentially affected neighbors are not notified of proposed develop- ment and because the city staff, commissions, and Council f do not review such development, the best interests of the public may not be served. The solution to this problem need not cause unnecessary delay to the developer or result in undue restrictions on the free use of land. Uncontrolled Negative impacts ' No attempt is made in the present regulatory scheme ' to control the negative impacts of certain land uses which do not constitute "substantial harm" in the sense that courts apply the term in the context of nuisance law. Thus, impacts are allowed to spill over onto adjacent property and adversely effect those using the property. One source of negative impacts is the nonconforming use. This class of land use is not subject to zoning regulation 4Refer to report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. In MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB MAI? RAPIDS -DES F101NE5 1 because of its existence prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. When a nonconforming use is rebuilt or expanded, however, it must comply with all regulations. Other sources of negative impacts include variances, uses located near the boundary of a zone, uses which represent maximum development in a zone which is zoned beyond its j: capacity,s and outright violations. While some of these sources of negative impacts are covered by present regu- lations, the city's efforts to control them may be mini- i mal due to a lack of pressure by neighbors. Zoning is intended to promote homogenous patterns of development in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The failure of a zoning ordinance to achieve this goal in the case of an existing neighborhood over which the zones have been laid is inevitable. Negative effects are alreadybeing g generated and are already impacting neighbors to varying degrees.6 Because of the limited criteria controlled by the zoning regulations, some i inequitable circumstances are not remedied. Zoning administrators do not analyze impacts because they lack discretionary authority to consider other relevant factors. Instead, their attention is focused on specific compliance with uses allowed in a given zone. The compa- tibility of a given development with the existing neighbor- hood beyond the spatial relationship is not the primary focus of zoning regulation. Thus, some landowners are left unprotected from negative impacts. 5O'Brien v. City of St. Paul, 173 N.W. 2d 462 (Minn. 1969) Describing apartment buildings in single family neighborhoods as near nuisance. 6Nei2hborhood Impacts Survey, (Iowa City: Department Margaret Bowser et al., of Community Development, City of Iowa City, September 1976). I MICROFILI4ED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDs.DLS 140114Es Limited Access for Residents to the Development Decision - Making Process Notification of the neighbors in proximity to re- development of an existing neighborhood should occur as a routine matter. Presently, development not subject to the review processes for subdivision or rezoning does not require public or personal notice unless the develop- ment presents a conflict suitable for action before the Board of Adjustment. Arguably, rezoning actions poten- tially have more sweeping consequences than Board matters and yet notice provisions are less stringent. While a procedure is available to the public whereby a protest can be made requiring a 3/4 vote of the Council for ap- proval of rezoning, such a procedure is ineffective if potential protesters are unaware of the rezoning proposal. Notice requirements for rezoning call for publication of a notice of the pending action in a newspaper of general circulation and the placement of signs on or in front of the affected property. The newspaper publication is effec- tive only to the extent that those potentially affected by the rezoning proposal subscribe to the newspaper and bother to read the fine print. Signs on the affected i property notify only those who walk or drive by looking for them. For the protest concept to be effective, notice procedures must be reasonable and fair. A low profile decision making process deprives public officials of a source of valuable information and sets the stage for conflicts between property owners. Notice of land use decisions ought to be :.,,tter calculated to reach those most apt to be affected by them. The public generally does not know who has the right to protest applications for rezoning and when such protests may be commenced. For example, while property owners who are adjacent to, in the rear of, directly opposite from, )0 MICROMMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIDINES or within 200 feet of the proposed change are legally qualified to file a protest, tenants similarly situated are not. If neither property owners nor tenants are aware of a proposed rezoning, both are denied any chance to participate, either directly or indirectly, in the decision-making process. A more thorough and systematic method of notification should be instituted in rezoning proposals. Effective notification and protest provisions should be part of all development review. Neighbors who are unfamiliar with the review and decision-making pro- cesses employed by the local government should not be penalized merely because developers have had more contact with the Board of Adjustment, Planning and zoning Commis- sion, and City Council. The primary reason for involving potentially affected parties in the decision-making process is to bring con- flicting interests out in the open, thereby improving the decision. If all affected parties are allowed to voice their opinions on the matter, the total costs of a develop- ment become more apparent. The decision-making process should be designed to make the developer consider measures which, if adopted, would minimize negative impacts on neighbors. The process should not, however, be so over- burdened as to prevent the expeditious and efficient decision-making regarding development. Lacko_ f Neighborhood -Oriented Incentives for Developer The lack of regulation or market pressure encouraging jdevelopers to recognize broader interests of the community compounds the lack of participation of the neighborhood where development is proposed. Developers invest their capital in a way which gives them the greatest rate of return. When they are confronted with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, which by its very nature is 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES limited in scope, their development decision is based on the inflexible criteria it contains. Other factors important to development of land in a manner compatible with the existing neighborhood and in tune with broader community goals are omitted because of the orientation toward strict conformance with the zoning requirements and lack of dialogue between the neighborhood and developer. Requiring rigid compliance with specifications for i development contained in the Zoning Ordinance does not give the developer the latitude to consider alternatives which might serve the public interest just as well. The j provisions for planned area development offer a measure of flexibility with respect to technical aspects of developing two or more acres of land. The concept of planned area development allows tradeoffs to occur among i ithe various parcels included in the area development. For example, density on one parcel of land in the area I might exceed the zoned allowance for density; another parcel might be entirely open space. The planned area development as a whole must have an average density which complies with the zone requirements. In the case of a single parcel not part of a planned area development, incentives in the form of flexible technical requirements would be very limited because of the uniformity require- ment of the state enabling legislation for zoning. Another concept which could be used to achieve i optimal location of land use as well as to provide an incentive for developers to engage neighbors in a dialogue regarding development i., the floating zone.8 The situation 7Iowa City Municipal Code Chapter. 8.10.20; A.L.I., Model Land Development Code, Section 2-2.10. BA.L.I., Model Land Development Code, Section 2.312 (2)(c). 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES where a neighborhood grocery store was desired in a residential area could give rise to a floating commercial zone. Approval of the development of a lot for use as a grocery store would be on a first -come -first-served basis. The lot owner who could obtain the City Council's approval first would be allowed to develop. Upon approval, the floating zone comes to rest on the lot approved and the opportunity for development is extinguished. The approval process would necessarily involve a dialogue between developer and neighbors because of the possibility for inherent incompatibility between residential and commercial uses. The city, by failing to formally recognize the legiti- mate interests of the property owners in proximity to devel- opment, provides no incentives for developers to seek neighborhood input or to consider neighborhood impacts. Neighborhoods, in general, represent an amorphous interest group capable of mustering only limited political clout to influence the development decision-making process. A dia- logue induced by political incentives would force the developer to seek neighborhood input and to concede certain aspects of the development in the name of public interest. Such a dialogue could result in requirements retarding or discouraging development altogether, but it might result in better timing of construction stages and design features compatible with and even complementary to the neighborhood. In spite of the fact that focusing the attention of the developer on neighborhood interests requires a well -devised scheme of incentives which tend to work in favor of the public interest without being excessively restrictive, it is clear that some movement in this direction is needed. 23 MICRDEILMEB BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mou+Es a Difficulties of Coordination of Related Land Use Controls The shortage of staff due to fiscal limitations on the local government requires that the problems of the land use control system be addressed according to their importance and that closely related functions be conso- lidated or combined. At the same time, an objective and fair regulatory system must be maintained. While land use regulations in Iowa City are volumi- nous and cover many different yet interrelated areas, they are administered by staff members who do not work with each other on a day to day basis. If such functions as zoning administration, development review, housing inspection, building inspection, fire safety inspection, health inspection, and police and parking enforcement cannot be combined, then at least an attempt to coordi- nate information regarding overlapping concerns should be instituted. Since the Code of Iowa requires the existence of a separate board or commission for each of these municipal functions, much of the fragmentation in the city's administrative structure is due to acts of the state rather than the local government. Under its Home Rule Charter, however, Iowa City should be able to as least reduce this fragmentation. The city's power to combine and coordinate both staff -level and adminis- trative agency -level functions is limited only to the extent that such action produces results inconsistent with state law pre-empting the field. In summary, the deficiencies of the present system of land use control st-m from five identifiable sources. The present scope of review focuses on new subdivisions and similar types of development not generally charac- teristic of that occurring in older and established neighborhoods. Existing regulations and procedures are not designed to control negative effects of activity zn MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDINES occurring incident to land development. The present decision-making process does not satisfactorily solicit public and neighbor input on and participation in devel- opment decision-making. The present system of controls jdoes not provide any incentives which encourage developers to consider neighborhood interest in or concern with the development. Finally, land use administration is frag- mented and land use control efforts by the various i boards and commissions of the city are often not proper- ly coordinated. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES CORRECTIVE MEASURES The foregoing discussion outlines the weaknesses in Iowa City's present land use control system as it pertains to existing neighborhoods and suggests several approaches to take in an effort to eliminate these weaknesses. The corrective measures presented below elaborate on these approaches. The alternatives pro- posed range from the modification of existing controls I to the addition of new regulations. I Modi and Land use regulations in Iowa City are designed both to promote orderly growth and development and to prevent or control any externalities that may arise. The effectiveness of a particular regulation depends on the method by which it is enforced and the degree i to which such enforcement is carried out. While a variety of factors, such as the attitudes of city Officials, the political climate in the community, and the disposition of the courts toward public interven- I tion,influence the land use regulatory system, the most I obvious and easily measured one is the cost in terms Of the city's budget. 1 The calculation of the costs and benefits of an i j effective system of land use control, however, should it extend beyond mere budgetary considerations. Unplanned i or haphazard land use imposes its own costs in terms of a lack of growth, a loss of tax revenue, and damages suffered by private citizens as a result of uncontrolled sources of externalities. Developers are often reluctant to build in such an unstable atmosphere and citizens begin to seek housing beyond the city limits. Established neighborhoods may break up and retailers may be forced to 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES leave the older parts of the city because of declining sales. An efficient and effective land use regulatory system is therefore important, if not essential, to the well-being of a city. This section contains several jproposals which, if implemented, could improve existing land use regulations and procedures in Iowa City. i 1. Consolidate Land Use Controls. Land use regu- lations in Iowa City have been adopted at different times and several different agencies have been given Power to enforce them. As a result, it is not always clear where the authority of one agency ends and that of another begins. Also, staff functions related to land use control are spread throughout the city offices. Communication is hindered and it is often difficult, if not impossible, to assemble all the expertise potentially j available for dealing with a particular problem. Finally, decisions made on one level of administration are often subject to review by a higher administrative unit of the city. The reviewing agency may have access to additional information or may employ different stan- dards in formulating its ruling. All of this reduces the efficiency and effective- ness of the city's system of land use control. city employees are often unsure of what course of action to i take and citizens and developers are left confused and frustrated. Two steps could be taken to relieve this problem: 1 a) A guidebook could be published containing all provisions of the municipal code relevant to i building and development and outlining procedures to be followed by developers and neighbors in land use matters. The guidebook would include such things as zoning regulations, housing and building codes, the impact assessment ordinance, and pro- cedures to follow in applying for rezoning or in protesting a specific rule, decision, or proposal. These ordinances and procedures could be explained 27 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nonlEs and, if necessary, supplemented by drawings or charts. The guidebook should be arranged in such a way that it could be easily updated. b) In cases where the delineation of authority is blurred or where overlapping is inevitable, administrative and staff functions could be combined and coordinated. While administrative decision- making bodies would probably not be combined per se, such agencies could meet in joint sessions or assign a combined staff to deal with a specific problem. City officials working with land use control matters could be more strategically placed within city hall in order to facilitate communication among them. 2. Improve Enforcement of Existing Regulations. The control which Iowa City can potentially assert through its regulations regarding land use and development is substan- tial. New subdivisions and large-scale development are thoroughly reviewed in light of the city's ability to provide public services and maintain public improvments. Enfcrcement of land use regulations is actively pursued by the city in the case of new development. Sections of the city developed prior to 1962, however, became subject to the zoning regulations retroactively. Many land uses in these areas benefit from categorization as nonconform- ing uses, or from long term neglect by city officials in previous administrations.9 When pressed to enforce the code provisions against a land use which generates a complaint, the code enforce- ment division will attempt to settle the controversy with- out formal action. Illegal uses which are not brought to the attention of the enforcement official are rarely de- tected or moved against because of the shortage of staff available to make detections and the unwillingness of i 9See report number 3, Land Use Intensity, and report number 10, Impacts Survey 1978. 28 / MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS•DES 610 RIES local government officials to take action against non- compliant land uses not generating complaints. Several policies could be implemented that would lead to better enforcement of the existing regulations: a) Present inspection efforts could be combined and coordinated. With some amount of retraining, many inspectors could be assigned to work with more sections of the code. In this way, enforcement efforts could be substan- tially improved without hiring additional Personnel. As an example of what can be done, the city recently combined the housing and building inspection functions and has thus far received favorable results. b) The number of inspectors could be in- creased. This would, of course, result in ad- ditional costs for the city. Other efforts in this direction, however, have proved successful. Until January of 1976, Iowa City employed only two full time housing inspectors. Rental pro- perty owners, realizing that the inspectors were overwhelmed by their workload, had little incentive to maintain their buildings at code standards and, accordingly, many of them did not. When federal housing program assistance became available, the city had to double the number of inspectors in order to be eligible for the funds. The effort of four inspectors has resulted in a much more effective program of code enforcement than previously existed. c) Municipal employees other than desig- nated code inspectors could be regularly in- structed and trained to look for and report violations of land use and building and housing regulations. Policemen, firemen, and water department personnel, among others, are like- ly to encounter such violations in the perform- ance of their regular duties. d) Citizens could be encouraged to report violations. Since a substantial number of violations are currently discovered by follow- ing up on citizen complaints, this would seem to be a desirable policy to institute. While it would undoubtedly result in some trivial and unwarranted complaints, most citizens would not be likely to report a violation unless they 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140RIE5 were certain that one actually existed. Addi- tionally, such a policy, if it resulted in increased citizen input, could not only serve as an incentive for city officials to take enforcement action, but would also uncover cases where rules were invoked harshly or need- lessly. Instances when rigorous and inflexible enforcement of land use regulations imposed un- due personal or economic hardship could be remedied by modifying or eliminating any useless or archaic provisions from the code. A practical and easily applied set of regulations would eventually evolve. 3. Institute Conditional Issuance of Permits. Anyone planning to build, rent, or occupy a building on a parcel must first obtain a permit from the building inspector. Approval of an application for a permit will be granted if the applicant is in compliance with all pertinent regulations. Some aspects of development, however, are not addressed by current regulations. The process of issuing permits could be used by the local officials in charge of controlling land use and de- velopment to reach aspects not addressed by other regula- tions. Any conditions attached to permits must be reasonable in terms of a justifiable exercise o£ the government's power to provide for public health, safety, i and welfare. The conditions would be based on standards ! predetermined by the appropriate regulating body. An example of a permit subject to conditions illus- trates this corrective measure. In the case of a parcel being converted from use as a single-family dwelling to a twelve -unit apartment building, the building inspector might require that adjacent property owners be notified of the pending application for a building permit. The solicitation of neighbor comments might reveal circum- stances about the parcel which would suggest alternatives for site development, timing of construction stages, or 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111ES some other measures which would help the developer meet set standards. Notification of nearby property owners as an example of a permit condition also highlights an administrative problem. Many permits are issued in cases which are trivial in terms of externalities. Some discretion re- garding notification requirements and similar conditions on permits must be left with the building inspector to prevent ludicrous results from occurring because of a general policy favoring notice. The notice policy, however, should specify guidelines which automatically trigger notice procedures in cases of 1) demolition of a structure; 2) construction of additional units; 3) i changes in usage of a building (e.g., from a warehouse to a bar);or 4) conversion of a structure to more intense usage requiring structural alterations (e.g., from a ' single-family dwelling to a rooming house). Building ac- tivity which broke these specific thresholds would be beyond the discretionary control of the building inspector. Even without the insight of the neighbors of a development in an existing neighborhood, the building and housing inspectors or zoning administrator may be able to foresee problems in time to prevent them. The use of conditioned permits and the process of negotia- tion which would occur between the developer and the building inspector or the Department of Community Develop- ment staff could lead to the development of standards which would go beyond the criteria reviewed under the present regulations. Conceivably, an analysis of impacts could evolve. 4. Upgrade Notice and Hearing Procedures. Notifi- cation and hearing procedures for land use decision- making are inconsistentand inadequate. Property owners 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tiOIT1Es potentially affected by a particular land use proposal are not always personally notified of the situation and public hearings on land use issues are not always well-publicized or well -attended. Both of these pro- cedures are vital to fair regulation of land use and should be consistent for decisions having similar effects. Where procedures are inadequate, the following suggest - tions are examples of possible improvements. The Board of Adjustment uses personal notice procedures and holds formal public hearings in conjunc- tion with its regulatory activity. On all appeal forms with Board of Adjustment requires a list of property owners within 200 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in the appeal. These property owners are person- ally notified of the action. Additionally, public notice of the action also appears in the newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing. The Board of Adjustment encourages participation to the extent that it does because of the necessity of finding specific factual elements of the standards contained in the ordinance for variances and special exceptions. 10 The importance of each affected parties' circumstances to the Board's decision makes personal notification a necessary procedure. The factual findings made in a legislative process such as rezoning are only one consideration of many that influence the decision. Because of the shift away from a focus on particular factual situations, the need for a notification procedure designed to yield findings of fact about particular pu ties affected by an application for rezoning on subdivisions is apparently less than for the decisions of the Board of Adjustment. The relative importance of individual input into these processes is 10Bd of Adjustment of: City of Des Moines v. Ruble_, 193 N.W.2d 997 (Iowa 1972). 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES also reflected in the less formalized hearings conducted by the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion. In the context of a public meeting, the lack of formality detracts from the importance of each individual witness. Since the potential effect on particular parcels of a rezoning decision in terms of negative impacts and property values is at least as great as a decision by the Board of Adjustment, the different procedures for no- tice and hearings cannot be justified. 11 Personal notice and more formal public hearings would result in better legislative decisions by the City Council. In order to get effective involvement of those affected by rezoning and other development review requiring legislative action, personal notification should be given to individual landowners and tenants who live either with- in the area of or within 200 feet of the proposed change. At best, notices would contain sufficient information re- garding the proposed change in land use to motivate the affected parties to participate in the process. At least, notices should inform affected parties of the pendency of potentially injurious development. Public involvement might be improved if hearings were held with neighbors on the site of the proposed change rather than holding the hearings at city hall. on-site hearings should be conducted by city staff since Board or Commission members are likely to be constrained by time and other decisions before them. Summary reports of neighbors' comments and complaints would be submitted as part of the staff report or as separate input for the Board or Commission's consideration. The neighbors' comments could be used in much the same way as the staff 11A L I , Model Land Development Code, Section 2- 319, Note 96. 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110IMES comments are used to modify or add to the requirements for the proposed development. Another method of fostering involvement of the neighbors included in or within 200 feet of the proposed development is to enlist the help of the North Side Neighbors' Organization (NSNO) or a similar group. The NSNO would develop a report on neighborhood concerns and perform the role of the development staff described in the previous paragraph. Its report could be sub- mitted separately or incorporated into the staff analysis of the proposal. The NSNO report would be an advantageous method to use in gathering neighborhood concerns because it would reflect a neighborhood -wide perspective and it I wouldbe backed by whatever political clout the NSNO represented. The key to effective use of a group like j the NSNO is the accuracy of the concerns about the future impacts from development. The NSNO's credibility would rest on its ability to specify negative impacts and possible solutions. The lack of technical expertise could be overcome by providing the NSNO with basic guide- lines for assessing development and estimating effects of performance of land use incompatibilities. The comments of the neighborhood and adjacent neighbors could be weighed at the discretion of the staff if the report was to be incorporated into the staff analysis of the proposed development. The staff would rework neighbor- hood input not articulated in a way which revealed alternative technical solutions. otherwise, the report of NSNO or staff -collected comments of neighbors at the I on-site meeting would go directly to the decision -makers. Besides the technical accuracy, an image of sustained and effective political clout must be cultivated. To become effective in the legislative process, the neighbor- hood organization must either gain support from all simi- larly situated homeowners against developers or it must 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES join with developers to promote some common interest. A more representative group or coalition with open membership could better assert its influence on the process. Such influence is more important in some processes than others. For instance, the appointed status of the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of Adjustment allows them to take a more objective point of view with respect to the merits of a neighborhood organization's concerns without totally isolating them from the political pressure that might be exerted. The City Council, however, is more susceptible to political pressure when making land use decisions than the Board or Commission. The expense of upgrading notice and hearing pro- cedures would not be prohibitive unless the land affected by the application was quite extensive. If the cost of mailing notices proved to be prohibitive, alternative methods of involving those most directly affected in the public decision process should be explored to sup- plement the traditional newspaper notice and sign posting. The developer could be made responsible for notification costs in part or whole. Costs of this proposal might also be held down by limiting its applicability to specified districts of the city with problems related to notice provisions. Additional Control Mechanisms In contrast to the modifications to the existing regulatory system presented above, the next four sections propose the institution of new approaches to the regulation of land use. These additions to the present regulatory system would allow the city to address problems present in existing neighborhoods. 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOINCS 1. Impact Assessment Ordinance. A method of controlling how much one land use can affect nearby land uses is to assess land use in terms of its impacts. 12 An impact associated with a given land use is a character- istic not confined to the property boundaries. Noise, glare, water runoff, and traffic are examples of impacts. A comprehensive list of impacts to be regulated would effectively supplement the control of land use held by the city through its zoning ordinance. 13 Thus, where the parcel was developed to maximum density in a zone allowing multifamily development to occur in a predominant- ly single-family neighborhood may meet zoning criteria, it would also have to measure up to standards of allowable impacts contained in an impact assessment ordinance. Un- like the indirect approach of zoning, the impact assess- ment ordinance is aimed at directly controlling tangible harms that threaten the public health, safety, and welfare. Additionally, enforcement of the impact assessment ordi- nance is not constrained to the implementation of goals stated in the city's comprehensive plan, but can go be- yond the plan. The impact assessment approach can regu- late land use more comprehensively than zoning regulations. Since zoning is based on a desire to promote homogeneous land use 14 rather than a desire to resolve conflicts between existing land use, this conclusion is especially true in the case of a neighborhood existing prior to the zoning ordinance. j12Refer to report number. 1, Impact Evalution: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines. 13McQuillin, Munici 24.69. pal Corporation, Vol. B, section � 14 Noel, Dir. W., "Retroactive 'Zoning and Nuisances," Columbia Law Review, Vol. 41 (1941), p. 457. 36 MICROFILMCD BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HOMES The ideas of analyzing and regulating impacts and of performance zoning resemble the principle behind nuisance law. 15 The court, by requiring that "substantial harm" be proved as a matter of law, restricts the number of impacted people who can seek relief on nuisance grounds. By establishing an administrative standard somewhere be- low the substantial harm standard, the agency assigned to decide cases of impact- assessment can offer relief to more parties with legitimate complaints about nearby sources of negative impacts. The standards would be contained in the impact assessment ordinance or would be in the form of rules promulgated by the agency. The rules would serve as guidleines for decision -makers in the land development industry, for neighbors and other parties adversly affected by negative impacts, and for the agency and its officers in ruling on particular cases. The guidelines would pre- vent negative impacts from being built into developments by notifying builders of their regulation. Parties suf- fering less than substantial harm but within the regulated range of impacts would have a cause of action for abatement of damages and recourse to an administrative body hearing such complaints. The agency, whose decisions would un- doubtedly be tested in court, would be guided by well - reasoned rules which were clearly linked to legitimate targets of government regulation. In addition, the agency would want to formalize its decisions by clearly stating findings of fact and the basis of each decision in order to facilitate subsequent judicial review. The agency and its officers could serve in a media- tion role between the parties by pronouncing the rights 15Ellickson, Robert C., "Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls:, University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 40, (1973), p. M. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES M0INES of the parties according to the guidelines and by encouraging settlement. If, within a specified time, the parties could not settle the dispute, the agency would formally hear and decide the case. The agency would remedy the problem by fining the offending party, ordering modifications to be made on the land use, or enjoining the use activity altogether. Failure to com- ply with these orders would result in the agency seeking a court order to enforce its decision. a) An Illustration: An example of how the impact assessment ordinance works is helpful to illustrate the concept. Homeowner X lives in an R3A residential zone on a lot with large oak and maple trees. Homeowner X bought the house with the idea of I raising a family and spending the later years of his life in peace. His problem concerns the furniture stripping shop owned by Y that is located on the property (in the C2 commercial zone) across the street. The odors from the vats of varnish remover, the large trucks making deliveries, and the increase in traffic caused by customers coming and going from the shop disturb X's peace and quiet. In addition, the lot on which the shop is located has been completely covered by storage sheds, an asphalt parking area,and piles of old broken furniture. Shop owner Y realizes that her establishment creates some disturbance and is not i attractive to the nearby residents, but Y maintains that the activity is necessary to the success of her shop. She is afraid that a change in the shop's oper- ation will result in the loss of her patrons and feels I that her use of the property is legitimately within the requirements for commercial uses set out in the Zoning ordinance. Residents who have attempted to stop odors and traffic by seeking the cooperation of Y have had no success and necomers to the neighborhood 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIeES are met with hostility from Y, meant- to quiet com- plaints in the future. Homeowner X learns of the city's new impact assessment ordinance and decides to take the problem to city officials (perhaps the code enforcement official) for resolution. X files a formal complaint indicating that the problem exists, that attempts to resolve the problem informally have failed, and that the use and enjoyment of his property are being impaired by the present manner in which the shop is being operated. X's complaint would specify the connection between the negative impacts (unpleasant odor, un- reasonable congestion, unsightly yard, etc.) and the source of the impacts (the shop). Other adversely affected neighbors could join the complaint or pro- vide evidence to support the allegations. ' If the city officials decided, based on the factfinding investigations by the staff (perhaps the Department of Community Development), that the com- plaint had merit, then a compliance order would be issued. The initial decision to issue the order rests on a determination of the level of odor, exhaust fumes, and run off being produced by the source and the intensity of their effects. Such a determination requires the prior existence of standards of regulated impact level. The standard serves as a safeguard against arbitrary action by the city official charged with enforcement and by the agency reviewing that decision. Upon such a finding, shop owner Y would have an opportunity to appeal the decision. After petition- ing the reviewing agency, she would be granted a I hearing on the matter and allowed to present a defense to the action against her. Homeowner X and his neighbors would be allowed to present evidence of the negative effects they experience. The reviewing agency would 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401HEs write a decision based on the facts presented at the hearing and the standard for the particular impact level. The decision may order specific remedial action to be taken within a stated time frame, declare the entitlement to rest with the homeowner or with the shop owner and encourage negotiation, award damages, or dismiss the case for lack of proof of essential elements of the claim. 16 If the reviewing agency decides that the home- owner is entitled to be free from the negative impacts above a level set by the standard, then the shop owner must make necessary reductions in impacts or pay the homeowners damages to continue at the present level. In effect, the shop owner must purchase the homeowner's right to less negative impacts. On the other hand, the Board may decide that the impacts do not exceed the standard. The homeowners may pool their resources in an attempt to buy the right of the shop owner to produce negative impacts. In the latter case, the impact source will not respond to the home- owners' monetary offer until it is sufficient to offset the economic consequences of changing a successful business practice. A key feature of the impact assessment ordinance is its ability to induce negotiations prior to the decision by the city official or reviewing agency. The inducement for bargaining is the possibility of being regulated by the city or the court system. Bargaining can effectively cut off the complaints and, thus, keep the attei,Lion of regulatory agencies else- where. 16 Calabresi, Guido and Malamed, A. Douglas, "Pro- perty Rules and Inalienability: One View of: the Cathe- dra't," Harvard Law Review, Vol 85 (1972), p. 1089. 40 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140IREs b) Forming Standards. The range of regulated effects is bounded on the bottom by a standard which triggers the yy jurisdiction and authority of the city 1. official and the reviewing agency to hear, decide and remedy the conflict between parties. (See Figure 5). The establishment of the bottom standard is essential to the correct and effect regulation by impact assess- ment. The upper boundary of the regulatory range is approximately equivalent to that level of harm deemed sufficiently substantial to maintain a nuisance suit in court. This upper standard represents the boundary between the administrative authority to deal with noxious effects of land use and the court's authority to deal with nuisance cases. In time, this upper boundary will be manifested in a performance standard. If a well-defined performance standard is established at this margin, the handling of true nuisance cases could be greatly expedited by resolving them at the local administrative level through the application of regulatory and prohibitory remedies. A formulation of standards of performance will result from a historical pattern of regulation of negative effects via the impact assessment ordinance. The difference between the standard triggering the regulatory power and the "substantial harm" standard i required by the courts for nuisance action may be significant. Standards of performance would be based on both technical and equitable considerations as well i as on inferences drawn from court cases and administra- tive rulings and orders. i c) Regulation and Prohibition: Regulatory per- formance standards trigger the remedies which repre- sent regulatory functions of the agency. Prohibitory performance standards trigger the agency's authority (concurrent with the court's) to prohibit and penalize 41 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Y FIGURE 5 NOISE IMPACT STANDARD Standard level Degree Type Source of effect (noise) of harm of harm of relief Economic - Substantial Physical Courts 95 db(prstandaody).............................................. A ......... .......... N _ Intermediate Inconvenient Regulatory Noneconomic Agency 50 db(rstandarody) .................................................................. Private - Negligible Inconvenient agreement MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES excessive levels of negative effects which constitute a substantial harm. For example, in Figure 5, noise in excess of 95 dbs in a residential zone can be prohibited by the agency as well as the court; noise levels greater than 50 dbs but less than 95 dbs are subject to the regulation by the agency only. While the power to regulate may be the same as the power to prohibit, the distinction being drawn here between regulatory remedies and prohibitory remedies seeks to avoid this confusion. Regulation is a means of public direction which is aimed toward mutual interests at the least cost to both sides of the conflict. The operating principle is one which seeks to foster mixed usage in close proxmity. Prohibitory remedies must be based on a finding of incompatibility between the inherent interests of the parties involved and of totally unacceptable social and economic consequences of nonintervention. Also operating in the decision-making process is an assumption about what use is most appropriate for a given area (similar to assumptions underlying a zoning plan). A presumption contained in the city's comprehensive plan regarding the desirability of a given land use in a given area may swing the decision in favor of one or the other side. The comprehensive plan will often yield if pressure of economic and political realities create too much strain on its foundation. The city's power to regulate and prohibit negative effects of land use through an impact assessment ordinance is derived from the Home Rule Charter and the power to police activity in order to advance the public health, safety, and welfare. If the effect of the regulation is seen as a reasonable exercise of police power and the decision-making process is sufficiently safeguarded against arbitrary and capricious 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIEs results and is not inconsistent with other regulatory schemes, then the system of regulation will most likely be held valid by the courts. d) The Procedures: Under the impact assessment ordinance, a plaintiff in a nuisance suit in District Court may have the case referred to the local review- ing agency if the court reasonably believes that the negative effect complained of falls within the regu- lated range of the ordinance. (See Figure 6). Routine deference to the administrative agency by the court may occur under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. Following the decisions of the reviewing agency, there is still an opportunity ! for judicial review. The policy of referring com- plaints of nuisance which are less than the substantial harm standard but possibly within the range of regu- lated negative impacts will serve to facilitate just results. In a case where the plaintiff goes directly to the reviewing agency, the agency's decision and grant of relief may fail to resolve the conflict adequately because of limitations on the agency. (See Figure 7). Thus, a plaintiff who has sufficient basis to win a favorable judgment on a nuisance theory in court will not be frustrated by commencing action with the city administrative agency. The city's reviewing agency may declare whether j the complaining party is entitled to have the negative effect abated or the source can continue to operate at the same level. Negotiations between the parties may be induced if the agency does not specify how the abatement is to be effectuated. The market value of the negative effect thus becomes an internal cost of the source's operation. In some instances, the agency may pre-empt bargaining by an order specifying that the source meet certain requirements which bring 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HHOn+Es Path of Transmission Source of negative Receiver — impact Filing nuisance suit District Court I Referral Ln Local Administrative Agency <- A. Finding of regulatory harm B. No regulatory harm Judgment A. Finding of substantial harm 1. Injunction 2. Damages S. No substantial harm 1. Dismissal 2. Referral FIGURE 6 FILING COMPLAINT IN DISTRICT COURT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIDIRES Path of Transmission source of negative ' Receiver impact Local Administrative Agency - Order A. Finding of regulatory harm B. No regulatory harm rn Plaintiff appeals W District Court A. Finding of substantial harm B. Affirm Local Agency C. Reverse Local Agency FIGURE 7 FILING COMPLAINT WITH ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES it into compliance with the regulatory standard. Such an order may involve either restraining the operation temporarily until design modifications can be made or subjecting the source of negative effects to a schedule of fines for failing to comply within a reasonable period of time specified in the order. 2. Residential Performance Standards: The con- cept of residential performance standards ties directly I into the impact assessment ordinance. The establishment of performance standards is common practice in regulating land uses characterized by external effects. Since the most obvious land uses which have these characteristics are industrial, regulation of industrial zone activity has been accomplished by setting standard levels of noise, smoke, and effluents which can be generated. More stringent standards have been won by environmental interests as the costs generated by polluting sources have become more apparent. i While the urgency of the need in residential and commercial zones may not be as great, the usefulness of performance standards should not be overlooked. Most residential and commercial users do not pump slime out into the natural drainage system or billow smoke and soot over the neighborhood, but high density I dwellings and auto traffic associated with a particular land use may result in parking problems and dangerous j conditions. Dust from gravel or dirt parking lots not I regulated by the zoning ordinance because of noncon- forming status, odors from unusual garbage not consti- tuting violations of housing or health ordinances, 1 and aesthetic dissonance resulting from disinvestment are examples of the types of problems that could be addressed effectively by means of instituting perfor- mance standards. 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Through the use of performance standards, parties found to be exceeding the prohibitory standard could be fined, made to pay damages to the injured parties, and enjoined. Parties found in violation of the regulatory performance standard could be ordered to modify the land use creating the negative effects. The existence of a written performance standard would, in either case, serve to convince the party in excess that an order to take corrective measures was justi- fied and reasonable. Land use conflicts addressed in written performance standards would be more easily resolved. 3. Site Plan Review Ordinance: Developers who require subdivision, rezoning, or adjustment of zoning specifications, as well as those who propose large-scale residential and nonresidential and planned unit develop- ment, must demonstrate to varying degrees to city officials and staff how the land is going to be used. One or two undivided parcels of land less than two acres not needing to be rezoned or adjusted may be developed without review or comment by city policy makers. Such development is typical of the transformation of the North Side neighbor- hood. Reconstruction occurring at the maximum allowable density often results in negative impacts on adjacent property due to the overly high density allowances and the lack of proper public management of the development I itself. Ideally, the negative impacts would be assessed (see impact assessment ordinance) in light of the com- patibility of the proposed land use with surrounding land uses. Estimates of future negative impacts may be difficult to calculate because of difficulty in 48 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIEs i quantifying impacts and because of a high degree of uncertainty about the future tenants or the volume of activity to be carried on. In this case, control according to standards of design of the site can be used as an indirect method of fostering compatibility. Site plan review represents and intermediate degree of Public direction in the land development market. (cf. High intervention by government through zoning regula- tions; low intervention through 4 performance standards). The topic of permitted or prohibited land use is not addressed as directly with site plan review as with zon- ing regulations. Site plan review may have the same effect of zoning if certain uses are incapble of meeting design standards. For example, design standards for location of commercial uses likely to generate noise and a demand for vehicular facilities may require installation of sound buffers and visual screening. The cost of adequately bringing a negative impact up to the performance standard may be prohibitive. Thus, the use or activity may be effectively eliminated by the combined operation of the impact assessment and site plan review ordinances. Site plans will be approved upon review by the staff and administrative body. Certain uses will presumptively require specified design characteristics based on standards. The standards for design are tied to the history of performance of a given land use. The land use producing negative effects will be subject to performance standards. Excess performance will result in effects triggering the requirements of any design standard for the site which might be selected as an alternative means of bringing the activity within the acceptable line of performance. Thus, a property owner putting land to use which exceeds performance standards may 1) reduce the level of activity until 49 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DGS MOINES the negative effects produced are below the standard of performance, or 2) develop a site plan incorporat- ing features which satisfy design standards, thus bringing the land use into compliance with performance standards. If the uncertainty about production and export i Of future negative impacts is substantial, mandatory design features may be unreasonable. Site plans may I be developed along a contingency theory. If certain `I conditions are created, then specified features designed to ameliorate negative conditions must be installed in the site plan. The development of the site could occur as conditions required rather than all at one on the jbasis of pure speculation about possible negative im- pacts. An ordinance allowing for phase development of a site would complicate the administrative process because of the need for on-going monitoring to deter- mine when critical conditions were reached. The use of site plan review as a means of assuring compatible development requires that an estimate of negative impacts and appropriate design features be determined. Such determinations require that perfor- mance standards and design standards be established. The reviewing administrative body and staff must be provided with enough information about the proposed I land use to make appropriate recommendations regarding i design features. Such a process also requires that the review staff have a technical expertise which will satisfy the demand forknowledge about the ability of certain design ano materials that could insulate those affected or isolate the source of negative impacts. In some cases, the review of the site plan for an I unusual land use may require participation by the applicant, the staff, the reviewing administrative body, Other agencies and interested parties, 50 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES and the neighborhood organization. Most cases where site plans are required will be handled as routine administrative matters with provisions for public notice, personal notice to adjacent property owners (others at the discretion of the building official), i and public hearing prior to the final decision. I The requirements for submission of a site plan would limit its application to cases where potential conflict was anticipated. Individual parcels in a residential zone being developed for residential purposes at the same, or nearly the same, intensity as nearby parcels would be exempt unless circumstances dictated otherwise. For example, in the case where a single-family structure is converted into a rooming house or multi -family dwelling, the demand for parking would dictate a site plan which would correct the imbalances by providing for more off-street parking. i Development subject to more direct and perhaps more comprehensive regulations,such as impact assess- ment and performance standards,might not be subject to site plan review unless design options were chosen. In general, the submission of a site plan would be required where other regulations were inadequate. Typical cases will be ones with land uses located near each other but different in intensity or use. 4. Planned Development Incentives. While the primary goals of land use controls are maintenance and preservation, regulations should not be so strict that new development is discouraged. Desired types of land use and development can also be encouraged by regulation. a) Flexible requirements: Use of the concepts of planned unit development and floating zones is not prevalent in an existing neighborhood. Usually the 51 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MHoINEs developer can only qualify for these types of development if the area of land exceeds two acres. I. Such a condition could be met in an existing neighbor- hood only by aggregating several parcels. This pos- siblity is unlikely on the North Side of Iowa City. In the event that two or three lots come under the control of a single owner who wishes to combine the land for one development, the city should be open to reasonable proposals which deviate from the speci- fications of the zoning ordinance but at the same time provide an added resource to the neighborhood. The extent of deviation should be limited by an overall average density not exceeding the zone allowance. The flexibility provided by the use of averages of requirements over the whole unit rather than a parcel -by -parcel dictation would allow for more leeway in developing the aggregate site. In some instances, public improvements might be waived i and more density allowed in exchange for the provision of special amenities which would benefit the neigh- borhood. The Department of Community Development, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council would participate in the process in essentially the same way as they do in cases of subdivision review. i The neighborhood's role in the process would be crucial to accurately estimating possible impacts and raising all the issues. b) Neighborhood consent: In conjunction with building flexibility into the specifications found in the zoning ordinance, the strict prohibition of uses could also be made a negotiable proposition. Where certain uses are prohibited in order to protect the public's interest in maintaining property values and in reducing conflicting uses, some uses could be allowed with / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MDIREs the consent of the neighborhood. This type of exception to the prohibited status of uses would be appropriate if it could be shown that property values would not be adversely affected, that conflict with nearby uses would be de minimus, and that the uses would enhance the neighborhood by providing a resource. Other- wise, it would be vulnerable to attack under the uniformity requirement of Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa. People living in residential zones which prohibit grocery stores, group homes, museums, and other non-residential types of development might find persuasive arguments for allowing such prohibited uses to occur. The criteria for obtaining consent of the affected neighborhood would be specified by ordinance. Cities in other states have adopted "prohibited unless consent" ordinances requiring two-thirds of the property owners abutting the street or property to give their consent. 17 The process of persuasion which would doubtless occur could be steered by safeguards similar to those included in regular elections. Consent action should be guided by standards so that property owners would not be able to act arbitrarily. Another option would be to treat the neighbors' consent as a request for rezoning and to make the granting of their approval contingent upon a study of the area and a showing of consent by two-thirds of the property owners within one hundred feet, or whatever distance was deemed appropriate by the ordinance. The neighborhood consent would in effect waive the restric- tions of the zone and grant the application use of property within the prohibited zone, subject to specific condi- tions based on the notion of compatibility. The grant of approval to the formerly prohibited use would again be subject to the zoning requirements if any substantial 17., Consent Requirement Upheld," Zoning Digest, vol. 22, p. 111, 1970. 53 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RRPIDS•DES MOINES change were made in the operation or structure. In this sense, its status would resemble that of non- conforming use. Neighborhood consent as a means of lifting prohibition or as a condition attached to approval of a rezoning request allows the neighborhood to determine its own character. The process of seeking consent will bring developers in touch with neighbor- hood concerns in addition to fostering a neighborhood identity. In time, as prohibitions are lifted, the conditions placed on land uses consented to by residents could be incorporated into the zoning i ordinance as conditional uses. The conditions could � very easily be expressed in terms of performance standards like those used in the impact assessment ordinance. The process would be designed to promote compatibility. c) Rehabilitation fund: Rehabilitation of neigh- borhoods can be encouraged through the establishment of a special loan and grant fund set up by the public.18 The conditions accompanying the grants and loans would be tailored to the ability of the individual property owner to repay the fund. Eligibility would in part be based on the lending patterns established by private financial institutions. Neighborhoods which did not need low-interest loans or grants could be encouraged to upgrade and maintain their dwellings by means of a property tax moritorium on such improvements. id) Special recognition: Neighborhoods which are ` able to establish a functioning organization to repre- sent their interests in local development decision-mak- ing may also meet criteria for designation as a special 18Housingand Community Development Act block grant program for housing rehabilitation. 54 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114Es district. As an officially recognized special district, the neighborhood, through its organization, could further influence the type of development occurring within its boundaries. The neighborhood might, for example, review proposed redevelopment in light of its historical signi- ficance and consistency with the historical designation. Property owners within the district would be members of the district for voting purposes. Special recognition by the organization of property owners could be held out as an incentive to rehabilitate and maintain homes. In summary, the corrective measures fall into two main divisions: modifications and additions. Possible modifications include consolidating controls, improving enforcement, conditioning the issuance of building per- mits, and upgrading present notice and hearing procedures. Possible additions include an impact assessment ordinance, residential development standards, a site plan review ordinance, and incentives for developers such as flexible requirements, neighborhood consent, a rehabilitation fund, and special recognition. 55 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS.DES fjOIREs Appendix A DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF IOWA CITY APPLICATION FORM NOTE IU Af ITE 6CY6NT SINI,E TFIIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION FORM. ONLY IIIOSE ITEMS NtLA Y6 YOUR APVL KATION SI ARE T BE FILIED. PLEASE TYPE OR PR NAME OF APPLICANT ADDRESS: PN NE: NAME Ui DEVELOPMFNT — AREA SIZE: PRESENT ZONING STRFET ADDRESS OR PRO PERTV LOCATION: -- ou7G'dt£P'i ENGINEER 5THE R: TYPE OF APPLICATION rI EASE CHECK _ REZONING FROM TO: ADDRESS: ADDRESS: ADDRESS: VACATINGS 4.tS ANNERATION dlK,ki FOR OFFICE USE ONLY FILE NUMBER FEE PAID: WSD� APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: NAME _ —... OA F PHONE: PHONF: 1. l4 ropies of Preliminary plul 2. Six conic. of final plat 3. Reprodueibin & 5 copies of final plat 4. Location Map 5.Legal Description S. Rediration of land for public one 7. Resolution for approval by Council 8. Leqal papers consisting of: 8. Attorney's opinion b. Encumbrance bond certificate C. Statement of County Treasurer d. Statement of Clerk of Court o. Statement of !county Recorder I. Statement of Owner I, spouse 9. Waiver of paving h. !'ert;flcale concerning improve ments I 9. E%iaLinq mite plan ... 10.1)evnlopment sl Le Plan 11.' I,It.e",••nt Of I.11Tt by develnner 12.1'etitior to Pave abutting .rents 13.Report on economic feasibility 14. Report on effect of PC nn surrnundinq Property 15,Report on impart of traffic 6y I'C nn nurroundinq mtrcetn 18.5even additional coping of plat ate dealrod but not required L ATTACH ADDITIONAL SNfETS If NECF.SiARY SG MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES THIS IS AN APPLICATION FORM ONLY, A LISTING OF OTHER SUBMISSION MATERIALS MAY DE OBTAINED FROM THE PLANNING DIVISION. Appendix B AFFIDAVIT FOR INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM PETITION State of Iowa City of Iowa City, Johnson County I, Iowa City, Iowa, on oath depose and say that I am a qualified elector. I swear that I will supervise the circulation of the petition and I will be responsible for filing it in proper form. All notices relevant to this initiative or referendum proceeding shall be sent to: (Name) (Address) iI have attached to this affidavit the full text of the proposed initiative I I ordinance or the ordinance sought to be reconsidered. Witness my hand this day of 19 i(Signature) Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me by this day of 19 Notary Public in and for Johnson County, Iowa "Qualified elector" means a person who is registered to vote pursuant to Chapter 48, Iowa Code (1975). 57 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rJOIRES Y AFFIDAVIT OF CIRCULATOR State of Iowa City of Iowa City, Johnson County I, Iowa City, Iowa, on oath depose and say that I am a qualified elector. I hereby certify that I personally circulated the petitions attached hereto. I have obtained signatures, all of which were affixed in my presence (number) and I believe them to be genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be. I swear that each signer had an opportunity before signing to read the full text of the ordinance proposed or sought to be reconsidered'. I understand that I am liable to criminal penalties as provided by State law if I file a false affidavit. Witness my hind this _ day of , 19 (signature) Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me by _ this day of , 19_ Notary Public in and for Johnson County, Iowa "Qualified elector" means a person who is registered to vote pursuant to Chapter 48, Iowa Code (1975). 58 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES L PHrITiuN FOR NFt tRr..11.un ON OIm INANaIIt. To the City Cnnncil of the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa: We. the undersigned, being qual if itd elector, of the City of Iowa City, do hereby join in a petition to require recnnsiderntion by tive Council of Ordinance 1 e _ entitled I attached hereto awl by this reference made a pare hereof, and, it the Council fails to repeal such ordinance, to have it submitted to the electors at an election at; required by Article VII, Home Rule Charter of the City of Iowa City. "Qualified elector" moans a person who is registered to vote pursuant to Chapter 48, Iowa Code (1975). 59 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RE5 PETITION TO INITIATE AN ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIM CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA we, the undersigned, being qualified electors of the City of Lowe City, State of Iowa, respectfully petition that the proposed ordinances, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, shall be aubnitted to the qualified eleetors of the City of Iowa City for their approval or rejection at an election as required by Article VII, Home Rule Charter of the City of Iowa City. "Qualified elector" means a person who is registered to vote pursuant to Chapter 4E, Iowa Code (1975). 60 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 4101NE5 Appendix C PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE CODE OF IOWA CITY 8.10.32 I. Standard application form filed with City Clerk. i II. Referred to Department of Community Development (DCD) I Current Planning Division for staff review. III. Application and staff report sent to Planning and Zoning i Commission (P&Z). a) Considered by P&Z at informal meeting. b) Recommendation formulated at formal P&Z meeting. C) Depending on the type of amendment, P&Z holds: 1) public hearing after 15 -day prior public notice; 2) public discussion after 7 -day prior public notice and signs on property. IV.. Application, staff report, P&Z minutes containing recommen- dation are referred to City Council. a) Public hearing after 15 -day prior public notice in newspaper and signs on property. b) Final action on application after consideration at two prior meetings unless this requirement is waived by 3/4 vote. c) Final action requires simple majority vote. If the Proposed action by the City Council is contrary to the P&Z's recommendation or protested by owners of 208 of I+ the land included in, to the rear or side of, or opposite j the land proposed for rezoning, a 3/4 majority vote is I required. I � 61 / MICROFILMED 0Y JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 410111ES Appendix D PROCEDURE FOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION I. Discussion stage (two-week time frame) (optional) A. Sketch plat to Dept. of Community Development (DCD). B. Informal Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) agenda item. II. Preliminary stage (45 -day time frame) A. Application for preliminary plat approval filed with City Clerk. B. Referred to DCD Development Coordinator 1. Distributed to agencies and school district 2. Agency review meeting 3. Applicant information meeting 4. Revisions to preliminary plat C. Referred to P&Z informal meeting 1. Consider application, preliminary plat, staff report 2. Revisions to preliminary plat D. Formal P&Z consideration 1. Denial (recommended) 2. Approval (recommended) E. Referred to City Council; action by resolution 1. Denial 2. Approval: good for 18 months a) proceed to Final Plat application process b) file with the City Clerk, DCD,and Engineering Division. III. Final Stage (45 -day time frame) A. Application for final plat approval filed with City Clerk. B. Referred to DCD Development Coordinator with legal papers. 1. Distributed to City Attorney & City Engineer 2. Agency review meeting 3. Applicant information meeting 4. Revised plat filed with City Clerk. 62 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101NES C. Referred to P&Z informal meeting 1. Consider application, final plat, staff report, legal papers 2. Revisions to final plat D. Formal P&Z consideration of revised final plat, staff report, legal papers, construction plans approved by City Engineer. Recommendation made. E. Resolution by City Council regarding final plat. IV. Appeal to District Court within 20 days of refusal to approve. 63 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401r1Es LEGAL PAPERS REQUIRED FOR SUBDIVIDING 1. Attorney's Opinion regarding title, encumbrances,and bonding. 2. Certificate by Clerk of District Court of approved encum- brance bond. 3. Certified statement from County Treasurer saying subdivision is free from taxes. 4. Certified statement from Clerk of District Court saying land is free from all judgments, attachments, mechanic's and other liens. 5. Certified statement of County Recorder regarding title, encumbrances,and bonding. 6. Statement of owner and spouse consenting to plat proposals. 7. Petition for city paving of streets; waiver of cost of paving and assessment. g. Certification by City Manager regarding improvements and installations. 64 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110HIES Appendix E APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DATE (Name) of (MailingAddress) respectfully request that a determination be made by the Board of Adjustment on the following appeal, which was denied by the Enforcing Officer on 19 for the reason that it was a matter which, in his opinion, should properly come before the Board of Adjustment. An interpretation exception variance is requested to Section of the Zoning ordinance or t e re..son that: It is an appeal for an interpretation of the ordinance or map. It is an exception to the ordinance on which the Board of Adjustment is required to pass. It is a request for a variance relating to the use area frontage_yard (or}-- provsions of the Ordinance. Remarks: I The premises affected are located at in Zone District Legal description o property involved in this appea : Has any previous application or appeal been filed in connection with these premises? What is the applicant's interest in the premises affected? What is the approximate cost of the wor >nvo ve . Explanation of purpose to which property will be put: Plot Plan attached yes no. 65 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES r10111E5 APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Page 2 Ground Plan and elevations attached yes _ no. If no, explain: Following is an abstractor's plat and list of property owners within 200 feet of the exterior limits of the property involved in this appeal, together with addresses ofA�DRESS WE li 1 (we) further state that if this request is granted, I (we) will proceed with the actual construction in accordance with the plans herewith submitted within six months from date of )this appeal; will complete the work withinegal, and said date; and thadolsom able from a finan" ciTT physic sis Date: 19 1gnature s o pp scant s) or se of Boara or e.0 �••- - -- Date of hearing Date hearing advertised Fee paid $ _ Receipt No. becision of the Board of Adjustment Reasons 1. 2. 3. Other remarks: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RV - PT1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Appendix F INTERPRETATION, VARIANCE, EXCEPTION OR SPECIAL USE I. Standing: person aggrieved or any officer, department, board or bureau of the City of Iowa City, affected by a decision of the Building Inspector. II. Appeal process: A. Appeal filed with City Clerk. B. Referred to Department of Community Development, Current Planning Division. C. Appeal and staff report sent to Board of Adjustment. 1. Public notice and hearing; letters of notice are sent to all property owners with 2001. 2. Standards a) variance - extreme hardship; b) exception - balance private interest against public health, safety and welfare; c) special use - 8.10.19 Zoning Ordinance specified conditions. D. Appeal to District Court. 67 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES Appendix G ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF THE HOUSING CODE Chapter 9.30.3 Iowa City Municipal Code I._ Commencement of action: A. Complaint filed with Housing Inspector. B. Violation revealed during systematic inspection. C. Housing Inspector determines if there are reasonable grounds to believe that a violation exists. II. Corrective letter sent to owner specifying areas of non- compliance. III. Petition by owner to Housing Appeals Board within 10 days: A. Filed with Housing Inspector B. Notice to petitioner of hearing date. C. Hearing held within 30 days of filing. IV. Action by Housing Appeals Board I V. Provision for judicial review. VI. Follow-up inspection and enforcement. i I MM MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES t401NC5 Appendix H IOWA CITY STAFF COMMENTS ON THE FINAL DRAFT REPORT 1. On page 4, reference is made to the use of a holding zone. In Peterson v. City of Decorah, 259 NW2d 553 (Ct of Appeals Of Iowa, 19_77) the court held that a municipality may not a holding zone. create 2. use of the initiative and referendum process for rezonings is mentioned on page 5. The City Legal Department takes issue with the statement that such actions are authorized by Section 362.4 of the Iowa Code and the City Charter. In fact, Section 263.4 refers to petitions authorized by the "City Code" as Chapters 364, 376, 380, 384, 388, and 392 of the Code of Iowa. Therefore, it can be argued that this section does not authorize our initiative and referendum procedure. With respect to The City of East Lake v Forest City Enterprises 96 St 2358 (196), a distinction can be made because the initiative and referendum procedure at issue was expressly authorized by the Ohio Constitution. Also, initiative and referendum procedures for rezonings have been held invalid in a number of other states including Texas, New Jersey, and Michigan, all of which adopted the same Standard Zoning Enabling Act as Iowa. You may wish to refer to the following cases dealing with this topic: San Pedro North, Ltd v. City of San nn+� ; r191) owno H3a 154 (N.J. 1973) and Horash v. City of Livonia,C 202 NW2d 803 (Mich 1972). 3. On page 29, you suggest that City employees, especially Police officers and fire fighters, should be instructed to look for and report violations. Section 8.10.29 of the Municipal Code states "...it shall also be the duty of all officers and employees of the City and especially of all members of the Police Department to assist the Building Inspector by reporting to him upon new construc- tion, reconstruction, or land uses or upon seeming violations." 4. On page 35 you suggest that an upgraded notice and hearing procedure could be limited to "spified districts of the city." An ordinance of this type specified likely to be held invalid on grounds of it being discriminatory. 5. With regard to consent zoning, it would seem appropriate to bring to your attention two Iowa cases on this subject which have been referred to me by the City Legal Department. II1CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES In Huff v. City of Des Moines, 56 uux uux 1929) a distinctionvwas1made�between8consentIowa273 ordinances in which the action of the property owners had, of itself, the effect of legislation and therefore consti- tuted an unlawful delegation of legislative powers and ordinances in which consent is used for no other purpose than to waive a restriction that has already been created by legislative authority and which creation made provision for such a waiver and is generally held constitutional. Our primary concern is, of course, the validity of an impact assessment ordinance. This concern stems from a well established rule "...that a municipal corporation cannot create by ordinance a right of action between third persons or enlarge the common law or statutory duty or liability of citizens among themselves... under the rule, and cannot directly create a civil liability of one citizen to another...As applied to causes of action in tort the rule is also applicable not only theoretically but in full and practical effect; an ordinance cannot directly provide that one person owes a civil duty to another, the breach of which to the damage of the other gives him a cause of action." (McQuillin Section 22.01) Section 364.1 of the 1977 Iowa Code articulates this general rule: "...The grant of home rule power does not include the power to enact private or civil law governing civil relationships, except as incident to an exercise of an independent city power." Commentators consistently interpret this provision as stating that a municipality may not create a different law of torts or create new civil liability. Municipal Home Rule Powers: Impact on Private Legal Relationships, 56 Iowa Law Review 631, 632; Limits on Municipal Power Under Home Rule: A Role for the Courts, 58 Minnesota Law Review 643, 674 (1964). It would seem thaL- the proposal to create a cause of action for damages for parties suffering less than substantial harm would be in conflict with. Section 364.1 of the Code of Iowa and the Common Law. Page 54 suggests the use of a property tax moratorium to encourage the upgrajing and maintenance of dwellings. As you are probably aware, legislation similar to this was taken up by the Iowa Legislature during their last session, however, it did not pass and we are therefore without appropriate enabling logislation for such a policy. With respect to your discussion of the North Side controlling development through special district status, we are disap- pointed that no mention is made of existing Iowa legislation, Chapter 303, historic Preservation District, which permits creation of such districts through a special election. 70 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIMLS REFERENCE AND RESOURCES A. Articles and Books American Law Institute's Model Land Development Code, Philadelphia, 1976. "The Basic System of Land Use Control: Legislative Perogative v. Administrative Discretion," The New Zoning: Legal, Administrative and Economic Concepts and Techniques, Bair, Fred H., "Toward a Regulatory System for Use, Develop- ment, Occupancy and Construction," Planning Advisory Service, ASPO, February 1969. Calabresi, Guido and Malamed, A. Douglas "Property Rules and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral," Harvard Law Review, vol. 85, p. 1089, 1972. Coase, R.H., "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 3, pp. 1 et seq., 1960. "Consent Requirement Upheld," Zoning Digest, vol. 22, p. 111, 1970. "County Emphasizes Neighborhood Preservation," Practicing Planner, June, 1976. Ellickson, Robert C., "Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls," University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 40, pp. 681-781 Haar, Charles M., "The Social Control of Urban Space," Cities and Space, Lowdon Wingo, (ed.), Johns Hopkins Press Baltimore, 1963. Hagman, Donald G., Urban Planning and Land Development Control Law, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, 1971. Heyman, Ira M., Innovative Land Regulation and Comprehensive Planning," The New Zoning: Legal, Administrative and Economic Concepts and Techniques, N. Marcus and M. Grov Heyman, Ira M., "Legal Assaults on Municipal Regulations," Management and Control of Growth, vol. 1, Urban Land Institute, 1975. 71 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES REFERENCES AND RESOURCES I Hirsh, Werner, Supply of Urban Public Services," Issues in Urban Economics, Harvy S. Perl.off and Lowden Wingo, Jr. eds. , Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1973. "Impact Zoning: Incentive Land Use Management," Environ- mental Comment, Urban Land Institute, January, 1977. McNulty, Robert H. and Kliment, Stephen A., Neighborhood j Conservation: A Handbook of Methods and Techniques, j Billboard Publications, New York, 1976. McQuillan, Municipal Corporations (3rd Ed.), vol. 8, Callaghan & Co., Mundelein, Illinois, 1969. Neighborhood Impacts Survey, Institute of Urban and Regional Research,Department of Community Development, Iowa City, 1976. Noel, Dix W., "Retroactive Zoning and Nuisances," Columbia Law Review, vol. 41 p. 457, 1941. Rashenkamp, Sachs, Wells and Associates, The Legal Context for Impact Zoning in New Jersey, Stetson House, Philadelphia, 1974. Scheidler, Sam F., Implementation of Constitutional Home Rule in Iowa," Drake Law Review, vol. 22, p. 294, 1973 Schretter, Howard A., "Making Building Codes Work for the Small Town," Small Town, vol. 7, No. 6,December, 1976. B. Constitutions, Statutes and Ordinances: Constitution of the State of Iowa, Article III, Section 38A- 1968 amendment providing for municipal home rule. i Code of Iowa: Chapter 28A Official Meetings Open to Public Chapter 103A State Building Code Chapter 303 Historical Preservation Districts Chapter 364 Powers and Duties of Cities Chapter 380 City Legislation Chapter 413 Cities - Housing Law Chapter 414 Municipal. Zoning Home Rule Charter of the City of Iowa City, Iowa 72 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINIS 1 i REFERENCES AND RESOURCES ' Municipal Code of Iowa City Chapter 8.10 Zoning Code Chapter 9.30 Housing Code Chapter 9.50 Subdivision Regulations Chapter 9.51 Large Scale Residential Development Ord. No. 69-2527 Large Scale Nonresidential Development Ord. No. 77-2859 Building Code C. Cases Board of Adjustment of City of Des Moines v. Ruble, 193 N.W. 497 Iowa 1972). Requirement for a variance. City of Des Moines v. Manhattan Oil Co., 184 N.W. 823 (Iowa 1921). Restricted residence districts. Use of police power. Regulated level of nuisance can be moved up or down. City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, 96 S. Ct. 2358 (1976); James v. Valtierra 91 S. Ct. 1331 (1971). Holding referendum on rezoning applications consti- tutional. City of 121n v. Fisch, 251 Iowa 149, 100 N.W.2d 14 (1921). Restriction in residential district upheld. DePue v. City of Clinton, 160 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 1968). Discussion of variance and exception by administrative agency. Figarsky v. Historic District Commission of the City of Norwich, 171 Conn. 198, 368 A.2d 163 (1976). Creation of district by city. Gumle v. Bd. of Selctman of Nantucket, 358 N.E.2d 1011 Mass. 1977). Creation of district by state. O'Brien v. City of St. Paul, 173 N.W.2d 462 (Minn., 1969). Consent zoning: residential area most protective. Waiver of restrictions rather than imposition of them held constitutional. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2, Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams .9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 4 livAtv . IiA 7w e Ff�4KI,Kt 4 livAtv . IiA The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer' Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) LAND USE INTENSITY Douglass Lee May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IdOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. The purpose of the Land Use Intensity report is to document the character of the North Side neighborhood in accordance with the four kinds of attributes outlined in report number 1, Impact Evaluation, and report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. Existing patterns, trends, and other factors are used to assess the inherent nature of the neighborhood and to understand the structure of the problems which affect it. As is corroborated by anal- ysis from other perspectives, the main sources of problems in the North Side are land use incompatibilities and an excess of automobiles. The neighborhood is made up of a heterogeneous mixture of attributes -- land use, housing tenure, density, structure type, and ownership. Imposing some kind of homogeneous pattern -- even at the block level -- is clearly infeasible, and hence solution of the neighborhood's problems will require land use controls not typically in use at the present time. Quite a number of people contributed to the report in major ways. Tim Fluck prepared an initial draft, and many of the ideas remain his. Paul Panik, Becky Schroeder, and Dave Koehser generated most of the data and the figures, and offered numerous insights into the existing character of, and trends in, the neighborhood. R MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES CONTENTS FOREWORD SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE NORTH SIDE Density Land Use Single Family Land Use Non-residential Land Use Multi -family Land Use Off-street Parking Tenure Single Family Owner Occupancy Absentee Ownership TRENDS Ownership Turnover Speculation Private Investment New Construction INHERENT SUITABILITY Location Historic Quality EXISTING POLICIES Overzoning New Comprehensive Plan MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 5 7 7 9 11 13 16 16 18 20 21 21 21 25 31 32 32 34 35 35 36 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Drawing mainly upon empirical information from primary and secondary sources, a variety of data have been assembled that describe the existing and inherent character of the North Side neighborhood. Some of the qualities ob- served are common to many urban residential neighborhoods, and some are unique to this particular neighborhood. The purpose of this study is to identify those attributes of the North Side, whether unique or typical, that illuminate its problems and its resources. The following conclusions emerge: Not only does the North Side contain many kinds of land use, they are spatially mixed together in a very heterogeneous way. Single-family, and multi -family uses are found on almost every block, and commercial, public, and semi-public are also interspersed. While most of the neighborhood is predominantly residential, there are no naturally existing land use zones larger than a block or two. Newer apartment buildings are scattered through- out the neighborhood in a way that suggests intentional dispersal. These buildings are incompatible with the previous development in many respects, frequently being constructed at ten times the previous density. The property value appreciation gained by these apartment land uses has often been at the expense of adjacent single-family residences. - Owner confidence in the North Side is generally high and remains high. Consistently high owner occupancy rates are probably important in sustaining this type of investment confidence. - Upwards of half the land in the North Side is given over to highway transportation, including streets and parking lots. A large share of the usage of the streets and parking is by non- residents of the neighborhood; since these transportation facilities have significant negative effects on neighborhood quality, i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DCS 140114CS A transportation land use ranks high on the list of land uses that need to be restricted and from which the neighborhood needs to be protected. - A basic conflict exists between the historic and other resources contained in the neighbor- hood and its prime location with respect to the University, Mercy Hospital, and downtown. It is not feasible to give the neighborhood over entirely to one purpose or the other, and any resolution of the conflict that allows higher densities in some locations while protecting the neighborhood's resources must be able to operate at a parcel -specific level. - Abnormally high turnover rates of property ownership have not been observed, and specu- lation is not readily apparent from secondary data sources. - Past local government policies affecting the neighborhood have been ambiguous and not condu- cive to maintaining the quality of the neighbor- hood, but recent actions have moved toward consistency and greater protection of the resi- dential areas. Programs are still needed which will mitigate past errors, eliminate the negative side effects of development at the microscopic level, and achieve development objectives where major land use changes are planned. Data for this report come from a variety of sources, which were cross-checked where feasible and frequently re- checked. Despite efforts to make the results as sound and as reliable as possible, a number of problems in the data must be acknowledged: data sources were sometimes difficult to access and awkward to use, leading to transcription errors; errors in the source data have been found, but un- doubtedly many remain; z�condary data sources may be out- of-date by varying amounts of time (sometimes 1-2 years) within the same source; data processing within the project was done entirely by hand, and was only one of many kinds of tasks performed by each staff member, which resulted in less control over errors; and both observation and analysis E MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES often required the exercise of judgment (e.g., in classi- fying observations) by persons only moderately skilled in such tasks. The picture of the neighborhood presented by this information may thus be inaccurate in detail and re- present a time period somewhat earlier than indicated, but the patterns presented are nonetheless a valid description of the general character of the neighborhood. K] ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE NORTH SIDE As urban neighborhoods go, the North Side is not especially complex nor outstandingly different. In compari- son to the average suburban neighborhood, however, it is very complex and very different. Since the homogeneous single-family suburban neighborhood is the standard by which residential neighborhoods are normally judged, there are many persons who regard the North Side as undesirable and unsatisfactory as a living environment, in part because of the variety and complexity. They believe that whatever problems the neighborhood suffers are inevitable and unavoid- able, and this should be obvious to anyone who chooses to live there. In contrast to this viewpoint, there are those for whom a large variety of facilities and amenities within easy walking distance is a valuable quality. older homes of different architectural styles, a mix of ages, family structures, and lifestyles, and nearby small restaurants and stores are often considered to be attractive features of a residential neighborhood. There are many reasons why it might be worthwhile saving older neighborhoods, i but the issue is not so much one of having a choice between mixed neighborhoods and homogeneous neighborhoods, but of being able to create and maintain good mixed neighborhoods. As things now stand, mixed neighborhoods generally have to work hard at protecting themselves in the face of pressures for change. While the North Side exhibits characteristics and i problems common to many urban neighborhoods, it also has i a quality -- when all the aspects are put together -- that is uniquely its own. Identi.fyi.nq precisely what- this quality is may be impossible, but some descriptive effort must be attempted if the quality if to be preserved. This 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES report, along with report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory, report number 7, Community Facilities, and report number 10, Impact Survey 1978, constitutes a be- ginning effort to document the character of the neighbor- hood as well as the problems it faces. DENSITY Average parcel size for properties in the North Side is about 6,000 square feet, and most fall within the range of 3-9,000 square feet. At the parcel level, densities range from a low of about 4 dwelling units to the acre for a single-family house on a large lot, to a high of about 50 dwelling units to the acre for a 3 -story, 18-plex. These densities are frequently found on the same half -block, almost always to the detriment of the lower density properties. This problem is examined further in the section below on land use. Summarizing density at the block level, the pattern shown in Figure 1 results. The majority of blocks (the middle two quartiles) fall between 10 and 17 dwelling units to the acre, with the highest average densities occurring along the western edge of the neighborhood and the overall pattern increasing from lowest density in the northeast to higher in the south and west. Even aggregated to the block level the pattern is not smooth, and the average density for a block can be substantially affected by the presence of one apartment building or several conversions. Higher densities are primarily related to nearness to the University of Iowa (on the west and south) and secondarily to nearness to Mercy Hospital, with closeness to downtown (south and west of the North Side) also a factor. 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIMEs BROWN ST RONALDS ST :< aolrir%Fid mi- rn ufr Figure 1. DWELLING UNIT DENSITY PER BLOCK r, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CUM RAPIDs•OLs c1011l[s KEY R 0-1.50 9 per acre] : : .::. :, :,dwellings ; 7-16.34 per acrel fyi% 2.25 and above 0 Data insufficient to yield reliable results per acrel U) LLJ .. , „z ,. • • •. ry�� f`f,::�/ � f/�. - :< aolrir%Fid mi- rn ufr Figure 1. DWELLING UNIT DENSITY PER BLOCK r, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CUM RAPIDs•OLs c1011l[s LAND USE Parcels of real property can be classified according to the primary purpose to which the structures or the land itself is being put, and the categories of purpose are re- ferred to as land uses. At the most aggregate level, the commonest categories employed are residential, commercial, industrial, public, and semi-public. Within these broad categories, further breakdowns are along dimensions parti- cular to each category: dwelling units per structure for residential, type of market area for commerical, expected levels of externalities for industrial, etc. Any set of land use categories will end up applying the same label to some activities that are dissimilar and separating some activities that are alike. Additionally, the same parcel may be used for several purposes (e.g., first -floor commer- cial and residential above) or the same purpose may be classified several ways (e.g., parking or multi -family). Single -Family Land Use Land used for single-family detached residential purposes is shown, by parcel, in Figure 2. The overall pattern is clearly one of a high proportion of single- family use in the northeast corner to a low proportion in the southwest. Within this pattern, however, there is a great deal of intermixing, with single-family and other uses frequently occurring side-by-side on the same half -block. only four half -blocks in the entire North Side have no single-family parcels (not counting hospital and school blocks), and these are either entirely institu- tional (churches) or entirely commercial. Even in the blocks with the highest densities there are at least a few single-family residences. 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOVIES i i.« DAVENPORT ST m � �,/.f� f iia:'•,:• BLOOMINGTON ST F4/HOSPITAL %pry :�•::a:n�.:+':i MARKET ST %: :::•.• = E::Q*; JEFFERSON= 6m ME Figure 2. SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE R FIICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIDIIIES s LLI ED • uz u • • • BROWNC RONALDS ST EN OH IM EM CHURCH ST I1Y7 ' %Ifs if.+2?CiCFik:4: i i.« DAVENPORT ST m � �,/.f� f iia:'•,:• BLOOMINGTON ST F4/HOSPITAL %pry :�•::a:n�.:+':i MARKET ST %: :::•.• = E::Q*; JEFFERSON= 6m ME Figure 2. SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE R FIICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIDIIIES Non -Residential Land Use The non-residential land use indicated in Figure 3 includes public (parks, schools), semi-public (churches, hospitals and clinics), and commercial (stores, restaurants, bars, service stations, offices).1 In contrast to single- family, the pattern of these uses is more concentrated in the southwest portion of the neighborhood; yet there is still a large measure of dispersion apparent. Non-residential activities and facilities can often provide valuable services and opportunities to residents of the neighborhood, but they can also generate negative impacts on nearby properties. Des- pite the preponderance of single-family use in the northeast area of the neighborhood, away from the non-residential uses, there is no buffering between the two; multi -family residential (being the only remaining land use other than streets) is sometimes thought to be suitable for this purpose, but is frequently less compatible with single-family residential use than is commercial land use. The location of commercial and other non-residential uses is partially explained by nearness to University and down- town,and arterial street frontage (Dodge, Market, Jefferson, Dubuque), but most of the services offered are small in scale and oriented, at least in part, toward neighborhood residents. One of the commercial facilities (a grocery) serving a large trade area is located at the corner of Dodge and Church. Thus, like other land uses in the North Side, non-residential activities are more sprinkled than clustered. lAll of the non-residential land uses are surveyed in report number 7, Community Facilities. Pi / MiCROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110111ES I FM - IV F_ z U) LLI I,_ LU F_ F_ Ir U) cy c/) m :D LL) ED U) Ld U) z m z z _j z _j BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST ....... . . . . . . . . . FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure 3. NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Multi -Family Land Use Only "larger" (four or more units) multi -family structures are shown in Figure 4, which include conver- sions as well as apartment buildings. A few of the larger buildings are the result of additions to single- family structures, but most of the bigger apartment build- ings have been constructed within the last ten or fifteen years. They run from six to eighteen units each, and are marked by the large black dots in the figure. Multi -family and non-residential land uses form the complement of single-family uses, and the pattern of de- creasing concentration from southwest to northeast is appar- ent in Figure 4. More significantly, the pattern is also one of dispersal, with newer large apartment buildings seldom located adjacent to each other (they appear to seek out lower density blocks instead). Typically, the newer buildings are massive in comparison to the neighborhood, i i largely surrounded by paving and cars, and unlandscaped. Appraisals and informal conversations with homeowners tend to confirm what is likely based on our impact surveys: property values for the apartment buildings have appreciated at the direct expense of adjacent single-family properties. It is not difficult to imagine that someone might be contented to live in one of these apartments, but it is impossible to imagine anyone wanting to live next door to one. No comprehensive data on the subject were obtained, but the residents of the apartment buildings seem to be students, and young singles and couples. Certainly these people are in need of housing as much as anyone else, and the North Side offers a location that is convenient to school, employment, and commercial services. Many residents do not own cars, but the auto ownership rate is still high enough that apartment parking lots are often overfilled despite the volume of on- and off-street parking space provided.2 2See report number 6, Parking. 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110IDE5 N KEY � Newer Apartments O Other Apartments H (n F_ Z tj D Cl) O Ci Z m z LLJ U) (D W W 02 QQ m Z Co (S > J C7 > J (D BROWN ST RONALDS ST O O 0 0 p 7 NnARKET ST = = WITS F___1 ®O PO -0-1 O 9 JEFFERSON ST Figure 4, MULTI -FAMILY STRUCTURES WITH FOUR OR MORE UNITS 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES •• 8•CHURCH ■ ••• ST FAIRCHILDST: ' I E—M9 DAVENPORT ST o_q = = 0 0 p 7 NnARKET ST = = WITS F___1 ®O PO -0-1 O 9 JEFFERSON ST Figure 4, MULTI -FAMILY STRUCTURES WITH FOUR OR MORE UNITS 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES There is thus a need to balance off the interests of existing residents and homeowners versus those of poten- tial residents. Constraints on this process might in- clude the following: 1) If redevelopment at a higher density is viewed as being in the best interests of the community, then a program for achieving this objective should be formulated and implemented. A full block is the small- est unit at which this should occur, and all property owners on the block should share equitably in the benefits of redevelopment; any high density development which occurs should be restricted to this program and concentrated geographically in the most appropriate location. Most especially, re- development should not be "encouraged" by simply permitting high density under the zoning ordinance, as has been the case in the North Side in the past; the result will always be spotty development, at the expense of many for the benefit of a few. 2) Any higher density development should by required to submit to a review and evalua- tion of neighborhood impacts. All negative impacts on nearby property owners should be eliminated prior to development, or compen- sation provided to affected property owners.3 Unless these policies are followed, major land use changes should not be permitted within the neighborhood. Off -Street Parking Transportation is by far the largest single land use in the North Side, consuming upwards of half the total land in the neighborhood when streets and parking are added' together. Figure 5 shows land used for large parking lots 3See report number 1, Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, and Guidelines, and report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. 1.3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES EM BLOOMINGTON ST M oil MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure 5. OFF-STREET PARKING 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES N KEY 4-9 spaces over 10 spaces U) Ld 16- (n F- z Ld it U) (n 0 z CO a z Z Ld m CD z En z 6 -,a U.1 1 6 >w D 0 BROWN ST —I U RONALDS ST CHURCH ST ow FAIRCHILD ST E9 [9 DAVENPORT ST = EM BLOOMINGTON ST M oil MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure 5. OFF-STREET PARKING 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES and the locations of smaller lots, but the map considerably understates the total amount- of land used for off-street parking. Streets themselves occupy 30-358 of the land in the neighborhood, and other parking covers roughly 208 of the remaining land. While adequate parking is essential, it also negatively impacts neighborhood quality (see report number 10, Impacts Survey 1978); parking is a burden placed on other land uses, which should be minimized. The ideal amount of parking that should be available within a neighborhood cannot easily be determined, as it depends upon many factors, but some general principles can be followed: 1) Parking which serves a few specific destinations, -- especially those outside the neighborhood -- places the neighborhood in the role of serving as a parking lot for other than neighborhood purposes. The University, downtown, Mercy Hospital, and to a lesser extent, Happy Hollow Park and Eagle's grocery, all create pressures to use some portion of the neighborhood as a parking lot. These pressures are especially destruc- tive of neighborhood quality when the parking is all surface parking, although parking structures are no more desirable as neighbors than open lots. 2) A neighborhood of moderately high residential densities, moderately high land values, and well located with respect to primary destinations should devote a smaller amount of land to parking than a lower density, more suburban neighborhood. Parking should be regarded as an undesirable and low priority land use from the standpoint of the neighborhood (there are, of course, even less desirable land uses), and should be restricted rather than encouraged. Scattered small and medium-sized parking lots tend to be associated with multi -family structures in the North Side, occasionally with commercial uses. A large area of parking surrounds Mercy Hospital, and another extensive area of parking is associated with office and commercial uses in the southwestern portion. 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES TENURE Housing policy in the U.S. has long operated on the precept that home ownership is a good thing, and overall it seems clear that higher quality housing and better maintenance tend to go along with owner occupancy. The causal relationship -- owner occupancy leads to better housing quality -- is plausible and descriptively accurate in general, but of little help as a policy guide. The North Side contains a mixture of owner and tenant occupied structures, and this will undoubtedly continue; of interest here are the patterns in ownership within the neighborhood. Single -Family Owner Occupancy Considering only single-family residential properties, owner -occupancy rates summarized by block are shown in iFigure 6. As with other variables, even at the block level the pattern of owner occupancy is mixed. Home ownership tends to be high in the northeast section, where single- family land use itself is predominant; overall, however, homeowners are sprinkled throughout the neighborhood, in- cluding the areas that are heavily commercial or multi- family. Again, because of the heterogeneous quality of the North Side, protection for the more sensitive land uses must be workable at the parcel level; "holding the line" somewhere by means of a buffer land use is not feasible because there are no homogeneous areas around which to draw lines. Note that Figure 6 does not show the amount of owner occupied housing, but only the proportion of single-family parcels that are owner occupied. pied. From Figure 2 we know that single-family land use declines from northeast to southwest; Figure 6 tells us that home ownership is unrelated to the proportion of land use that is single-family, in this particular neighborhood. Overall, single-family owner occupan- cy is fairly high throughout the North Side. 1.6 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES KEY mi 31mommamm Figure 6. PERCENT OF SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER OCCUPIED DWELLINGS PER BLOCK 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tjoiriEs = High Owner Occupancy (80% and above of S -F F7777771 dwelligs owner .1 Middle Owner Occ upancy 150%-n80%ot S-Foccupied) dwellings owner occupied] Low Owner Occupancy 150% and below of S -F O s owr Data insufficient to yielddwellinreliablegresultsneoccupied] Ld U) F- U) F- Z Ld F- V) F- Ir 0 o ED U) Z x U-1 ED Z) U) z < wU) (D z 0-1 < U-1 U > BROWN ST RONALDS F ....... ST r_ - CHURCH ST. SCHOOL FAIRCHILDF-1 PARK E mmmm mi 31mommamm Figure 6. PERCENT OF SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER OCCUPIED DWELLINGS PER BLOCK 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tjoiriEs Absentee Ownershi Non -occupant ownership of all residential property is shown, by parcel, in Figure 7. This includes multi- family structures, many of which are partially occupied by their owners (new apartment buildings do not contain owner occupants). The pattern reinforces the previous patterns, namely, that land uses, owner occupancy, and residential structure types are highly interspersed within the neighborhood. M. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES w BROWN 6 --iii ff 2 V. ffm i p< -lam 'i !i, Illlllf FAIRCHVLD MST PAR Z ci O Cn tr U.1 m (n W a:Cn Z O Z J i JU 6 --iii ff 2 V. ffm i p< -lam 'i !i, Illlllf FAIRCHVLD MST PAR DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON S"i � CHURCH eEp' 2 V. i p< -lam 'i !i, Fv AL BLOOMINGTON S"i � CHURCH YM 2 V. i MM -lam HOSPITAL MARKET ST � • , m • JEFFERSON ST Figura 7. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY In MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES YM 2 V. HOSPITAL MARKET ST � • , m • JEFFERSON ST Figura 7. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY In MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES TRENDS The first step in assessing neighborhood quality is to develop a static, or cross-sectional base of information about neighborhood characteristics; the second step is to estimate the dynamic trends at work, i.e., the changes which have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur in the future. As the housing stock in the North Side aged, and the urban area of Iowa City grew, the nature of the neighborhood changed from a middle-class "family" pattern to the mixed age, household type, and renter -occupied patterns presently in evidence. .The southwest portion has always contained commercial activities, and -at one time was moderately indus- trial: three breweries were located along Market Street, one where the Economy Advertising Company is now located (at Linn Street), and report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory, mentions a tin shop, a carpet weaver, a blacksmith, and other small manufacturing operations. The other portions of the neighborhood have always contained schools, hospitals and churches, but the commercial development at Dodge and Church is relatively recent. At no time in its past does the North Side seem to have exhibited homogeneous tracts of uniform land use, and the only land use progression that represents a secular trend in the long run is the gradual shift from single-family to multi -family. OWNERSHIP Occupancy by resiaential property owners has been described above, and the generally high levels of owner occupancy suggest an historical stability and at least pill MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES a potential for future stability. Other indicators of dynamic pressures are the rate of change in ownership and the character of absentee ownership; the former must be related to what should reasonably be expected for the neighborhood, while the latter can be used to assess the i amount and type of speculative interest in the neighborhood. i Turnover i Ownership turnover is shown for all properties, for the period 1976-78, in Figure 8. Real estate transac- tions have been moderately high throughout the North Side, but not such as to suggest panic selling or massive shift in the ownership; rather, the frequency of transaction implies a steady flow of new residents and new owners into the neighborhood. Turnover rates are as high for single- family properties as for others, and in comparison to Figure 1, are probably higher in the lower density areas than in the ' higher density areas. Speculation The word speculation seems to have many meanings, de- pending upon the user. If it is distinct from "investment", then speculation in some way means the appreciation of pro- perty value without making a substantial outlay for improve- ments or otherwise increasing the attractiveness of the I property on its own merits. Speculation is the holding of property in the hopes that the market will go up and the capital gain can be extracted by reselling the property. A definition of this sort depends a great deal upon the intentions of the owner, and there are few, if any, I methods for obtaining information on the intent of the 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES Figure 8. OWNERSHIP nnm2R, ALL R.o USES, 19 -,a 2, m_r DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES «a, \ } § § %01.. BLOOMINGTON ST dLLA = LLLj per, /pHOSPITA] \ MARKET :.. � . m,� a _. JEFFERSON 7 ¥ \ ƒ MOM \ \ � . . ... � ' ! « a \ � m' ,• .,. Figure 8. OWNERSHIP nnm2R, ALL R.o USES, 19 -,a 2, m_r DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES «a, \ } § § BLOOMINGTON ST dLLA = LLLj per, /pHOSPITA] \ MARKET . m,� a _. JEFFERSON Figure 8. OWNERSHIP nnm2R, ALL R.o USES, 19 -,a 2, m_r DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES «a, \ } § § owner if his or her purposes are not readily apparent. Hence speculation must be operationally defined on a "de facto" basis, in regard to the characterisitics of the owner: owners without an obvious reason for owner- ship of a particular piece of property are tentatively designated as speculative owners. Stores owned by their tenants and residential structures occupied by their owners are thus, by definition, not speculating, even though their intent might be otherwise. i The scattering of parcels indicated in Figure 9 are owned by realtors, builders, and corporations with no obvious purpose beyond real estate investment. Some of these parcels undoubtedly represent the savings of individuals or the productive investment of private enter- prises; on the other side, there are probably many parcels not so indicated whose owners are waiting for the market i to appreciate so they can sell out. Given the moderate turnover rates, some property is bound to be in hands of owners who are in the process of disposing of property but i have not yet done so. Several of the properties marked in the figure contain new apartment structures presently in the ownership of the builder, so the speculation on these properties, to the extent there was any, has already occurred. Many of the parcels are i3cated on corner lots or on + the corner of an alley. For an apartment building, this may offer easier access and higher visibility than a mid - block lot, but this has not prevented the occurrence of apartment buildings on mid -block lots. The forms of "speculation" that can be seen in the North Side do not appear notably threatening, and no attempts to assemble several parcels into a single ownership are evident from secondary data. To a large extent, Figure 9 simply shows the locations of new apartment buildings. 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES BROWN ST u p W co 0 U) cr 0 Z w 0 U F_ BLOOMINGTON ST ■ F_ JEFFERSON ST W Z z 0 z m CS � J a > � J U) cr 0 Z w 0 U DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST ■ DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure 9. SPECULATIVE OWNERSHIP 24 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES PRIVATE INVESTMENT From the impact surveys (one in 1976 and the second in 1978, the latter included in the final report series of the North Side study) an attempt was made to estimate whether a particular property was being upgraded, held in a steady state, or being allowed to depreciate. This assessment was intended to be independent of the quality of the structure -- both good and deteriorated structures could be getting either better or worse -- and was recorded by field observers from the exterior of the property. The measure is thus subject to variability and possible bias from one observer to the next. Nonetheless, this estimate of private investment provides a rough indication of confidence in the neighborhood and would be satisfactorily reliable if major changes were occurring. Each property was thus given a score of +1 if positive investment were evident, a -1 if disinvestment was apparent, and a zero otherwise. Block scores were obtained by summing the parcel scores, and the results for 1976 are shown in ' Figure 10. As is the case with other block summaries, the number of observations upon which the summary is based is not evident from the figure. Commercial as well as residen- tial properties are included, but parking lots, public, and semi-public uses are not. The pattern of 1976 investment scores is irregular, although positive investment tends to be stronger in the north half and the east half. One possible explanation for this is that owner confidence is greatest in the "heart" of the neighborhood, and the heart is where the least traffic is found (see report number 5, Streets and Traffic). Market, Jefferson, and Dubuque are all major arterials, and Dodge, Governor, and possibly Church sustain moderately heavy volumes that might be less conducive to improvement of owner-occupied.residences. If this relationship is valid, 25 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110HIES KEY Highest 16 and above] N Second Highest [3-51 Middle [1-21 Lowest [0 and below 1 OData insufficient to yield reliable results U) j F- F- F-I Z U O w N F O LJ m zz LLJ > Z m Q z O > S L, BROWN ST i i RONALDS ST 0 CHURCH ST ST SCHOOL r M . ODD .L�....... DPARK 2G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES the effect of converting Gilbert Street into a one-way couplet with Dubuque (one of several proposals recently presented) would have severe negative impacts on the North Side. Other factors may also help to explain investment. Absentee ownership (Figure 7) is weakly associated with disinvestment, while single-family owner occupancy (Figure 6) seems to coincide generally with positive investment. Low investment and disinvestment areas are generally in close proximity to Mercy Hospital, the commercial area in the southwest corner, the high density areas on the western edge (indirectly, the University), and the cluster of commercial establishments and Horace Mann elementary school at Church and Dodge. These low investment areas also coincide generally with large volumes of off-street parking (Figure 5). Investment as observed in 1978 is shown in Figure 11. The pattern is similar to the previous one, and most of the same comments apply. Figure 12 shows the distributions of block scores for 1976 and 1978, as well as the distribu- tion of changes in block scores. The average score went up slightly from 1976 to 1978; while the difference is not statistically significant, from debriefing of the field observers it appears likely that they applied higher stan- dards in the more recent survey and that private investment in the North Side may, indeed, have increased by a modest amount in the two-year period. Since investment in both years was clearly positive, a good deal:of confidence in the neighborhood must exist on the part of property owners. From Figure 13, which identifies the blocks which went up or down by the greatest amount, the impression is gained that confidence is falling in the southern half of the neighbor- hood and rising in the north. The measurement of private investment is too crude, and the data on the other variables too unreliable or out- of-date to place much weight on conclusions drawn solely 27 PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 28 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES HOMES e Y 0 0 O C score 4 — J r i -6 .5 4.1 .B •1 U 1 3 ] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 INVESTMENT LEVEL BY BLOCK 1976 INVESTMENT LEVEL BY BLOCK 1978 e a Y T U O 6 � O 5 � 4 score 4 5 6 i e B 10 11 11 NUMBER OF BLOCKS THAT CHANGED PER SCALE UNIT Figure 12. DISTRIBUTIONS OF BLOCK SCORES AND CHANGES 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INEs KEY MighDii-invuotonunt Blocks M High Positive Investment Blocks Numbers Represent Scores for Changes |nPrivate Investment MAR-KETqT JEFFERSON ST ------ = =�---� Figure 13. MAJOR CHANGES IN PRIVATE INVESTMENT, 1978^1978 ' 30 H7Ck0rlLw[AoY ][lR/NM/CR[l|AA CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOOMINGTON ST BROWN ST RONALDS ST MI = CHURCH ST FA�IRCH ;LD ;ST1===E1 MAR-KETqT JEFFERSON ST ------ = =�---� Figure 13. MAJOR CHANGES IN PRIVATE INVESTMENT, 1978^1978 ' 30 H7Ck0rlLw[AoY ][lR/NM/CR[l|AA CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOOMINGTON ST MAR-KETqT JEFFERSON ST ------ = =�---� Figure 13. MAJOR CHANGES IN PRIVATE INVESTMENT, 1978^1978 ' 30 H7Ck0rlLw[AoY ][lR/NM/CR[l|AA CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES on the basis of analysis of the indicators described above. The evidence provided by the land use analysis is consistent with conclusions arrived at by other means, and an understanding of the problems impacting the neighborhood is improved by reviewing this informa- tion, but the value of the land use analysis is obtained only in conjunction with other perspectives on the neighborhood. NEW CONSTRUCTION During the slightly less than two-year period the North Side study was underway, one house was moved out of the neighborhood and its place taken by a parking lot, and one other house was demolished and construction started on an apartmentbuilding. This building lull may have been due in part to a temporary moratorium imposed in the fall of 1977 while the comprehensive plan was finalized, in part to curiosity about what the compre- hensive plan might recommend for the neighborhood, in part to the militancy of some residents against apartment devel- opment, and in part to a lack of interest resulting from better opportunities elsewhere. Whatever the reason, building activity remained low but not totally absent. Within a longer time frame, recent construction is reflected in the newer apartment buildings shown in Figure 4. If the lower densities recommended in the comprehensive plan adopted in May of 1978 are implemented in a new zoning ordinance and map, apartment buildings of this type will a good deal less likely in most portions of the neighborhood. 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES INHERENT SUITABILITY Existing patterns and trends provide the strongest basis for judging neighborhood character, but it is also possible to take a broader and more normative view- point and ask what the neighborhood is inherently most suited for. This determination can be based on location, i major employers or other facilities in or near the neighbor- hood, characteristics of the land and topography, transpor- tation facilities and other infrastructure, characteristics of the resident population, etc. There is no reason to automatically accept the existing characteristics as determinant of future character, but the farther the future alternative is from the existing the less feasible the alternative becomes. LOCATION University of Iowa land and buildings are adjacent to or within a block of the western boundary of the neighbor- hood, and a third of the southern boundary as well. The downtown commercial and business center of Iowa City begins within one block south of the neighborhood and is easily accessible on foot from the southwest portion. Dubuque, Dodge, and Governor Streets connect directly to Interstate 80 as well as to nearby communities, and Gilbert Street is the major arterial to the south. Within the small metropolitan area of Iowa City (roughly 70,000 population in the County) the North Side enjoys a prime location. This location is also an important factor behind most of.the neighborhood's problems. Usage of the streets is primarily for through traffic, and a large non-resident demand for parking is evident (see reports number 5, Streets and Traffic, and 6, Parking), mostly unrelated to existing development in the neighborhood. Several options can be reviewed in the light of location factors: 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401NES 1) The neighborhood could be given over to institutional uses and parking. Medical, educational, and religious institutional com- plexes could be initiated or expanded, and parking structures and lots built around them. For the most part, only the southwest half of the neighborhood would be suitable for these kinds of uses. This alternative has little to recommend it, especially since neither the University nor'the hospital have expressed a desire to expand in the North Side area. The amount of land already devoted to parking, however, brings this option perilously close to realization even without institutional expansion. Z) By means of major planned redevelopment, the existing neighborhood (again, primarily the southwest half) could be replaced by mixed-use multi -family and commercial structures, including offices and restaurants. While there are exciting prospects in this scheme, it is unlikely that there is enough investment interest, managerial and entrepreneurial talent, or market demand to support such an undertaking. To the extent these resources exist in Iowa City, they are better directed at the downtown area and especially the urban renewal program. 3) Piecemeal development in the southwest corner could add commercial facilities and increase residential densities. The results might be very beneficial to the neighborhood, very destructive, or anywhere in between, depending upon public policies and other factors. Scattered development and redevelopment might also occur throughout the North Side. Since this general option is the only feasible alternative to the status quo (no change), attention needs to be given to how piecemeal devel- opment might be undertaken. At the minimum, the conditions suggested above under Multi -family Land Use should be imposed (p. 13). Location of the North Side within Iowa City is thus an important factor in the neighborhood's future. Options can be created, but socially beneficial results will not occur without care and thought. 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401?IEs HISTORIC QUALITY From report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory, it is evident that the North Side contains a resource that is of considerable value to Iowa City, the State, and probably the region. The nature of this resource is a physical neighborhood that consists of examples of middle- class dwellings almost uniformly distributed across the last one -hundred -and -forty years of the neighborhood's lifetime. A wide range of architectural styles is represented, in structures which are modest in elegance and size, and these mingle with each other throughout the neighborhood. Some of the styles are national in derivation, some are regional, and some of the variations are purely local. It is the aggregation of this variety and the quality it creates as a whole, rather than any small set of major landmarks, that make the neighborhood historically interesting and valuable. The North Side is historic as a neighborhood, of a particularly mid- western and unpretentious kind. Besides the historic resources represented by the structures themselves, the North Side is also endowed with a resident population that generally appreciates the historic quality of the neighborhood and is willing to maintain its traditions to the point of rehabilitation and restoration if necessary. Many people in Iowa City have a devoted interest as well as expert knowledge in urban history and architecture, and could be called upon to develop and reinforce the historic attributes of the neighborhood. The historic quality of the North Side is a major asset to the neighborhood and the City, and any assessment of the inherent character of the North Side and development of policies for its future should give central consideration to these historic resources. 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES EXISTING POLICIES Past and present policies of local government may have some effect on how the character of a neighborhood evolves: the policies may reinforce existing neighbor- hood characteristics, trends, and inherent suitability, or local policies may counter in whole or in part the other influences. Typically, there is some ambiguity in existing characteristics, trends, and inherent suita- bility; local policy may serve to clarify these patterns or further confuse them. OVERZONING In 1962, zoning was applied to the North Side which permitted a substantial increase in density (by a factor of up to ten times) from what previously existed. This zoning, and the absence of any complementary programs or policies, has resulted in the spotty and clumsy multi- family development now readily apparent (see Figure 4). From 1972 through 1975, attempts were made by residents of the North Side to reduce the zoning from the R3A desig- nation (43.6 dwelling units/acre) that applied to most of the residential area, to R3 and R2 (7.'s _::its/acre), but these efforts were unsuccessful. A staff study published in 1974 acknowledged the problems but did not recommend downzoning.4 The evident intent of the original high density zoning was to encourage the development of apartments in place of single family structures, to take advantage of the prime location of the North Side with 4Department of Community Development, R3A Area Study, 1974 (City of Iowa City, 1974). 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES t40INES respect to the University. Prior to the 1962 zoning, a study had recommended the redevelopment objectives but also cautioned about the problems in implementing any program to achieve them.5 By itself, the zoning was insufficient and had the effect of greatly increasing ambiguity and uncertainty, much to the detriment of the neighborhood. In conjunction with the comprehensive plan revision begun in 1976 and adopted in 1978, interim rezonings in the North Side have lowered permitted densities while a new ordinance and map are being prepared. NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN While the North Side study has been going on, the City has been revising its comprehensive plan. Since the North Side is only a small portion of the area and 1 population covered by the plan, the amount of attention directed specifically at problems of the North Side has i been necessarily modest. one objective of the neighbor- hood study has been to encourage a comprehensive plan for the City which would be consistent with protection of the neighborhood. There was no expectation that the comprehensive plan would solve the problems of the North Side, but the plan could, and does, provide a context within which the neighborhood problems can be worked out. The step which the plan takes with respect to the North Side is a small one, but it is in the direction toward reducing ambiguity and increasing protection. 5Bartholomew, Harland, and Associates, 1960 Housing and Public Buildings (City of Iowa City, 1960). wrl / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROI_AB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Land use and residential density boundaries are shown in Figure 14. Iligh density residential uses are restricted to the west and south edges of the neighborhood, and the primary residential areas are given designations for densities close to what already exists. These boun- daries will presumably coincide with zoning districts that will match the planned uses. A new zoning ordinance is being drawn up, and preliminary versions contain pro- visions that will increase flexibility within commercial zones, and will reduce the likelihood of strikingly in- compatible development by minimum lot size and open space jrequirements. These features are clearly beneficial to the neighborhood, but they leave several issues still unresolved: 1) Many problems exist as a result of prior development that will continue to undermine neighborhood quality if left uncorrected. It is a prevailing perception, although not neces- sarily an accurate one, that zoning can only be used to prevent problems, not cure them. It is probably not in the best interests of society that incompatible apartment buildings in the North Side be demolished, but much can be done to ameliorate their undesirable side I effects. The rationale for controlling these negative externalities is presented in report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. 2) Portions of the neighborhood are indicated on the plan for high density residential devel- opment ,(up to 80 units to the acre), and a conti- nuation of past policies for these areas will be as destructive in the future as they were in the past. For any area which is designated for some use that is drastically different from the present ones, and for which redevelopment is necessary, a program for managing the transition is essential. If implementation is left solely to the whimsey of private entrepreneurs, the results will be inefficient in the use of scarce resources and inequitable in the distribution of costs and benefits. 5 M residence, an historic structure which I am rehabilitating, lies within an area of this type. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES N BROWN RONALDS F 1 BLOOMI JEF ® General Commercial Office Commercial Public and Semi -Public KEY Residential 2-8 du/acre " 8-16 du/acre " 16 - 24 du/acre 24-+80 du/acre ® General Commercial Office Commercial Public and Semi -Public Figure 14. ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I— U) U) Z u~j LLJ j Z U O C7 O) � W m LSI fn _j Z D J Q O L) O C7 > o J O Figure 14. ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES WE Figure 14. ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3) Although the planned mix of land uses constitutes a reasonable balance for the North Side, there is no analysis so far which substantiates that the social benefits of redevelopment to higher density exceeds the social costs, in some portions of the neighborhood and not in others. Wholesale redevelopment is infeasible, scattered private redevelopment has been tried for fifteen years and has now been rejected, and a freeze on all development is unrealistic; I the new plan recognizes these extremes and ` avoids them, but there is still no way to de- termine at what point in time and in what locations the interests of the community as a whole are best served by redevelopment, and when they are best served by preservation. 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CITY,OF IOWA CITY! Deo'irtmgqt 0! Plentjir m rn D e ve 16 p,mentmT."-ptc;, Joni �l itesearch n .... ... .... AA, ll, 1101111 , CITY,OF IOWA CITY! Deo'irtmgqt 0! Plentjir m rn D e ve 16 p,mentmT."-ptc;, Joni �l itesearch n .... ... .... MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NE5 The research and studies forming the CITY OF IOWA CITY basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop. City Council ment (HUD). The statements and Mary C. Neuhauser t conclusions contained herein are Carol deProsse those of the grantee and do not John Balmer necessarily reflect the views of the David Ferret U.S. Government in general or HUD in Robert Vevera, Mayor particular. Neither the United States Clemens Erdahl nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- Glenn E. Roberts pressed or implied, or assumes re- Pat Foster' sponsibility for the accuracy or com- Max Selzer' j pleteness of the information herein. f Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain** Jane Jakobsen + Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer 1 Juanita Vetter City Stall 1 Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community ' Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members " Past Chairperson } j THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional i 11� Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director ' Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader 5 A complete list of the reports In this series appears on the inside back cover. § t MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NE5 I HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) HISTORIC STRUCTURES INVENTORY (SELECTED PORTIONS*) Elaine Baxter October 1977 Revised May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of. Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City *The complete survey is available from the Institute of Urban and Regional Research. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES FOREWORD 1 Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and 4 Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was 1 made to the City of Iowa City, and the work carried out by } the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. This inventory identifies and records those structures within the North Side neighborhood which possess historic or architectural significance, up to approximately World War I. As one component of a comprehensive planning study of the neighborhood, the historic survey is intended to serve two major purposes: first, it attempts to document 4 some of the many social and physical resources that make the community an important and worthwhile segment of Iowa City, and second, it attempts to integrate a concern for historic preservation with a general interest in neighborhood protection. ' It is the recommendation of this study that some kind of additional incentive to retain the structures identified in this inventory be created possibly in the form of an historic district or districts. Iowa has recently enacted enabling legislation which describes the process by which these districts may be established, and many other instruments can be used for protecting historic resources. i A note of appreciation is warranted for the people whose knowledge of architectural history and historic 1 inventories was drawn upon for this inventory. Dawn Chapman of the City of Iowa City, Professors Robert Dykstra and Laurence Lafore of the Department of History of the University of Iowa, Lauren Horton of the Iowa State Historical Department, Jerry and Carol Goddard of Burlington, Iowa, and Todd Mozingo of MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIRES the Division of Historic Preservation of the Iowa State Historical Department all were helpful with their advice. Also, the residents of the North Side neighborhood were unfailingly helpful in supplying information about their homes and neighborhood. Elaine Baxter conducted the entire survey, which includes almost 450 properties in the full survey, by herself. ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES DBL CONTENTS FOREWORD HISTORIC STRUCTURE INDEX MAP HISTORY OF THE NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD Ear1Y Residents Business Growth and Change PROTECTING HISTORIC RESOURCES Historic Landmarks Historic Districts Historic Inventories Easements and Covenants Revolving Funds GUIDELINES FOR AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE INVENTORY Identification Description Historic Significance REFERENCES HISTORIC STRUCTURES SURVEY iii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111[S PAGE i 1 2 2 3 4 6 6 7 7 8 9 11 11 13 18 26 HISTORIC STRUCTURE INDEX MAP NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD BROWN + •• ■•.•s • • •••• • F; •• ++ •• RONALOS • • e •W • •Z• "` ' W K CHURCH Z D. U ■ • • 7 • • • : F. • • ■ • • m • • Z y1Ed)• • ■0'Z • • W0Q FAIRCHILO, T 77• • • • • • • ■ • • . • ■ • u • ■ - DAV ENPO RT DLOOMINfi TON an am on ""j •au•ee • e +■■ ••• ••■ J C + HOSPITAL a Cx` ]�7 38 L MARKETIs a " gCHOOL ■ •■ ■■ • • •• So u•• ■••■ E ^JEFFERSON KEY 59 ,Block Number Historic Structure Location FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1101RES HISTORY OF THE NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD The history of the North Side eighborhood begins in 1839 with the founding of the City of Iowa City. The First Legislative Assembly, meeting in Burlington in 1839, passed a bill to locate the permanent capital of the Territory of Iowa in Johnson County. The Iowa City site was picked for the new seat of government and by May of 1839 the new city was surveyed and platted. All of the North Side neighborhood was contained with- in the boundaries of the original City of Iowa City. The neighborhood extends from Jefferson Street on the south to Brown Street on the north, and from Dubuque Street on the west to Governor Street on the east. This area, lying just north of the central business district and west of the campus of the University of Iowa, was one of the earliest parts of the city to be settled. EARLY RESIDENTS The people who first settled on the North Side, and those who came after them, left a record of their way of life in the buildings which they built. The oldest homes still standing in the neighborhood are simple in style. The architecture of these buildings most closely resembles the Greek Revival style which was popular in the United States from about 1820 through the 1840's. The majority of the new arrivals came from Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania and New York, and they built their new homes to look like the ones they left behind. Churches were quickly established in the new communi- ty, and the first Mass in Iowa City was celebrated in 1840 on the site of the present St. Mary's Catholic Church. The Methodists founded their church in 1840, on the location now occupied by the United Methodist Church. 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES td01NES Immigrants moved to Iowa City, and the North Side, from Ireland, Germany, Scotland and, in the late 1840's, from Bohemia. The Bohemians, or Czechs, moved into the northeast part of the North Side; this area cane to be called "Goosetown". They built their parish church -- St. Wenceslaus -- in 1893, and Czech Hall in 1900. This community building is now used for the Preucil School Of Music, but its history is not forgotten; the building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. BUSINESS It was not long before a commercial area grew up on the North Side, along Market Street between Linn and Gilbert. Three breweries dominated the block; first, the Englert's established a brewery in 1853 on the south side of the 300 block of Market. Across the street, on the north side of Market, was the Dostal Brothers Great Western Brewery.' Down the block on the southwest corner of Linn and Market was the Union Brewery, owned by Conrad Graf and later by Hotz and Geiger. This building, built in 1856, is still in use today by the Economy Advertising Company. The other breweries have been demolished, and parking lots now occupy the sites. Other businesses came and went, and a listing of them illuminates a way of life now past. There were, ice houses, meat markets, cobblers, saloons, groceries, and lunch rooms. There was a soda water bottling business, a confectionary, a tin shop, a barber, a blacksmith, a bakery and a carpet weaver. Protecting all these establishments, ,and the surrounding residents, was the Alert Hose Company, ready to battle fires when summoned from its headquarters at 204 Linn. 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES Some th'_ngs have not changed so much; drugs were dispensed from the same corner where Pearson's pharmacy now does business. Since the 1850's there have been rooms for rent on the second and third floor of the building where Sutton T.V. is located. Many familiar institutions like John's Grocery and Taco Grande have housed a succession of enterprises since the 1870's and the 1880's. I One of Iowa City's most distinctive commerical buildings -- Slezak Hall -- is located on the northwest corner of Linn and Bloomington. Nostalgia for Bohemia must have inspired the design for this complex of buildings, which included a saloon, a grocery, a stage, meeting rooms, a hotel, boarding rooms and space for horses and carriages for the guests. The entire group of buildings is still intact and now houses Pagliai's Pizza, the Laundromat and the Holub Apartments. GROWTH AND CHANGE The simple architecture of the 1840's gave way to more complex and ornate styles, and the buildings on the North Side mirrored the tastes of the times. The residents of the North Side were primarily middle and working class people and there are few opulent homes in the neighborhood. There are some larger and more distinctive houses, but the dominant theme is one of modest houses. They represent, on a small scale, the changing styles that shaped American architecture from the 1840's until World War I -- the period covered in this inventory. As the population of Iowa City grew and the North Side became more built up, many early buildings were torn down or moved to different locations. Around the turn of the century many of the older small brick and stone buildings were replaced by larger frame houses. J MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1110INE5 The North Side not only was a neighborhood of residences, businesses and churches; it also had schools and a hospital. In the 19th century, Sisters of Mercy the Hospital and the Josephite Sani- tarium were both on the block now covered by Mercy Hospital. A branch of Ralston Creek flowed through the block, but was covered over by the turn of the century. Other landmarks in the neighborhood which have vanished include the brickyard in Happy Hol the J. low Park, T. Aldous Greenhouse (located on the lot now occupied by Eagle's Supermarket), and the Third Ward School on the southeast corner i Johnson. of Davenport and j Despite the changes, the alterations and litions, the most remarkable the demo - neighborhood is feature of the North Side j its continuity. Here is a neighborhood t that displays the range of domestic and co r American Architecture from the 1840's onward. Tial j growth was over by World War I but thThe major jbuildings dating from the 1920, ere are many Want character of the Wei s and 1930's. The domi- nant has years. survived for 138 It is an American neighborhood of a type as once common and now rapidly 'disappearing into our past. i d i 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES PROTECTING HISTORIC RESOURCES His architectural resources have long been of some interest and have recently attracted a sub- stantial and increasing concern. Consequently, a number of mechanisms for protecting historic resources have been developed, and the variety and effectiveness of these measures have been accelerating. A few will be listed and briefly described.* Whatever instrument or combination is used, success in preservation depends upon a consistent and high level of community support, within the neighborhood and also in the larger community. HISTORIC LANDMARKS At an earlier stage in historic preservation policy, landmark designation generally implied national signifi- cance, complete restoration, and a single major structure. The concept has since been broadened so that the National Register of Historic Places now includes structures and districts, of state and local interest as well as national, and structures adapted for reuse as well as meticulous restorations. Landmark status helps to heighten awareness and may add or detract from the value of the property, depending j upon potential alternative uses of the site, but it does jnot impose controls unless supplemented by statute or ordinance, or unless Federal funds are involved. The *Succinct but much more complete surveys of historic preservation law and techniques can be found in several articles in the July/August issues of Urban Land, 34, 7 (1975) and in the article by John R. Schein, Jr., listed in the references at the end of this introductory section. 6 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES MOINES North Side has many historic structures -- documented by this inventory -- but few if any are significant enough by themselves to warrant landmark designation. HISTORIC DISTRICTS Districts may be designated in the National Register, through state enabling statutes, and by local ordinance; all of these are available in most states. Some of the more famous neighborhoods that have utilized this device are the Vieux Carre in New Orleans, College Hill in Providence, Beacon Hill in Boston, Society Hill in Philadelphia, and Historic Savannah in Georgia. Some kind of review process is always required for establish- ment of an historic district, and controls imposed depend primarily upon local ordinances. The advantages of an historic district are twofold: non -historic properties may be restricted for the benefit of the historic quality of the district as a whole, and no single property needs to qualify for landmark status. Controls are typically oriented to the preservation of exterior aspects of s structures, perhaps limited to facades, and the compati- bility of new structures or additions. Iowa has recently enacted historic district enabling { legislation, originally intended for the Amana colonies, S but so far no use has been made of the statute. A good ii deal of neighborhood and resident participation is permitted in the Iowa model, while also requiring approval by the State Division of Historic Preservation. HISTORIC INVENTORIES The primary purpose of an inventory, as is the case here, is to stimulate interest in the historic quality of local structures, to encourage further effort on the part 7 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raolMES of residents and property owners to document structures and take advantage of the historic qualities, and to provide information that may be useful to persons seeking to retain existing historic structures. With strong community and neighborhood support, an inventory can prove to be a very effective instrument for slowing the destruc- tion of historic resources, but a good organization of active buffs, a high level of vigilance against threats to historic structures, and a willingness to put forth Political effort at critical times are all required. Most of the various means for protecting historic resources require an inventory, and so it is often a good Place to start. The net for the North Side inventory has been cast broadly, even though many of the individual pro- perties are not particularly significant by themselves. A historic inventory can also be integrated into a general process of development review in which applications for construction and demolition are not granted until a review and assessment of impacts -- historic, environmental, neighborhood, fiscal, etc., -- has been carried out. There is no assurance that historic assets will be preserved via this mechanism, but it provides a level of protection that favors preservation more than an inventory by itself, yet less than an historic district. I EASEMENTS AND COVENANTS Property rights (up to and including outright acqui- sition) can be acquired by public agencies and private groups, especially non-profit organizations. These rights, in the form of easements, impose constraints upon the use of the property (e.g., the facade must be retained) and usually reduce the market value of the property. Owners may in some instances be willing to donate an easement, E:7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES in return for lower property taxes. The easements may be held by a private organization or by a public agency and can, of course be sold back to the property owner. Covenants are restrictions which pass with title to the property, and can, again, be imposed by purchase or by voluntary imposition; purchase may be by negotia�. tion or, through a public agency carrying out a public purpose, by condemnation. It is not at all uncommon for neighborhood organizations to acquire properties, add restrictive covenants to the title, and resell the properties. REVOLVING FUNDS Revolving funds act as pools of cash or credit that may be used to finance mortgages in the neighborhood, to acquire properties for purposes of rehabilitation and resale or for adding covenants, to acquire easements, or t to support commercial establishments and services. Sources of funds may be Federal or other government pro- grams, or private capital, including local lenders, churches, and civic organizations. As the present inventory demonstrates, the North Side is historic in the sense of showing vestiges of an average middle-class American neighborhood as it has evolved over better than a hundred years. There is little in the way of national landmarks or mansions in the North Side, yet the historic quality of the neighborhood as a whole is of major interest to the City of Iowa City and has some state and national significance as well. Much of the stylistic variations that were typical of previous periods have been removed or covered up, but a great deal remains and a modest amount of restoration and re- habilitation could greatly enhance the historic character of the neighborhood. 0 PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I70UIEs The North Side is beset with a number of detri- men'=al influences, however, in the form of incompatible apartment and commercial development, excess demand for parking, and large volumes of through traffic. Historic preservation will not be successful as long as these problems continue to be aggravated by neighbor- hood land use control policies and suburban development outside the neighborhood. The recently approved compre- hensive plan for the City provides some improvement in local policies affecting the North Side, but these are still insufficient to provide long run stability and protection for the neighborhood. 10 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i i GUIDELINES FOR AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE INVENTORY The guidelines which follow explain how the informa- tion was gathered and recorded for the North Side Neighbor- hood Preservation Study historic Structure Inventory. Residents of the neighborhood who would like to do fhrther research on the architectural or historical significance of their own homes or the neighborhood as a whole can use these guidelines, and they will prove helpful as well as to the professional planner who wishes to conduct a simi- lar project. Many of the inventory sheets are only partially completed, but this should be sufficient to provide a skeletal view of the architectural and historical significance of the structures in the neighborhood built prior to World War I. Further work will still be necessary to flesh out the story of the North Side neighborhood. A copy of the inventory form appears on the next page, and the items below refer to sections on that form. IDENTIFICATION 1. Block Obtain the city block number from the Iowa City Assessor's office at Johnson County Courthouse. 2. Address List the number and street address of the building. 3. Present Use For the North Side neighborhood the uses will be either single family residential, multiple family residential, commercial, religious, or educational. In the latter three cases, give the specific name of the occupant; for example: 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: present use: present owner: date of construction: building type and material: architectural style; condition; importance to neighborhood: notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Ira MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINEs block: z O lot ¢ U no. owner F� occupied: z w A z i commercial - John's Grocery. Information about present use can be obtained at the City Assessor's office at the Johnson County Courthouse, and should be field checked. 4. Lot Number The City Assessor's identifying lot number will be found at the City Assessor's Office at the Johnson County Courthouse. 5. Owner_ Occupied Only relevant for residential uses. Check ownership Of property at the City Assessor's office, and cross- check with listings in the Iowa City Telephone Directory j. and City Directory to ascertain owner occupancy. ? DESCRIPTION a � h 1• Date Of Construction The date of construction for the buildin s by this inventorY was dg covered determined by two methods listed below. A third method, not employed here, will be explained to assist on this subject, people wishing to do further research (a) exact dating For this inventory, reference was made to books be Iowa City architecture by Keyes, Lafore and Weber. These works give exact dates for a limited number of North Side structures. Dates for a great many more buildings were obtained from information contained in the Sanborn Insurance Maps located at the Iowa State Nistori- Cal Library in Iowa City. The first of these maps for Iowa sequent maps weCity was issued in 1883 and sub - re published in 1888, 1899, 1906, 1912 and 1920. The maps depict all the 9, 190 tures on a block, in outline form, and denote the building materials used. Not all blocks are included, but for those that are it is possible to date post -1883 structures with a high degree of accuracy. 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140 nu s (b) Approximate Dating by Architectural Styles An estimate was made of the date of construc- tion for the majority of buildings in the North Side neighborhood. This was done by studying the architectural styles that were popular during the period covered in the inventory from approxi- mately 1840 up to World War I. Books by Plymat, Whiffen, and Williams contain pictures and descriptions of 19th and early 20th century archi- tectural styles and list the years these styles were in fashion. Keyes' and Lafore's books were also useful in this effort. Buildings which are outstanding examples on the North Side of styles occurring after World War I are also included. Whiffen and Lafore were the only sources used for the post -World -War -I period. The term "circa", meaning approximately, has been used when uncertainty exists about the exact date of construction. In all such cases the abbreviated form "c." precedes the date; for example: c. 1890. (c) Other Research Techniques The Iowa State Historical Society Library in Iowa City, the Iowa City Public Library and the Special Collections section of the State University of Iowa Library in Iowa City are all repositories for a great deal of useful information about the older buildings on the North Side. The librarians will be able to assist individuals in their search for early newspapers of Iowa City, old city directories, histories of Iowa City and Johnson County and collections of early letters, photographs and diaries. The Historic Preservation office of the Iowa State Historical Department in Iowa City can provide information on research methods and the results of studies in other communities. Documents kept at the Johnson County Courthouse provide other clues helpful when assigning dates. Wills, deeds and the Assessor's tax roles are all potential sources of informa- tion. Property owners can examine their abstracts; a sudden increase in property value indicates construction on the lot. i InLcrviews with older residents can yield data on year of construction or information on alterations or movement of buildings to new sites. These methods were not used in completing the inventory, but should be used in adding to the body of knowledge contained in this report. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101rr[S VA Building Type and Material a. number of stories one story two story three story describe any variation from the above, or any combinations b. building materials brick wood frame stucco shingle stone siding overlay of more recent addition aluminum asbestos perma-stone imitation brick siding describe any other building materials that occur that are not listed above 3. Architectural Style The buildings on the North Side are generally a simplified version of the several styles that were popular in the United States from the period of settlement of Iowa City in the late 1830's through the Victorian styles of the middle and late 19th century and into the early 20th century. Pictures and descriptions of the styles most pre- valent in the North Side follow these guidelines, and the reader is advised to consult these in order to become familiar with the characteristics of the various styles. The information for this section comes from Lafore, Plymat, Whiffen and Williams. The terms "early" or "late" precede the style names when accurate dating information suggests that the structure has been built somewhat be- fore or after the period during which that style flourished. 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Two styles that are common on the North Side do not lend themselves to easy categorization in the recognized styles. The terms that have been coined to describe these styles for the purposes of this study are North Side Victorian c. 1885 - 1905 and North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage c. 1890 - 1910. The architectural styles most often seen in the North Side neighborhood are: a. Greek Revival c. 1830 - 1850 b. Italianate c. 1845 - 1850 c. Gothic c. 1845 - 1910 (this includes both early Gothic and late Carpenter Gothic) d. Queen Anne c. 1875 - 1900 e. North Side Victorian c. 1885 - 1905 f. North Side Turn -of -the Century Cottage c. 1890 - 1910 g. Georgian Revival c. 1890 - 1920 I Other styles which are present in the North Side neighborhood are noted in the space for archi- tectural style, but no attempt has been made to picture and describe every style in the guidelines, �I because they appear so rarely and are not typical of the neighborhood. Whiffen's book provides the most complete coverage.of the many styles of American architecture in use during the 19th and 20th centuries. 4. Condition Using the following criteria, describe the condition of the structure. a. excellent - no visible repair work needed b. good - major repairs not needed, but need for general maintenance C. fair - in need of repairs more than routine maintenance work d. deteriorated - in need of major repairs 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES i 5. Importance to Neighborhood Rate the architectural or historical importance to the neighborhood using the following remarks. a. has importance independent of surrounding structures - This category is reserved for the most important structures in the North Side. example: 120 N. Dodge, 319 Bloomington b. focal point of block - In a group of buildings this one stands out because it is more interest- ing architecturally. example: 215 N. Linn C. important as part of a cluster of buildings - This building is not distinctive on its own but gains importance as part of a group. example: 229 N. Gilbert d. later alterations have diminished architectural value - So much of the original building has been remodeled or covered over that it lacks the appearance common to its period. I example: 331 Market 6. Notable Features of Building Site Mention anything distinctive about the following elements of the building. a. porch b. windows c. doors d. roofs e. chimneys f. brackets or "gingerbread" g. columns h. foundation i. shed, barns or landscape features j, describe any other outstanding features about the exterior of the building If the structure is mentioned as an outstanding example of its style by Keyes or Lafore, or is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, that should be noted. This information can be obtained from the Division of historic Preservation, Iowa State Historical Department, Iowa City. kiwi MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo119ES HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE 1. Original Owner Name the source for information, Keyes, Lafore, Weber, or other. In most cases this will be blank and further research will be necessary to determine the original owner. 2. Original Use The same comments apply here as above. 3. Historical Significance Information of historical value will be entered here. To determine historical significance it is necessary to consult reference works on local history, architectural history, or individuals familiar with the history of the North Side Neighbor- hood. The information used in this inventory came from books by Keyes, Lafore, Weber and the Sanborn Insurance Maps. If the sources cite information about the structure being moved from its original location, that should be entered here. 4. Sources List the sources of information used in dating or determining historical significance. IP, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES I GREEK REVIVAL 1830 - 1850 The earliest settlers in the North Side Neighborhood built structures based on the styles of ancient Greece. This Greek Re- vival style was very popular in the eastern part of the United States, and as the pioneers moved west they built their homes in this mode. The more ornate examples of Greek Revival with their classic columned porticos do not appear in the North Side. Instead, the typi- cal Greek Revival building seen here is very simple in form, and many structures will have only a few details of the style on a simple rectangular structure. 219 N. Gilbert materials wood frame brick stone - local yellow sandstone style one story two story door rectangular glass transom over door 19 windows six over six panes stone lintels over windows on brick and stone versions roof low pitch to roof broad cornice broken pediment dentil molding MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPT DS- DES MOI REs tow pitchea vroof with dmtil sir over six Vjir�lOW -molding —_ - = `z _ = pa"e% !.~ '� Stone Lintel anchor iron _ _ �: - ttansom a= Y� 219 N. Gilbert materials wood frame brick stone - local yellow sandstone style one story two story door rectangular glass transom over door 19 windows six over six panes stone lintels over windows on brick and stone versions roof low pitch to roof broad cornice broken pediment dentil molding MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPT DS- DES MOI REs ITALIANATE c. 1845 - 1885 The coronation of Queen Victoria on June 28, 1838 marked the beginning of the Victorian era, which lasted for more than 60 years. The term "Victor- ian" is applied to a number of architec- tural styles that were popular during the years of Victoria's reign. The first of these styles to become popular in Iowa City was the Italianate It was imported from the East, where eaves with htsvy brackets Pt agars on Porch- or veranda materials wood frame brick style one story - not common two story wealthy persons were building homes in the 1830's and 1840's. The new styles became popular in the West via pattern books, which allowed local carpenters and builders to copy the fancy buildings from "back East". The Italianate house with a tower or cupola Is not common on the North Side; instead, Italianate fea- tures appear on the basic rectangular house of the Greek Revival period. Low pitched �.- 1161M Miui� 9 18 E. Je f f ersort windows tall slender - often floor length segmental arches over windows - early ornate arches over windows - late bay windows common 2.0 roof low pitch to roof extended eaves ornate brackets, often paired, under eaves, around porches and bay windows door double doors common oval glass inserts in door porch almost always a porch (often called veranda) square pillars with brackets MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111E5 M -.= GOTHIC C. 1845 - 1910 At about the same time that Italianate style buildings were replacing Greek Revival in popu- larity, the Gothic style was also being introduced. "The Architec- ture of Country Houses" by Andrew Jackson Downing, printed in 1850, helped popularize both the Italian - ate and the Gothic. The Gothic style is easy to identify but hard to date. That is because it remained in use for such gingerbread bargeboard on. gab tes ----� aired window wit4 pointed arch trite — gingerbread trim o n Po materials wood frame style one story two story a long time, from the Gothic Revival in the 1840's, 1850's and 1860's to the Carpenter Gothic of the late nineties. The Gothic style has sharp- ly pointed rooflines, multiple gables and fancy scroll woodwork. With the invention of the mechanical jigsaw, gingerbread decoration was made pos- sible on a grand scale. Patterns were mass produced, and trim was applied to otherwise plain houses. Itis often the case that this trim has been removed in later years. 17o E.Fmircttil.d. windows pointed -early Gothic paired windows in some instances 21 roof sharply pitched steep pointed gables gingerbread bargeboards porch aingerbread trim MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id0111ES ateef pitched roo f .Day Avi=•aow QUEEN ANNE c. 1875 - 1900 The name Queen Anne is a mis- leading one for this style. It is not an adaptation of the architecture of Queen Anne's time, but is instead an American version of a style popular in England in the latter part of the nine- teenth century. The Queen Anne style is charac- fish scale shin.gl-e s steep pitched. roof with Tnany gables -T materials wood frame - mixture of surfaces board siding and fish scale shingles most common brick - mixed with fish scale shingles on gables style one story - uncommon two story porch delicate spindlework classical details terized by complexity and irregularity of form. There is always a variety of surface texture, roofs and wall projec- tions. The tower or turret is the most prominent feature on some North Side Queen Anne houses. Pattern books and blueprints by mail were the source of inspiration for most of the North Side Queen Anne houses. tower targe porch with spindle or gitager - bread trim 314 E. Church windows bay windows frequent variety of window shapes window panes often outlined with stained glass squares leaded glass and stained glass roof steeply pitched many gables dormers and towers 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES !401RE5 NORTH SIDE VICTORIAN c. 1885 - 1905 North Side Victorian is d term coined to cover the large number of late nineteenth century houses on the North Side which owe a great deal to both Queen Anne and Georgian Revival styles, but are really too simple in form to fit either style. Most often there Is a prominent front gable on these houses and the gable often has fish scale shin- gles on the gable peak. There are porches, sometimes Queen Anne, some- times Georgian Revival in detail. It is gingerbi bargebod Large f rc window upper zed usually St or leaded Possible that some houses, In their original form, would be classified as one of the above styles. Over the years a great many structures have had all trim removed, porches torn off, siding applied, and new windows added, so that all that is left to hint at the style are the steep roof and the gables. There may be a large margin of error in this inventory in judging correctly the original architectural styles of these houses. materials wood frame - fish scale shingle wood trim common brick style one story two story windows large front window - upper portion stained or leaded glass 23 L roof (able torch with gingerbread .rim 5 o o E. ChutrtV roof steeply pitched front gable most prominent feature orch gingerbread trim Georgian Revival details MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES NORTH SIDE TURN -OF -THE -CENTURY COTTAGE c. 1890 - 1910 There are many simple rectangular or L-shaped houses on the North Side which do not fit into any of the catego- ries of Victorian architectural styles. These houses are usually one story, al- though there are some two story houses classified as cottagea in this inventory. These cottages bear a resemblance to the earlier Greek Revival style, but the pitch of the roof is steeper, the cor- ro d distinctive treatment of wiUAVWs or door - material wood frame style nice is not as wide, and the windows are taller and narrower. In their origi- nal state they may have had trim clas- sified as Carpenter Gothic. As in the case of the North Side Victorian, the trim and the porches have often been re- moved leaving a very simple, plain house. These houses are difficult to date accu- rately, and the inventory may be in error on many Turn -of -the -Century Cottages, 01L 814 E. Church one story roof two story moderdtr. to steep pitch windows porch no distinctive treatment plain or simple trim 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs moderate pitched roof With, plait+. E .-T GEORGIAN REVIVAL c. 1890 - 1920 The Georgian Revival represents a turning away from the foreign influences of the Italianate, the Gothic, and the Queen Anne styles. Americans were look- ing to their own architectural past and were building houses based on Colonial styles. The turn -of -the -century Georgian Revival still showed Victorian influence, but grad- ually the new style resembled the 1700's more and the 1800's less. leaded windoi C01UTMM witty heavy atone supper On the North Side, the Georgian Revival house is usually not ornate in form. There is often a Palladian -style window in a front dormer, and doors sometimes have fan lights. The domi- nant feature, is the front porch with co- lumns topped by capitals in the Doric, Ionic or Corinthian orders. 2 14 E. Church materials roof wood frame hipped, pitched or gambrel brick dental molding under eaves style door two story fan light over door windows porch Palladian -style columns of Classic orders leaded windows clustered columns paired windows short columns with heavy bevelled glass stone supports 7 r, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES r7 1 REFERENCES Insurance Map of Iowa City, Iowa. New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Co., 1883 and 1888. New York: Sanborn -Perris Map Co., 1892 and 1899. New York: Sanborn Map Co., 1906, 1912, and 1920. Keyes, Margaret N. Nineteenth Century Home Architecture of Iowa City. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1966. Lafore, Laurence. American Classic. Iowa City: Iowa State Historical Department Division of the State Historical Society, 1975. Morrison, Jacob. Historic Preservation Law Washington National Trust for Historic 'Preservation, 1965. and Robert R. Dykstra. "Report on the Proposed Rezoning Area of Iowa City's Near North Side". Iowa City, 1975, (mimeographed). Plymat, William Jr. The Victorian Architecture of Iowa. Des Moines: Elephant s Eye, Inc., 1976. Schein, John R., Jr. "Historic Preservation in the Com- prehensive Plan", Practicing Planner, (March 1977), pp. 29-32. Weber, Irving B. Iowa City. Iowa City: Iowa City Lions Club, 1976. Weidl, Michael F. "The Law of Historic Preservation", Urban Land, 34, 7 (1975), pp. 27-30. Whiffen, Marcus. American Architecture Since 1780• A Guide to Styles. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1969. Williams, Henry Lionel and Ottalie K. Williams. A Guide to Old American Houses 1700-1900. New York: A. S. Barnes, 1962. 26 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES W O C BLOCK 18 MARKET JEFFERSON Historical Structure KEY ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS•DES 140INES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 18 i address: 117 N. Lucas lot Present use: single family residence no. 37-2073 ner present owner: City Property Corp, o� Occupied: no date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 16 z address: 7291:. Market lot 0 < a no. 2075 present use: multiple family residence Present owner: Roberta Fenlon owner Cont:occupied: no Cora Griffin E+ z • w q date of construction: c. 1850 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame-brick veneered i architectural style: Greek Revival condition: deteriorated i importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures notable features of building and Z site: i In describing this house, Keyes refers to it as the Templin- Fenlon House. There are segmental F a c U arches over the windows and I door, window sills of dressed stone, star-shaped anchor irons and horizontal boarding in the gable peaks w q . The door treatment, with its fluted pilasters topped by Corinthian capitals, a ddition. may be a later b 1 original owner: James D. Templin I original use: - ! historic significance: 3 W r U z ' z r I U O H sources: Keyes, Sanborn 1899 I %i I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES 1401NES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 721 E. Market present use: multiple family residence present owner: Ida Blecker block: 18 lot no. 2076 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c.1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -aluminum siding architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: Another 2 story wood frame house occupied this site prior to 1906. sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906, 1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES w I ; U 4 z C7 H U) , U H O H H x r, a North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 719 E. Market present use: single family residence present owner: Barber/Cont: Mulligan block: 18 lot no. 2077 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian transitional to Georgian Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1906, 1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES .. G W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 18 z O lot ZC address: 120 N. Dodge no. 2081 U present use: single family residence owner H present owner: Henry Lindner occupied: yes w Q date of construction: 1852 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Greek Revival condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures z O notable features of building and site: F I This house has features which mark it as transitional from w H p Greek Revival to Gothic Revival. The hood over the door, and the w arch -like brackets on the side porch, are Gothic 'Revival touches. Q The stone lintels over the windows and the transom over the front door are pure Greek Revival. . original owner: S. F. W. Branch original use: w historic significance: U z U H z - H U a O F sources: Keyes i I MICROFILMED BY '1 JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES rs North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 114 N. Dodge Present use: multiple family residence present owner: E. Hicklin block: 18 lot no. 2082 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: Gothic condition: good importance to neighborhood: Important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IEOINES F_ 9 r. I I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 719 E. Tefferson Present use: multiple fomily residence present owner: Margaret Gerker block: 18 lot no. 2087 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIMES Z I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 720 E. Jefferson present use: single family residence present owner: Phillip and Shirley Rocca block: 18 lot no. 2088 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoINES .. IZ North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 722 E. Jefferson present use: single family residence present owner: McLaughlin/Cont: Kindl block: 18 lot no. 2089 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -aluminum siding architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: By 1906 a 1 story addition had been made to the rear, and porches were added on the east and west sides of the house. sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPT DS -DES MOI MES z .dw i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 730 E. Jefferson present use: single family residence present owner: James and Meg Vargason block: 18 lot no. 2090 owner occupied yes date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Tum -of -the -Century Cottage condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES E_ Q BLOCK 30 CHURCH MARKET ElHistorical Structure KEY ❑ Existing Structure / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110It1E5 �,1 �aC TI A11. I IVNky IV CCUkTS _ 1I C�PYEL u2P�E 1�IhrJl.1 a- ; � �I.A;((�FSJtIWV SCl1COL i TIP MARKET ElHistorical Structure KEY ❑ Existing Structure / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110It1E5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block.: 30 ZO ' lot H U address: 524 N. Johnson no. 119.3 present use: educational - Preucil School of Music owner r present owner: Safarik Lodge #75 occupied: i z W Cont: Wm. and Doris Preucil A i date of construction: 1900 s building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good z importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures U notable features of building and site: H a x Czech Hall, as this building was known, is cited by Lafore Q and Dykstra as a good example of early Georgian Revival. The building I is on the National Register of Historic Places. i i i I I j original owner: Bohemian Benevolent Association 1 original use: community building U historic significance: 2 The Czech community in Iowa City used this building as f a meeting hall. z C7 ` U M I U H a sources: Division of Historic Preservation, Iowa State Historical Department; Lafore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1906. FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 630 E. Fairchild present use: single family residence present owner: Paul Chelf block: 30 z 8 lot a no. 1194 O w owner F occupied: yes z w Q H date of construction: 1879 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: H F a H The trim on the porch of this house has, what Keyes calls, a U character reminiscent of Chinese lattice work. Lafore and Dykstra Q place the construction date c. 1850-1860. original owner: Francis X. Rittenmeyer original use: historic significance: U z U H fa z U) a O M x sources: Keyes, Lafore and Dykstra IIICROFiLMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111[s z z J BLOCK 54 PON." LDS CHURCH R, Historical Structure KEY Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOEi1CS 11 ■ �� CHURCH R, Historical Structure KEY Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOEi1CS North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NE5 z 0 address: lot 629 N. Gilbert H 4 U no. 758A Present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: 2 .Otto/Cont: occupied: no Richard Wayne w A date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance 0 notable features of building and site: .. F • a H x U w A original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NE5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 lot q address: 313 E. Ronalds no. 759 U Present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: George Pickering occupied: no 2 w Q date of construction: c. 1885-1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings p notable features of building and site: .� F a This North Side Victorian house has a bargeboard on the gable, U fish scale shingles and a pedimented porch. A original owner: original use: historic significance: w U sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES r401NEs U x O F U3 x North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 address: 311 E. Ronalds lot present use: multiple family residence no. 760 present owner: Gerald Dean owner Cont: Fred Sales occupied: no date of construction: c. 1870 added to c. 1905 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Greek Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: The wide eaves and Greek Revival door treatment indicate an early construction date. original owner: original use: historic significance: Porches were added to the house between 1899 and 1906. sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES z 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory i address: 628 N. Linn present use: multiple family residence ( present owner: William Terry A block: 59 lot no. 761 owner occupied; no date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian transitional to Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1906, 1912 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 z O address: 624 N. Linn lot F a present use: multiple family residence no. 762 U present owner: Sturdivant/Cont: owner no F Mac Investment Occupied:z w Q N date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: z O H H n. a U w A MICRONUIED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES SfOIMES original owner: original use: ; historic significance: w C I E`a ` z U a O f H W H sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICRONUIED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES SfOIMES F North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 z lot address: 620 N. Linn 0 9 Q jno. 763 Present use: single family residence U present owner: owner John Grady H occupied: yes z Q H date Of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings z notable features of building and site: 0 t H a The porch of this house has columns with Doric capitals. The front entrance has double a O golden oak doors with beveled glass panels. A i 1 f� I j original owner: original use: historic significance: w i U ' U z EOEO 9z a i O caH r� x sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 I t 9 i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 i z lot address: 308 E. Church O U no 765 present use: multiple family residence owner Present owner: Sweet/ Cont: z occupied: p no Mary Arp w Q date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Queen Anne condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance p notable features of building and site: F A towered Queen Anne without the peak, this house has U been transformed from its original form. The house at 314 shows the w style as it was in the 1890's. The 300 block of E. Church has been A ' praised by Lafore and Dykstra, and this house is pictured in Lafore. I j original owner: W Professor William A. Willis I original use: historic significance: w U I z The original owner was superintendent of Iowa City schools, 1884-1891, and principal of the Iowa City Academy � according to Keyes. z I U a O F CO x sources: i Keyes, Lafore, Lafore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1899 i Ij {{ i i i i I I I I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES 1101RES 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 314 E. Church Present use: single family residence present owner: Delta Chi Fraternity block: 54 z 0 lot ¢ no. 766 U owner H occupied: no z w A H date of construction: 1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Queen Anne condition: good' importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: H w The three story tower is the outstanding feature of the x house. The wrap-around porch has balustrade and grille of turned rr spindles. Both Keyes and Lafore show pictures of this house, A and Lafore and Dykstra call it "an almost perfect example of the towered Queen Anne style." original owner: Joseph Michael original use: historic significance: w U z U ti E� z c� sources: Keyes, Lafore, Lafore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1899 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINEs North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study" Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 i � lot address: 316 E. Church no. 767 present use: single family residence owner present owner: George Peiseler occupied: no date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: In a block which Lafore and Dykstra mention as having several distinctive houses, this house stands out as a simple Italianate style. i original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Lafore and Dykstra i i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101IIE5 :. F_ W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 318 E. Church present use: single family residence present owner: Martha Rohr block: 54 lot no. 768 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: The Italianate porch of this house attracts attention even in a block of outstanding houses. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Lafore and Dykstra MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 lot address: 324 E. Church no 789 present use: single family residence owner Present owner: James Quinn occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: Lafore and Dykstra single out the 300 block of E. Church Street as having an especially good collection of 19th Century houses. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Lafore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1899 i i i h MICROFILMED BY l DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS.DLS MOIRES z z W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 54 z 0 address: 330 E. Church lot 4 Present use: single family residence no. 770 present owner: Dorothy Moore owner occupied: yes z W C] H date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 1 story brick -aluminum siding architectural style: North Side Tum -of -the -Century Cottage condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: This is one of the 19th century houses which line the 300 block of 1., Church Street. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Wore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1899 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IMES F, O F a N x U w W z _Z J BLOCK 57 DAVENPORT s S 3 W m J /- BLOOMINGTON Historical Structure KEY ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110itiES 5 Md ,r MAROS �) s S 3 W m J /- BLOOMINGTON Historical Structure KEY ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110itiES 5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 57 2 O � ¢ address: 325 N. Gil Bert lot U Present use: single family residence no. 1339 .. present owner: Sutherland owner occupied: yes F i A date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material; 2 story wood frame R architectural style: Georgian Revival with 17th century baroque forms condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: F Lafore and Dykstra note that this house is unique in Iowa ~ City for its 17th Century baroque designs applied to a house which rAa U could be expected to follow the Georgian Revival style. The w distinctive trim around the windows and on the porch is noteworthy, A S original owner: f original use: historic significance: w � U z U z f � Y � � U x O F CO I� x sources: Sanborn 1906, 1912 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study j Historic Structure Inventory block: 57 z 0 lot Q address: 331 N. Gilbert no. 1340 U present use: multiple family residence owner F present owner: Scott and Keith occupied: z Cont: Strabala q date of construction: c. 1915 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings p notable features of building and site: E This is a Georgian Revival house with a decorative motif on w N U the porch pediment, Doric capitals on the porch columns and a w leaded glass window. Q original owner: original use: w historic significance: 2 U H z c� M U N a O EnEn I sources: i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory t i address: 321-323 B. Davenport ` present use: single family residence present owner: Pearson block: 57 lot no. 1341 owner occupied: yes date of construction: C. 1845-1855 building type and material: 1 story brick architectural style: Greek Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures notable features of building and site: Keyes mentions this as another of Iowa City's oldest buildings. The transom over the front entrance and the brick work over the windows are characteristic of these small Greek Revival Cottages. The houses on this side of the 300 block of Davenport are all 19th century construction according to Lafore and Dykstra original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Keyes, Lafore and Dykstra MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101tIES �_� r! North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 319 Davenport present use: single family residence Present owner: Daters block: 57 z ' 0 H lot E- no. 1342 owner F occupied: no z w Q j date of construction: c. 1900 l building type and material: 2 story wood frame - imitation brick siding architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished Importance z notable features of building and site: F a U w Q � I l original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899-1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 315 Davenport present use: single family residence present owner: Wagner block: 57 lot no. 1343 owner occupied: yes date of construction: 1850-1860 building type and material: 1 1/2 story brick -aluminum siding architectural style: Greek Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1888 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 328-330 Linn present use: multiple family residence present owner: Kehrer block: 57 lot no. 1345 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: i i original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899-1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 326 Linn present use: single family residence present owner: Costolo block: 57 lot no. 1346 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES F, r. North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 322 Linn Present use: single family residence present owner: Healy block: 57 lot no. 1347 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -aluminum siding architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: , i , i original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1906, 1912 I I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES C North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 31B Linn present use: single family residence present owner: Fennell block: 57 lot no. 1348 owner occupied: no date of construction: C. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: deteriorated rtant as part of a cluster of buildings importance to neighborhood: impo notable features of building and site: v yy L t 3 j� VSp original owner: g original use: l' historic significance: 1 r sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 !1 i a a MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES Q North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 308, 312, 314 Linn present use: multiple family residential present owner: Holub/Cont: Skarda block: 57 z 0 F lot U no. 1349 owner 1, occupied: no z w Q H date of construction: c. 1875 building type and material: 3 story brick architectural style: Italianate condition: excellent z importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures O H notable features of building and site: H a H cz This building is notable for its ornate stone arches over the windows, and the brackets under the eaves. Q original owner: original use: Slezak Hall historic significance: This portion of Slezak Hall was a hotel and boarding rooms, see the inventory sheet on 302-304 Bloomington for more details. sources: Sanborn 1888, 1892 Weber MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101REs North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 57 Z 0 H lot U address: 302-304 Bloomington no. 1349 present use: commercial Pizza Palace owner H present owner: Holub/Cont: Skarda occupied: w Q H date of construction: 1875 building type and material: 3 story brick architectural style: Italianate condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures notable features of building and site: This distinctive Italianate building not only has the typical brackets under the eaves, dentil molding on the cornice and arched windows, but is also notable for the unusual roof line both on this building and on the adjoining Laundromat at 310 Bloomington. original owner: original use: commercial - Slezak Hall historic significance: Slezak Hall housed a complex of uses including a grocery and a saloon on the first floor, a meeting room with a stage on the cecond floor and hotel and boarding rooms at the rear in what is now the Holub Apartments on Linn. The present Laundromat housed feed for horses and carriages were kept in the low building at the rear of the lot. sources: Sanborn 1888, 1892, 1899 Weber MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES �_5 W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 57 z o ¢ address; 310 Bloomington lotno. 1349 U Present use: commercial -Laundromat owner Present owner: Holub/Cont: Skarda occupied: 2 w q date of construction: 1875 building type and material: 1 1/2 story brick architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: .� F n. This building should be considered as part of Slezak Hall (302-304 U Bloomington). The style is distinctive and complements that building, w They were built as a complex. q original owner: original use: Slezak Hall - stable and feed historic significance: I U z Refer to the inventory sheet for 302-304 Bloomington. C'1 z C7 H ti 0'. O E H x sources: Sanborn 1888, 1892, 1899 Weber I I f i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES BLOCK 58 R LOOMINGTON Z J MARKET '•,= KEY Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Mol 1 -------I' ^—^---- 5 Z J MARKET '•,= KEY Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Mol 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 58 lot address: 219 N. Gilbert no. 36-1903 present use: multiple family residential owner present owner: Patricia Chase et al occupied: no date of construction: 1897 building type and material: 2 story stone architectural style: Greek Revival condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important independent of surroundings notable features of building and site: This is an early Iowa City Greek Revival house with stone lintels over six over six windows The door has side lights and a rectangular fan light and there is a decorative molding on the cornice. It is pictured in both Keyes and Lafore. original owner: Caroline Wentz original use: multiple family residential historic significance: This home, built of local yellow sandstone, is one of theoldest In Iowa City. It Is on the National Register of Historic Places sources: Keyes, Lafore, Division of Historic Preservation Iowa State Historical Department MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES M0111Es G 7 ra, 0 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 229 N. Gilbert present use: single family residential present owner: Mary Keating block: 58 lot no. 1905 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Queen Anne condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: There is a decorative motif on the porch pediment, a leaded glass window, a steep tin roof and a modified Palladian window surrounded by fish scale shingles in the front gable. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1892, 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIaEs Z 7 i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 58 address: 319 N. Bloomington lot 1906 Present use: Commercial -Walls Alive no. owner r present owner: Westinghouse Learning Corp. occupied: date of construction: C. 1870-1880 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surroundings notable features of building and site: The columns on the porch of this house have Italianate style bracket supports. There are ornamental stone arches over the windows, an oval window in the front gable and ornamented double doors. Heavy brackets appear under the eaves of the tin roof. A stone water table tops the stone foundation. The front porch was added c. 1895. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1883, 1888, 1892, 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NE5 7 P. I 0 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 214 N. Linn present use: commercial -Hamburg Inn MF -2 present owner: Kathleen Graf block: 58 lot no. 1911 owner occupied: date of construction: c . 1890 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: 1890's commercial condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: The decorative cornice is the type frequently seen in commercial buildings of the 1880's and 1890's. original owner: original use: historic significance: This building is the oldest of a group of buildings housing small businesses on this side of Linn Street. From the late 19th century and into the early 20th century the Alert Iiose company stood at 204 Linn. It provided fire protection and was famous for a pair of matched horses. Other business in this part of block 58 have included a tin shop, a cobbler a soda water bottling co. , a confectionary, a meat market and a drug store c. 1910 at 200 Linn. sources: Sanborn 1883, 1888, 1892, 1899, 1906, 1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 70 z J MARKET LEMwiq (TIAIEf; BLOCK 59 KEYLLJ Historical Structure Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a I I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 119 N. Gilbert present use: single family residence present owner: Klein block: 59 lot no. 1922 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1870-1880 building type and material: 2 story shingle architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important as part of cluster notable features of building and site: Further research is needed on this house; it is possible it was built in the Gothic or Italianate style, and has been altered over the years. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1883 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOINES I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 59 lot address: 318 E. Jefferson no. 1935 present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Paul Shaw/Cont: occupied: no 318 Jefferson Corp. , et al Mr date of construction: 1883 building type and material: 2 story brick -stucco applied later architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: E~ w Italianate brackets and dentil molding appear under eaves and U on porch cornice. The first floor windows extend to the floor and the w second floor windows have decorative stone segmental arches. The bay Q window on the second floor is repeated in a bay shaped entrance on the first floor. original owner: Robert Hutchinson original use: historic significance: This house was the only house on the west end of this block for many years. It was located near the back of the lot at 310 Jefferson and was moved to the present location c. 1905 sources: Keyes, Lafore Sanborn, 1888, 1892, 1899, 1906 I t 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 59 lot address: 331 C. Market no. 1925 present use: commercial Taco Grande owner present owner: Goldberg, Merrel, occupied: Trustee et al date of construction: c. 1870-1880 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: late Italianate j condition: good importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: Decorative flat arches over upper windows. d a original owner: original use: historic significance: In the 1880's a market was located in this building and by the 1890's a meat market was doing business on this site. To the west were a variety of small businesses including a barber, a blacksmith, a saloon and in the middle of the block stood the City Brewery. This was Iowa Clty's first brewery founded in 1853. There was also a brewery across the street on block 58 and on block 67. j sources: Sanborn 1883, 1888, 1892, 1899, 1906, Weber r i y MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORIES 7 F_ Id North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 59 lot address: 320 E. Jefferson no. 1936 present use: single family residence owner present owner: Douglass Lee occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1885 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Queen Anne condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures notable features of building and site: The variety of surface textures on this house is typically Queen Anne. Fish scale shingles appear on the bay window and also on the gable. The front gable peak has a decorative bargeboard. The variety of window types (stained glass, frosted glass, and small -paned windows) is also a feature of the Queen Anne style. The porch, with its Ionic capitals on the columns and dentil molding, was added to the house c. 1910 original owner: J.J. Englert according to Eva Englert, now deceased original use: historic significance: This house was originally located at 321 Market Street the only residence in a commercial block. To the west stood the City Brewery, Iowa City's first brewery built in 1853 and owned by J.J. Englert. The rest of the block housed an array of everchanging small businesses including a carpet weaver, a paint shop, black smith, saloon, barber and meat market where Taco aande now stands. Around 1910 the house was moved to the present location. Adeline Englert, a daughter of J.J. Englert, lived here until her death c. 1972. sources: Sanborn 1888, 1892, 1899, 1912 Weber MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tdOIREs r. 7 *, F a U w Q North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 328 N. Gilbert present use: multiple family residential present owner: Michael Hart block: 59 lot no. 1938 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: There is a large porch which wraps around the front and east side of the house. The porch has massive stone supports and square columns. Another noteworthy feature is the leaded bevelled glass Windows. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MIGROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES F_! a Q I i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 115 N. Gilbert present use: multiple family residence present owner: Reta B. Lakin block: 59 z lot a no. 1939 owner occupied: yes w Q H date of construction: c, 1850 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Greek Revival condition: good z importance to neighborhood: Important independent of surroundings O notable features of building and site: E a H a There are stone lintels over the windows and an oblong fanlight over the front entrance in the Greek Revival manner. Other notable features w include the dentil molding on the cornice and the stone water table Q topping the foundation. This house is referred to in Keyes as the Rohret-Lekin house. original owner: original use: w historic significance: U z a This house was originally located at 328 Jefferson. It housed U Iowa City's first City Hall c. 1875-1882. The move to the present location took place c. 1910 and the front porch was added at that time. H w sources: Sanborn 1883, 1888, 1892, 1899, 1900, 1912 Weber Keyes / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I FAIRCHILD BLOCK 70 r Lam„ P -z �(I I Bi N 4 I DAVENPORT s j- Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 70 O lot address: 225 E. Fairchild no. 1376 ¢ U present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Strub occupied: no z w Q H date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Queen Anne transitional to Georgian Revival condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: �. F a The porch of this house seems to be Georgian Revival, but the U many gables, fish scale shingles and finial on the roof all point to w the Queen Anne style. The architecture of the carriage house is similar Q to the main house. Lafore and Dykstra call this "...a large and imposing house....." I s i original owner: 1 original use: � historic significance: w U + z t 0 1 z 0 M i U + a O F x sources: Lafore and Dykstra, Sanborn 1899 i / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOHILS a North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 221 E. Fairchild present use: multiple family dwelling present owner: Strub block: 70 lot no. 1377 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Greek Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: The Sanborn insurance Map for 1899 shows a one-story wood frame building on this site. sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES re 7 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 70 lot address: 215 E. Fairchild no. 1378 present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Benson/Cont: occupied: no Richardson and Scheurman date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame - imitation brick siding architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 Mr i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 207-209 E. Fairchild present use: multiple family residence present owner: Pitkin block: 70 lot no. 1379 owner occupied: no date of construction: c . 1850-1860 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame architectural style: Greek Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: Pilasters by the front entrance and six over six windows indicate an early construction date. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES .. Q North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 412 N. Dubuque present use: single family residence present owner: Nolan block: 70 z date date of construction: c. 1840-1850 building type and material: I story brick architectural style: Greek Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures O notable features of building and site: H a H rci Another of Iowa City's very early homes located on the North U Side, this house has segmental arches over the windows and a transom q over the door. Keyes refers to it as the Johnson -Wilson House. original owner: Sylvanus Johnson original use: w historic significance: Z 4 Property originally owned by Iowa City's first brick maker Sylvanus Johnson. z C7 m sources: Keyes MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES 0 lot 4 no. 1383 U w owner H occupied: no ;7 - date date of construction: c. 1840-1850 building type and material: I story brick architectural style: Greek Revival condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures O notable features of building and site: H a H rci Another of Iowa City's very early homes located on the North U Side, this house has segmental arches over the windows and a transom q over the door. Keyes refers to it as the Johnson -Wilson House. original owner: Sylvanus Johnson original use: w historic significance: Z 4 Property originally owned by Iowa City's first brick maker Sylvanus Johnson. z C7 m sources: Keyes MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study i Historic Structure Inventory block: 70 lot address: 220 C. Davenport no. 1389 present use: single family residence owner present owner: Blanch Peters occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1860-1870 { building type and material: 2 story wood frame -asbestos siding ! architectural style: Italianate condition: fair importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: I The Carpenter Gothic porch is a later addition to a house which displays elements of an earlier style. At one time there were probably brackets under the wide eaves. The floor length windows and transom i over the front door are other indicators of an early construction date. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 1W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 222 E. Davenport present use: multiple family residence present owner: Mackey block: 70 lot no. 1390 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: Porches were added to the south and east of the house sometime before 1906, sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES z r. 5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 70 lot address: 403-05 N. Linn no. 1391 Present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Murphy/Cont: Wm. Terry occupied: no date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -aluminum siding f architectural style: Georgian Revival j condition: fair L importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings f9 notable features of building and site: t original owner: original use: historic significance: A one-story wood frame house stood on this lot prior to 1906 sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906, 1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES F, O H M x U CO W North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 70 lot address: 411 N. Linn no. 1392 present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Esther Hunter and Hazel Graham occupied: no date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES G BLOCK 71 CHURCH r- , r� v %r, FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401IIES �rl,ti �v1 Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure yr v %r, FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401IIES �rl,ti �v1 Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory I block: 71 z address: 527 N. Linn lot 0 present use: single family residence no. 1394 U present owner: William Lenz owner occupied: no z W q � I date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as a part of a notable features building cluster of buildings z of and site: O i a U A original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1906 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES E i i I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 lot address: 533 N. Linn no. 1395 present use: single family residence owner present owner: City Property Corp. occupied: no date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES EM r. W U z North Side Neighoorhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 219-221 E. Church present use: multiple family residence present owner: Dwight Finken block: 71 lot no. 1397 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: deteriorated importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: There are twin front gables on this large Georgian Revival duplex. original owner: original use: historic significance: A smaller two story wood frame building occupied this site, and was removed sometime prior to 1912. sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906, 1912 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES M / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 6 EA Q i North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 lot address: 215 C. Church no. 1398 present use: single family residence owner present owner: Kick./Cont: occupied: yes Andrian Angelsberg 1L( I date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 1 1/2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage ? condition: deteriorated importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings i notable features of building and site: r r, t t original owner: original use: historic significance: The Sanborn map of 1899 shows a 2 story wood frame building on this location. n i pV_ d 7 sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906, 1912 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 6 EA Q i 1 - . North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 address: 211 E. Church lot present use: multiple family residence no. 1399 present owner: Nicholas Peet owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1915 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: The gable end of this rather unusual Georgian Revival house faces on Church St. There are gables with gambrel roofs on the east and west sides of the building. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 70 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 2 O E. lot address: 528 N. Dubuque no. 1401 U present use: single family residence owner E� present owner: C. P. Berg occupied: yes w Q H date of construction: c. 1880-1890 ? building type and material: 1 story wood frame #I architectural style: Carpenter Gothic condition: good j importance to neighborhood: focal point of block p tt notable features of building and site: Gingerbread trim on the porch E and a bargeboard on the gable mark this house as Carpenter Gothic p in style. tj j} M 9 original owner: I original use: W historic significance: G 2 U z C/3 I P a i ° f i x sources: Sanborn 1899 1 1 k / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114E5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 lot address: 508 N. Dubuque no. 1403 present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Olga Johnson occupied: yes Cont: Robert Mitchell date of construction: 1906-1912 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: The fluted columns on the porch are an unusual detail. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1912 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIMES z Z Z �. North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 202 E. Fairchild present use: multiple family residence present owner: Mary Englehart block: 71 lot no. 1404 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Gothic condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: There are seven gables and paired narrow windows in the second floor of this house. original owner: original use: historic significance: There is no record of this building on the Sanborn maps. That suggests it was moved here from another location. sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 a low North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 z 0 lot a U address: 208 E. Fairchild no. 1405 present use: multiple family residential owner E~ z present owner: Sarah Smith occupied:`Q A H date of construction: Pre 1899 building type and material: 2 story wood frame i architectural style: Italianate 1 condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures z p E" notable features of building and site: a a There are several Italianate features on the first floor of this U M house including the floor length windows, the columns and brackets ua q 1 on the porch, and the bay window on the east side. t 'r original owner: w original use: U historic significance: z U H �1 z c� H U) p hf H rn r x sources: Sanborn 1899 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 212 E. Fairchild present use: multiple family residence present owner: L. R. Brumley block: yl lot no. 1406 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1910 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1906-1912 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 2 16 E. Fairchild present use: multiple family residence present owner: H.A.H. Investment block: 71 lot no. 1407 owner occupied: no date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame - asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: fair importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: original owner: original use: historic significance: There was a 1 1/2 story brick building on this lot prior to 1899 sources: Sanborn 1899, 1906 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1I011ILs z z 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 z 0 H lot F address:222 E. rairchild no. 1408 H present use: multiple family construction04 owner present owner: Clement Brack/Cont: occupied: no z Betty Norbeck O H date of construction: c. 1890 building type and material: 2 story wood frame - asbestos siding architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: deteriorated importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance notable features of building and site: O H a H r U M w A original owner: I, I original use: I historic significance: w U 2 U �t t7 H caz U �i 0 F CO .Ti sources: Sanborn 1899 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 410111Es North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 71 lot address: 230 E. Fairchild no. 1409 present use: single family residence owner present owner: George McCormick occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important as part of a cluster of buildings notable features of building and site: The porch is a later addition to the house. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I10INES i4i CHURCH BLOCK 74 FAIRCHILD ;:. KEY Historical Structure ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40 ulEs North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: yq o I lot ¢ address: 521 N. Dubuque no. 624 U present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: viola Lons occupied: z no w Q date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -aluminum siding architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: The porch of this Georgian Revival house has clustered columns with Doric capitals. There is a broken pediment on the gable front. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES z ,1w North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 f z _o i E+ lot U address: 529 N. Dubuque no. 625 w present use: multiple family residence owner F present owner: Fred Lewls occupied: no w � Ca date of construction: c. 1870 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: Italianate condition: fair z importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p H notable features of building and site: E a a This house still retains much of its original appearance. ED It has paired brackets under the eaves, Italianate columns on the w� porch and floor length windows on the first floor. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 address: 111 E. Church lot ¢no. 626 U present use: single family residence owner present owner: Baldwin Maxwell occupied: yes 2 q date of construction: c. 1920 - 1930 building type and material: 2 story stone and stucco architectural style: English, half-timbered condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: z notable features of building and site: focal point of block O F P. This house with its steep roof and fake half-timbering is U Pictured in Lafore. It represents a fad for Olde English houses CO in the 1920's and 1930's. q original owner: original use: historic significance: ua U U N z t7 .. U H Q: 0 H H x sources: Lafore / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 i O F lot address: 530 N. Clinton no. 627 U w present use: multiple family residence owner E present owner: Eugene Hubbard occupied: no w Cont: Richard Wayne date of construction: c. 1895 building type and material: 2 1/2 story brick architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: excellent z importance to neighborhood: Important independent of surrounding structures O H notable features of building and site: H w H x He're is one of the most impressive examples of Georgian Revival on the North Side. There is dentil molding on porch and roof cornice, w0 leaded and stained glass windows and Doric capitals on the porch columns. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1899 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 z O lot ¢ address: 522 N. Clinton no. 628 U Present use: sorority owner j present owner: Delta Delta Delta Assoc. occupied: z Pi Chapter Q date of construction: c. 1920 - 1930 building type and material: 2 1/2 story brick architectural style: Classical Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: F a An imitation of Greek Revival from the 1920's or 1930's. This a building has a portico with large columns having Corinthian capitals. m There is a round window in the gable peak and a broken pedimenton q the front gable. original owner: original use: historic significance: w U z U z j U) a O F x sources: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 z 0 H lot ¢ address: 500 N. Clinton no. 629 U present use: religious - church owner present owner: 1st Baptist Church occupied: Z w Q H date of construction: 1952 building type and material: Stone architectural style: Gothic condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: focal point of block notable features of building and site: There are lancet windows in this Gothic style church. There Is also a rose window over the pointed arch entrance. original owner: original use: historic significance: The 1st Baptist Church was organized in 1841. sources: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI01REs 0 a. a x U w North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 z 0 lot Q address: 114 E. Fairchild no. 630 U present use: sorority owner Etl present owner: Alpha Delta Building Corporation occupied: w Q N date of construction: c. 1930 building type and material: 2 story brick architectural style: Georgian Revival condition: good importance to neighborhood: focal point of block z notable features of building and site: H a Another of the fraternity and sorority buildings built in the U Georgian manner. This one has stone keystone lintels, fan lights Q around the entrance and brick quoins at the corners of the building. original owner: original use: historic significance: w U U Hy I~ z t, H U O F N x sources: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 120 E. Fairchild Present use: multiple family residence present owner: Elizabeth Means block: 74 F. O lot U no. 631 P. owner F occupied: no w Q H date of construction: 1877 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: Gothic Revival condition: good z importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures O notable features of building and site: e. a H A house so outstanding itis cited by Keyes, Lafore and Lafore U and Dykstra. It is considered to be one of the most striking houses w In Iowa City. It has a steeply pitched roof, fancy bargeboards, bay Q windows, elaborate chimneys, and many other features of the Gothic style. original owner: Mr. and Mrs. Clarence W. Keyser original use: historic significance: The house was constructed by Louis H. Jackson for the Keysers, but it was occupied for over forty years by Stephen A. Swisher and his family. It is often referred to as "the old Swisher place" . sources: Keyes, Lafore, Lafore and Dykstra r- - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 79 z 0 address; 128 E. Fairchild lotno. 632 4 U present use: multiple family residence owner present owner: Dorothy Yount/Cont: E~occupied: z no Duane and Elizabeth Means w A date of construction: c. 1900 building type and material: 2 story wood frame architectural style: North Side Victorian condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: .� Gingerbread trim on the gables decorates this house that Lafore F. n. a considers an outstanding example of Midwestern turn -of -the -century domestic architecture w Q original owner: original use: historic significance: w U z 4 U N z H sources: Lafore, Sanborn 1899, 1906 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 74 z U H F lot a U address: 515 N. Dubuque no. 633 present use: multiple family residence owner F present owner: Duane Means occupied: no w Q H date of construction: c. 1870-1880 building type and material: 2 story wood frame -asbestos siding architectural style: Italianate condition: good z importance to neighborhood: later alterations have diminished importance U H notable features of building and site: a H An old bam with board and batten siding is presently being used as a garage. w Q original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: / MICROF'ILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r I e North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROIDES Author Report 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty Victoria Williams 6. Parking 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1976 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen Douglass Lee 16, Final Report Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROIDES a The research and studies forming the CITY OF IOWA CITY basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- City Council I ment (HUD). The statements and Mary C. Neuhauser t conclusions contained herein are Carol deProsse those of the grantee and do not John Balmer necessarily reflect the views of the David Perret U.S. Government in general or HUD in Robert Vevera, Mayor particular. Neither the United States Clemens Erdahl nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- Glenn E. Roberts pressed or implied, or assumes re- Pat Foster' sponsibility for the accuracy or com- Max Selzer* pleteness of the information herein. Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader ' I I I A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back fcover. II i I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HIRES HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) try STREETS AND TRAFFIC Kevin Laverty November 1977 revised May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City P - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES FOREWORD Funding for the North side neighborhood preserva- tion study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement". The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. From our surveys (Im ap,ct Survey, report number 10, and Land Use Intensity, report number 3) and neighbor- hood discussions (Community Participation, report number 13), it became clear that there were two major sources of negative impacts on the North Side: those emanating from transportation -- streets, traffic, parking -- and those resulting from incompatible development. This report, along with the Parking report (number 6), deals with the former group of problems. Kevin Laverty wrote the first draft, which was presented in preliminary form and subsequently revised by Mary Howard and myself, along lines suggested by Kevin. DBL MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES CONTENTS APPENDIX Iowa City Staff Comments on the Final Draft 43 Budget 44 REFERENCES ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES i FOREWORD 1 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 INTRODUCTION 6 Impacts Created by Roads and Streets 11 PROBLEM AREAS AND ALTERNATIVES Impacts Generated by Traffic on 11 Negative Heavily Traveled Streets 15 Proposals Through Traffic on Residential 17 Excessive Streets and in Alleys 20 Proposals Conflicts Between Modes: Autos, Pedestrians, 27 and Bicycles 29 Proposals 33 Circulation Improvement 37 Proposals 39 Drivers' Sightlines at Intersections Burden of Street Maintenance on the City's 39 General Fund 42 Proposals APPENDIX Iowa City Staff Comments on the Final Draft 43 Budget 44 REFERENCES ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Trafficways are an important component of Iowa ` r City's transportation system. The movement of people and goods is a necessary function which trafficways I help to provide. Trafficways are also the source of I what should be called "external" effects, because I these effects impact persons other than users of roads and streets. As examples of these external effects, traffic noise may interrupt a telephone conversation or interfere with sleep; heavy traffic flows endanger pedestrians; and road salt kills grass, shrubs, and trees. The goal of the transportation element of the North Side neighborhood preservation study is to iprotect residences and other land uses from the exter nal effects of traffic while maintaining the circula- tion function provided by roads and streets. This closely parallels the overall study goal of protecting neighborhood resources while allowing change to occur. The major conclusions can be summarized as follows: - Traffic on streets and in alleys has a significant negative impact on neighborhood quality in the North Side. Noise, fumes, physical danger, and un- sightliness make the neighborhood less desirable and reduce property values. - A balance among modes -- auto, bicycle, and pedestrian -- does not exist in the North Side because of the overwhelming predominance of the auto. Drivers and non -drivers alike seem to believe that auto traffic should not be inhibited in any way. The result is a pedestrian environment which is unpleasant and dangerous, yet most trips in the neighborhood are made on foot. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES - Neighborhood residents are paying through property taxes -- for street maintenance and improve- ments that actually detract from the value of their properties. Renters and consumers pay these taxes indirect- ly, while street users are exempted from paying property taxes on streets. Transportation and land use interactions are complex and often subtle, and a comprehensive strategy is necessary in order to avoid pushing the problems from one place to another. The following recommendations are based on the premise that the North Side must accept a relatively high level of through traffic as a necessary evil, but that the negative impacts of this traffic should be ameliorated and mitigated to the maximum extent feasible: 1) Pedestrian crosswalks need to be marked at all intersections that include an arterial street, and at many other intersections as well. Markings should be maintained in a permanent high state of visibility, to remind motorists that pedestrians frequently cross these streets and have as much reason to be there as motor vehicles. 2) In several locations, diverters or barriers should be erected to eli- minate through traffic on residential streets and alleys by channeling it onto arterials. Experience in other communities indicates that such devices greatly improve the neighborhood environment but also arouse the virulent antagonism of a minority of motorists,. so a program for installing diverters should be undertaken incrementally and with strong community support. 3) Residential uses on arterial. streets should be buffered and/or screened against the negative impacts of traffic noise, fumes, dust, and unsightliness. Ea MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES ■ 4) Signs that inform motorists of diverters pedestrian a residential environment, bicycles, recommended routes to the hospital, etc., should be erected in appropriate locations. f 5) Three intersections should be I signalized: Church and Dubuque, Jefferson and Gilbert, and Market and Gilbert. Signals would improve safety at these busy intersections, help control the speed of arterial traffic, and provide protection for pedestrian crossings. 6) Bicycle routes and streets need to be improved by physical separators between auto and bicycle traffic, improved markings, and signs. i 7) Residential streets feeding arterials can be "necked" by extending the curbs into the crosswalk; this indicates to motorists the entrance of a residential neighborhood and provides more protection for pedestrians. B) Brick paving on residential streets should be retained, even replaced, since traffic tends to Imove more slowly on the uneven surface. 9) Sightlines at intersections should be kept as they are or reduced. Shorter sight distances require motorists to be more careful and drive more slowly on residential streets, and landscaping on corner properties (which may obstruct sightlines) adds to general neighborhood quality. I 10) All improvements which are for the benefit of motorists or serve to protect pedestrians, bicyclists, residences, and residents from motorists, should be paid for out of highway user fees. 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es 11) The City should begin to bring its street budget into balance, by funding only those projects that can be fully financed by highway user fees. Recent legislation to increase the state gasoline tax and increase the share apportioned to cities should greatly facilitate this budget balancing 12) The City should begin to impose user charges (parking fees, annual registration fees, gasoline taxes) on motorists to help support the street system in the City. To the extent necessary, specific authorization should be sought at the state level. n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NEs INTRODUCTION Planners have often claimed that automobiles and traffic are destructive influences on neighborhood quality, and the practice of subdivision design fre- quently reflects this potential for damage by maxi- mizing the use of cul-de-sacs and minimizing the impacts of arterials through reverse frontages, landscape buffers, and earthen berms. 1. A large body of research has documented the microscopic impacts of noise from tires and engines, the distribution of air pollutants such as lead, asbestos, dust, carbon monoxide, particu- lates, and other hydrocarbons, and water pollutants such as petroleum products and by-products, chemicals used for snow removal, and others. Residents of urban neighborhoods often complain about truck noise, traffic danger, and too many automobiles. Yet these negative impacts are seldom considered in planning for older neighborhoods. Housing programs focus on structures and occupants; when transportation is dealt with in the planning process, it is usually to recommend more street and parking capacity. Neighborhood residents also tend to think in terms of traffic and parking congestion, and accept gradually increasing volumes of arterial traffic passing through the neighbor- hood as inevitable. City officials, likewise, appear to regard the deterioration of inner neighborhoods as normal and high traffic volumes as necessary. To the extent that traffic is a blighting influence on neighborhoods, local public policy has generally been unwilling to recognize the problem. 1See, for example, Residential Streets: Obiectives, Principles and Design Considerations, published3ointly by ULI, ASCE, and NAHII. 5 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES 1 I I I I i Impacts Created By Roads And Streets i Categories of readily observed external effects generated by traffic ways are listed in Table 1. Each of these effects is directly related to one or more of three factors: size of streets, number of streets, and traffic volume (including number of trucks). These effects are translated into impacts upon indi- viduals or property located within the range of each effect. In general, the range is defined by distance from the source. A major highway bordered by agricul- tural land will therefore generate much less severe impacts than a similar facility bisecting a residential neighborhood, even though the levels of external effects produced are the same. In addition to the effect of distance, the level of an impact can be reduced by a physical buffer. As an example, the visual impact of a street can be reduced by a vegetative screen.2 The relationship among the source, the external effect generated, the placement of a buffer, and the impact actually received is diagrammed in Figure 1. The impact felt from a given level of external effect at a given distance is shown in (a). In (b) the impact of the same level of external effect is less because of increased distance from the source. As the result of using a buffer in (c), the impact is reduced further. Whether distance from the source or 2The Highway Research Board report, "Effect• of Highway Landscape Development on Nearby Property", offers methodology for assessing the impact of a highway upon a residential area as well. as means for buffering the impact. Also, the NCIIRP report on "Highway Noise: A Design Guide for Prediction and Control.", contains information on barrier design and the assessment of barrier effectiveness in reducing noise. G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Table 1. Categories of external effects generated by trafficways. A. Physical 1. noise and vibration 2. erosion, runoff, and waterborne pollutants 3. dust and airborne pollutants 4. trash and litter 5. physical danger from moving vehicles B. Non -Physical 1. visual and aesthetic 2. reduction in neighborhood quality C. Fiscal 1. burden on General Fund 2. property tax lost as result of property value decline 3. property tax uncollected on street right-of-way 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES eeff'ect I �j Impact a) J distance ~from source external Impact b)[:: effect J 0 1 1 r ----distance from source source C) ,----distance from source Figure 1. RELATIONSHIP AMONG SOURCE, EXTERNAL EFFECT, BUFFER, AND IMPACT �A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOINES Impact buffering will produce a greater reduction in the impact will depend upon the specific external effects. This general relationship has to be modified for a number of the external effects listed in Table 1. Physical danger from moving vehicles occurs in a fairly well-defined space, except for cases in which vehicles leave the roadway. Therefore, the smooth decay of the effect with distance, as shown in Figure 1, would be replaced by a discontinuous drop of the effect at the edge of the roadway. The range of the effect of trafficways on overall neighborhood quality (above and beyond the specific effects listed) is not easily pinned down: it depends upon how a resident defines his/her "neighborhood". Thus, a major through street four or five blocks away can have a severe impact on neighborhood quality if it bisects what is perceived as the neighborhood, even though the physical effects four blocks from the source are likely to be minor. This is because streets with large volumes of traffic create a barrier -- psycholo- gical in addition to physical -- between what lies on either side.3 The residents of a specific jurisdiction also suffer the fiscal impacts of trafficways, either directly through tax payments or indirectly through rents. Thus, streets that are maintained from the General Fund place a property tax burden on all Iowa City residents. At the same time, the North Side I I 3Traffic creates not only a barrier effect but also reduces the livability of the neighborhood and leads to negative attitudes toward the neighborhood on the part of residents as well as having a generally depressing effect. One study which demonstrates these results in considerable depth is Donald Appleyard and Mark Lintell, "Environmental Quality of Streets: The Residents' Viewpoint", HicLhway Research Record, No. 356 (1971), pp. 69-89. �- 9 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOLHES property tax base is being reduced by the negative impacts of streets and traffic. 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DCS IIOINES PROBLEMS AND ALTERNATIVES Five problem areas have been identified by drawing from the list of external effects presented previously, from the neighborhood ImpacLs Survey conducted during the summer of 1976, and from block meetings conducted (luring the spring of 1977. These areas of concern are: - negative impacts generated by traffic on heavily -traveled streets - excessive through traffic on residential streets and in residential alleys - conflicts between modes: autos versus pedestrians, autos versus bicycles, and bicycles versus pedestrians I - circulation bottlenecks - driver's siqhtlines at intersections • - burden of expenditures for street maintenance (and construction) on the City's General Fund iWithin each of these areas the problems are described, analyzed, and a range of proposals offered that could be included in a solution to the problems. NEGATIVE IMPACTS GENERATED BY TRAFFIC ON HEAVILY - TRAVELED STREETS Figure 2 indicates the average daily traffic (ADT) on the major streets in and adjacent to the North Side. Dubuque, Dodge, Governor, Market, Jefferson and Church Streets generate severe negative effects of the types noted in the first section of this report. The impacts on the North Side are significant, because low- and f medium -density residential activity borders most seg- ments of all these streets. 1.1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES lio INES n N O.e Park Ad 10,300 O O CO O O N 3700 4800 5900 5800 5000 4900 10f—] r, 6200 5500 5200 fk1lOto OOO Is 4700 -5 6000 5200 Ol 4400I 4200 I I rrr ---- ---,I 4700 00 0 I O �j O Jelterson 0 0 0 0 o In to n o O N Church 0 ea o c — o e e y n m U o o Figure 2. 1975 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC IADTI Source: Iowa City Department of public Works Engineering Division / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11010Cs I BROWN ST RONALDS ST F DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 1 -- F- V) f - I - Cn z U) LLI I- z (n U) CnLd 0 CO CO W cn z 0 Z 00 z :r 0 U Z _j 0 0 _j C7 7) 0 _j noise caused ly trucks down shifting to climb hill ------- �/ --T school children must F� cross bus, street F] PARK �ex diffl t pedestrian crossings HOSPITAL dangerous intersections 1-- U) Of 0 z Of W 0 0 Figure 3. MAJOR THROUGH STREETS AND EXAMPLES OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS 1.3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IIIEs Certain streets generate greater negative effects and the impacts upon adjacent land are greater because of higher percentages of truck traffic. Dodge and Governor Streets have the most truck traffic in the North Side, because of their designation as Iowa Highway 1. The impacts arising from noise, vibration, erosion, runoff, waterborne pollutants, dust, trash, physical danger, visual, and aesthetic effects are the most con- centrated around streets with heavy traffic flows. This is significant for two reasons. First, many of the im- pacts of traffic are concentrated upon property adja- cent to the streets; the impacts are more severe if the effects are not buffered or otherwise ameliorated.4 Second, any increase in traffic, whether due to increased development which generates additional travel, or the result of street improvements, will generate additional external effects which will again impact most severely upon those properties adjacent to the major streets.s Figure 3 highlights the most heavily traveled streets of the North Side and indicates a few of the i more severe impacts of traffic. 4The Socio -Economic Studies Division of the Federal Highway Administration published a report in 1976 en- titled The Social and Economic Effects of Highways which might be useful in looking at the effects of traffic. Particularly relevant in the report was a study of social effects of auto traffic on urban streets, that found that heavy traffic caused residents either to move away from the street or to retreat from the front of the house. 5Technology Rev:.,:;w published an article in January, 1978 entitled "The Carcinogenic Automobile". The article makes the case that there is a strong correlation between the amount of highway traffic and the observed mortality from cancer.. This would be a strong argument against generating any additional. travel through residential areas. 14 MICROFILIIED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES Proposals 1) Increase tree planting as a buffer to various external effects of traffic. Large trees, small trees, and shrubs or hedges can be used to ameliorate visual impacts and, to some extent, to reduce noise. Such planting should be under- taken along the streets noted in Figure 2.6 2) Construct sound barriers along Dubuque Street to ameliorate the severe noise impacts suffered by adja- cent structures. Barriers could be landscaped walls or landscaped berms.? 3) Return Dodge and Governor Street to two-way status. Through traffic on these one-way arterials (designated as Iowa Highway 1) often exceeds posted speed limits (25 mph) and severely impacts the neighborhood. Making Dodge and Governor into two-way streets while continuing to designate southbound Dodge and northbound Governor as Highway 1, prohibiting northbound truck traffic on Dodge, and making the circu- lation improvements indicated in Figure 4, would improve the balance between the concerns of residents and of through traffic. If an east side through route 6Hall, Birnie and Taylor of McMaster University presented a paper in 1978 entitled "The Effectiveness of Shielding in Reducing the Adverse Impacts of High- way Noise". In it they argue that psychological attitudes are important when constructing sound barriers: "Our results indicate that a tree screen has more 'impact effectiveness' than a concrete wall. This would seem to be a simple matter of aesthetics --the former is more pleasant to look at than the latter". 7The office of Environmental Policy, Federal Highway Administration, has published a guide, "Funda- mentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise: Noise Barrier Design and Example Abatement Measures" (April, 1974). This guide provides data on barrier placement, materials, configuration, and design. 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401MES L Key to symbols: SO stop sign R left turn lane EN F 0 Z cc W 0 0 Ba Figure 4. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPOSED TWO-WAY DODGE AND GOVERNOR, AND ADJACENT STREETS 16 / IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IaOInES (such as the Scott Blvd. proposal) is constructed as highway 1, all through truck traffic on both Dodge and i Governor Streets would be banned. EXCESSIVE•' THROUGH TRAFFIC ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND IN ALLEYS Significant negative impacts are created by relatively small amounts of traffic on residential streets (i.e., streets other than the major through routes noted in the previous section) and in resi- dential alleys. In addition to the general impacts which have been noted, through traffic is likely to move at a higher speed than local traffic, resulting in a higher possibility of collisions, greater incon- venience and danger to pedestrians,8 and more severe noise impacts. A balance must be struck between these impacts and the access requirements of residents. Figure 5 indicates the location of residential streets on which excessive through traffic has been observed. In each instance the street provides a connection between major through streets. Although arterial streets are designed to carry this through traffic, a certain number of vehicles flow through residential streets, largely because of the grid layout of North Side streets. Significantly, two streets with very little through traffic are Johnson 8P.D. Goodwin and T.P. Hutchinson emphasized this point in an article entitled "The Risk of walking", Transportation 1, 3(September 1977): "Accident rate per distance traveled is estimated to be 5 times higher for pedes- trians as auto drivers. Likelihood of accident goes up with the product of vehicle and pedestrian flows." emphasis added) 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111Es F - 1n w O m O BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST F f FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST I MARKET ST 1 JEFFERSON ST I— V) Z Z_ J H w m J (D 1— U) w U O 0 F- U) U J V) (n Ir O Z m w O 0 MIM ............................ VITAL SCHOOL Figure 5. RESIDENTIAL STREETS ON WHICH EXCESSIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC HAS BEEN NOTED 18 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES SCHOOL ............................ VITAL SCHOOL Figure 5. RESIDENTIAL STREETS ON WHICH EXCESSIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC HAS BEEN NOTED 18 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES Street and Fairchild Street, which are aligned so that vehicles must make several turns to go around North Market Park. As the result of this grid pattern, the traffic circulation pattern in the North Side is essentially one of "filtering". Larger amounts of traffic use the major streets because of the greater safety and case of movement, but there is no active "channeling" (i.e., forcing traffic onto major streets) in the current layout. Excessive through traffic seems to be the result of individual drivers choosing the "best" route. For example, Brown Street is used (rather than Church Street) as a connection between the north parts of Dodge and Dubuque Streets because the street is the most direct route, has no stop signs and little through The Berkeley Neighborhood Traffic Study Summary lists several means of traffic control: "Assignment of more officers to traffic enforcement is presently needed in any case, but the least costly and most effec- tive means of control is with self -polic- ing devices. Diverters, normally a diagonal barrier across a four-way intersection, force traffic to turn, while a closure blocks all traffic. Semi-diverters close half of a street, permitti g entry or exit in one direction, but may be subject to frequent violation. Median barriers prevent left turns and cross traffic, but permit through traffic flow. Traffic circles constructed in the middle of exist- ing intersections reduce conflicts and speed, but have little effect on volumes and cause increased automobile -bicycle conflict. Chokers reduce street widths at intersections, increasing sight distances and enhancing pedestrian safety. Stop signs assign priority at intersections, but cause local noise increase and have proven ineffective for speed control or traffic diversion. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES traffic; in short, the reduction (by four blocks) of the distance traveled makes Brown Street a desirable through route (see Figure 6). This through traffic generates significant impacts and disruption of the neighborhood. Through traffic in alleys is the result of the same kind of behavior by drivers, although alleys are probably used as a one or two block "shortcut" rather than for longer trips. Through traffic in alleys is dangerous and inconvenient to residents and creates a great deal of dust and wear in the unpaved alleys. Two different types of strategies can be used to reduce through traffic on residential streets and in residential alleys: a) Reduce the desirability of these local streets as through routes with measures ranging from the installation of stop signs to physi- cally blocking vehicular access. b) Increase the attractiveness of selected through streets, relative to residential streets, through design considerations such as increased number of lanes, wider lanes, reduced number of points of access, speed limit increases, etc. In general, direct strategies to discourage un- desirable through traffic are preferable to improvement of through streets. First, improvement of through streets would exacerbate the negative effects which those streets currently generate. Second, direct discouragement of through traffic is the only way to j catch all the possible trips on the street network which could potentially use residential streets. Proposals i l) Construct- traffic diver.ters on selected residential streets to dis- courage through traffic. Diverters would connect- either the northwest and MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101REs 1 � T Mayflower Apts., Forest View Trailer Court Interstate 80 Park Rd., Hancher Auditorium, I— rn Z Ld x Z) DO Z BROWN ST ----------------- i TO =n RONALDS ST CHURCH ST Church St. route Westinghouse, A.C.T., Prarie du Chien Rd., Interstate 80 Brown St. shortcut Figure 6. THE BROWN STREET "SHORTCUT" FROM NORTH DODGE TO NORTH DUBUQUE 21 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Coralville LLI U a :D Z M I— rn Z Ld x Z) DO Z BROWN ST ----------------- i TO =n RONALDS ST CHURCH ST Church St. route Westinghouse, A.C.T., Prarie du Chien Rd., Interstate 80 Brown St. shortcut Figure 6. THE BROWN STREET "SHORTCUT" FROM NORTH DODGE TO NORTH DUBUQUE 21 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES southeast corners of an intersection or the northeast and southwest corners, thereby preventing through vehicle movement by forcing either a right or left turn. Curb cuts should be made to allow passage of bicycles, shopping carts, etc. Figure 7 shows what a traffic diverter at the corner of Fair- child and Linn Streets might look like. Possible locations of traffic diverters throughout the North Side are shown by Figure 8. 2) Make special effort to reduce traffic impacts on Church Street, be- cause of its primarily low-density single family character and because of the historic significance of its houses. Church Street probably cannot be replaced in its role as an east -west link, yet increased traffic would have severe impacts on the residences, many of which lie close to the right -of-way. Any proposed circulation improvement which could be expected to increase traffic (e.g., prohibiting parking to widen traffic lanes) should be carefully examined in this light. 3) Construct barriers at the intersection of a residential street and an arterial, pre- venting traffic from using that point of access to the residential street -.10 Barriers could be used at .intersections such as the corner of Dodge and Brown Streets, for example, because the through traffic problem on Brown Street would be difficult to solve with 10Thishas been done in Dubuque, Iowa, on a residential street. According to an article March 29, 1978 in the Des Moines Register, traffic has been cut down considerably on -that residential street, but the barriers have been strongly criticized for upsetting traffic circulation and adding to traffic congestion on other streets. Another objection sometimes raised is the increased difficulty of snow removal on blocked - off streets. Anything which physically forces motorists to change ingrained habits will produce a strong nega- tive reaction in the initial stages of implementation. Diverters and barriers have been in use for several years in Berkeley, California; part: of this experience is eva- luated in the De i.,euw, et al, report on the licrkel.ey Traffic Management Plan. 27. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I existing curb T raised Curbs with cuts for bike , pedestrians, etc. \ Z Z J bicycle lanes Figure 7. DIVERTER EXAMPLE AT FAIRCHILD AND LINN STREETS I 23 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Im HIES H BROWN ST ROAI.4LDS ST CHURCH ST SCHOOL El PARK FAIRCHILD ST❑ ❑ DAVENPORT ST I BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL ' MARKET ST L -J SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST DIVERTER BARRIER I-- Z ir Ij W w Z O w CD S. in Z m Z BROWN ST ROAI.4LDS ST CHURCH ST SCHOOL El PARK FAIRCHILD ST❑ ❑ DAVENPORT ST I BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL ' MARKET ST L -J SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST DIVERTER Figure 8. POSSIBLE LOCATIONS FOR TRAFFIC DIVERTERS AND BARRICADES 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BARRIER I-- ir Ij O Z Ld U > S. J 0 Figure 8. POSSIBLE LOCATIONS FOR TRAFFIC DIVERTERS AND BARRICADES 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES diverters. Barriers would create cul-de-sacs, which diverters would not. Possible barrier locations are also shown by Figure S. 4) Increase the use of signs, both for traffic control and also for driver awareness of a residential neighborhood. Signs such as "slow -- entering neighborhood" or "traffic diverters ahead" or "no through traffic" could be used to discourage circulation on residential streets. Increasing the use of "Stop" signs would have some effect in slowing down and making the streets less desirable through routes. However, such "stop" signs would quickly become routine to the average driver, who might then fail to heed a similar sign at the intersection with an arterial, where a full stop before proceeding is imperative for safety reasons. 5) Maintain and restore brick surfaces. (See figure 13 below). 6) Construct barriers at one end of alleys. This measure would absolutely prevent through traffic. 7) Install speed control bumps. Raised bumps on the pavement, such as are in use at City High School, serve both to reduce vehicle speed and discourage through traffic. These devices would have the side effect of inconveniencing residents who use the alley as auto access to their properties, as well as bicyclists and persons with baby strollers or shopping carts. In addition, the City might be liable for damage to private cars, and City vehicles (such as Sanitation Depart- ment trucks) which use the alleys would suffer additional wear. 8) Make alleys one-way opposite observed flow of undesirable through traffic. Loca- tions of various alley problems are shown in figure 9. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES r m ■. BRICK N �L 09000EXCESSIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC �ITy m GRAVEL m V) F- U) Z Lij� Z (n O W m En W Cn � m Z m Z Z (D Q W Z J > O J C7 > O S J OD BROWN ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ RONALDS ST CHURCH ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i FAIRCHILD ST j DAVENPORT ST ❑ ❑ i BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST ❑ H B e I -_J ❑ JEFFERSON ST H Fl= ' Figure 9. ALLEYS IN THE NORTH SIDE 26 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MMDLREs 9) Construct raised medians at mid - block on north -south streets. This would have two effects: (1) traffic could move no more than one block length in an alley, (b) left turns into alleys would be discouraged. Figure 10 shows an example of such a construction on Gilbert Street be- tween Market and Jefferson Street. Raised medians would have the disad- vantages of reducing alley access to residents and creating a solid mass in the street which moving vehicles would have to avoid. CONFLICTS BETWEEN MODES: AUTOS, PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES Because of varying travel patterns and speeds, conflicts between autos (and other motor vehicles), bicycles and pedestrians can be expected unless each mode has a separate right-of-way with no crossings. iPedestrians and bicycles (generally) move at speeds lower than desired by auto drivers (for themselves), while autos pose physical danger to non -motorized travelers. Pedestrians often have to wait for all auto and/or bicycle traffic to pass before a street I crossing is attempted, because these faster -moving modes consider stopping or even slowing down an un- necessary inconvenience. The existing situation in the North Side displays three aspects of these conflicts among modes: i - pedestrians crossings of streets are poorly marked and maintained. - east -west bicycle lanes are marked only on Jefferson and Market Streets, and there are no north -south bicycle lanes. - auto drivers often fail to give proper consideration to pedestrians and bicycles. 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MARKET ST. Taco Grande left turns Into alley possible but more difficult through traffic prevented -� Johns Grocery RAISED MEDIAN I JEFFEF SON ST. St. Paul's Lutheran Church Figure 10. RAISED MEDIAN EXAMPLE ON GILBERT ST. 1 BETWEEN MARKET AND JEFFERSON STREETS i 28 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES The character of the North Side requires a balance between autos and other modes. Many residents -- families with children, students, and others -- have chosen to live in the North Side because the neighborhood permits them to rely less upon the automobile than they would in other areas. The current trafficways situation in the North Side is best described as one of "auto dominance"; auto travel is strongly favored to the detriment of pedestrian or bicycle travel. Proposals 1) Paint crosswalks regularly or re- surface with material which contrasts with road surface. As shown in Figure 11(a), the current trafficways alignment maintains the integrity of lanes for vehicular travel, while pedestrians have to "cross" streets, which can be psychologically and physically intimidat- ing. Figure 11(b) diagrams a suggested improved pedestrian environment, in which crosswalk surfaces are made of the same material as the sidewalks. This measure would increase awareness of pedestrian areas, but drivers would have to yield to pedestrians at crosswalks (either voluntarily or as the result of enforce- ment) in order to effect safer and more convenient pedestrian travel.11 2) Erect signs at crosswalks informing drivers of pedestrian right-of-way. 11According to an August 1977 article in the i Des Moines Regir, Cedar Rapids initiated a system in which pedestriastens are instructed to extend their arm in order to obtain right-of-way at crosswalks. The Register comments that there has been trouble with enforcement of this, however, because police feel there has to be contact to warrant writing a ticket. 29 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES VIOIREs a) parking 1 1 bl i 1parking y® / MARKET ST. bike lane I• I II Figure 11. EXAMPLE OF IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK AT MARKET AND LINN STREETS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111[5 3) Integrate alleys, traffic diverters, barriers, and "necking" of intersections (see Figure 1.5 under circulation improve- ment) into an overall improved pedestrian environment.12 4) Construct a pedestrian overpass of Dubuque Street at Brown Street. Many pedestrians cross here, and other solu- tions involving stopping traffic (e.g., a traffic light-) may be infeasible be- cause of the hill on Dubuque Street. 5) Separate bike lanes from traffic lanes by raised curbs. 6) Paint bike lanes a contrasting color. 7) Provide additional bike lanes and/or "bike streets". Figure 12 indicates exist- ing bike lanes in the North Side (westbound on Market Street and eastbound on Jefferson Street) and suggested routes for either new bike lanes or designated bike streets. Bike lanes involve some level of mainte- nance expenditure, but this is probably un- necessary unless a major street is designated as a bike route. Residential streets can be designated as "bike streets" upon which autos would be required to yield the right- of-way to bicycles, and autos would be prohibited from overtaking bicycles (a move- ment which often endangers bicyclists). Routes for bike lanes/streets should be selected on the basis of suitable surface (for example, the brick surface of Linn Street is less than ideal, although the street's width suggests that it would be good for bike lanes) and usefulness of 12 The UMTA booklet Central City Environment and Transportation states "Immediate and dramatic improve- ments in pedestrian amenities can be made by enlarging and making better use of sidewalk space to improve pedestrian crosswalks and transit stops or to enhance other pedestrian activities, such as sitting and window browsing. Plants, trees, shrubs, grass, and pavement designs create interest and beauty. Vegeta- tion can provide shade and protection." (p. 54). Many examples are shown from around the U.S. 31 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES BROWN ST RONALDS ST cl;ul a FAI RCH DAVENPORT ST BLOOi-VIINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 4 Ahk PROPOSED TRAFFIC LIGHTS m m m SUGGESTED BIKE STREETS ® EXISTING BIKE LANES F - z � N mmmmmsm�armmmgi�mm����m'm���■ �m amm�.am mm ommm*mmm�mm�m �e0�0 Di0 0!� ••• i a CHOOL =8=1= El PARK mmmm.immm����.mssomo �smm�s��m HOSPITAL Figure 12. 32 SCHOOL I� �� BIKE STREETS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES the route for bicycle travel. Bike routes on Davenport, Gilbert, Johnson and Lucas Streets could become part of a city-wide bicycle route system. S) Maintain, protect, and restore (where asphalt patches exist) the North Side's brick streets. These are seen as an important resource to the neighborhood and also help to discourage through traffic because of the rough surface. Brick streets of the North Side are indicated in Figure 13. 9) Protect other resources associated with but incidental to trafficways, such as large trees on the parking. CIRCULATION BOTTLENECKS An expression of the need for "better streets" is often stated by residents; this phrase can be I translated into faster and more convenient circulation. i Figure 14 locates some of the points of difficult traffic movement that were brought up during the block meetings held during the spring of 1977. Two important ideas need to be discussed that are not usually fully considered in the demand for improved traffic circulation. First, the problem areas previously discussed in this section (negative impacts generated by traffic on heavily -traveled streets, excessive through traffic on residential streets, in residential alleys, and conflicts between modes) can be aggravated through street improvements. Faster traffic flows on arterials, for instance, are likely to make the impacts of these streets more severe. Circulation improve- ments will do little to discourage through traffic on residential streets, and may actually increase the number of vehicles, since easier access for residents is also easier access for through traffic. Smoother, faster R#7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIDEs BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHU FAIRCHI DAVENPORT ST SCHOOL El PARK BLOOMINGTON ST L___j E HOSPITAL :TA 7L] MARKET ST C� SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST ❑ Figure la BRICK STREETS OF THE NORTH SIDE 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES V) U) z U) LLI Ld Z) 1-- x 0 cr 0 Z) w ED cf) ED z ED z Z) z z _r a —1 0 SCHOOL El PARK BLOOMINGTON ST L___j E HOSPITAL :TA 7L] MARKET ST C� SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST ❑ Figure la BRICK STREETS OF THE NORTH SIDE 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES U N U) LU H a: j H F Z Ld 00 Z (Ld D �W 7 Z m Q 6 > J C7 > 0 J BROWN ST P ns parked cars create difficulty steep -for tarot oft J -- - grade of Governor RONALDS ST Ir u u parked cars make L Parking on one aids O P makes street fairly narrow, entrance to alley —i high difficult of traffic !I despite CHURCH ST ------------ ----- ; ---------SCHOOL ��ult to I i SCHOOL L` make left turns ' left -turning traffic PARK slows thou h traffic �g .• FAIRCHILD ST 0,Q� 1 ❑ dangerous i no atop Signe DAVENPORT ST O L parking L 1 _J both aidess J Cangle arkin plug ltfmakes street double-parked too narrow BLOOMINGTON ST dsilvery vehicles makes street only one car wide HOSPITAL MARKET ST C entdllfreulty = scllooL ering or ng cross Market IStt JEFFERSON ST O. dangerous Intersection Figure 14. POINTS OF DIFFICULT TRAFFIC MOVEMENT 35 IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES traffic flows are also likely to create more conflicts with pedestrians and bicycles. Second, the short -run improvement which is desired and sought through increasing and improving circulation generally is not nearly as much of an improvement as was anticipated: traffic "fills up" streets both as the result of individuals choosing the best route to drive their cars and because future residential and commercial development is likely to occur so as to utilize streets with "excess capacity". The decision to improve streets must take into account the fact that better circulation can generate additional traffic that can completely nullify the benefits of improvement,13 One common example is the resurfacing of streets and alleys. Rough or broken surfaces (and, to some extent, brick streets) slow down most drivers and encourage the selection of another route. If the result of not resurfacing residential streets and alleys is slower j traffic and less of it, the rough surfaces are actually F of benefit to the neighborhood. This discussion should not be taken to indicate a position against any circulation improvements in the North Side; rather, the point is that the long -run tradeoffs -- impacts on the neighborhood, traffic volume, and ease of access -- should be studied. The view that "you can't drive fast enough between points A and B" is i simply insufficient reason for effecting a circulation improvement. Complaints about inadequate circulation should be carefully considered, and a true improvement should be implemented :f adequate financing is available and the side effects do not overwhelm the benefits. 13 In, "Procedures for Estimating Ilighway User Cost-s,Air. Pollution,and Noise Effects", the authors make the comment that: "The formal costs of diverted traffic can be estimated and accounted for in the highway network,...but the previous travel time and user costs for generated traffic are not known." 36 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111E5 Proposals 1) provide traffic lights where two major streets intersect, particularly in cases where there is substantial left turning traffic. Church and Dubuque, Gilbert and Jefferson, and Gilbert and Market are intersections fitting this description. Concurrent measures should be taken to ensure that neither through traffic in the neighborhood is increased nor drivers use residential streets as shortcuts to avoid traffic lights. 2) Mark pavement so that left -turn lanes are provided on major streets, decreasing the danger of rear -end collisions and reducing the inconve- nience to through traffic. Two possible locations for these are along Governor Street and for the southbound lane of Dubuque Street. Again, these should be carefully planned so that overall traffic volume and through traffic on residential streets are not increased. 3) Move curbs outward at intersections, "necking" the street at that point, so as to prevent parking and provide easier access to side streets. At an inter- section such as Governor and Ronalds, left -turning traffic from Governor must enter Ronalds swiftly because of traffic volume and speed. If there is parking on both sides of the street, Ronalds is too narrow for two cars to pass, creating a dangerous situation. Chokers would be more effective than curb paint- ing or signing in preventing parking, would provide space for the planting of shrubs as noise and visual buffers, and would create a safer pedestrian crossing. Necking of Ronalds Street at the corner of Governor as compared with the existing situation is shown in Figure 15. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES RONALDS ST. 0: O 2 ® ¢ w O existing ------------------------------------------------------ proposed RONALDS ST. C Figure 15. EXAMPLE OF "NECKING" ON RONALDS ST. AT GOVERNOR STREET m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IIIES l DRIVERS' SIGIITLINES AT INTERSECTIO14 Objects such as trees, hedges and building block drivers's fields of vision. When the objects are located near intersection, drivers' views of the cross street are reduced. The expression of the need for improved sight- lines highlights tradeoffs that are typical of trafficways improvements: easier auto travel (as a result of improved sightlines) also has the effect of removing neighborhood resources (trees, hedges), reducing the buffering of residents from traffic, and increasing traffic speed and volume. The problem is really not sightlines, but the desire of drivers to move as fast as possible with disregard to the nega- tive effects that are generated. If poor sightlines cause drivers to slow down or not travel on residential streets, the current situation should be maintained. BURDEN OF STREET MAINTENANCE ON THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND Most people are surprised to find that fuel taxes and registration fees for automobiles and trucks fall far short of covering the expenses incurred in street and highway construction and maintenance. While the Interstate system comes close to paying its own way and Iowa's primary system basically does the same, local streets are heavily financed through general fund sources, primarily the property tax. In Iowa City, 2/3 of expenditures on streets come from general funds.14 14Fora recent review of highway costs and revenue flows in Iowa, refer to Douglass Lee and Stephen Kautz, "Highway Financing in the State of Iowa", in the Proceedings of the Transportation Research Forum. 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES There are two implications to this. First, a significant portion of the property tax levied by the City of Iowa City consists of a contribution to the maintenance and construction of streets. This property tax burden falls directly upon property owners and is in part passed on to renters in the form of higher rents. 15 Second, the burden of this expenditure lessens the availability of funds for police, education, and other services which provide general benefits to the community. Another dimension to the problem is that streets have the effect of reducing the property tax base, because the negative impacts of arterial streets and through traffic on residential streets reduces property values and results in lower tax collections.16 A strate- gy of channeling traffic onto well -buffered arterials would transfer some of these costs from residents back to street users. The City of Iowa City probably has very limited 15Accordingto Slavet, et al., "There is an argument that nonusers as well as users benefit from roads and therefore should share in some of the costs. For example, it can be demonstrated that property owners receive benefits from access to their lands. This is true when a road is first built: there is a once -and - for all increase in the value of land made more accessi- ble. For this reason, street betterments are charged to owners or to a developer who agrees to bear some of the cost of a new or improved road. when the land is j subsequently sold, however, the increased value will have been capitalized into the purchase price of the land, and there is no argument for making subsequent owners continue to pay for the "access" through the property tax." 16A review of the literature on property value of- fects of streets can be found in the monograph by Keeler and Small. Evidence of property value losses resulting from traffic can also be found in the works by Schmitt, Gambel, et al., and Vance. NO MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CENR RAPIDS -DES MOINES authority to increase user -generated revenues (excise taxes on fuel, parking surcharges, and registration fees) available for trafficways, since these charges are largely determined and collected by the state. The burden on general funds could only be eased in the short run by sharply decreasing expenc?itures on trafficways to the level of available user -generated revenues. Iowa City can ask for an increase in the levels or its share of state highway taxes or request legislation permitting local options on these user charges. By using general fund revenues to pay for road expenditures, the motorist is being shielded from the full costs of the service provided. It is a matter of public choice whether or not to subsidize a particular good or service, but one consequence of underpricing is to encourage greater usage of the service. More highway travel will be consumed than iwould be the case if user charges covered all costs, so households can locate farther from where they work than they would otherwise. Residents and pro- perty owners in the North Side are required, in effect, ito subsidize low density fringe development in the north corridor of Johnson County, and also suffer the negative impacts of• increased auto traffic and com- muter parking. housing in the North Side is being replaced by parking lots, while new subdivisions appear in exurban and rural areas, often located on low volume unimproved roads. There are many ways in which urban taxpayers subsidize county residents, and many factors which lead to urban sprawl, but the i• long standing and increasing subsidy to street and highway users is a critical parameter in the urban al MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES decentralization process. Proposals 1) The City should adopt a long-range goal of requiring the operators of vehicles to pay the full costs of traffic - ways construction, maintenance and admin- istration, the costs of protecting pedestrians and bicycles, the costs of protecting the North Side and other neighborhoods from the external effects associated with traffic, and to contribute to general government expenditures. 2) The City should lobby with the Iowa General Assembly to allow muni- cipalities to exercise local options on fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees. In the interim, General Fund expenditures on trafficways should be cut to an absolute minimum. It is pos- sible that truly critical needs might go unmet, but such a situation would certainly increase public awareness of the need for increasing vehicle user charges. 42 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Appendix. IOWA CITY STAFF COMMENTS ON THE FINAL DRAFT REPORT 1. Page 17 discusses the effects of excessive through traffic on residential streets and alleys. "Excessive" through traffic is never actually defined, and since no comparisons are made with other residential streets we do not know what in fact "normal" and "excessive" levels of traffic are. 2. On page 20 and elsewhere in the report, the term "significant impacts" is used. While it is no doubt true that automobile traffic does have some effects on the environmental quality of neighborhoods, we feel that some attempt should have been made to document I these effects quantitatively. For example, tests could have been conducted to measure the ambient noise levels on the streets where the claim was made that excessive noise is being produced by excessive traffic. 3. Without discussing the relative merits of these types of traffic control devices, page 24 suggests possible locations for traffic diverters and barriers. From a practical standpoint it would appear that diverters at both Fairchild and Davenport would be self-defeating. 4. Reference is made several times to the loss in property values suffered by property owners adjacent to heavily traveled streets. While this is entirely possible, some documenting evidence could have lent to the credibility of the claim. 5. You suggest on page 39 the use of objects such as trees to obstruct the sight lines of drivers so that they would be encouraged to drive slower and more carefully through the neighborhood. It would seem that you are overly confident in the ability of this proposal to influence driver behavior, and that in fact it would increase danger to pedestrians and other users of the streets. 6. Your claim about the burden which street maintenance I places upon property taxpayers in the North Side and elsewhere in the City appears to be slightly overstated. Upon f .reviewing the City budget for the fiscal years 1977, 1978 and 1979, we found that property taxes contributed a total. of $20,401 to the street system maintenance budget, Out of a total budget of $1,817,693 or roughly 1.1 percent. 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES REFERENCES Bolt, Baranek and Newman, Highway Noise Generation and Control. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report Number 173. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research' Board, 1976. i Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. A Handbook for Pedestrian i Action. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1977. Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. Banning the Car Downtown. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977 Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. The Rediscovery of the Pedestrian. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977. Brambilla, Roberto, Gianni Longo, and Virginia Dzurinko. American Urban Malls. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Gov- ernment Printing Office, 1977. Brinton, John H., Jr., and Joel N. Bloom. Effect of Highway Landscape Development on Nearby Property. National j Cooperative Highway Research Program Report Number 75. Washington, D.C.: highway Research Board, 1969. Curry, David A. and Dudley G. Anderson. Procedures for Estimating II_^hway User Costs, Air Pollution, and Noise Effects. National Cooperative highway Research Program Report Number 1.33, Washington, D.C.: Ilighway Research Board, 1.972. an MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40IRES DeLeuw, Cather and Company and City of Berkeley. Six Months Experience - Berkeley Traffic Management Plan. Berkeley: DeLeuw, Cather and Company, May 1976. Department of Community Development, Ames, Iowa. Ames Neighborhood Planning Guide. Community Planning Department, Iowa State University, 1976. Gambel, Hays, et al., Community Effects of Highways Reflected by Property Values. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, August 1973. Goodwin, P.B., and T.P. Hutchinson, "The Risk of Walking," Transportation, 6.3 (September 1977), pp. 217-230. Hall, F.L., S. Birnie and S.M. Taylor, "The Effectiveness of Shielding in Reducing the Adverse Impacts of High- way Noise", paper presented to the meetings of the Transportation Research Board. Canada: Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, 1978. Keeler, Theodore and Kenneth Small. The Full Costs of Urban Transportation. Part III: Automobile Costs and Final Intermodel Cost Comparisons. Monograph Number. 21• Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Re- gional Development, July 1975. Kugler, B. Andrew, Daniel E. Commins, and William J. Galloway. Highway Noise - A Design Guide for Prediction and Control. National Cooperative I Highway Research Program Report Number 174, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1976. 5V MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Lee, Douglass and Stephen Kautz, "Highway Financing in the State of Iowa," Proceedings of the Transportation Resear�orum, 18, 1, Oxford, Indiana: Richard B. Cross, (1977), pp. 223_231. Lyon, Richard H., "Environmental Noise and Acoustical Modeling." Technology Review, 78, 5, (March/April 1976), pp. 60-67. O'Hara, Edward, "Hard Decisions and Lower Fares." Trans- portation United States Department of Trans- portation, 2, 3, (Spring 1976), pp. 8-11. Public Technology, Inc. Center City Environment and Trans- portation: Local Government Solutions. Washington, D.C.: Public Technology, Inc., December 1977. I i Schmitt, Rolf, "Predicting the Impacts of Transportation on i the Spread of Urban Blight," Transportation Research Record Number 634. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1977, PP• 27-32. i Slavet, Joseph, Katherine Bradley, and Philip Moss. Financing State -Local Services. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath Co., 1975. Smith, Wilbur and Associates and Curtis Associates. Draft Final Report - BorkeleZ Coordinated Transit Develop- ment Project. San Francisco: Wilbur Smith and Assoc- iates, Inc., April 1976. Transportation Research Board, "Motor Vehicle Noise Control." Special Rcport Number 152. Washington, D.C.: Trans- portation Research Board, 1.975. 46 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES L U.S. Department of Transportation. Fundamentals and Abate- ment of Highway Traffic Noise: Noise Barrier De- sign and Example Abatement Measures. Washington, D.C.: office of Environmental Policy, Federal Highway Administration, April 1974. U.S. Department of Transportation, "More on Social and Ec- onomic Effects of Highways," Highway and Urban Mass Transportation (June 1977)• U.S. Department of Transportation, "Noise Barriers," High - and Urban Mass Transportation, (June 1977). U.S. Department of Transportation. The Social and Economic Effects of Highways. Washington, D.C.: Socio - Economic Studies Division, 1976. Vance, John, "Liability of the State for Highway Traffic Noise," Research Results Digest, 99 (February 1978), Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board. witheford, David K., "State of the Art -Transportation Noise Barriers," Transportation Research News, Transpor- tation Research Board, (July - August 1976). 47 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each c Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoluES JORM MICROI_AR The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster" Max Selzer" Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members "" Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the Inside back cover. 9 HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) P A R K I N G Victoria Williams November 1977 Revised May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES idOIMES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work was carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research, under a subcontract. Because the North Side is located near the downtown and the University, there is a large demand for parking space in the neighborhood. Multi -family structures often contain several car owners per dwelling unit, creating a high level of resident demand for parking; stores and employers located in the neighborhood provide some off- street parking and also add to on -street demand; employees and students at the University may park in the North Side while at work or at school; and nearby dormitory residents may store their cars on the neighborhood streets rather than use a University lot. Whether on the street or off, cars create a burden for the neighborhood that is destruc- tive of its amenities and attractiveness. Many helpful comments were given to us by Dick Gibson and Bill Binney of the University's Office of Facilities ti Planning, by Denis Parsons at Mercy Hospital, and by Jim Brachtel in the City's Department of Public Works. Chuck Burd made substantial contributions in the analysis i and final rewrite of the report. DBL FIICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MIRES CONTENTS FOREWORD SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 PARKING PROBLEMS 3 Commuter Parking 3 Automobile Storage 3 Multi -Family Units 4 Mercy Hospital 5 ANALYSES OF REMEDIES B Permit System B Usable Open Space Requirement 16 Reducing Parking Demand at Mercy Hospital 19 APPENDICES 21 A. Demand and Supply 22 B. Car Counts Zg REFERENCES 40 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES SUMMARY AND The average automobile is in motion only a small percentage of the time. During the remaining time it is stationary, parked some- where along the street or off the street in a special parking facility. While stationary, the car requires a certain amount of space for storage and accessibility; the problem lies in finding the space.l The provision of adequate parking facilities is of increasing importance to most communities. The problem stems from factors tending to increase demand for parking space while supply lags behind. Merely increasing the supply of parking space is not the best answer since there are negative impacts associated with parking, and the necessary space must be procured at the expense of valuable amenities such as green spaces, lawns, trees and vegetation. The most desirable solutions are those that discourage relatively unnecessary parking and assign costs in an acceptable manner. Comprehensive consideration of the parking problem is necessary so that the negative impacts are not overly concentrated or merely shifted to another area. Several factors have been identified as being primarily responsible for the excess parking demand in the North Side Neighborhood: -commuter parking due to the convenient location of this neighborhood in relation . to downtown, Mercy Hospital, the University and the bus lines; -storage of cars belonging to University students living in the nearby dormitories; j -inadequate off-street parking space provided by North Side apartment units, rooming houses, fraternities and single family residences. 1ASPO Planning Advisory Service, Parking in Residential Areas, No. 214, September, 1966. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES flOPIES The most innovative recommendations for the parking problem are: 1) A Parking Permit System (with various mocations) whereby the user pays for the privilege of parking on the street. Because of its prime location, space in the North Side is valuable - whether on or off the street. Attaching a price to curbside parking or allowing preferential parking for residents and charging a small fee, would serve a dual purpose of channeling some parkers back into municipal and University -provided facilities, and forcing those who continue to park on the streets to assume the costs of parking's undesirable effects. 2) A Usable Open Space Requirement aimed at causing new development to assume the cost of parking and limit the external effects on the neighborhood. Too often, excessive park- ing demands an undesirable proportion of multi -family residential lots. Specified amounts of usable open space, incorporated into site requirements, would work together with parking and building area specifications to indirectly control the number of dwelling units that could feasibly share a lot. 3) The Reduction of Parking Demand at Mercy Hospital by decreasing the incentive for employees to drive to work. Because parking is a free benefit to employees of Mercy Hospital, there is an excessive demand for parking space. Removal of this incentive would encourage employees to carpool or seek alternative forms of transportation. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES PARKING PROBLEMS 1. COMMUTER PARKING When the supply of and demand for parking is analyzed for North Side residents alone (see Demand and Supply Section -Appendix A), there is an overall balance of spaces and cars in the neighborhood. This balance is rather tenuous, however, and is easily upset when daily commuters take up on -street parking spaces. Many of the commuters who park in the North Side are destined for the University. Since all of the existing j commuter lots are located on the west side of the Iowa River, commuters traveling from the east and south must cross the campus in order to park. In addition to adding unneeded traffic to city streets, this arrangement encourages parking in areas along commuter routes and closer to the east side classes --notably the North Side Neighborhood. Although relocation of some of these commuter lots seems warranted, there is a problem of land availability, and therefore an incentive -Is needed to constrain commuter cars to designated places. 2. AUTOMOBILE STORAGE A significant contributor to the North Side parking problem stems from a relatively small number of cars (primarily belonging to students living in the east side dormitories) that are stored in the neighborhood. Early in the academic year there is a long waiting list for spaces in the University -provided storage lots. As time passes, however, this demand decreases --perhaps because students discover there is little need for a car in Iowa City or because they have found somewhere else to park. The major storage lots are south of campus, not as easily accessible to dormitory residents who own cars as are the North Side streets. 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs.DEs raOINEs The current policies dealing with the problem of automobile storage are a) calendar parking (alternating control allowing parking on only one side of the street), and b) the city-wide ordinance limiting on -street parking to 48 hours in the same place. Both of these controls impose inconveniences on residents while not always alleviating the impacts of automobile storage. (See Figure Al in the Appendices for a summary of on -street parking controls in the North Side.) 3. MULTI -FAMILY UNITS The parking needs of multi -family dwelling units in the neighborhood impose two major problems --inadequate provision.of space and improperly designed and controlled lots. The current Iowa City Zoning Code requires an allocation off 1h parking spaces per dwelling unit in multi -family developments. This criterion is frequently inadequate, however, when 3 or 4 car -owning students share an apartment. Figure 1 depicts problems resulting from a typical North Side lot development. Taking into account the allowable density of North Side zoning, setbacks and parking requirements, and the original size of a neighbor- hood property (80' by 150'), fully 50% of the area is paved over for automobiles. If one concedes that parking lots do not qualify as usable open space, the available green area is limited to the 20 -foot setback strip -- clearly inadequate for either the recreation of the tenants of a twelve-plex or the protection of a livable neighborhood environment. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIUES Parking Spaces 9'x 20' 2800 sq. ft. LOT SIZE: 12400 sq. ft. ALLOWABLE DENSITY: 12 units 12 2BR apartments• (700 sq. ft./unit, 4/ floor) PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT: 18 spaces 'FHA min. for. 2BR-6SOsq.ft. Figure 1. R3A TYPICAL LOT DEVELOPMENT A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1 4. PARKING IMPACTS OF MERCY HOSPITAL The parking requirements generated by Mercy Hospital greatly impact the surrounding neighborhood streets. The facility presently employs approximately 675 persons (including part-time staff) in addition to 92 doctors, and contains 234 patient beds. There are 273 hospital - provided parking spaces (Table 1) to meet the demands of both employees and visitors. According to the engineer at Mercy Hospital, the Large General Lot is usually filled to capacity by employees' cars, with occasional openings for others. Overflows are formally directed to the Municipal Parking Lot on Market Street (1'h blocks from the hospital) and informally to the surrounding neighbor- hood streets. 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 14010ES Lot Location Doctor's Adjacent to Parking Lot and east of the hospital Emergency West of emer— Parking Lot gency room, next to hospital Admissions Adjacent to and Parking Lot west of hospital on Market Street Large Market Street half General Lot of the first block east of hospital Small Across from General Lot Large Lot on alley TOTAL Table 1 MERCY HOSPITAL PARKING FACILITIES Number of Spaces Users Cost 98 Professional Free, must have staff/clergy, sticker open to other hospital employ— ees from 3 p.m. - 6 a.m. 8 Emergency patients Free only 15 New admittance Token gate from only 8 a.m. — 5 p.m. 129 General employees Free with sticker Visitors tl (no time limit) 23 General employees and visitors 273 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES attended from 6 a.m. — 5 p.m., free all other hours Free ANALYSIS OF REMEDIES The four problems just outlined interact to make parking a complex issue in the North Side. A compre- hensive and multi -dimensional approach is needed to improve the situation, because piecemeal strategies will only shift parking problems to another location or into another form. The goal, then, is to achieve a balance between the demand for on -street parking and provision of off-street parking (in addition to on -street parking), while maintaining a quality neighborhood environment. 1. PERMIT SYSTEM A permit system might be a better way of allocating on -street parking space. Requiring the purchase and display of a permit in order to park on neighborhood 2'From a cursory review of case law, it appears that there are some unresolved issues in the area of permit parking, especially when attempting to discriminate between classes of users (as would be the case if residents received free permits, priority purchase, or were exempted from certain rules) . The city clearly has the power to enact legislation to control in a reasonable manner (rationally related to a legitimate government purpose, i.e., police power) the parking in a residential area. Gardner v Brenswick, 197 Georgia 167, 28 SE 2nd 135 (1943); Raggen7os v Chicago, 336 Illinois 573, 168 NE 661 (1929). Specifically in Commonwealth v Berney, 353 Mass 571, 233 NE 2nd 739 (1968), the Court noted that a regulation providing for reserved parking spaces or parking priority on public streets to occupants of premises abutting on the streets would be valid, pursuant to an enabling statute apparently author- izing such regulation. The legality of the proposed system, then, rests on how effectively permit parking in the North Side can be related to the health, safety, morals and common welfare of the community. In Commonwealth v Petralia, 362 NE 2nd 513 (1977), the reduction of traffic congestion and air pollution and the encouragement of use of public transportation were 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES streets would serve a dual purpose of channeling some parkers back into municipal and University -provided facilities, and forcing those who continue to park on the streets to assume the costs of parking's undesirable effects. Not only does on -street parking mar the beautiful all found to be legitimate state purposes. In justifying the classification of parkers into residents and non- residents, it was found that "the discrimination made by the Cambridge regulation is based rationally on the use or nonuse of a motor vehicle. A resident who parks near his home is not using his automobile, whereas a person who parks in an area away from his home has used his vehicle and thus contributed to the problems which the Cambridge regulation seeks to address. Place of residence is merely a reasonable means of measuring the use of vehicles." The Supreme Court of the United States ruled, in Count Board of Arlington County v'Richards, 98 S.Ct. 24 (1977), that a permit parking system whic distinguishes between residents and nonresidents does not violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the state or federal constitu- tions (an argument previously used to invalidate such regulations State v whisman, 24 Ohio Misc 59, 53 Ohio Ops 2nd 102, 263 NE 2d 411 (1970)). Quoting from the Arlington citation: County ordinance directing the county manager to determine those residential areas especially crowded with parked cars from outside the neighborhood and authorizing issuance of free parking permits to residents of designated areas, to persons doing business with resi- dents there and to some visitors, but denying permits to all other persons, did not deny equal protection. To reduce air pollution and other environmental effects of automobile commuting, community reasonably may restrict on street parking available to commuters, thus encouraging reliance on car pools and mass transit, and community may also decide that restrictions on flow of outside traffic into particular residential areas would enhance quality of life, thereby refusing noise traffic hazards and litter, and such restrictions would not violate equal protection. Equal protection clause does not presume distinctions between residents and nonresidents of local neighborhoods to be invidious, but requires only that distinction rationally promote objectives of regulation. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES streetscapes of some of the North Side (excessive curb parking creates a visual and physical separation between homes facing each other across a street), a more important concern is for safety, as the possibility of pedestrians stepping out from between parked cars into traffic lanes is increased. Parked cars on residential streets also create difficulties in turning corners and in entering and leaving driveways and alleys. Because of the prime location of the neighborhood, land in the North Side is valuable. Whether on or off the street, worthwhile amenities are traded off when parking usurps other land uses. Pricing of parking pro- vides a highly flexible means of control that could be used to discourage certain types of users and encourage others. Through this system, a satisfactory distribution It should also be noted that parking restrictions to discourage automobile commuting have been recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency to implement the Clean Air Amendments of 1970 (See 38 Fed. Reg. 30629). A general thrust of the regulation of on -street parking is the levying of a fee for parking in high demand areas of a city, the higher the demand the higher the fee. Where only a portion of a city (i.e., a neighborhood) is restricted (e.g., to residents), it is our opinion that a permit system is more defensible if a fee is charged, even if the fee is only $10 per year as it is in the North Beach section of San Francisco. Residents and neighborhood businesses could be given priority in the purchase of permits, and/or given a limited number of permits (e.g., one per dwelling unit). It is clear that on -street parking is a privilege and therefore users can be charged for parking. "It is not an essential function of public streets to serve as a place for overnight storage for motor vehicles, and members of the public do not have a 'fundamental' or 'inalienable' right to use the streets for that purpose." DePace v Willmin ton, 44 Delaware 319, 58 Atlantic 2nd 742 (1948 "An ordinance prohibiting night parking on certain streets except by those purchasing permits is not invalid as constituting a revenue measure, but constitutes rather a reasonable technique for regulation of night parking." Commonwealth v Dobbins, 344 Massachusetts 272, 182 N.E. 2nd 123 (1962), State v Perry, 269 Minnesota 204, 130 N.W. 2nd 343 (1964), Milwaukee v Hoffman, 29 Wisconsin 2nd 193, 138 N.W. 2nd 223 (1965). 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOPILS of parking could be obtained, demand could be kept at or below the supply level, and some return on public invest- ment could be realized. Suggested Mechanics of a Permit System In order to effectively shift the demand for parking away from the North Side, the price of permits must be competitive with University and municipal facilities (i.e., University storage lots, $42/yr.; faculty/staff lots, $8/mo.; municipal meters, 10-15fi/hr.). After giving priority purchase to residents, any remaining permits could be sold to non-residents on a first-come, ' first-served basis. The number of permits sold should be ' equal to some percentage of the total number of on -street i parking spaces available less metered spaces. jThis percentage may be somewhat greater than the desired parking density if the permits are not all used ? simultaneously. Using metering in conjunction with parking permits (one or two bn each block face) would allow short-term parking for visitors, while maintaining a price for the privilege of curb -side parking. As previously mentioned, demand for parking is not uniform throughout the neighborhood; therefore, price and/or controls should be graduated with distance from central areas of activity (University, Mercy Hospital, downtown). Figure 2 indicates the areas of demand as identified from actual car counts (see Appendix). Zone A is the area of most intensive demand. It encompasses roughly a two -block strip adjacent to Dubuque Street and also includes the commercial area of the neighborhood and streets surrounding Mercy Hospital. Demand for on - street parking in this area is consistently great, thereby 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIR[5 BROWN ST RONALDS ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST f r U z III a U ~ D w m z m z a o J 12 C7 9 z U) a: 0 z m O CD Figure 2• PARKING ZONES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLs MOIIILS justifying a higher parking price. Demand for on -street parking decreases in Zone B, the buffer zone, but it is recommended that a minimal price be maintained for the privilege of parking so that cars are not merely moved from Zone A to Zone B. Finally, Zone C represents an area of relatively moderate to low parking demand, there- fore it does not require any special controls. Signs notifying parkers of the Permit System should be posted (i.e., 3 per block face). Enforcement will be via daily patrol, with violation fines of $5 (same amount currently charged for calendar parking and 48-hour violations). Any revenues generated from permit sales or fines which exceed operating and enforcement costs could be used for neighborhood improvements, city streets and parking, or rebated to purchasers.3 Variations of the System There are several adaptations to the mechanics just described, some of which would probably be more palatable to residents and therefore more politically feasible. For instance, residents could be issued one free permit, either per dwelling unit, per parcel, or per car owner, and then purchase any additional permits desired. In cases where the creation of off-street space is impossible (land not available, cost prohibitive), application could be made for a second fee permit. Any resident not needing his/her free permit could sell it. Another modification of the system which would be particularly effective on storage automobiles would be the issuance of free permits to residents along with the reduction of the 48-hour parking limit to 24 or 12 hours. 3A survey of case studies compiled by the Transportation Systems Center in Cambridge, Mass. entitled The Restrain of the Automobile in American Residential Neigh or oo s, suggests that revenues from such a permit system will consistantly exceed costs. 13 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Cars displaying a permit would be exempt from the rule, and enforcement could be focused on users from outside the neighborhood. Having to move a stored car that often would probably inconvenience a user enough to channel his/her demand back into University -provided spaces. In order for such a system to be effective on commuter parking demands, the time limit would probably have to be decreased to as low as 2 hours, thereby significantly increasing enforcement efforts. There are some tradeoffs involved with the variation just described. Issuing free permits to residents encourages car ownership through an inequitable distribution of a scarce resource (land) to those with cars and those without off-street parking. An incentive would exist to use a fictional address within the neighborhood in order to obtain a free permit. Also, revenues from a fee system would be foregone. Finally, it is important to resolve the question of where displaced storage automobiles would go. Depending on the utilization rates of municipal (Table 2) and University facilities, it may be preferable to allow some continued use of neighborhood streets for these functions, as long as users assume the costs. i impacts of a Permit System The overall impact of a permit system in the North Side will be a decrease in demand for on -street parking space. However, each category of user has its own.rationale for parking in the neighborhood, and it is important to predict how displaced parkers will cope. Depending on the mechanics of the system, residents will either have to pay for the privilege of parking on the street in front of their houses, create off-street parking, or decrease car ownership; or, in the case of free permits for residents, they will enjoy increased 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES Table 2 MUNICIPAL PARKING LOTS The following data are from the 1976 (latest available) report of the City Finance Department. Central Business District Lot Location Capacity Cost Utilization* Iowa Lot Iowa Avenue, in back of 76 spaces 100/hr 608 the old Post Office Washington South of Washington, 150 spaces 150/hr 608 Lot between Clinton and Capital Moose Lot South of College, 31 spaces 150/hr 488 West of Clinton N Burlington North of Burlington, 28 spaces 150/hr 358 Lot East of Clinton Library Lot East of Library 79 spaces 150/hr 208 Recreation East of Recreation Lot Center 77 spaces 104/hr 278 Plaza Lot South of Civic Center 121 spaces 100/hr 118** Municipal South of Penney's, 299 spaces 150/hr 638 Lot bordered by College, Dubuque, Linn, Burlington North Side Area Market Lot Market Street 73 spaces 100/hr 538 Schuman Lot N. Side of Clinton 24 spaces 100/hr 488 and Dubuque *Utilization is determined by comparing collected revenues from lot usage to the potential revenues if each lot was filled to capacity over a specific time frame. **This is not a true figure due to sales of monthly permits for part of the lot. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES access to curb -side parking at no extra cost. Commuters without permits will utilize University and municipal facilities or seek alternative forms of transportation (i.e., bus, bicycle, walk, carpool). Demand for Univer- sity storage lots will increase when the streets are no longer available to dorm residents. After the permit system is sufficiently established, City and University facilities may be able to raise their prices without a reduction in demand, and thereby make parking more self- supporting. Visitors to the neighborhood will also have to pay for parking at the scattered short-term meters. Converting the 32 block faces presently designated as "Calendar Parking" to the permit system will result i in an overall increase in the number of street spaces and generate both positive and negative impacts. For example, parking on both sides will narrow the streets, thereby reducing traffic flow; however, it will also contribute to all of the problems of curb -side parking. Converting streets with no controls to the permit system, on the other hand, will result in fewer cars and more vacant space when commuter and storage demand are decreased. 2. USABLE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT In conjunction with an on -street permit system, steps must be taken to control the amount of off-street parking on residential and commercial lots. Specified amounts of usable open space should be incorporated into site require- ments so that landscaping is not traded off for increased parking. Such encroachment is common and warrants formalized control. Usable green space requirements, in addition to parking and building area specifications, would work together to indirectly control the number of dwelling units that could feasibly share a lot. Because of the economic benefits of high-density development, 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES owners should internaize the impact of parking without denying the neighborhood and residents the enjoyment of trees, grass, and plantings. Implementation As a first step, the zoning code should distinguish between usable open space and parking areas, which serve different and mutually exclusive functions. It is admittedly difficult and even subjective to establish a space/unit allocation; however, implicitly about 317 sq. ft. are designated for this purpose under current regulations (12,000 sq. ft. lot minus 2,800 sq. ft. for the building jand 5,400 sq. ft. for parking, leaves 3,800 sq. ft. or 317 sq. ft./unit for open space). A reexamination of Figure 1, however, will show that much of this open space is in fact unusable "strips" of land along the sides of the building and the parking lot. De Chiara and Koppelman, in their Manual of Housing/ Planning and Design Standards (1975, p. 76), recommend an outdoor open space allotment of 535 sq. ft./unit for three f story apartments and 870 sq. ft./unit for two story j apartments. Elsewhere, the F. Collins, Colorado, Zoning j Code (1975) requires 807 sq. ft. of usable open space per unit in their medium density multi -family district. Figure 3 depicts the much improved situation where an 800 sq. ft./unit requirement is applied to a typical North Side development. Impacts f The implicit tradeoff of higher density for usable open space has been discussed. Developers would either have to provide more land or build underground parking facilities if they didn't want to decrease the number of units. Part of these increased costs could be reflected 17 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101MES ng Spaces 9'x 20' T7120 LUI W OU x IDU t- LANDSCAPING A SCREENING LOT SIZE: 12,000 sq. ft. ALLOWABLE DENSITY: 8 units, 6-28R 2-1 BR PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT: 12 spaces Figure 3. TYPICAL LOT DEVELOPMENT (with recomended changes In density controls) W.- MICROFILMED P MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES hmIRES in higher rents and/or fewer developments in the neighborhood. The overall quality of the North Side would be increased, however, as parking's impacts are more carefully controlled. 3. REDUCING PARKING DEMAND AT MERCY HOSPITAL Although Mercy Hospital plans to provide additional parking on land it already owns to the west of the hospital on Bloomington, such development is not in the best interest of the neighborhood because it will mean the destruction of some historically significant architecture.4 jOne alternative which might promote more efficient I use of the hospital's existing parking space would be the elimination of any of the specialized lots (i.e., Admissions Parking Lot, Doctors' Parking Lot) which are not fully utilized and creating, instead, more general use lots. As indicated in Table 1, Mercy Hospital Parking Facilities, employees do not pay for the privilege of parking in hospital -provided facilities. This free service effectively discriminates in favor of those employees who utilize it. Eliminating this discrimination would internalize some of the cost of parking, thereby reducing the incentive for individuals to drive to work and hence the demand for parking space. Implementation If a price were attached to the Mercy Hospital Parking Lots, then a resultant decrease in demand could ! be expected. A sufficient charge for on -street parking must accompany such a system, or the emmigration of parkers from the hospital facilities would aggravate the existing on -street parking problem. Employees could also buy a 4See report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MMORIES permit for on -street parking, assuming a surplus after resident purchases. The number of meters could be increased in the few surrounding blocks to facilitate visitor parking. An alternative method for reducing demand could be similar to that used by the American Hospital Supply Corporation in Evanston, Illinois.5 Each parking space could be rented for an appropriate length of time (in the case of Mercy Hospital, areas necessary for immediate use such as emergency admittance would be excepted). All employees, whether they drove to work or not, would receive upward adjustments in their pay equal to the cost of leasing a parking space per pay period. Impacts i The removal of parking discrimination would reduce the incentive to drive and may cause some of the employees to carpool or seek other forms of transportation, thus reducing the demand for parking. There would be an increase in costs for the hospital if it elected to finance parking space rental for all it's employees. Some of this expense would be offset by the revenues taken in from leased parking spaces, however. If employees were not reimbursed for their parking expenses, there would be less incentive to drive, but it is politically difficult i to take away existing job benefits. The costs of reducing parking demand are more equitably borne by those who benefit directly from Mercy Hospital (the employees or the patients) rather than the North Side residents who suffer the effects of excessive on -street r parking. SAHSC News, December 6, 1977; Downtown Ideas Exchange, December 15, 1977, cited by Land Use Digest, Vol. 11, no. 2. 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIDS•DES MOINES APPENDICES 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES I Appendix A DEMAND AND SUPPLY The following information relating to demand for and supply of parking space in the North Side was obtained from a study conducted by the City of Iowa City entitled "Neighborhood Impacts Survey." From this block by block inventory, 1383 dwelling units (separate household of one or more persons) were identified. This figure was then multiplied by 1.5, the overall ratio of cars to households, as obtained from the results of a general survey designed to gain citizen input into the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan.(1.5 is also the parking space require- ment for each unit in multi -family dwellings). The resulting product, 2075, represents an estimation of the total number of cars owned by North Side residents, or the parking demand. To obtain the amount of off-street parking available in the neighborhood, the Impacts Survey was again utilized, and spaces were counted directly from the block maps. The total sum was 1075. This represents an overall ratio of i .78 off-street parking spaces to dwelling units, as com- pared to the required 2.0 ratio for single family houses and 1.5 parking ratio for multi -family units under the present zoning regulations. For the purposes of this report all off-street commercial, school, and church parking lots were deleted from the off-street total. It was felt that the parking i parking lots developed for these uses would not be available for homeowners or renters in the study area. (This number is noted in Table Al, however.) The supply of on -street parking space was tabulated by determining the number of block faces available for parking (Figure Al) and multiplying by the average number of cars that could park on a block face (allowing for driveways, fire hydrants, alleys and other physical 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RES Table Al PARKING SUPPLY 6 DEMAND Demand 1383 dwelling units X1.5 ratio of car ownership 2074.5 cars Supply Off-street 1075 off-street parking spaces (867 off-street spaces for commercial, church, school, fraternity, municipal lots) On-street 50 blocks x 4 block faces = 200 block faces _2 (Mercy Hospital is 2 blocks joined) 198 block faces i Street Controls (Figure 1) i of blocks covered no. parking anytime 63 parking only Sunday mornings 8 parking on parking 2 - loading. zone 1 - metered parking 5 calendar parking 32• parking anytime 87 Total 198 'Calendar Parking alternates sides so can only count half at one time or 16. 16 calendar parking 87_ parking anytime 103 X 10 spaces/block face = 1050 on-street spaces Total Supply 1075 off-street spaces U-32 on-street spaces. 2105 total spaces for residential parking Demand Supply ( - 2075 2105 2105 = 1,01 ratio of parking spaces to resident care I, i 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES F - U.1 D C=7 O BROWN ST no RONALDS ST CHURCH ST El FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure Al. ON -STREET PARKING CONTROLS F- 2 Z J F- U) F- LY W m * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking :,........ Calendar Parking ***ego Loading Zone riwwwwwo Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only (300013❑ Metered Parking F- U) F_ Z (j Ld F- 0 QU) Z CS > > S 3 a 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101rIEs conditions which would influence parking availability). This breakdown of parking controls and the number of affected blocks are listed in Table Al. The "No Parking Anytime" restrictions are placed to promote the through - street nature of Church, Dodge, Governor and Dubuque Streets. They also greatly facilitate the vehicular movement around Mercy Hospital from Bloomington Street. The metered areas, Sunday parking, parking on the parking and loading zone controls all have specialized uses and do not contribute usable space for resident parking. This leaves the streets allowing parking anytime and calendar parking. An adjustment, however, must be made for the 32 block faces of calendar parking, since this is an alter- nating control allowing parking on only one side of the street (the North and East sides on even dates and the South and West sides on odd dates). In effect, the calendar parking total must be divided in half to repre- sent available parking space at any given time. The total number of street spaces, calculated from this process, is shown on Table Al. Added to the off-street provisions, a comparison can then be made between the demand for and supply of parking space for North Side residents. These i figures (2075 cars and 2105 parking spaces) imply that adequate parking exists in a nearly 1 to 1 ratio for the present residents of the North Side.* Shortages develop, however, when parkers from outside the neighborhood are considered. This ratio assumes a uniform demand for and supply of parking throughout the neighborhood which, in fact, is not the case. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES Appendix B CAR COUNTS Car counts were made at 10:00 A.M., and 6:00 P.M., and 12:00 A.M. on March 22, 23, and 24, and again on April 5, 6, and 7. This provided information about the locations of various parking densities within the North Side neighborhood with respect to time of day and whether or not university classes were in session. The numbers on the following maps represent the number of cars parked per block face. Noting the difference between the counts taken when classes were and were not in session and the lo- cation of high parking density areas, it appears that University students are major contributors to the parking problem. The nearness of the dormitories to the North Side neighborhood, and the location of some of the high density areas, leads us to attribute a portion of the increase in parking while classes are in session to dormitory car storage. Another, smaller high density area near the fraternities on Dubuque Street seems to be caused by fraternity car storage. Looking at dif- ferences in car counts when classes are and are not in session does not, however, distinguish between parking of'students who are residents of the North Side and parking of students who live outside the neighborhood (dormitories) and merely store their cars here. There was a greater concentration of parked cars in the northwestern part of the neighborhood during the 10:00 A.M. and the 6:00 P.M. counts (the working part of the day). There are both Iowa City Transit and Cambus stops in this area. It appears that commuters leave their cars parked in this area and take the busses into town or school. Parking in the vincinity of Mercy Hosptial was highest during the 10:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. counts, but remained considerably above normal at the 12:00 A.M. counts also. This is true when classes were both in and out of session. 26 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES 6101r1Es The conclusion is that mainly Mercy Hospital employees and possibly visitors are responsible ,for the inordinately high level of parking in this area. The car counts provide information which helps identify the sources of the parking problem on the North Side. Major contributors were determined to be university students, employees of businesses in the North Side (Mercy Hospital in particular) and commuters who park their cars in the neighborhood and walk or take busses. to their destination. 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140MCS CAR COUNTS 3-22-78 (Wed.) 10:00 a.m. University Classes not in Session N H BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST 0 FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST i BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST I— Z z J H x w J M * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking Calendar Parking •••••• Loading Zone mwm� Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only 0000013 Metered Parking H Z U) Er � F- 0 D (n W N Z z z S S > J O0 6 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114CS no 00I �— o ri o I o CAR COUNTS 3-22-78 (Wed.) 6:00 p.m. University Classes not in Session N RONALDS ST CHURCH ST EIo FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST E LOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST I- 0 W Cr F- U) Z Z -i * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking Calendar Parking •••••• Loading Zane Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only n0onue Metered Parking F-cn F- U) F- Ld NO cr Z D En CC ZW aa w == O J j 29 PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs•DEs 11011jEs CAR COUNTS * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime 3-23-78 (Thurs.) 12:00 a.m. No Parking University Classes not Calendar Parking in Session **sees Loading Zone N Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only n00000 Metered Parking U! U) F_ t%z ~ Ld H F - bi tjp D CJ W m (n W (/7 z zzz S 0 _j O J 0> j BROWN ST ........ RONALDS ST FAI DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 41011IE5 CARS S 3-23-78 (Thurs.) 10:00 a.m University Classes not in Session N F- N Z Z I N F- W NJ C7 BROWN ST RONALDS ST * Parking on the Parking CHURCH ST 0 FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•D[.. 1401ME5 Parking Anytime No Parking Calendar Parking 0009*0 Loading Zone ww� Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday only 000000 Metered Parking N W Z cn F- F- p Z N Z _� ZO W U J O �j � CHURCH ST 0 FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•D[.. 1401ME5 CAR COUNTS 3-23-78 (Thurs.) 6:00 p.m. University Classes not in Session N Cn w =O BROWN ST CHUI FAIRCH i DAVENP( i BLOO M I NGI MARk U) U) H w ED J 0 JEFFERSON ST 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t101NCs * Parking on the Parking _DS ST Parking Anytime RCH ST O %:1 7D::[; �{ �2 $ 1 O:; 1 y ice! F o —1 * 6 H I No Parking ILD ST 5 Z ' L 3 Calendar Parking 4 * 1 0 •����• Loading Zone 0 •F•: o o ° 7 0 to : to '�: 4 p 0 8* 0 0 O 2 2 0 3 0 0 e Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. 0 0 0 0 0� Sunday Only 00000❑ Metered Parking F- N 1— U) LLI O x U) Cn m U) w En Cr Q _ 06 JEFFERSON ST 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t101NCs 122 2 0 7 5 0 3 0 0 _DS ST O Z L i:s: Z Z Z:' I 2 1 5 4 0 O Z O 2 0 0 Lo RCH ST O %:1 7D::[; �{ �2 $ 1 O:; 1 y ice! F o —1 * 6 H I ILD ST 5 Z ' L 3 )RT ST ° 2 1 0 5 ? 3 4 7- 4 * 1 0 'ON ST 0 •F•: o o ° 7 0 to : to '�: 4 p 0 8* 0 0 O 2 2 0 3 0 0 ET ST o 0 4 0 0 0 ° 3 0 6 Ro 0 0 717 0 0 0 0 0 0� JEFFERSON ST 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t101NCs CAR COUNTS 3-24-78 (Fri.) 12:00 a.m University Classes not in Session N BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST 0 z, FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST I- U) Z Z J E- Gr w 07 J 5 * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1+40Ir+ES No Parking Calendar Parking 0900#0 Loading Zone o Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 P.m. Sunday Only ❑000[1❑ Metered Parking F- F_ H U) Z W cn Of Z C13 Z W N X 8U O j 0 J 0 I TJ �.J 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1+40Ir+ES CAR COUNTS 4-5-78 (Wed.) 10:00 a.m. University Classes in Session N U) W 0 BROWN ST 12 RONALDS ST r CHURCH ST 1 ° 0 Ib 1 FAIRCHILD ST 0 DAVENPORT ST f 0 BLOOMINGTON ST c 0 7 MARKET ST c 0 0 JEFFERSON ST * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking ,., Calendar Parking •••••• Loading Zone s Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only 000000 Metered Parking (. 7 5 2 C C 3 4 0 L s 3 � 0 o 7 S 2 ° n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIgEs I- LLI UQ) U X � S H Z w U) Z m cr W Z Z z J 0 -) (. 7 5 2 C C 3 4 0 L s 3 � 0 o 7 S 2 ° n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIgEs am' Co] O Z LLI UQ) U X � S am' Co] CAR COUNTS 4-5-78 (Wed.) 6:00 p.m. University Classes in Session N F- W a D BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST So FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Z Z J * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking Calendar Parking ••see• Loading Zone Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only 000000 Metered Parking V) Lo~ F- W w N ~ F- U) O Z S o 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIgES BROWN ST o 3-7 s p S 2 D ip Vol Z D ,.., !' ? �/ IBJ t J 5 3 RONALDS ST10=7 :'?::.;',;:<:;:::;:>: / o �z� 0 0 SI / 3 7 CHURCH ST' /D 3 V20 D D °FAIRCHILD ST ""39": �DZ 2 10 zo ei DAVENPORT ST ff S BLOOMINGTON ST " o D O MARKET ST r JEFFERSON ST 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rdOIJILS L 1/ 3A G * Parking on the Parking CAR COUNTS Parking Anytime 4-6-78 (Thurs.) 12:00 a.m. No Parking University Classes inCalendar Parking Session 00*000 Loading Zone N Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only 000000 Metered Parking F- ~ V) F_ U) Z F- H W H z O Z W Z ll! Q W z 3 m a U 6 O (9 J U � -1.) BROWN ST o 3-7 s p S 2 D ip Vol Z D ,.., !' ? �/ IBJ t J 5 3 RONALDS ST10=7 :'?::.;',;:<:;:::;:>: / o �z� 0 0 SI / 3 7 CHURCH ST' /D 3 V20 D D °FAIRCHILD ST ""39": �DZ 2 10 zo ei DAVENPORT ST ff S BLOOMINGTON ST " o D O MARKET ST r JEFFERSON ST 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rdOIJILS L 1/ 3A G F DA I� BLOC JEFFLHbUN a I 37 CAR COUNTS 4-6-78 (Thurs.) 10:00 a.m University Classes in Session N yE Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking F Calendar Parking 000400 Loading Zone Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 P.m. Sunday Only 000000 Metered Parking FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101NES F- W � N ~ F- Z V) F U) F wIn Z m LLJ U) G3cn W Z (DQ j z g J 0 _ � p J FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101NES CAR COUNTS 4-6-78 (Thurs.) 6:00 p.m. University Classes in Session N BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST ,BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST H cn Z Z J * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking Calendar Parking 6990'• Loading Zone ��. Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 P.m. Sunday Only ❑00000 Metered Parking H Z W m .,7 C H U) F- O N Z= O b 33 / 50 �E7171 I f e 77 11 o 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :d0111Es C�7 r. 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :d0111Es C�7 r. CAR COUNTS 4-7-78 (Fri.) 12:00 a.m University Classes in Session N F— cn N W U) x LdO Z J 0 J 0 BROWN ST .........::: 0 o r /Z. 0 10 RONALDS ST 1;;?:;:.>'• <:z:::>:s::::'ss 10 r * Parking on the Parking Parking Anytime No Parking „••• Calendar Parking *sees* Loading Zone Parking 6:00 a.m. - 1 p.m. Sunday Only aooaoo Metered Parking c H U) w Z� V) N Z 0 O aa Z Z U > O S 10.7 7 45 Z 4 0 o r ! o0 rl I__J CHURCH ST . i�,:.k.���1..,.�. ° oy r I ra 7 0 0 FAIRCHILD ST b 3 9 DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST I 0 O b o t i r o7 `:; 0 4 r * 0 0 0 MARKET ST 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 b b o 0 0 0 0 JEFFERSON ST 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401rus 0 REFERENCES Allen, Doug, An Alternative Comprehensive Plan for the U of I," class paper, May 1977. ASPO Planning Advisory Service, Parking in Residential Areas, No. 214, September 1966. Barron, Margaret, et al., Neighborhood Impacts Survey, Institute of Urban and Regional Research, Iowa City, Summer 1976. De Chiara, Joseph & Lee E. Koppelman, Manual of Housing/ Planning and Design Standards, Prentice Hall, Engle- wood Cliffs, N. J., 1975. Department of Community Development, Report on People's Guide and Survey, Iowa City, Iowa June 1977. Ft. Collins, Colorado, Zoning Code Revisions, 1975. Iowa City Tree Planting Ordinance, November 1976. Iowa City Zoning Code, 1976. Land Use Digest, Vol. 11, No. 2, February 1978. Lozano, Gary, "Regulating Residential Density in Iowa City's Near North Side," class paper, December 1976. Old West Side Association, Inc., Old West Side, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971. Poorman, Philip R., "Parking Provisions at the University of Iowa," class paper, 1976. Simkowitz, et al., The Restraint of the Automobile in , Cambridge, Mass., April 1978.. 40 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES VIDIIIES 0 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron B. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14, Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the Institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i O DORM MICROLAR The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I10PIES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perrel Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer' Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor ' Past Council Members '• Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. Y HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) COMMUNITY FACILITIES Margaret Barron May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Department of Community Development City of Iowa City Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished as a joint effort of the City and the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research. "Community facilities", as a term, has been interpreted here to encompass all public, semi-public, and private facilites, that provide some kind of service to local residents, outside of their homes. Margaret Barron wrote the initial report, and Rebecca S. A. Schroeder prepared the inventory included under "Other Private and Commercial Facilities." The section on "Other Public Facilities" was added by the Project Leader. Many members of the staff of the project contributed helpful comments on the draft and in discussions. MM MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES CONTENTS i FOREWORD SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES 1 EVALUATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES 3 Services Provided 3 Services Needed 3 Service Area 4 Neighborhood Impacts 4 SCHOOLS 6 Horace Mann Elementary School 6 Services Provided 6 Services Needed 7 Service Area' 9 Neighborhood Impacts 9 Central Junior High School 11 Services Provided 11 Services Needed 12 Service Area 12 iNeighborhood Impacts 12 Willowwind School i 14 PARKS 15 Happy Hollow Park 15 Services Provided 15 I Services Needed 15 Service Area 16 Neighborhood Impacts 16 North Market Square Park 16 Services Provided 16 Services Needed 17 Service Area 17 Neighborhood Impacts 17 ii / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES LIBRARIES 18 Services Provided 18 Services Needed 1s Service Area 19 Neighborhood Impacts 19 OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES 20 Police and Fire Protection 20 Housing and Code Enforcement 20 Transportation 21 Public Works 21 MEDICAL SERVICES 22 Mercy Hospital 22 Services Provided 22 Services Needed and Service Area 22 Neighborhood Impacts 23 Free Medical Clinic 24 Services Provided 24 Services Needed 26 Service Area 26 Neighborhood Impacts 26 Emma Goldman Clinic for Women 27 Services Provided 27 Services Needed and Service Area 27 Neighborhood Impacts 27 RESTAURANTS AND BARS 30 Services Provided 30 Restaurants 30 Bars 30 Services Needed 30 Service Area 32 Neighborhood Impacts 32 iii / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES GROCERY STORES 33 Services Provided 33 Services Needed 33 Service Area 33 Neighborhood Impacts 34 OTHER RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES 36 Services Provided 36 Services Needed 36 Service Area 37 Neighborhood Impacts 38 APPENDIX A. Inventory of Selected Commercial Facilities 39 iv MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS A comprehensive range of community services is evaluated in this report, without regard to whether they are publicly provided, offered by private enterprises, or provided by some combination of public and private resources. Faci- lities reviewed include schools, parks, libraries, hospitals and clinics, groceries, restaurants, and other public and private facilities. Overall, the North Side is moderately - well served, although there a few deficiencies and some other related problems: Horace Mann elementary school is experiencing declining enrollment; - No library facilities for the general public are located in the neighborhood; - Happy Hollow'Park and Mercy Hospital, as well as some retail establishments, provide valuable services to the residents of the neighborhood but also create some negative impacts because of their orientation to a service area that is larger than the neighborhood; Most negative impacts are the consequence of traffic and parking, although litter, petty vandalism, noise, and unsightliness are also associated with some community facilities. Recommendations for improvements and policies in the area of community facilities are the following: i(1) Horace Mann school should be retained if this is at all feasible, as it is important to maintaining the mix of families and household types that currently are found in the North Side. Joint uses of the existing facility should continue to be developed, one of which might be a small library oriented to- ward serving elderly residents. Another use could be child care services immediately before and after school. (2) Happy Hollow park should either be expanded or the recreation programs and facilities located there altered to better serve nearby residents and lessen the number of automobiles attempting to park on or near the park. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I1011JES I (3) It should be a general policy to favor public and private services in the neighborhood that make ef- forts to appeal to neighborhood residents and pedestrian access. This policy is not simple to administer, but implementation can be based on re- quirements such as maximum off-street parking, open space, landscaping and screening, trash con- trol, and enforcement of on -street parking con- trols. (4) No distinction should be made between public and private services in requiring that acceptable stan- dards of "neighborliness" be met; for example, the parking lot at Horace Mann should be paved and landscaped. 2 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES f EVALUATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES Variety of land use is one of the neighborhood's positive attributes, as well as the source of some of its problems. Residential is the most prevalent use, but interspersed among the older homes and newer apartment buildings are activities which provide services to both the neighborhood and the larger community. The adequacy of these services, and the positive and negative impacts generated by their presence, form an important com- ponent of the neighborhood's ability to attract residents and to remain attractive as the demands for services change and evolve over time. Evaluation of each community facility or type of facility is organized under four main headings: SERVICES PROVIDED A description of the facilities currently available and the services provided, currently and historically, is included for each type of facility and major facility. This information reveals the balance between supply and demand, and patterns and trends in consumption. SERVICES NEEDED A rough, generally judgmental, assessment is made for each type of facility as to whether it is needed and whether or not additional facilities are needed. In the case of the North Side, maintaining a varied mix in the ; population requires a wide range of services and facilities. 3 FI ICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES SERVICE AREA An important distinction from the perspective of the neighborhood is the degree to which facilities located within the neighborhood actually serve neighborhood residents as opposed to non-residents. Facilities which are oriented towards serving local residents tend to be more compatible in scale, make more effort to adapt to neighborhood needs, and create fewer negative impacts. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS Positive impacts generally derive from the service provided by the facility, and the objective becomes one of seeking to maintain access to the service while mini- mizing the negative impacts. Users or consumers of the services are most frequently the direct source of impacts, in the form of traffic, parking, inconsiderate people, and litter. Pressure to store cars, even temporarily on the street, tends to undermine neighborhood quality, especially as demand rises above on -street parking capacity. Litter comes from many sources, but a major one is take-out food packaging; while none of the facilities can be properly regarded as a fast food outlet, many stores and restau- rants sell food for consumption off the premises. In both these examples, the problem is exacerbated if the clientele is primarily from outside the neighborhood. A distinction that is commonly made between public and private facilities seems to be unimportant in the neighborhood context. The order of types of facilities evaluated in the list below progresses generally from public to private, but the same procedures for evaluation are applied.;to either kind. Figure 1 shows where all of the community facilities in the neighborhood are located. 4 MiCROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOINCS BROWN ST ROKw r%Q ST ❑ © hospital/clinic/pharmacy s:: school ❑ ❑ A& church 0 supermarket N O corner grocery store • tavern/ restaurant ❑ gas station T1 office El o other commercial FAIRCHILD ST � �� � ❑ W ❑ � ~ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ N Ln DAVENPORT ST Ln W E- F- O N N Z fn CE BLOOMINGTON ST w O § Z Z ro >O S > 3 o BROWN ST ROKw r%Q ST MARKET ST ® .. ❑ <... ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ JEFFERSON ST Figure I. LOCATION OF NORTH SIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ❑ ❑r ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � U CHURCH ST El FAIRCHILD ST � �� � ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑ DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST ® .. ❑ <... ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ JEFFERSON ST Figure I. LOCATION OF NORTH SIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i C SCHOOLS There are three schools in the North Side Neighbor- hood: a public elementary school, a public junior high, and a small, private ungraded school serving approximately ages 5 to 12. HORACE MANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Horace Mann is one of the oldest grade schools in Iowa City. It was built in 1918 and serves grades kinder- garten through sixth. 1. Services Provided a. Facilities 20 permanent classrooms 0 temporary classrooms 16,308 square feet of classroom space 325 = capacity enrollment 224 = enrollment in the fall of 1976 10 teachers in the fall of 1976 b. Enrollment Figures for 1966-1976 1966-67: 591 1967-68: 567 1968-69: 576 1969-70: 548 1970-71: 359 (first year that Shimek School was open) 1971-72: 321 1972-73: 306 1973-74: 281 1974-75: 260 1975-76: 254 1976-77: 224 c. Community activites and Services at Horace Mann Parent-Teacher Organization Election Polling Kirkwood Community College Adult Classes City Recreation Program Cub Scouts, Campfire Girls, Bluebirds Central Junior High Volleyball and Basketball Practices Neighborhood Meetings 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORIES 2. Services Needed It is evident from the declining enrollment at Horace Mann that the actual classroom space is more than adequate to meet the needs of the neighborhood. The primary need, from the neighborhood's point of view, is to keep Horace Mann open. This has been an issue for about the past five years; rapid decline in the enrollment of several of Iowa City's oldest, most centrally located grade schools has been a politically volatile issue with no easy or popular solutions. The preservation of a neighborhood school in the North Side is an issue of concern to all neighborhood resi- dents, not only parents. The presence of a neighborhood school is an important factor in many families' decision to move into an area: it affects property values and, thus, the quality of the neighborhood for all residents. It is likely that, without Horace Mann, the shift to multi -family living in the North Side would be accelerated. Total school enrollment in Iowa City elementary schools has been declining for the past several years, with a loss 4.78 in 1976 over 1975. However, this has not been a uni- form decline in all of the schools, but a strong decline in the older,. more centrally located schools and overcrowd- ing in the newer peripheral schools. The schools with declining enrollment are: coralville central Longfellow Roosevelt Hoover Lucas Sabin Horn Horace Mann Twain 3 Lincoln 0£ these, Longfellow, Horace Mann, and Twain, which are older schools, have the largest percentage declines. In one case (Sabin) this decline has been alleviated by starting an innovative educational program open to'students city-wide on a first come, first-served basis. This pro - 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES gram was very popular for several years, but this is not an alternative -that can be extended to all schools with enrollment problems and, in addition, it won't be an acceptable solution in all cases. For example, a dis- cussion in recent years of proposals to combine Sabin with Horace Mann met with considerable opposition; there is strong neighborhood sentiment in favor of keeping the neighborhood character of Horace Mann. The issue involved is the preservation of an elementary school in an older neighborhood, with strong support for the school but opposition to new programs designed to bring in children from other neighborhoods. If the options of closing and consolidation are both rejected as detrimental to the neighborhood, two strategies remain to protect the school: (1) The community services that are operated through the school building might be expanded, and (2) the neighborhood itself could be strengthened, to improve its ability to support a neighborhood school. The role of Horace Mann School in providing community services needs to be strengthened. Already Horace Mann serves a number of functions besides elementary education, including adult classes, recreation programs, election i polling, and neighborhood meetings. If other community services lacking in the North Side could be developed in such a way that they could operate compatibly with the school functions, the chances for the survival of Horace Mann might be improved. According to some neighborhood residents, there is a strong need, both in the North Side and elsewhere in Iowa City, for supervision of elementary - age children between the hours of 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. If a program of before -and -after-school child care were provided at Horace Mann, funded by parents' fees, with priority given to residents of the school's present district and others accepted on a first-come, first- served basis, a constructive way of dealing with the declining MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES enrollment might result. Iowa City has a large single - parent population as well as many student or working mothers who need child care beyond normal elementary school hours; it is highly likely that this type of program would be attractive to parents who work downtown or at the University. The trade-off involved in this potential solution to Horace Mann's declining enrollment is that the neighbor- hood character of this school will, to some extent, be lost. This is something that neighborhood residents oppose, yet it appears that some compromise is needed in view of the very real possiblity that Horace Mann could be closed. Beyond this sort of compromise, the only real solution to the problem of strengthening Horace Mann would be to strengthen the neighborhood itself, through II any measures that increase the stability of the area and idesirability to single-family homeowners. Another: neighborhood service that might utilize the school's facilities would be a library designed to serve the North Side population. For example, the North Side has higher than proportional numbers of elderly (over 60) residents when compared with Iowa City as a whole. A small library designed to serve this population could use the school after hours and during the summer. 3. Service Area j The service area of the school is defined by the'Board i of Education when school district boundaries are set. Figure 2 shows the boundaries for the Horace Mann district. 4. Neighborhood Impacts Horace Mann is a focal point for the neighborhood; it provides a meeting place for organizations, activities and services; it increases the attractiveness of the Vj MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Figure 2. HORACE MANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: DISTRICT BOUNDARIES 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoINES neighborhood to families with children, thus having a positive influence on property values. The school yard, with adjoining North Market Square Park provides green space and recreational facilities for neighborhood resi- dents. Negative impacts of the school include some traffic congestion around 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., and dust and minor flooding from the unpaved, unscreened 17 -car parking lot. In addition, neighbors complained of children tres- passing on private property and causing noise and some traffic hazard before and after school hours. CENTRAL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL Central Junior High is the oldest school building in Iowa City and is presently in poor condition. It was built in 1904 and now has classrooms for seventh through ninth grade. 1. Services Provided a. Facilities 22 permanent classrooms 6 portable classrooms 23,677 square feet of classroom space 250 = capacity enrollment 439 = enrollment in the fall of 1976 b. Enrollment Figures for 1966-1976 1966-67: 670 1967-68: 686 1968-69: 544 (West Junior High opened) 1969-70: 516 1970-71: 535 1971-72: 542 1972-73: 504 1973-74: 487 1974-75: 445 1975-76: 418 1976-77: 439 11 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES C. Community Activities and Services at Central Junior High Parent-Teacher Organization Election Polling Kirkwood Community College Adult Classes City Recreation Program University Homecoming Parade - central place for bands 2. Services Needed Central Junior High is the smallest and oldest of Iowa City's three junior high schools. Its major problem is the age and condition of the building, while its major attribute is its central location. The marked decline in junior high enrollment in Iowa City for the last three years, and the likelihood that this decline will continue, given present elementary school enrollment figures, make any replacement of Central Junior High facilities with a new buildingunlikely and inadvisable. The high maintenance costs of the present building are a disadvantage but the present facilities serve adequately for adult education, recreation programs, and election polling in addition to junior high education. Of long run concern to the neighbor- hood is the next use of the site now occupied by Central Junior High, and the point in time at which the change will occur. 3. Service a Fiqure 3 shows the district boundaries for Central Junior High. 4. Neighborhood Impacts Central Junior High has one unpaved parking lot that accomodates approximately 26 cars. Its negative impacts on the neighbors stem from the fact that it is unscreened and dusty. 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101r1ES Figure 3. CENTRAL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL: DISTRICT BOUNDARIES 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Unsupervised junior high students are a problem for neighbors of the school in the late afternoon. Neighbors complain of noise, trespassing, litter and minor vandalism. WILLOWWIND SCHOOL Willowwind is a small private grade school located in a converted single-family home on Fairchild Street. It serves approximately 35 children from all over Iowa City; thus, its impact on the enrollment of the neighbor- hood grade school is minor. It provides an alternative to public school education for families with the means to pay private school tuition, but it also presents some problems to the immediate neighborhood. Residents of blocks 49 and 50 particularly objected to the parking problems and street congestion that take place in the early morning and mid-afternoon around the school. Except for a small, on -street loading zone in frontof the school and two unused gravel parking spaces in the rear year, the school hasn't dealt with this problem. The neighbors favored instituting calendar parking on Fairchild between Gilbert and Johnson to open up more spaces for loading and unloading and to avoid the situation in which the street is blocked by parked cars on both sides and a parent is double parked in the middle of the street while waiting for children after school. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES HAPPY HOLLOW PARK 1. Services Provided classification: Community Park location: Brown Street and Governor Street size: 1.3 hectares or 3.3 acres acquired: 1945 description: "Fully developed for its size. Present uses (ball diamond) and parking problem completely overpower the aesthetics of the park and the neighborhood." (From draft of Community Facilities Report, Iowa City Dept. of Community Development) facilities: court games game field open space picnic tables and shelter playground equipment 2. Services Needed Happy Hollow is officially classified as a "Neighbor- hood Park." However, its dominate facility is a baseball diamond. The shelter, picnic tables and playground equipment are crowded behind the ball diamond, and the small open space area runs only along the northern boundary of the park. The ball games that are played here are, for the most part, connected with Iowa City's men's and women's leagues, and therefore draw players and cars from all over the city. In effect, this "neighborhood park" is being used to meet citywide needs, with neighborhood needs playing a secondary role. If this park is to be used primarily asa community park, then its size should be increased to accommodate the demands being placed on it. This pattern of usage of the park by people from outside the neighborhood should be documented through a user survey. In addition, a survey 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMES of the service area of this park should be made to determine what unmet recreational needs of the North Side could be served through Happy Hollow. 3. Service Area Happy Hollow's service area is larger than the neighborhood due to the presence of the ball diamond. Its official service area as a "neighborhood park" is supposed to include 1000-3000 people. A user survey would provide a more accurate estimate of its true size. 4. Neighborhood Impacts The major negative impacts result when the parks are used for large organized activities which draw traffic from outside the neighborhood. This results in some congestion in parking on the streets around the park, and parking on the grass. NORTH MARKET SQUARE PARK 1. Services Provided classification: Community Park location: Fairchild Street and Johnson Street size: 0.6 hectares or 1.5 acres acquired: 1839 description: Fully developed for its site." (From draft of Community Facilities Report, Iowa City Department of Community Deve- lopment) facilities: court games open space picnic tables shelters playground equipment 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 2. Services Needed North Market Square does not have the same competing uses that Happy Hollow has. The service area of North Market Square appears to vary with the facility being used. Neighborhood children use the playground equip- ment, residents of a larger area use the park to walk their dogs, and young adults drive to the park to use the basketball area. 3. Service Area North Market Square serves as both a Neighborhood Park and a school playground. The playground was fprovided with all new equipment in 1976. Neighborhood residents appear to be well -satisfied with the park except for a desire to see one section set aside for dog -walking to avoid the problem of dogs desecrating play areas. 4. Neighborhood Impacts Both parks are resources for the North Side Neighbor- hood. They provide recreational opportunities, green space, and visual amenities. Their existence probably iis a factor in stable property values in the North Side. 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIOS•DLS MOINES LIBRARIES SERVICES PROVIDED There are no libraries open to the general public in the North Side. Elementary school children are served by the Horace Mann library (10,000-11,000 books) during the school year. The entire city is served by the Iowa City Public Library. The inadequacies of this facility are noted in the Community Facilities Report of the Iowa City Plan by the Department of Community Development. Usage of the library has increased by 2'h times since the library was reopened in 1963 at its present size. The planning report recommends an expansion of facilities at the present location. SERVICES NEEDED The North Side, along with the rest of Iowa City, is inadequately served by the present Iowa City Library facilities. Consideration should be given to the possibility that the North Side (and perhaps other Iowa City neighbor- hoods) would be better served by the development of a neighborhood library at an easily accessible location within the North Side than by contributing (through taxes) to the expansion of the downtown library. A neighborhood library could be operated in such a way as to more directly serve the needs of the population to which it is most readily accessible. For example, according to the 1970 Census, 14.58 of the North Side population is over the age of 60, as compared to 10.08 for Iowa City as a whole. This is a group which has particular needs for the service libraries can offer. Retired people frequently have greater leisure time available for quiet activities, and;in some cases, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140114ES contact and socialization. Through greater need for a small neighborhood library, older citizens of the North Side could be provided with the opportunity to meet with others who share their interests and hobbies as well as to get information and help concerning city, state and federal programs and policies aimed at the elderly and other issues or problems which particularly affect this age group. If this type of facility were developed in the Hourace Mann School and opened in the late afternoon and early evening and all day during the summer, this under-utilized facility would better serve the North Side Neighborhood. SERVICE AREA The Horace Mann option as a location for a neighborhood library has the advantage of a centralized location for the North Side, providing maximum accessiblity for all North Side residents. Except for the southwest portion, the entire neighborhood is closer to Horace Mann than to the Iowa City Public Library. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS The primary impact of neighborhood library would be to incrase communication within the neighborhood and enlarge the resources available to the elderly. Some negative impacts in the form of increased traffic or parking congestion may result if neighborhood residents use cars to get to the library. However, it should be noted that Horace Mann is on two busy arterial streets, Dodge and Church. The increase in traffic due to the library won't be very great compared to the total traffic volume. In addition, Horace Mann has a seventeen -space parking lot, which would probably eliminate congestion in parking on side streets. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION Central Police Station is located two blocks south - of the North Side neighborhood, and response to various types of neighborhood problems seems to be at least as adequate as in other areas of the City; there is no evidence -- in terms of incidents or complaints -- that police services in the neighborhood are less than what is reasonably expected. Rape is the only violent crime that arouses some concern, while more common problems consist of burglary, g y, petty vandalism, disorderly conduct, i excessive noise, and the like. The North Side appears to receive at least its fair share of the City's efforts at controllingthese problems. The central fire station is also two blocks south of the neighborhood, and, again, services do not appear to give grounds for complaint. Because of the mix of structures, age, and close proximity, preventive measures deserve a higher than average level of attention; whether due to individual preventive measures, fire inspections and education, and/or fire fighting capacity, the North Side does not seem to have suffered much damage from fire. HOUSING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT Housing programs, in the form of rehabilitation grants and loans have recently been extended to the North Side, and these efforts are documented in Report No. 14, Grant Program Coordination. Also included are Community Deve- lopment Block Grant funds available for neighborhood site improvements (Report No. B). Housing inspection and code enforcement activities have been greatly increased in the past year or so (see Report No. 2, Land Use Administration MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAN DS -DES 1101 RES and Procedures) and these have been especially directed at rental housing. All of these are of considerable benefit to the North Side. TRANSPORTATION Because of its close -in location, many trips by resi- dents can be served by bicycle or on foot. Several bus routes traverse the neighborhood. As discussed in the Streets and Traffic report (No. 5) and Parking report (No. 6), the transportation problems of the neighborhood relate not to access for residents but to propensity of the neighborhood to be used as a corridor for through trips or a place for temporary automobile storage. PUBLIC WORKS The neighborhood is well provided with water, sewer, gas', electricity, and telephone services, but many of these are quite old and in need of replacement. Power and telephone lines are strung from poles in the alleys, and are extremely unsightly; a program should be initiated to underground or upgrade them over a period of time. Storm sewers are frequently inadequate to handle runoff, and the south end of the neighborhood is subject to flooding. The causes, besides limited runoff capacity, are urbanization in the Ralston Creek watershed and improper storm water retention in the North Side and other portions of the water- shed. Parking lots, especially, should be required to satisfy the requirements of the City's Storm Water Management ordinance, even though the lots may have been in use prior to the enactment of the ordinance. 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MEDICAL SERVICES Medical facilities in the North Side include one hospital, two clinics, four doctors' offices, three dentists' offices, and one pharmacy. These facilities serve the neighborhood as both health care resources and employment opportunities. In addition, they impact the neighborhood through use of neighborhood land for buildings and parking areas and through effects on values of adjacent land due to incompatibility of structures and land uses, as well as the real or perceived possi- bility of expansion of the facilities. MERCY HOSPITAL 1. Service Provided Mercy Hospital is a large Catholic hospital located on block 38. Its facilities include: 234 beds 92 medical doctors 767 employees a 24-hour emergency room parking spaces for staff, patients, and visitors 2. Services Needed and Service Area Mercy Hospital presently has no problem with over- crowding and no plans to expand. It is the smallest of the three hospitals in Iowa City; therefore, services jwhich Mercy is unable to provide are frequently available elsewhere. For example, Mercy performs no elective abortion, for religious reasons, but this service is available through several medical facilities in Iowa City. Because hospitals generally serve an area larger than a neighborhood and because Iowa City has three large hospitals with overlapping service areas, a full inven- tory of all medical facilities in the Iowa City area 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES UIRES and a study of the health needs of the population would be necessary to determine what additional services are needed. The North Side falls into the service area of all three hospitals and has two clinics in the neighborhood; the residents therefore have a range of options open to them in choosing medical services. 3. Neighborhood Impacts Mercy Hospital is a large facility which, with its parking areas, physically dominates Block 27, 28,and 47 (see figure 4). It is the largest single interruption in the residential land use pattern of the North Side. It presents particular and immediate problems to residents of surrounding blocks in the form of increased congestion in traffic and on -street parking. No on -street parking is allowed on Market Street. Bloomington and Gilbert both have calendar parking near Mercy Hospital. Van Buren and Johnson have 48-hour parking on both sides of the streets. It is evident merely from driving around these streets that there is high demand for those parking spaces nearest the hospital. Residents have complained of inconvenience to themselves and their guests from congestion in on -street parking. Only one of Mercy Hospital's parking lots is landscaped. The large lot on Block 27 and the smaller lots on Block 47 present problems of negative visual impact, glare, and storm run-off to the neighborhood, as noted in the Neighborhood Impact Survey. Considerable green space on these blocks has been lost to parking and the deteriorated condition of the remaining houses attests to the conse- quences of these negative impacts. Recommendations regarding 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIIDINES parking management in the neighborhood and around Mercy Hospital are contained in Report No. 61 Parkin . FREE MEDICAL CLINIC 1, Services Provided The Free Medical Clinic has been open for five and one-half years and is located at the Wesley House, 120 N. Dubuque street. The clinic operates two evenings each week, Monday and Thursday, from 7:00 p.m. to approximately 11:00 p.m. Patients of the clinic are not charged for the services they receive: all medical personnel at the clinic are volunteers, the space at Wesley House is provided for a small fee to cover utility costs, and funds for equipment and some drugs are provided by United Way and the Johnson County Board of Health. The clinic has three part-time paid budget employees, a director who is in charge of theatients, a resource and referral person who counsels p who require services beyond that which the clinic is albe to provide, and a medical records person. On a typical night the clinic is open, there will be two doctors, five medical students, one to four urses and ten to fifteen volunteer patient advocates present. Approximately 40 to 45 patients will be seen. At around 8:30 or 9:00, the registration list will be cut ents will be turned away off and another l0 to 20 pati for lack of time and personnel. No x-rays or surgery will be performed and the number of drugs available at the clinic is limited. 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14opl Es Congestion on side street; due to off-street parking of hospital staff and visitors 1 Small parkingp G-3 iota; encroeehin N on residential area.' i BLOOMINGTON STREET MARKET STREET Mercy Hospital building; Incompatible In size and architecture with surrounding North Side i homes. P: paved G. gravel Number Indicates# of vehicles per lot P- 45 P-38 G Largeparking lot attractively landscaped MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110pas Figure 4. Large parking lot; not landscaped source of noise, glare and r problems. 111�I�i ►�, P-138 MERCY HOSPITAL NMI, M P-138 MERCY HOSPITAL 2. Services Needed Personnel at the Free Medical Clinic feel that the demand for their services exceeds their capacity, and they support this with data on the number of patients turned away each night. Money, however, is not necessarily the limiting resource; additional professional volunteers would be needed in order to expand the services or hours of operation. 3. Service Area Patient origin data kept by the clinic shows that the service area includes many college students and Iowa I i City residents but also extends outside of the country and the state. Figures for January 1976 to December 1976 were as follows: college students. 737 Iowa City residents . . . . . . . . . . . .2379 Johnson County - outside of Iowa City . . . . 587 Iowa - outside of Johnson County. . . . . . . 439 outside of Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4. Neighborhood Impacts The Wesley House is adjacent to a gas station on. the north and First United Methodist Church on the south (across the alley). The property to the rear of the building is used as parking lot. Because only one residential parcel (St. Mary's rectory) is located on this block, problems related to noise and congestion in traffic and parking have less impact than would be the case in residential area. In addition the clinic fronts on Dubuque Street and is north of Jefferson and south of Market. All three of these are busy, noisy arterials and the addition of traffic from the clinic is not a significant factor in their noise and congestion levels. Clinic patients use the parking lot (18 graveled spaces) to the rear of the building. Also, there is a city parking lot within two blocks of the clinic. 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES JJOIDES EMMA GOLDMAN CLINIC FOR WOMEN 1. Services Provided Emma Goldman Clinic provides medical services and counseling to women including birth control, abortion, prenatal care, and veneral disease treatment. Most of the examination, laboratory tests and counseling are done by para -professionals. The one MD works primarily with abortions. The clinic has been operating for two years and is open from B a.m. - 5 p.m. five days a week. This staff of the clinic emphasizes self-help in medical care and conducts numerous classes for women in health care issues. Once a year, a well-publicized campaign is carried on to provide screening for venereal disease for both men and women. 2. Services Needed and Service Area The clinic is not overcrowded at this time. No patient origin information was available. Without an accurate estimate of the size of the service area and study of the needs of the area population, an estimation of unmet needs is difficult to make. 3. Neighborhood Impacts The Emma Goldman Clinic is located at 715 North.Dodge Street in a R3A zone. The facility itself is a converted two-story frame house with a small garage and one gravel parking space in the rear. The rest of the parcels on this block (Block 32) are used as single-family homes (all owner -occupied) or duplexes ( 4 structures, three 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MDIIIES of which are owner -occupied). Dodge Street is a heavily traveled arterial street; Ronalds Street to the south and Brown Street to the north are both quiet residential streets with 48 -hours parking on both sides of the street. The Neighborhood Impact Survey shows two code violations associated with the Emma Goldman parcel: a sign in the front yard exceeds the 4 square feet limit, and parking equal to one space for every 100 square feet of floor space in the clinic is lacking. Given the single-family owner -occupied nature of the block on which this clinic is located, a strong potential exists for negative impacts to spill over to neighbor- ing parcels, resulting in conflict between the neighbors and the clinic. Discussions at neighborhood block meetings confirm that this conflict exists. Specific problems include increased traffic, congested parking along Brown and Ronalds,and Emma Goldman patients walking across neighbors' lawns to get to the clinic. In addition, lifestyle conflicts were alluded to: opposi- tion to the philosophy and practices of a women's clinic which provides birth control and abortion services is strong among at least a few neighborhood residents while at least a few others strongly favor these facilities in theory and even in their own neighborhood. Many times it is the neighbors who oppose such a clinic on philosophical grounds who are most vocal in pointing out the traffic and parking problems. The R3A zoning classification allows clinics but requires that parking be provided. If Emma Goldman had sufficient parking, its negative interaction with its neighbors would be lessened. On the other hand, valuable green space in a residential area would thereby be lost. Emma Goldman does not have sufficient space on its own P4.3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES parcel to accomodate one space per 100 square feet of clinic area and would have to convince neighbors to lease or sell back yard areas to be converted to parking, which is neither likely nor desirable in a single family residential area and could encourage conversion to mulitiple family land uses. Emma Goldman patients undoubtedly appreciate the attractive atmosphere of the block but are inconvenienced by insufficient parking and busy, noisy Dodge Street. It appears, therefore, that the benefits that accrue to Emma Goldman from being located in a residential area are exceeded by the problems this location causes the neighborhood as well as clinic users. If an alter- native space could be found that provided the atmosphere desired by the clinic supporters as well as adequate parking and accessibility to Iowa City transit, and, if money could be raised to facilitate the move, both the neighborhood and the clinic would benefit. 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i RESTAURANTS AND BARS SERVICES PROVIDED The North Side has six taverns and six restaurants. The taverns are all small establishments in older buildings. Some of the taverns attract mainly students while others appear to have a clientele drawn from the neighborhood. The six restaurants include a delicatessen, a pizza palace, a hamburger place, a taco place, a lunch counter, and a cafe. i 1. Restaurants jSheepshead Cafe - 209 Linn Street Pagliai's Pizza Palace - 302 - 304 Bloomington Street Hamburg Inn - 214 Linn Street Pearson's Pharmacy Lunch Counter - 200 Linn Street Taco Grande - 331 Market Street That Deli - 329 Market Street 2. Bars Tuck's Place - 210 Linn Street Nickelodean - 208 Linn Street Magoo's - 206 Linn Street George's Buffet - 312 Market Street That Bar - 327 Market Street Dave's Foxhead - 400 Market Street SERVICES NEEDED Bars and restaurants provide meeting places for neighborhood residents. This is particularly important for older people who frequently have an excess of leisure time and fewer social contacts than non -retired groups. 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES F Figure 5. LOCATION OF BARS, RESTAURANTS, AND THEIR PARKING AREAS IN THE NORTH SIDE. BLOOMINGTON i W m Z � J D MARKET ISI JEFFERSON 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 9 For the elderly who do not like bars or who want to share other activities or intersts, no meeting place is available in the North Side. A Senior citzens center or a neighborhood library might fill this gap. SERVICE AREA All of the bars and restaurants in the neighborhood are concentrated in a six -block area in the south-west corner (see figure 5). This area is very close to the central business district and the university. It is obvious that these bars and restaurants serve an area beyond the North Side, particularly including dormitory residents and downtown employees. Two or three of the bars seem to serve primarily older residents of the area, as opposed to attracting a large student clientele. I NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS The area in the southwest corner of the neighborhood, areI where the North Side's twelve bars and restaurants among clustered,has few residential parcels interspersed the commercial uses. It is characterized by heavy traffic both all day and late into the. night, many pedes- traffic and small, unkempt trians, lights, noise and tra parking areas. Because these bars and restaurants are closely concentrated in one small area, they appear to share parking facilities and trash storage areas e another. Neighboring and they primarily impact on residential areas suffer from the increase - andlate negative visual impact of the parking night noise and traffic. 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES GROCERY STORES SERVICES PROVIDED There are three grocery stores in the North Side: one large chain store, "Eagles", located at Dodge Street and Church Street; and two small, older neighborhood stores, "Hawkeye Dairy Store" at 701 Davenport and "John's Grocery Store" at 401 Market. SERVICES NEEDED Discussions of neighborhood problems at neighborhood block meetings did not reveal inadequacies in grocery store service in the North Side. Discussion of the gro- cery stores revolved around the negative impacts felt by the neighbors of these stores and the friendliness which characterize the two smaller stores. ! SERVICE AREA The service area of grocery stores is related to two factors. One is walking distance. This is especially important for non -drivers, including may students and elderly. The presence of these two groups in the North Side may be one factor in the continued existence of two neighborhood stores at a time when the old corner grocery stores have been rapidly disappearing. Eagle's apparently draws customers from far beyond the mile area. The quality of its produce, the variety of other products, the ease of parking, and the check cashing policy appear to be factors in this large service area. John's Grocery Store also offers extra services: a delicatessen, an unusual selection of beer, and late 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES hours. Hawkeye Dairy Store appears to draw customers mainly from its immediate neighborhood. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS All three of these grocery stores have similar impacts in the following ways: - convenience of shopping for neighbors i - increased traffic on streets and alleys, with increased noise which is particularly undesirable iat night - unscreened parking areas - noise and lights from unloading trucks at j night and in the early morning - garbage, litter, windblown trash in neighbors' I yards In the case of John's Grocery Store, considerable tore was voiced by the neighbors, as support for the s well as appreciation for the owner's efforts to be a en while problems were discussed. good neighbor, ev In the case of Eagle's Grocery Store, the neighbors particularly objected to the high level of traffic in the alley and the resulting expense to them of yearly re -graveling. Both John's and Hawkeye. are old residents,of the neighborhood and are remnants of a time when corner grocery stores dotted the town. They add to the interest- ing character of an historically significant neighborhood. 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Molrl[s N F- in w =d BROWN ST * COMMERCIAL FACILITIES [other than ban and reetaurantel F- RONALDS ST CHURCH ST FAIRCHILD ST El El DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST F- N z F - Q C3 J N LJ W D m U) Z ILI Z m Q RONALDS ST CHURCH ST FAIRCHILD ST El El DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST F- N z Q C3 J w O t� Figure 6. LOCATIONS OF COMMERCIAL SERVICES 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES OTHER RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES A brief inventory of commercial facilities (including groceries but not bars and restaurants, other than what is contained above) was undertaken, and the results are pro- vided in the appendix. Figure 1 shows the locations of these stores. SERVICES PROVIDED Stores in the North Side offer paint and wallpaper, picture framing, television sales, gasoline servicing, houseplants, used clothing, and other goods and services. The generally good health and high quality of commercial enterprises in the neighborhood is revealed by several simple indicators: (1) Most of the stores appear to be making improve- ments of various kinds, such as replacing signs, rehabilitating the structure, expanding or rearranging the goods and services offered, and upgrading the outside appearance of the property. (2) The trend in merchandising and types of services is toward 'greater specialization, and away from "variety" stores that sell a little of everything. (3) There is a moderate turnover, with successful entre- preneurs staying on and less successful ones being replaced j by others seeking to find the particular mix of attributes that will work for them. Most of the commercial facilities seem to be carefully adapted to the local market, rather than standard formula operations that work anywhere. (4) Vacancy rates are low, and unoccupied structures are usually undergoing remodeling or rehabilitation. SERVICES NEEDED Retail stores appear in response to a perceived market demand, and survive if the entrepreneur can compete success- fully in the market. A commercial service that is needed may not be present because entrepreneurial talent is lacking in that area, investors are overly cautious, the proper �Z. MICROFILMED aY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES location or facility is not available for rent or purchase, or perhaps for a number of other reasons. Stores, restaurants, etc., come and go in the neighborhood, and it appears likely that the successful ones know the market they are aiming for and adapt specifically to it. In part because of the nearness of the neighborhood to downtown and in part because of the services already provided in the neighborhood, there are no obvious gaps that have been identified in the mix of goods and services offered. In many older neighborhoods, commercial blight is as much a problem, if not more of a problem, than residential blight; this does not seem to be the case in the North Side, which has a group of suitable and well -supported businesses. Deeper analysis of the commercial environment in the North Side was felt to be unnecessary. SERVICE AREA Two generalizations about service areas can be proposed: one, any commercial facility located in the North Side needs to also be supported by at least some customers from a larger trade area; and two, the larger the volume of non -neighborhood customers the greater are the parking and traffic problems created. Neighborhood orientation is desirable and often essential for success, but stores cannot be expected to be entirely dependent upon neighborhood business, which means that cars must be accommodated to some extent (for restaurants and some stores, non -neighborhood customers often walk from downtown or the university). Yet traffic and parking severely impact the quality of the neighborhood. For a low-volume business such as a frame shop, the amount of traffic is un- noticeable; for a store like John's Grocery with a mixed service area, the auto traffic is considerable but the impacts are far below what they might be if the same place were occupied by something like a Quick Trip, for example; at the other extreme, Eagle's Grocery necessarily depends upon access to a large parking lot. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CCORR RAPIDS -DES IIOIfIES NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS All of the facilities create something of benefit to the neighborhood, whether the service is of incidental or of primary interest to the neighborhood; none of the commercial facilities generate a negative impact by virtue of the service that they offer. Negative impacts, where they exist, are an indirect result of the presence of the facility, and hence the potential exists for retaining the benefits of the service while minimizing the negative impacts. A relatively small number of sensibly enforced policies would go a long way toward accomplishing this: (1) Necessary parking lots should be paved, landscaped, and screened. (2) On -street parking should be metered near commercial facilities (this is generally done; the problem occurs with arterials). (3) As structures are modified and new ones added, they should be made more compatible with a small-scale residential neighborhood. For the most part, the existing structures are not bad, and mandatory design review does not seem to be called for unless franchise operations suddenly take a liking to the neighborhood. . (4) Trash controls should be enforced, and efforts taken to encourage better disposal practices. Overall, the North Side's commercial facilities are an asset to the neighborhood, and it is easy to imagine any number of types of stores that could be present that would not be desirable. The relationship between commerical faci- lities and a residential neighborhood is a delicate one, but one that can be beneficial to both. While stepped-up commer- cial pressure for expansion in the North Side is unlikely in the near future -- given the space being made available by urban renewal -- a sharp increase in the attractiveness of the neighborhood could bring with it a spate of unwanted enterprises. 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOINES n APPENDIX: INVENTORY OF SELECTED COMMERCIAL FACILITIES (excluding bars and restaurants) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 13 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: GROCERY Eagle's Discount Supermarket 600 N. Dodge 1964 1 story brick modern commercial j service area: primarily neighborhood, although the store is Ij accessible to the north -and east, beyond the neighborhood Access (other than neighborhood walk-in customers) is I predominantly by auto. I . impacts: nature of service: I importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient grocery shopping I physical: positive - I negative - visual (structure is incompatible with.'re.si:dential area, cars, glare, excess paving, trash, windblown trash , noise (Aeeh..4nieal equipment in back, of building, loading dock, traffic), traffic dangers, incompatible service in a residential area remarks: The 'grocery store parking lot is net screened from abutting residential district. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raOIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study 16 Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. category of service provided: name: address: GROCERY Hawkeye Dairy Store 701 E. Davenport date of construction: structure: clapboard 2 story commercial service area: mixed (neighborhood support; citywide ... delivery) impacts: nature of service: sells dairy products, cold meats, a few groceries importance of service to neighborhood: provides con.Venient dairy product shopping ! physical: positive - Visual, (.architecturally consistent with. 'neighboring structures.), serVice is compatible w .kh I the neighborhood i negative - parking (congested, even with 8 - car off-street parking on the side.)', traffic (loading zone.blocks traffic) i remarks: A commercial service in an R3A zone is a nonconform- i,ng use. i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401HES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 46 category of service provided: GROCERY name: John's Groceries, Inc. t address: 401 E. Market i i i date of construction: circa 1875-1885 structure: 2 story brick Italianate commercial service area: mixed (supported by neighborhood walk-in customers) impacts: nature of service: small grocery store which includds a deli and offers a variety of imported beers importance of service to neighborhood: convenient locally owned grocery store i physical: positive - visual (appealing, well maintained compatible with block and neighborhood, building has historic significance) I negative - visual (trash - wrappers, boxes, etc., 12 car parking lot), noise, traffic (loading area, congestion at parking lot entrance), i • remarks: A commercial service in an R3B zone is a nonconform- use, There is an unscreened Parking lot on the. south 'And West sides, A free-standing advertising sign (.approximn;tely 15 squares feet) does not conform to the Si n regulations in an R3B zone, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 15 category of service provided: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE name: address: date of construction: structure: service area: mixed impacts: nature of service: Brown's Floor Covering Inc. 720 E. Davenport 1853 2 story brick Greek Revival; new garage in rear serves as commercial building. importance of service. to neighborhood: provides convenient floor covering service physical: positive - visual (well maintained exterior 'and yard, well prese>;Ved h.istorio property is an attribute to the block), compatible serVice. negative - visual (an apparently recent front entrance), traffic (an occasional truck blocks street and makes noise) remarks: A commercial service in an R2 zone is a nonconforming use. Two 'Brown Floor Covering" signs, (a 1� foot square. hanging sign and an oversized 6 foot square sign) do not conform to Iowa City's Sign regulations in an R2 zone. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 31 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: AUTO Harry's Dodge Street DX Service N. Dodge & Church 1955 painted brick modern commercial service area: primarily neighborhood (plus customers from traffic on Dodge Street) impacts: nature of service: importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient auto service i Physical: positive - negative structure, openness, lavisualck of (inconsistent building pavement, glare greenery, excessive , parked cars, debris around building, e.g., metal drums, tires, parts), noise (traffic), incompatible service j remarks: To conform with Iowa City's parking regulations, thisfone isoot gnotesufficiennce is tlyrhigh� screen a parking lot; / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raouuS a North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services inventory category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: AUTO block no. 57 Russ' Super Standard 305 N. Gilbert circa 1940 (remodeled circa 1950) brick modern commercial service area: primarily neighborhood impacts: nature of service: gas and service station importance of service to neighborhood: convenient locally owned auto service physical: positive - visual (nice lawn and flowdting trees, well, maintained building) negative -. visual (.signs cars,. glare.'from cement and cars, incompatible building structure), noise, smell, incompatible service remarks: The parking lot should be screened by a 6 foot high fence to conform with Iowa City's parking regulations in an•R3A zone. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIMEs North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 57 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE Bloomington St. Laundromat 310 E. Bloomington 1875 (was part of Slezak Hall complex) 1'h story brick Italianate service area: primarily neighborhood impacts: nature of service: importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient laundry services physical: positive - visual (building has historic significance), service is compatible with neighborhood negative - visual (shade and color of building, unscreened parking lot) remarks: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 14014ES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 57 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE Plasma Center & Bio -Resources Corp. 318 E. Bloomington 1975 1 story cement modern commercial service area: citywide (supported by UI customers) impacts: nature of service: importance of'service to neighborhood: independent of neighborhood physical: positive - service is compatible with the neighborhood negative - visual (color of building is bland and unappealing, building structure is inconsistent with neighborhood and block, erosion from roof drainage unsightly rear storage building, unscreened parking lot) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: PLANTS Blum's Blooms, Ltd. 211 N. Gilbert circa 1962 1 story brick modern service area: citywide (estimated at roughly 1/3 North Side residents, 2/3 city and UI) impacts: nature of service: sells house plants, installs and maintains commercial facilities' plants, gives plant lectures (at least 1/3 business is away from the store) importance of service to neighborhood: provides con- venient flower shopping and service physical: positive - visual (nice store front, a part of the well-maintained Gilpin building, -plenty of off-street parking in the municipal lot in the rear), service is compatible with neighborhood negative - visual (rear municipal lot is unpaved, basic building is not architecturally consistent with the neighborhood) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAN DS•DES MORTES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: BARBER Friday's 217 N. Gilbert 1964 identical brick 1 story addition to the Gilpin building service area: primarily neighborhood impacts: nature of service: importance of service to neighborhood: convenient barber shop physical: positive - visual (old barber pole at entrance., part of the wellrmAintained Gilpin •buiUiny), gervipe 'is compatible. with, the nei.ghborhpod negative - Visual (municipal parking lot ip the. rear is unsoreened and unpaved, basic building is not architecturally consistent with, the neighborhood)_ remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■ North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 category of service provided: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE name: Next to New Shop address: 213 N. Gilbert date of construction: 1962 structure: part of the Gilpin building service area: citywide (probably supported by neighborhood customers) impacts: nature of service: sells used clothing & miscellaneous on consignment importance of service to neighborhood: generally independent of neighborhood physical: positive - visual (nice entrance design, redwood stained front - former garage door, part of well-maintained Gilpin building,), service is compatible with the neighborhood negative - visual (municipal parking lot in the rear is unscreened and unpaved, basic building is not architecturally consistent with the neighbor- hood) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MD n1Es North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 category of service provided: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE name: address: date of construction: structure: service area: citywide The Linen Closet & Walls Alive 319 E. Bloomington 1890-1880 2 story brick Italianate impacts: nature of service: sells bath, kitchen and bedroom linens and accessories (Linen Closet); wallpapering and decorating services (Walls Alive) importance of service to neighborhood: a mini household- decoxating trade center due.to the location of another coRMerciai service in same building physical: positive - visual (well-maintained yard and exterior, nice signs, building has histoiic significance), service is compatible with neighborhood negative - dust, rush hour congestion in parking lot, visual (stored vehicles in the front and rear) remarks: The stored vehicles are a nonconforming use in•a C2 zone. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: DRUGSTORE Pearson's Drug 202 N. Linn circa 1850 1 story brick commercial service area: citywide and larger (supported by neighborhood and UI walk-in customers) impacts: nature of service: luncheon counter, prescriptions, full line of drugstore meroh4ndi5e.. importance of service to neighborhood: ne,ghborhogd resource, convenienent shopping{ medi.eal supplies F, meeting place. physical: positive - visual Cnice building, 5 car offs street parking lot is paved,..small shrubbery atop a brick wall in front)., service is compatible, with the neighborhood negative - visual CPedrson',s drive ;up facilities, and ovexhB(pging si,gn), traffic (tends to become congested on busy 1 c way Market) remarks: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 58 i category of service provided: PAINT & HARDWARE name: address: date of construction: structure: Gilpin Paint and Glass 330 E. Market 1962 1 story brick modern commercial service area: mixed (originally located downtown) impacts: nature of service: sells paint, hardware, glass, decorating mervh}ndi:se, importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient shopping for overall house maintenance needs I physical: positive - visual (well-maintained brick; building)( parking (ponyenient off-strdet Parking for 12 cars), service is compatible with. neighborhood Negative - v;$1141 (building type is inconsistent with. historic neighborhood(„adjacent municipal parking lot is. unscreened and unpaved). remarks: The building is located next to an unsereened City pa;king lot, which 'does not conform to Iowa, City',s parking regulations. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id01BE5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 67 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: AUTO Leo's Standard 130 N. Dubuque circa 1920 (remodeled 1974) 1 story brick modern commercial service area: mixed (supported by UI trade and customers from Dubuque Street) I • impacts: nature of service: gas and car service importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient auto service for peripheral neighborhood residents physical: positive - visual (well-maintained building) negative - visual (building structure is inconsistent with historic neighborhood, parked cars, signs, glare from cars and cement), smell, noise, incompatible service remarks: 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 67 category of service provided: name: address: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE Economy Advertising & Bankers Advextising 117 N, Linn date of construction: 1856 (was Union Brewery) structure: 3'stor y brick 'Greek 'Revival Italianate service area: citywide and larger impacts: nature of service: importance of service to neighborhood: independent of the neighborhood Physical: positive - parking (sufficient on- and off-street parking, visual (still has partial brick. sidewalk. and driveway,. building has historical signifi- Cance.), service is compatible with 'neighborhood negative - traffic (loading area presents some problems in terms of blocking Linn Street and the sidewalk) remarks: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I10INES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 68 category of service provided: AUTO i name: Amelon Skelly Service address: 204 N. Dubuque date of construction: circa 1920 (ori(jinally not a gas station), (recently structure: remodeled) 1 story brick modern commercial service area: mixed (supported by UI trade and customers from Dubuque Street traffic) impacts: inature of service: gas and service station importance of service to neighborhood: provides convenient auto services .physical:, positive - visual (well-nmaintained building) i negative - visual (building structure is inconsistent with historic neighborhood, glare from cement and cars, large Skelly sign, unsightly parked cars), noise, traffic congestion, incompatible service remarks: ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 68 i I category of service provided: APPLIANCES Sutton Radio and name: Television Inc. address: 203 N. Linn date of construction: circa 1850-1860 (originally the Central Hotel - a stage structure: shop 3 story painted brick Greek Revival I service area: citywide and larger impacts: nature of service: sells and services TVs, radios and some stereo equipment i importance of service to neighborhood: independent of the neighborhood physical: 'positive - Visual Cbuilding i.s consistent with,block.and neighborhood,, well,-malntained', building hds h;is.torical signr.Eicance c. part of a cluster of historic build ngsl', service is compatible with the ne2,ghborhood inegative - visual (exterior could be sandblasted, rather unsightly large yellow advertising sign), parking (congested on-street parking, although they own h of a lot in the rear) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Private Commercial Services Inventory block no. 68 category of service provided: name: address: date of construction: structure: service area: citywide HAIRDRESSER Headliners 207 N. Linn 1946 cement block modern commercial impacts: nature of service: hair salon and sells potted house plants importance of service to neighborhood: proVicdes convenient hairstyling for men and women physical: positive - Visual (pleasing exterior de.sign - awnknga, plants in window, nice entrance., bri<ck.front, wood shake shingles). I. service is compatible with. the neighborhood negative - visual (poor grass seeding), parking (insufficient -customers probably use municipal lot next to Pearson's Drug) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES a 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study block no. 68 Private Commercial Services Inventory category of service provided: MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE name: address: date of construction: structure: The Frame House and Gallery 211 N. Linn circa 1885 2 story frame recent wood siding, North Side Turn -of -the Century Cottage service area: citywide and larger (including Europe) impacts: for art nature of service: picture framing, gallery (including jewelry and pottery), sells retail and consignment art importance of service to neighborhood: independent of the neighborhood isual (.well-maintained, brick physical: positive - v work on steps, building has historic significance - part of cluster of historic buildings)1 service is compatible with the neighborhood negative - visual (.later a.,) parkingf(lack t has diminished the historic importnceruse the parking facilities but customers probably municipal lot next to Pearson's Drug) remarks: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron S. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 / MICROFILMED BY ` JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES n0111ES 41 Al .71 rl. I The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401tIES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer - Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Pall Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor ' Past Council Members Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the Inside back cover. HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) NEIGHBORHOOD SITE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Victoria Williams May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side neighborhood preservation study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Ap- proach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement". The award was mde to the City of Iowa City, and the work carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. The idea behind the Neighborhood Site Improvements report was that of producing a miniature capital improve- ments program at the neighborhood level, solely for pur- poses of discussion. No priorities have been assigned to projects, and no attempts made to evaluate them from a technical standpoint. Cost estimates are included in the report, so residents and policy makers can judge for themselves which projects create benefits that are high relative to costs. Projects have been culled from the other North Side study reports, but there is no assurance that the list is exhaustive. i A sizable number of Iowa City staff professionals provided us with valuable advice and information: Jim Brachtel, Frank Farmer, Denny Gannon, and Craig Minter in the Public Works Department; Rick Geshwiler, Bill Keating, and Sue Sheets in the Department of Community Development; and Hugh Mose, the Transit Manager. Other helpful sources include Mel Schweer'of the Iowa -Illinois Gas and Electric Company, and the Electrical Distribution Office of the University of Iowa. Their aid is greatly appreciated, but we take full responsibility for the substance and accuracy of the final report. DBL MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CONTENTS FOREWORD INTRODUCTION 1 TRAFFICWAYS 2 1) Alley Surfaces 2 2) Traffic Controls in Alleys 2 3) Cement Patches in Brick Streets 4 4) Pedestrian Right -of -Ways 4 5) Traffic Diverters 6 6) "Necking" 7 7) Traffic Lights 7 8) Bike Lanes 7 PARKING LOTS 10 9) Screening 10 VEGETATION 11 10) Tree Planting 11 RECREATION SPACE 12 11) Happy Hollow Park 12 WALKWAYS 14 12) Sidewalks 14 13) Lighting 16 14) Benches 16 UTILITIES 16 15) Undergrounding 16 SUMMARY TABLE 20 REFERENCES 23 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES INTRODUCTION The following list of possible neighborhood improvements for the North Side of Iowa City has been developed as a result of residents' comments at block meetings, expressions of concern from members of the North Side Neighbors organization, and observations by the study staff. Although distinctions are sometimes vague, an attempt has been made to limit this list to physical public improvements for the area (e.g., side- walk maintenance and repair) as compared to neighborhood problems that require a "policy" approach (parking control). Improvements have been arranged in sections that correspond to other reports of the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study, and these provide a more detailed justification for the proposed improve- ments. The intent of this study is not to establish a priority listing of projects, but to show improvements for which a need has been expressed. The program of improvements is presented in a table at the end of the report. Included in the informa- tion contained in the table is the location, the source of the recommendation for the improvement, a description of the improvement itself, and a rule -of -thumb estimate of some of the cost parameters. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DLS MOINES TRAFFICWAYS 1) Alley Surfaces As indicated in Figure 1, almost every block in the neighborhood is divided in half by an alley. The unpaved alleys, concentrated along the eastern border of the study area, are also noted. Negative impacts such as dust, noise and run-off would be reduced if these alleys were surfaced or regularly oiled. The City Streets Department recommends the latter as less costly in the long run. Residents share the cost of materials (.9 gal./sq. yd. at 37h� a gal.) and the city provides equipment and labor. Under the present policy, it is difficult to achieve consensus among abutting property owners for alley improvements. Residents must take the initiative in making arrange- ments with the city. 2) Traffic Controls in Allevs Although residential alleys are not intended for use by through traffic, those alleys indicated in Figure 1 havebecome a convenient short cut for many motorists. In addition to contributing to some of the negative impacts discussed above, through traffic is dangerous and disrup- tive to residents. Possible controls such as barriers, speed bumps, or raised mid -block medians on Norta-South I Streets would tend to slow traffic and discourage 3 short -cutting. E MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI01NES i mme BRICK N eoeeeEXCESSIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC •,_GRAVEL FIGURE 1. ALLEYS IN THE NORTH SIDE Ell MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI01RES I— O X O Z w W O O U) l~ Z U) Ld F- j Z N d O W m ZO O Q Z JN CS FIGURE 1. ALLEYS IN THE NORTH SIDE Ell MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI01RES I— O X O Z w W O O 3) Cement Patches in Brick Streets Many residents of the North Side view their brick streets as valuable resources and they object to patches of cement and asphalt used to fill holes resulting from utility repair and other maintenance work. Until recently, the city had no policy i of brick replacement, resulting in over 100 patches along the eighteen blocks of brick streets in the study area (Figure 2). Restoration of bricks to these areas would greatly enhance and preserve the unique character of a number of North Side Streets. 4) Pedestrian Right -of -Ways The city policy of marking pedestrian cross -walks is limited to those intersections which have pedestrian traffic of 200-300 crossings an hour for at least 8 hours a day. This policy adversely affects safety, because motorists and pedestri11 ans lack a mutual respect for each other. Marking of more pedestrian crossings has been requested by some residents, and any attempts to raise motorists' awareness of pedestrian rights -of way (by signs, painted lines, contrasting surfaces) seems worthwhile. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BROWN ST RONALDS ST v.,IrtuKILD $' j DAVENPORT ST i r BLOOMINGTON ST i' MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST f FIGURE 2, BRICK STREETS OF THE NORTH SIDE !.9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MolliEs 5) Traffic Diverters The use of traffic diverters would discourage through traffic on the residential streets of the North Side and would help protect the neighborhood from some of the negative impacts (noise, dust, vibration, physical danger) of excessive vehicular j movement. Design possibilities range from the diagonal positioning of 3 or 4 large cement tubs (containing plantings and trees) across key intersections, to landscaped islands such as the diverter pictured in Figure 3. Although more costly, the latter would contribute green space and lend a pedestrian orientation to the area. 0 rq FIGURE 3 -TRAFFIC DIVERTER R / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 6) "Necking" Moving curbs outward at intersections prevents parking and provides easier access to narrow side streets. At an inter- section such as Governor and Ronalds, left -turning traffic from Governor must enter Ronalds swiftly; if cars are parked on both sides, then two moving vehicles cannot pass (Figure 4). 7) Traffic Lights Traffic lights should be provided where two major streets intersect, particularly in cases where there are sub- stantial left-hand turns. The intersections of Church and Dubuque, Gilbert and Jefferson, and Gilbert and Market fit this description (Figure 5). The following data demonstrates the need for traffic control. No. of Accidents NoRank in City la77 . Of Accidents Rank in City Rate of Accidents Church and Dubuque 1 bicycle 1>fb 1977 3 property damage -- -- Gilbert and Jefferson 6 Personal injury 18 property damage 7th 3rd 9th 2nd Gilbert and Market 2 Personal injury 7 ro ert dama a 20th 15th 16th 11th The city is presently considering traffic light installation at the last two intersections. * 8) Bikes Considering the location of this neighborhood in relation to downtown and the university, and the fact that many students reside in the North Side, there is an obvious *The two Gilbert St. intersections were signalized in the Summer of 1978. 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB COAR RAPIDS -DES M011ILs RONALDS Sr' existing proposed RONALDS ST. m m Figure 4. EXAMPLE OF "NECKING' ON RONALDS ST. AT GOVERNOR STREET Ni MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401fICS mug d O need for more and improved bike lanes. Figure 5 shows the only existing bike lanes in the area along Market and Jefferson and locates suggested additions. Some streets which do not lend themselves to standard bike lanes (Linn Street has a brick surface and calendar parking controls) could be designated as "bike steets",upon which autos must yield right-of-way to bicycles. • PROPOSED TRAFFIC LIGHTS N SUGGESTED BIKE STREETS EXISTING BIKE LANES N � N Z W Zp N O O N W Z W �1 W Z m Z J C7 > J U BROWN ST Immm",�����������������. �J1�10 010 O1� RONALDSST�=�0 CHURCH S7. 110�� �LpOpO D; CHOOL ❑1 ARK �1� AIRCA 0 ST 1r� 1 r II r_ r�!r—_i DAVENPORTST.... T . . Om"m..T T.� BLOOMINGTON ST 1 1 1 �i�i HOSPITAL 10 MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST FIGURE 5. BIKE STREETS AND TRAFFIC LIGHTS k, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIREs PARKING LOTS 9) Screening Screening of the city -owned Market Street parking lot, in accordance with the Iowa City Tree Planting Plan (see Figure 6) is recommended. TYPICAL PARKING LOT SITE PIAN 4 - 14 - CONTOUR 0211 CALIPER TREE, _ 20% OF EACH: CRAB APPLE GREEN ABH MAY, W76 LITTLE LEAF LINDEN GLOBEHEAD MAPLE Y I"• 501 BRADFORD PEAR CIZD Cap - 1 �0= 0: CZD p W CIO DECIDUOUS DRIVE FIGURE 6. SCREENING OF PARKING LOTS Department of. Community Development, guide to Parkinq I,nt 1,11ildscapinq 10 / MICROFILMEC By JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES VEGETATION 10) Tree Planting As explained in the Iowa City Tree Plan, trees are an extremely valuable amenity. In addition to being beautiful, they provide shade, windbreaks, limited noise control, and insulation. Continued tree planting should be encouraged along the parking area of streets. Arterial or collector streets such as Dubuque, Church, Dodge, Governor, Market and Jefferson should be considerel as having first priority because of the amount of traffic flow and increased need for protective buffering. Such trees as pine and spruce are suggested for this purpose. From a windshield survey, a count was made of the number of block faces on the above named streets which could use more trees. These included blocks that were completely naked of vegetation (South Side of Church between Dubuque and Linn) and those which contained unlandscaped apartment buildings. Other areas, such as the south side of Bloomington between Dubuque and Linn, have been included because they were noted in the Neighborhood Impacts Survey. 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES RECREATION SPACE 11) Happy Hollow Park As indicated in Figure 7, the recreation and green space within the study area is limited to only two municipal parks and the playgrounds of two schools - a total of only 8.57 acres. One of the parks, Happy Hollow Park, has been described by the city as "fully developed for its size." It has been observed, however, that the present use (ball diamond and resulting parking space requirements) completely overpowers the aesthetics of the park and neighborhood. The addition of 1.2 acres of land to the west (see Figure 8) j would significantly ease this situation. N N N Z N Ul W N F 7 U) N Z ZNAPPY 7 3 > o PArocww BROWN ST 0 ! RDNALDS ST O �C�DO�L�O CNL O O OL xH MMN PLAYGROUND FAIRCH[;; O HNRTHARKETS EARE❑ DAVENPORT ST O BLOOMINGTON ST O O MARKET ST O O O CENTRAL JP HIGH PLAYGROUND, . JEFFERSON ST I�JmiI FIGURE 7. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS IN THE NORTH SIDE 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES proposed sidewalk r� Figure 8. HAPPY HOLLOW ADDITION 13 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES WALKWAYS 12) Sidewalks The results of an inventory of sidewalk conditions are recorded in Figure 9. The numbers refer to individual squares of sidewalk that were judged in need of replacement due to severe cracking,upheaval, or other deterioration that constituted a safety hazard. Where marginally damaged squares were interspersed with those clearly constituting a walking hazard, all were counted for replacement. When such squares were surrounded by others in good condition, they were not counted. There are areas of the North Side which do not have sidewalks. Along Dubuque Street between Ronalds and the alley 1 north (Figure 10) this is exceptionally dangerous due to the high volume and speed of traffic. The steep embankment of i property fronting Dubuque Street further complicates pedestrian travel along this half -block and necessitates some type of retaining wall accompanying sidewalk installation. Another location for sidewalk installation is noted on Figure 8. City policy consists of referring any complaints about sidewalks to the City Council. In all instances, installation and maintenance costs are assessed to property owners. BROWN ddrrwHk-tiul� 1 � n 0 mRONALDS z13 Figure 10, PROPOSED SIDEWALK 14 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES � DAVENPORT ST 22 32 28 BLOOMINGTON ST r?7 29 2s 0 u i MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 22 U)F_ W O I_ I— I- Z w j U I- V) cn O o Z W J 0 m Z on O W O S QNQ J O BROWN ST 40 55 18 F 30 12 24 RONALDS ST CHURCH ST 47 27 72 21 1645 33 72 FAIRCHILD ST El r 201 34 22 19 38 61 u � DAVENPORT ST 22 32 28 BLOOMINGTON ST r?7 29 2s 0 u i MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST 22 46 62 43 20 F 43 F 65 FIGURE 9. SIDEWALK SQUARES NEEDING REPLACEMENT 15 MICADFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ItofilES 13) Lighting Commercial portions of the study area have adequate street lighting, butthe residential areas possess only a minimum of lighting, far too little for the safety and con- venience of residents (Figure 11). City policy is to place streetlights at intersections only (unless the block is unusually long), leaving the mid -block sidewalks extremely dark. Because the North Side is a high risk area for crimes such as rape, and because it attracts substantial pedestrian traffic, increased street lighting is needed. The style could be similar to street lights on university property. 14) Benches Strategic placement of benches and/or shelters would provide pleasant rest stops for pedestrians and bus riders. The Manager of the Iowa City Mass Transit System has suggested locations that are close to neighborhood institutions such as Mercy Hospital and Eagles Grocery Store (Figure 12). A wooden bench is seen as more aesthetically pleasing and a pedestal leg would contribute to mowing ease. UTILITIES 15) Undergrounding Most of the alleys in the North Side contain numerous utility poles, elevated platforms, telephone and power lines, transformers, and other equipment used for utility distribution. These features, plus the wires connecting individual structures to each system, create an unsightliness that is detrimental to neighborhood quality, and a program of staged undergrounding would be very desirable. The City presently mandates the under - grounding of utility services in new subdivisions at a total 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101ME5 N tr EXISTING STREET LIGHTS U) C3 N Z W LLI m m m N ZZ Z LLI Ffr— N Q H Z U) w Z p J ; Q 8 J > BROWN ST • RONALDS ST CHURCH�ST� � ❑ 0 � ❑ ❑ *❑��❑ * FAIRCHILD ST ❑ * ❑ ❑ { DAVENPORT ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � BLOOMINGTON ST � �� ❑ � ❑ ' MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST FIGURE 11. STREET LIGHTS 17 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101REs N © BENCHES/SHELTERS BROWN ST RONALDS ST W 10 ❑ ❑ l__J ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ ❑ 1 W uj CHURCH ST 1 'o 1' W —� ❑ 10 cc ❑1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 0=.=1cc 0 ❑ ' o❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �0 ❑1> FAIRCHILD ST I xx ;- I❑❑❑ Ell _❑❑�x DAVENPORT ST j ❑ ❑ z 10 BLOOMINGTON ST 1 MARKET ST ©seMMMm MIA 1 F] E: JEFFERSON ST ❑ 1 FIGURE 12. m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es IOWA CITY TRANSIT ROUTES F— F- U (� Z Z Cy � LJ ED Cn W U) m Z O O D J C7 Q > O 0 J 0 BROWN ST RONALDS ST W 10 ❑ ❑ l__J ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ ❑ 1 W uj CHURCH ST 1 'o 1' W —� ❑ 10 cc ❑1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 0=.=1cc 0 ❑ ' o❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �0 ❑1> FAIRCHILD ST I xx ;- I❑❑❑ Ell _❑❑�x DAVENPORT ST j ❑ ❑ z 10 BLOOMINGTON ST 1 MARKET ST ©seMMMm MIA 1 F] E: JEFFERSON ST ❑ 1 FIGURE 12. m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es IOWA CITY TRANSIT ROUTES cost of about $3.00/ft. (only part of which is assumed by the developer). In addition to the loss of capital value of existing above ground equipment, undergrounding in the North Side would be more expensive because of existing infrastructure (sidewalks, alleys, etc.) and the need for residents to rewire their homes to accept underground service. The utility company estimates that the average age of poles and wires in the neighborhood is about 10 years, although the majority tend to be clustered at each extreme (new and 20-25 years). 19 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table Estimated Costs $110/alley $1,705 total $500 each $1,400 each $85,950 Total $25/intersection $250 total Reference Location Description Imarovement Pro osal � --- 1) Alley Surfaces Streets &Traffic (see Figure 1) 15 1/2 alleys, oiled once a year Report 5 2) Alley Traffic Control Streets &Traffic leys between Davenpor and Fairchild 6 1/2 alleys mid block barrier in alley Report 5 from Dubuque to Dodge; between Jefferson and mid block medians in Market from Dubuque to N -S streets Van Buren 3) Restore Bricks to Streets & Traffic Brown 19 patches 38 patches Cement Patches Report 5 Linn Fairchild 29 patches Davenport 11 patches Church 5 patches with an average area of 48 sq. ft. 4) Pedestrian Right- Streets & Traffic Church & Dubuque Fairchild & Dubuque 6" lines, reflective paint, 6' apart, of -Ways Report 5 Davenport &Dubuque applied twice/Yr- wice yr.Bloomington Bloomington& Dubuque or installation of Market & Dubuque permanent material Jefferson & Dubuque (brick, plastic) tic)ocolorf Market & Linn Market & Gilbert 6' wide Jefferson & Linn Jefferson & Gilbert MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Estimated Costs $110/alley $1,705 total $500 each $1,400 each $85,950 Total $25/intersection $250 total Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table (Continued) Reference Estimated Improvement Proposal Location Description Costs i 5) Traffic Diverter Streets &Traffic Linn &Davenport Landscaped island 10' $21,000 each Report 5 Linn & Fairchild wide constructed dia- Linn & Ronalds gonally across Inter - Linn & Bloomington sections or 3 or 4 cement tubs w/plantings 6) Necking Streets & Traffic Ronalds & Governor Extending curbs out 3' $5,000 per Report 5 along 15' of block face intersection at intersection 7) Traffic Lights Streets & Traffic Church & Dubuque Standard stop light $12,000 each Report 5 Gilbert & Jefferson pretimed signals Gilbert & Market 2 phased control 8) Bike Lanes Streets & Traffic Davenport 36 blocks of lanes $9/block ' N Report 5 Gilbert painted a contrasting total $324 j Johnson color 4' wide, once a Lucas year Ronalds Church Fairchild Linn "Bike streets" $60/sign Brown sign to inform $300 total motorists every 2 or 3 blocks 9) Screening Market Parking Market Street Plantings around $3,000 Lot Report 6 between Linn & perimeter i I i !I i Gilbert MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Improvement 10) Tree Planting 11) Happy Hollow N. 12) Sidewalk Replacement N 13) Sidewalk Installation 14) Street Lights 15) Benches Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table (Continued) Reference Proposal Location Iowa City Church - 12 blocks Tree Planting Dodge - 3 blocks Plan Gilbert - 52 blocks Governor - 2 blocks Jefferson - 2 blocks Market - 112- blocks & business Bastion Bloomington - 1 block Brown Street between Governor & Lucas See Figure 9 Dubuque between Ronalds and alley North 9 square blocks from Market to Church, Gilbert to Dodge Located midblock or down 1/3 of block on one side, 2/3 down facing block Corner of Jefferson & Linn, Market and Van Buren, Jefferson and Governor, Dodge and Church MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES Description 150 trees pine, spruce other large trees 1 tree every 32.8 feet Addition of 1.2 acres adjacent & to the west of park Replacement of 1,572 individual 4' x 4' squares of sidewalk 4' wide, z block long, plus 4' retaining wall 25 lights lantern or globe on a 10-12' pole, Mercury Vapor Wooden bench with pedestal leg Estimated Costs $75-$100 each $7,545 - $11,318 total $90,000 25, 152 sq. ft. @ $2.25/sq. ft. $56,592 total Sidewalk, $1,350 Wall, $15,000 $500 each $12,500 total $75 - $600 each $300 - $2,400 total V REFERENCES Department of Community Development, Iowa City Bikeways Plan, 1977. Department of Community Development, Iowa City Tree Planting Plan, 1976. North Side Neighborhood Study, Streets and Trafficways, Report Number 5. North Side Neighborhood Study, Parking, Report Number 6. Old West Side Association, Inc., Old West Side, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971. 23 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES T. The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster" Max Selzer` Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City staff Neal Berlin,, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members " Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the Inside back cover. HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) IMPACT SURVEY MANUAL Margaret Barron August 1977 revised May 1978 c North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa, Iowa City Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement". The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished as a joint effort of the City and the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research. i Throughout the conduct of the North Side Study, metho- dology and techniques of measurement had to be developed for most of the components. Some of this methodology is fairly complex, as in Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines (report number 1), and the results can only be regarded as a first effort. Other methodologies are adapted from conventional procedures (report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory, report number 7, Community Facilities, and report number 3, Land Use Intensity), and explanations of the methodology are contained in the appropriate reports. For several elements of the study (report number 5, Streets and Traffic; report number 6, Parking; report number 11, Citizen Self -Help Handbook, and report number 13, Community Participation), the methodology is largely original but utilizes simple techniques for the most part; again, the specifics are presented in the individual reports. For the Impact Survey, the purpose of the methodology was to identify problems and resources in the neighborhood as revealed by readily observable physical evidence. While much of the information requires the exercise of judgment (what constitutes a significant negative impact, what is a valuable resource, estimating whether an owner is upgrading a property or not), the observations can be reproduced with reasonable accuracy and give an indication of what is worthwhile or unde- sirable about the neighborhood. More important, it offers MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES a starting point for discussion with residents and policy makers about preservation and enhancement. The first impact survey served this purpose quite well, and the methodology as it evolved seems to be easily transferred. The 1978 survey team followed the instructions written by Margaret Barron, and only minor modifications were made to them as a result of the second trial. DBL I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CONTENTS FOREWORD INTRODUCTION 1 PREPARING BLOCK DATA FORMS 2 Description of Information at Assessor's Office 2 Procedures for Completing Block Data Forms 3 Field Verification 5 Additional Background Information 6 DRAWING FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION ON BLOCK MAPS 8 COMPLETING RESOURCES FIELD STUDY 10 COMPLETING THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS FIELD STUDY 13 INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOLDING NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK MEETINGS 16 Contact the Neighborhood Organization 16 Contact the Block Meeting Hosts 17 Staff Preparation 18 Materials to Bring to the Meeting 18 Conduct of the Meeting 18 Follow-up Contact 19 Tasks for Project Staff 19 Follow-up Reports on Neighborhood Issues 21 iii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INEs INTRODUCTION The Neighborhood Impacts Survey outlined below is designed to facilitate the gathering and organization of specific and detailed information concerning the positive, negative, and regulatory aspects of land uses in a multi -use neighborhood. The completed survey is a combination of data compiled from existing municipal sources plus a block -by -block walking survey of the study area. The information that is gathered falls into three categories: block data, resources, and negative impacts. In addition, a map of each block is drawn from existing city maps and used for the recording of information during the field survey component. The following pages give instructions for performing the survey. The first step is to prepare a map of each block in the study area, depicting parcel boundaries and numbers. In addition, block data forms (Part I) should be prepared and filled out to the extent possible by using available data. Secondly, the maps and block data forms are taken into the field, where two surveyors walk around each block, including the alley, twice. On the initial walk around the block, one surveyor verifies as best he/she can the information on the block data forms, and records the rating (arrived at by both surveyors) of owner investment in major structures. (Part I C. 2). This surveyor also fills out the "Resources" sheet (Part III). The second individual completes the block map (Part II) by drawing in structures, parking areas, trees, and other significant features on the block. This individual also records on the map the location of block resources. On the second walk around the block, negative impacts are identi- fied by the surveyors. One surveyor is responsible for completing the "Negative Impacts" form (Part IV). Directions for fulfilling each of these tasks are presented in this instruction manual, under the section identi- fied in parentheses in the preceding paragraph. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140HIES I. PREPARING BLOCK DATA FORMS The block data forms contain background information on each parcel of land for each block. This information includes 1) the parcel number, 2) the address of the building on each parcel, 3) the zoning category that applies to each parcel, 4) The land use or activity to which the parcel is currently devoted, 5) the name of the owner of each parcel, 6) whether or not the parcel is owner -occupied (see sample Block Data Sheet, page 6). This information is all available through official city records. In Iowa City, it can all be obtained from the City Assessor's files. The information on owner -occupancy can be verified through the city directory. For multi -family land uses, most of this information can be verified through the records of j the Minimum Housing Office. DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION AT ASSESSOR'S OFFICE The assessor's office will usually have maps of each block in the city or county, with parcels sketched in and numbered, the address of the structure or structures on each parcel, and the last name of the owner of the parcel. These maps are un- official documents but are usually kept up-to-date and so are fairly accurate. The official records are kept as cards filed according to parcel number. Most of the cards contain the followinginfor- mation: 1) a description of the parcel location and boundaries; 2) the name of the owner; 3) the address of the structure or structures on the parcel (there is usually only one structure per parcel, not including accessory buildings such as garages, sheds, etc.); 4) a description of the use, e.g., residence, store, public land, vacant lot, etc.; 5) for residence, the type of structure - single family, family conversion, family flat, or family duplex; 6) for multi -family rental property, 2 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401eES a description of each unit and the rent paid; 7) a sketch of the major structures on the parcel, indicating floor dimen- sions and entrances; 8) the total number of rooms on each floor, and the number of bathrooms, bedrooms, and rooms with cooking facilities; and 9) the assessed valuation of the property. Quite often the cards will be incomplete because of an owner's refusal to allow the assessor into the structure. In such cases the cards will not contain information on the number of rooms, floor dimensions, and rental units. Commercial properties are kept in a separate file from residential property. If any "gaps" are encountered in the residential file (e.g., if parcel no. 1955 is followed by no. 1959), the missing records can probably be found in the commercial file. PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING BLOCK DATA FORMS 1. The first step is to determine the locations of ' parcels on each block, the corresponding parcel numbers, and the address of the structures on each parcel. This information can usually be obtained from the maps, and entered in the appropriate columns (see Block Data Sample). However, since the maps are unofficial documents, the information for each block is sometimes incomplete. One problem is that all of the parcel numbers may not be on the map. To determine each parcel number it onlt entered is usually { necessary jy to know the number and location of one parcel on the block. Parcels are numbered counterclockwise starting With the parcel at the northeastern corner of the alley (see block map). If one parcel number is known, the others can be � filled in simply by counting backward (clockwise) or forward (counterclockwise) from the known parcel. Maps will generally � have at least one parcel number entered for each block and only rarely are parcels not numbered in sequence (those that are not I 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDItl[S numbered in sequence are usually numbered, for instance: 25, 25A, 26). parcel numbers can be verified when information is collected from the parcel cards. 2. The second step is to enter the name of the owner or owners of the property. This information is listed on the cards. Some cards may contain a notation such as "Smith, James cont: Jones, Tom." This means that Jones is buying the house on contract from Smith, the title remaining in Smith's hand until the property is completely paid for. In this case, both names should be entered on the data sheet as they are listed on the cards. 3. The next step is to determine the use of each parcel. This use is indicated on the card and can be entered directly on the Block Data Form. The major categories of use are: single family, entered as SF; multi -family, entered as MF; public land; vacant land; and commercial establishments. In the case of a imulti -family home, the number of living units should also be entered on the data sheet, as, for example, MF -4 if there are four units. When the information on the number of units is missing from the assessor's records, it can be obtained from the Minimum Housing Office. For commercial properties, the name of the business should be entered. See Sample Block Data Sheet, page 6. 4. The "zoning" column of the Block Data Sheet can be filled in simply by referring to a detailed zoning map of the area. In those cases where zoning district boundaries pass through blocks, care must be taken in accurately accounting for each parcel. 5. Finally, it must be determined whether the structure on a particular parcel is owner -occupied. The city assessor cards are of limited value in this determination. Only when the signature of the person who allowed the inspector into the building is that of the owner can it be concluded that the building is owner -occupied; determination must be made with the aid of r- 4 MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES the Iowa City Directory. The address of each parcel can be looked up in the Directory and if the name of the indi- vidual living at that address matches that of the owner, then a check will be placed in the owner -occupied column of the block data sheet. After the block data sheets are completed (except for owner investment) and a block map is drawn to a sufficiently large scale (approximately 1" = 601), the surveyors are ready to begin work in the field. On the first trip around each block, the field block map information is drawn and the resources sheet is completed. FIELD VERIFICATION 1. A verification, to the extent possible, of the information on the Block Data Sheet is conducted during the field survey on the initial walk around the block. The address and use/activity can be verified by simple observation while i the number of housing units indicated can often be verified by counting mailboxes or utility meters. 2. Finally, the last column on the Block Data Sheet titled "Owner Investment," should also be completed during the initial walk around the block. In order to provide an indica- tion of the amount of owner investment activity occurring on each parcel, a plus (+), zero (0), or a minus (-) is placed in each space of the column. A plus sign indicates that the owner is carrying on maintenance and renovation activity with the obvious purpose of increasing the value of the property, while a zero indicates a level of maintenance sufficient to retain the present value of the property. Finally, a minus sign is assigned to those properties where the owner is dis- investing and where, as a result, the structures are being undermaintained. 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION In addition to the Block Data that are gathered through city records, the surveyors should gather together any available information on the history and architecture of the neighborhood. The local library is a good place to begin the search for this type of information. The location and description of all his- torically or architecturally significant buildings.should be noted on the Resources sheet before the field work is started. 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES BLOCK DATA BLOCK 57 ,rctai;iyeiy new a arcmenE nutiuMk PARCEL ADDRESS ZONING IISI:/A(:'r1Vl'I'Y OWNER OWNER OCCUR OWNER INVEST. 1339 325 Gilbert 113A SF Sutherland K + 1340 331 Gilbert 113A Ml: -8 units Scott G Keith Cont: Strabala 0 1341 323 Davenport R3A SI: Person X 1342 319 Davenport R3A' SI' Daters 0 1343 315 Davenport R3A SI: Wagner X + 1344 311 Davenport R3A SF G shop Harman X 0 1345 328-30 Linn 113A MF -3 units Kehrer K + 1346 326 Linn R3A SF Costolo K 0 1347 322 Linn R3A SI: Healy K + 1348 318 Linn R3A SF Fennell — 1349 312, 308 Linn C2 11+ units" Holub/Cont: Skarda } 1349 304' Bloomington C2 Pizza Palace Ilolub/Cont: Skarda + 1349 310 Bloomington C2 Laundromat Holub/Cont: Skarda 0 1350 318 Bloomington C2 Bio -Resources Negus/Cont: Lloyd et al 0 1351 322 Bloomington C2 MF -2 Carroll X — 1352 305 Gilbert C2 Gas Station Amoco Oil Co. 0 1353 311 Gilbert C2 MF -2 Netolicky — 1354 315 Gilbert C2 SF Fisher K 0 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES II. DRAWING FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION ON BLOCK MAPS A. Along with the verification of block data compiled prior to the field survey and the listing of neighborhood resources, the sketch of the location of all major buildings, accessory buildings, and parking facilities is completed on the initial walk around the block and through the alley. B. All major buildings and accessory buildings are sketched to approximate scale and location in the appropriate parcel indicated on the block base map. These structures are drawn in black ink, with major buildings distinguished from accessory buildings by the placing of crossed diagonal lines within their rectangular outline (see sample Block Map). C. Due to density of structures, foliage, etc., it is often not possible to discern the shape and lot coverage of the entire structure from the front sidewalk. In these cases it is helpful to sketch onlythat portion of the structure which is visible and to complete the sketch from the alley or side street viewpoint. Also, backyard garages must often be drawn from the alleyway. D. All parking driveway areas are drawn, with curbcuts, to approximate size in pencil. Paved areas are indicated by placing a "P" in the delineated area while gravel and other non -paved surfaces are indicated by a "G". Following this descriptive letter, the number of parking spaces is given. In "driveway" type parking areas the potential of parking cars one behind the other, blocking egress, is not considered in the idetermination of the number of parking spaces available but, i rather, only the driveway width. E. The surveyor who draws the map is also responsible for numbering the approximate locations of resources (green ink), and negative impacts (red ink.). The marking of resources includes sketching in the approximate size and location of mature trees which are counted as resources. j I H MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORIES L-1 I I N W in a U � O � 0 L-1 I I N t MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 o� a t MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 o� III. COMPLETING RESOURCES FIELD SURVEY A. Scan the "Resources" form included in the pre -field survey.materials for the block. If entries have been made for structures of historic and/or architectural value through re- search prior to the field survey, these should be located on the block map by writing the number found in the left-hand column of the Resources form over the structure on the block map in green ink. Further comments about the structures can be added on the Resources form. B.' Enter other observed resources generally in the order of parcel numbers as you move around the block. The following steps apply to all entries made on the Resources form in the field: 1. The resources should be numbered sequentially. 2. Enter the number of the resource in the left- j hand column of the Resource form and in green ink at the correct location on the block map. 3. In the space to the right of the number describe the resource, (e.g., row of trees, well-maintained house). 4. Further to the right in the same row indicate the specific impact, (e.g., visual enhance- ment, noise abatement). (See sample Resources form) i C. Identification of resources should be made using the Resources Checklist (see Table 1) as a guideline, but the surveyor should not limit observation to these items. Field observations can and should be used to refine the Resources i Checklist. D. Observations which constitute both a resource and a negative impact should be cross-referenced in the following j! manner. Next to the number of the observation on the Resources form, the notation "NI" (for negative impact) should be made, followed by the number assigned to the observation from the "Impacts" form. 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111[5 RESOURCES TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 57 Historic buildings - South side of 300 block Davenport St. well preserved houses of exclusively 19th century construction. Historic building - Pearson Duplex - 321-23 Davenport - Colonial Style house. 3. (39) Historic building - 325•Gilbert - 17th century design forms worked into ',midwestern classic" design; well maintained house F, yard. 4. Trees along Gilbert - large shade trees; shade, visual. N S. Trees along Davenport - large 8 medium size trees; shade, visual. j 6. houses - 328-30, 326, 322 E 318 Linn - visually pleasing group of houses; all but one (48) well maintained (45, 46, 47, 48) s i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Table 1. Resources Checklist 1. Public amenities a. trees -- mature and newly planted, unusual or valuable varieties, and other landscaping b. parks, other recreation and open space c. brick sidewalks and streets I 2. Private amenities I i a. trees, flowers, shrubs b. fences and other buffers c. private open space 3. Structures a. well-maintained housing b. structures of possible architectural merit or historic i interest c. other structures of note -- barns, etc. 'I 4. Community facilities a. Schools b. Hospitals, clinics, pharmacies I C. Libraries d. Parks e. Grocery stores f. Taverns, restaurants g. Service stations 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIN14ES IV. COMPLETING THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS FIELD SURVEY A. Check the "Negative Impacts Checklist" (Table 2) for the types of negative impacts to be observed and listed. This checklist should not be limited to the listed items. The checklist should be revised and improved through field experience. B. Enter the observed negative impacts in order as the sources are encountered in moving around the block. Use the following steps: 1. The sources of the negative impacts (e.g., Dodge Street traffic, poorly maintained house, unscreened parking lot) should be numbered sequentially. (See sample Negative Impacts form) 2. The type of impact emanating from that source (e.g., noise, visual, dust) should be listed in the space to the right of that impact. 3. Further to the right in the same row, indicate the properties which suffer the impact. Properties on neighboring blocks which are also impacted should be listed by a capital "B", the block number, dash, parcel numbers (e.g., B68 - 07, 08, 09). (See sample Negative Impacts Sheets numbers 8, 9, 10) The Negative Impacts field survey is completed on the second trip around the block. 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Table 2. Negative Impacts Checklist 1. Airborne a. dust and dirt particles (total suspended particulate) b. windblown or deposited trash and litter C. odors d. smoke and fumes e. airborne lead, asbestos dust, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and other pollutants f. noise 2. Water borne a. runoff (erosion) b. standing water (flooding) c. water borne silt and debris d. water borne pollutants (chemicals, bacteria) 3. Environmental hazards a. slippage -prone soils (slides) b. earthquake stability 4. Other physical a. vibration b. structural undermining c. physical dangers d. interference with normal activities j 5. Non-physical _ r a. unsightliness b. life style conflicts (social) C. light, air, and breathing space d. privacy infringement e. glare i 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. (48) House Visual - poorly maintained � 2. Leaning telephone _ pole Hazard 3. (49) Laundromat Visual - shade 6 color of building j 1 4. (49) Parking lot for laundromat $ Visual - unscreened Pagliai's 1 5. (50) Bio Resources f, rear storage building Visual n 6. (51) Storage of autos Visual 7. (50) Bio Resources Erosion - drainage from roof 8. (51) House Visual - poorly maintained i exterior 9. (S2) Gas station 10. (53) (louse 6 garage BLOCK 57 IMPACTED PROPERTY 1347, 1349, East side of block 69 1343, pedestrians in alley Adjacent blocks Adjacent blocks 1351 $ adjacent blocks 1353 1353, 1354 1351 B58-05, 06 Visual (signs 6 cars) Block 56 Noise 1353, 1351 Smell B48 -S6, 58, 59 Visual - poor maintenance - 1354, B48-56, 58, 59 needs paint Visual - old implements and a 39, 54 bit of garbage - next to rose garden at 54 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES nOINEs V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR HOLDING NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK MEETINGS When the neighborhood impacts survey has been completed, all of the background needed to begin setting up the block meetings has been gathered. Block meetings are set up through the neighborhood organization and are normally held in the homes of volunteers who live in the neighborhood but can also be held in public schools or church'rooms. These meetings are held for two primary reasons: 1) to gain neighborhood input into the process of identifying issues, analyzing problems and processes, and proposing solutions and changes; 2) to increase citizen awareness and understanding of the processes that lead to neighborhood problems and the tradeoffs involved in proposed solutions. The goal is to develop policy proposals which represent an informed consensus which neighborhood residents are willing to get behind and promote. Examples of minutes, contact reports, etc., from block meetings are contained in report number 13, Community Participation. CONTACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION To begin the process, the neighborhood organization must be contacted and asked to support the project by setting up and hosting the meetings. If no neighborhood organization exists, the project staff may decide either to set one up or to work through other organized groups. For example, the, parent -teacher organization of the neighborhood schools, neighborhood churches, or civic groups in the city may fill the gap if no neighborhood organization exists. The primary advantage of working through an existing neighborhood organization or starting a new one will be an enduring level of participation that will extend beyond the life of the project itself. Natural inertia and a reluctance to believe in the efficacy of citizen action can be overcome 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES through substantial, meaningful community involvement; a strong neighborhood organization can increase the chances that this community involvement will extend beyond the immediate issues addressed by the project. The process of working through an existing organization begins by contacting the organization's leadership and obtaining their support, by convincing them that the neighborhood has much to gain through the project and the neighborhood organi- zation will be strengthened through participation in the project. It is important to have one volunteer who is willing to act as the primary contact between the organization and the project staff. Next, a meeting of the full organization should be held to begin to make the neighborhood aware of the existence and purposes of the project and to ask for volunteers to host block meetings. The primary contact should be in charge of taking the names of these volunteers and setting up the schedule of block meetings. CONTACT THE BLOCK MEETING HOSTS The primary contact should provide all meeting hosts with the basic information on why the meeting is being held and what will be discussed. Then the project staff should contact the hosts at least a week before the date of the meeting to communicate the following: a. We are interested in residents' ideas about their neighborhood; b. We did a preliminary survey which we will present at the meeting as the starting point for discussion of positive and negative aspects of the neighborhood; and c. Owner -occupants, renters, absentee owners, and managers of commercial establishments should all be invited to attend the meeting. Several points of information should also be verified: (a) day, time, location of the meeting, and (b) blocks to be covered. 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES STAFF PREPARATION At least two project staff persons should attend each meeting. If a turnout large enough to warrant splitting the meeting into two groups is expected, one or two others should attend to facilitate note -taking. Staff should review thoroughly the Impacts Survey for the specific blocks to be discussed at the meeting. An on -foot tour of the blocks should be done for general infor- mation and to note any changes which have occurred since the survey was taken. At least one of the staff in attendance should be prepared to answer specific questions relating to zoning, parking regulations, etc., that might be anticipated. i MATERIALS TO BRING TO THE MEETING a. 20 copies of the survey for each of the blocks to be discussed. b. 20 copies of the introduction to the survey. C. A large map of the study area and adjacent area. d. One copy of the Zoning Code or Zoning Code Checklist. i CONDUCT OF THE MEETING OneP erson should begin the meeting by introducing the staff, explaining the purpose of the project and the meeting, and going through the survey of one block, explaining all components. Neighborhood residents should then be asked for corrections or additions to the survey and ideas concerning problems and solutions for the neighborhood. Staff members should be prepared to keep the discussion flowing by asking for comments on issues that have been identified through the survey or discussed in other block meetings. One staff member 18 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES should be assigned the tasks of obtaining a list of the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all attendees and taking minutes of the discussion. FOLLOW-UP CONTACT The person who hosted the meeting and other individuals should be encouraged to contact the project staff to exchange any thoughts and ideas that might arise after the meeting. Informal contact should be made within a week after the meeting. Specific issues of an immediate nature may come up, such as current public works or zoning changes in the neighborhood. The staff should decide whether they can provide available input on specific issues of this type. Minutes of the meeting and proposals produced in response to specific concerns raised at the block meeting should be delivered to the person who hosted the meeting. (S)he should distribute these materials to attendees of the meeting and to other interested residents. The focus of this process is to attempt to establish a pattern whereby the staff plays the j role of facilitating communication and providing technical assistance, while the residents are encouraged to make decisions and take action on their own. TASKS FOR THE PROJECT STAFF Minutes of the meeting and proposals to be distributed to attendees of the meetings will be produced by the staff who were in attendance. Specific assignments will be on an ad hoc basis. 1. Attendance List Attendance lists should be kept for each meeting and distributed with the minutes and proposals. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raotrus 1 2. Draft Minutes One or more of the staff persons in attendance will produce the draft minutes within a few days after the meeting. These should be quickly circulated to other staff for additions, changes, etc., and directed to the Project Leader. 3. Final Minutes The final minutes will be the public record of the block meetings. The minutes will be distributed to attendees of the block meetings, the neighborhood organization, city administrations, and politicians, in addition to being placed in the project files. Minutes are distributed to the neighborhood through the block meeting hosts in order to keep this communication's network from the staff to the neighborhood open. 4. Block Proposals One or more staff persons will be assigned to produce block proposals in response to specific concerns expressed at the meeting. These proposals should provide a brief statement of each of the major issues discussed at the meeting, comment on the nature of the problem, propose alternative solutions to the problem, and discuss tradeoffs involved in each of the proposed solutions. The first draft of these proposals takes the form of an Internal Draft, to be circulated to staff members for discussion and revision. Following the revision, a Draft for Discussion is issued and circulated to attendees of the meeting, the heighborhood organization, and city administration. 5. Neighborhood Follow-up Once the Block Proposals draft has been circulated, informal feed -back from the neighborhood should be received. For this purpose, the project phone number is included on all circulated copies of minutes or proposals. In addition, the hosts of each block meeting should be contacted, to get their jown impressions of the proposals and any reactions they have picked up from their neighbors. i l P411 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES FOLLOW-UP REPORTS ON NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES Through the neighborhood survey and the block meetings, a number of issues will be identified which are of concern to the entire neighborhood or any number of blocks within the neighborhood. These issues might include neighborhood traffic patterns, congestion in on -street parking, negative impacts of some land uses, the adequacy of or externalities associated with community facilities, or life style conflicts. The project leader should identify these issues and assign staff members to write reports. These reports should include a description of the issue, the affected properties or people, the effects of the city's policies and ordinances on the issue, possible solutions, and tradeoffs involved in each solution. These reports should also follow the route of Internal Draft, staff discussion, and Draft for Discussion (circulated to the neighbor- hood and city administrators). 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report R Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4, Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty Victoria Williams 6. Parking 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley ii. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i I � ...... .. . . .... . ...... Tt it i I � The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Ferret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer* Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain** Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members " Past Chairperson MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ttoIRES THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA �i i- Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Lead_ t, 4 f A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the Inside back cover. , a i E HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) IMPACTS SURVEY 1978 May 1978 Andrew Chesley Paul Panik Susan Schmidt Rebecca Schroeder North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader i Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa, Iowa City i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id01NES INTRODUCTION The North Side Im actsStud 1978 is the result of a joint pro ect sponsored by the Iowa City Department of Community Develop- ment and the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research. The first impact survey undertaken during the summer of 1976 was a twelve -week project funded by the Bicen- tennial Internship Program of the Center for Public Affairs Service -Learning of Indiana University, the City of Iowa City and the University of Iowa. The survey was both a component of the ongoing Land Use Report Task of the Iowa City Comprehensive Planning Program and a scaled-down version of the Neighborhood Survey component of a proposal submitted to the Department of Rousing and Urban Development under the FY -76 Innovative Projects Program entitled, "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." In April and May of 1978 the second survey was done, to update the'information gathered on the sumner of 1976 survey, and to provide data on changes which had occurred in the neighbor- hood over the preceding nine to ten months. An analysis of these data is presented in report number 3. Land Use Intensity. BLOCK DATA Some traditional components of a land - use survey are included in the neighborhood impacts survey. Utilizing records available through the City Assessor's Office, the follow- ing information was compiled and field -verified: 1. Parcel identification number and location. 2. Parcel address. 3. Existing land use. A. Parcel owner, and 5. Whether a residence is owner -occupied. For each block these data are listed on the block form entitled "Block Data." Additional components were added to the survey to provide information concerning the positive, negative, and regulatory effects of land use activities in a multi -use, historically significant neigh- borhood. Data concerning these three components are contained on the block forms entitled "Resources" and "Negative Impacts." RESOURCES The "Resources" section contains a listing of thos�res of a block which contribute positively to its overall quality. The block resources include such items as mature trees, open space, "corner" grocery stores, and buildings of historical and/or architectural merit. Several books and reports on Iowa City architecture were used to identify the significant buildings in addition to field determination by the surveyors. For each of these buildings a short description of its style and outstanding characteristics is also included. A far more complete historic survey is contained in the Historic Structures Inven- tory, report number T. - NEGATIVE IMPACTS The negative impacts of one land use activity upon another are listed an the block form entitled "N���egg��ativ��e____Imi pacts," on a block by block, parce splc basics. In contrast to resources, negative impacts reduce the over- all qualities of the block. For example, a large, unpaved parking lot in a residential area creates dust, noise, traffic hazards, and MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPT DS- DES MOINES unsightliness, all of which reduce the values of nearby residential properties. For each bloc)., both the source of these negative impacts and the properties affected, i.e., the impacted properties, are identified. It should be pointed out that often a particular feature of a block can be both a resource and a negative impact. For example, a local store provides convenient service, yet its parking lot may be unsightly, garbage ridden, and noisy. OTHER SURVEY INFORMATION I In order to obtain a crude measure of the amount of private investment activity occurring on each parcel, the "Owner Investment" column was added to the Block Data Foam. Upon visually inspecting the exterior of the major structure of each parcel, the surveyors rated owner investment by placing a plus, zero, or minus in the appropriate space. A plus sign indicates that the owner is carrying on main- tenance and renovation activity with the obvious purpose of upgrading the overall character and quality of his or her property. A zero is assigned to those parcels where the owner is not carrying on any major rehabilitation acti- vity but is maintaining the property with the intent of holding its present value. For example, '! those homes that showed little recent outward sign of upgrading, yet were structurally sound, were given a zero. Finally, a minus sign was assigned to those properties where the owner appears to be disinvesting and where, as a result, the structure is being undermaintained. The Iowa City Zoning Code is the primary instrument through which land use is regulated in the study area. Generally, the examples of non-compliance noted fell under the categories Of Use Regulations specific to each of the study area's four zones. These 20nes--R2, R3A, R313, and C2 --are delineated on the Study Area Map on page four and the relevant zone for each Parcel is indicated in the "Zoning" column of the Block Data Form. No attempt was made to determine instances of enforceable violations, and listing of non-compliance has been dropped from the current version of the survey. Report number 1, Im act Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines includes an evaluation of the e ica�f typical zoning controls in older mixed land use neighborhoods. Finally, brief block -specific comments made by surveyors during or immediately following the completion of each block are included with the three forms already mentioned. It must be emphasized that while these are the subjective impressions of the surveyors, they do attempt to note qualitative aspects of the block which are not amenable to the other, more formalized, methods of notation included in the survey. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 140INES BROWN 73 03 52 33 32 s • u■u • ••rar - • ••are • au• •} ::::::I?I 74{n-1 71 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JEs STUDY AREA *BLOCK NUMBERS *ZONING 3 (�� r e.FFF-RsON • .. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JEs STUDY AREA *BLOCK NUMBERS *ZONING 3 INHABITED STRUCTURE LEGEND ACCESSORY BUILDING TREES/PLANTS FENCE BLOCK RESOURCE no.2 NEGATIVE IMPACT nal PAVED PARKING AREA - 2 CAR J22 UNPAVED PARKING AREA ORIGINAL 80' LOT LINE - I L' 1 PARCEL LINES NLL.I 4 NUMBERS *NOTE: ALL MAPS DRAWN TO APPROXIMATE SCALE ONLY MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK DATA BLOCK •rola I'ARLTiI. Clvrry at- a ADDRESS ZONING USC/ACT IVITY ONNI:P O'i: SCIIcuC Ir:H-0 r.IFI. 37-2025 119 Governor Pad SF hrlsan, Ruth I T 2026 North Governor R3A Vacant Lot Condon, 4iliian S vdry 2027 831 Market R3A 5F Fuhrneister, Marla K I 0 2028 877 l'arkot R3A IIF -3 Condon, Willi.= B lbq' I S I 0 2029 821 N.vk4t 93A NF -2 Rrrnnsn, Yaltrr Recella 2030 810 Marlet Rad SF FelJurr, Carrie 0. Y + 2031 2032 811 Market 807 ltarket R3A 83A SF SF Pohrer, John A. Ih,Phvs, lLtg," \ d -f- — 2033 8031Lirket 504 Jefferson filo Jcrfrrson R3A R3A R3A NF -2 SF SI' A'rthotiac. Cror Fr 8 )la l.l.•I Quinn, Jaaee 11. rit.,3 trick, Glen cl!;;; lhu oa, !..ar K A 0 tl p J 814 Jefferson Pad SI' Rar. R.n)nond 6 Eil.•s•n K 0 818 Jefferson RSA SFTokhcic, Sara A. \ } 824 .Icffarson R3A SF Knordrl, EJeln \ r 2039 105 Governor Il3A Mr -u' dark, .Iwmrs 4 I" it to 0 2040 117 Governor RSA SF Dreekonn, Aabrose 3 0 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES Colmuen to Qu,Ue a hew houzeb on .thi,a block ane bung (on. reeentey have been) rehabiUta.ted by indivi-duat owneu. Houses foe otdeA and smaUelf but veAy iueU-kept. Cnoluded apanbnen.t bu.i.Cdi.ng on SE corner seems to be a .threat .to fiUA Uend... Jeb6emon St. coaCd be, peatey enhanced by tAize-pean.tilig. 5 G MARKET 4 J X JEFFERSON 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES c' cc W O 0 BLOCK 5 i `-I ;1 ii i p NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE iI A ' 1. Trees along Lucas 2. (36 - 38) House - 814, 818, 824 Jefferson 3. (40) Open lot with garden 4.. (25) House - 119 Governor i J S. Trees along Market 6. .(29) House - 821 Market 7. (30) House - 819 Market 8. (32) House - 807 Market RESOURCES BLOCK 5 i - row of young, nicely spaced trees all along the block. - small; older houses; very well maintained; all newly painted; yards very well maintained. - provides visual relief from crowded corner lot. - small older house; well maintained; attractive - rota of young, nicely spaced trees; shade and screening from busy street. - very well maintained house; large attractive yard large, attractive well maintained house. architectural and historical significance: badly in need of paint. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES 7 NO. SOURCE 1. Governor St traffic 2. (39) Parking lot NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 5 TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY Noise 25, 26, 27, 40, 39 Visual (yard completely - 38, 40 (also houses across Governor). paved with parking) 3. Jefferson St. Noise, visual traffic 4. Market Street Noise, visual traffic S. (26) Parking lot Visual, dust 6. Alley (gravel) Dust i I 8 34 - 39 (visual impact could be ameliorated by by planting trees along Jefferson). 27 - 33 25, 27 Properties along alley MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK DATA BLOCK 6 PARCEL ADDRESS -GNING USE/ACTIVITY 06SI:R OW acct;.,. r.. 37-2041 227 Governor R2 SF Prielar 4 Frus K n 2042 A17 Bl onmi ngton R2 SF nakrs. Oran-Ganscn'ator Gorge P. p 2043 815 Bleonington R2 SF KmpicA, Jace> 4 Jane 3 + 2044 2045 809 Bloomington 226 Lncns R2 R2 SF SF uh-M, J..-.•: L. Yod.•r, Ba pd R. L BJrrr h,. I I p I } 2046 224 Lucas R2 SF no,hor, Cral, R. L BarPara A. 0 2047 220 Lucas R2 SF Claypool, Gar;• Lee S Th,,e-. 2048 _ 218 Lurm R3A W-4 SF home In rear Kj onaas, llerle 4 Ell". 0 2049 804 Market RSA SF rercarnn, Rlehar.l T. 3 0 2050 910 Wrket RM SF rorcerar., Rich ed T. 0 2951 814 ILtrket RS.3pq _4 I!o icu}ek, Charlotte Cent: Seadvl, Lrle G. + 2052 816, 818 )larket RSA MF -S (3 rmsl Rlttge n, 6tnjamin — 205.3 82.1 Markot AM SF Rrote, lb rpe 0 2054 828 Market R3.3 Sr Alherlunky, Juba 0 2055 207 209 Governor 93A MF -2 BlacL 4 S'cu:il 3 n 2056 213 ravernor RM SF X'altmr, Joseph R, K } / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Molr(ES Comments North side o6 btock colis.ibtts 06 genehakey wett-ma,ulta,tned hou u and yards. The homed ahe mostly otdert, smalteA, 45dngte-6amity dweMngs..,S.tAur-tunes on .the � south 4ide o6 .the btoek arte cuo oed but ane taAgeA and gerleAat.t( decUizi lg, with attte I yard space. The d-ttuc.tuAe an tot 2052 .i,a a targe apa)itnent bu.itrU.ng in p00A con- dition. It v.isuaUy dominates thi.a paA,t o6 the block because it has a ?106.t no setback. 9 i0 BLOOMINGTON 4 w MARKET 2 v / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES cc 0 0 W �0 Z � BLOCK 6 �r w MARKET 2 v / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES cc 0 0 W �0 Z � BLOCK 6 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE r 2. 3. (55) 4.- (56) i 1 I S. (41) b !I 6. 7. (45) Trees along Market Trees along Governor Duplex and yard - 207 Governor House and yard 213 Governor Yard and garden 227 Governor Trees along Bloomington Yard - 226 Lucas RESOURCES BLOCK - row of young and old trees; provide much shade and some screening. - young, full row of trees; shade and some screening. - well maintained duplex and yard; well foliaged with bushes, flowers, and evergreens. attractive older house with well maintained yard. well maintained yard with large vegetable and flower garden. - closely spaced, young, fall trees: visual, shade and some screening. - nice yard with flowers MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES I `i f i I I i f 11 � NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY i 1. Governor St. Noise traffic j2.. Market St. Noise traffic 3. (51)_ Yard gravel Half of backyard gravel (visual, dust) 4. Alley - gravel Visual, dust, standing water I i 41, 55, 56 49-55 50, S2, 43, 44 Bordering property / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK _ 6 I BLOCK DATA BLOCK PARCDI. ADDRESS ZONING USB/ACTIVITY OWNTR Oh\fR�, a\•'p 28-1080A 321-23 Governor R'_ 4F•2 Tomlin, With I n 1080 329 Governor R2 3;F-2 Ccl.rich, John 4 IIargare S 0 1081 817 Davenport R2 SF Porronce, I. G. and „Lowell �11 1082 ell Davenport R2 MF -2 Letchty, 4 Ruth I 0 1083 330 Baas R2 IIF -2 Kandura, George 4 Flnrcncc K + 1084 324 Lucas R2 SF Ilinlel, pearl K I 0 1085 320 Lucas R2 5F DeFranee, 1. G. p 1080 310 Lucas R2 SF DCFranee, I• G. G GC.0,,, I:l l'3,IriC C 0 ,087 808 Bloomington R2 SI' Tomlin, With + logs 812 Bloomington R2 SF Tomlin, Edith K + IO89 elu Bloomington R: SF B., hh,., TLar_s 1090 820 Bloomington R2 SF :ion .W. I.u,heran Cluwl C 1091 315 Governor R2 SF Cont l In, i'ranc is 4 C.rn"Ira e t + 1092 830 Bloomington R2 SF Conklin, Franns 4 f.; neviere + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Co mnent6 Seemtngty veAy 6tab& ne6.idenUa.0 beoch MULL mo6ttCy 6.tn9Ze-6adntey Ionia, a 6;Wv dupCexu and no apaAbnent6. GenehaUy .the homes ahe bmatten, neweA and mono bubuAban .in chanacten. and .the yartd6 ane tangeh. 13 I 14 ...... ......... DAVENPORT 2 F Al ►� 1'11 lKs FAAmoll I 2 BLOOMINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES cc O w W )0, �I BLOCK .7! F Al ►� 1'11 lKs FAAmoll BLOOMINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES cc O w W )0, �I BLOCK .7! NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Bloomington 2.. (87).. (louses - 808 Bloomington 3. (92) (louse - 830 Bloomington 4. (91) House - 315 Governor S. (81) House - 817 Davenport 6. (83) Yard 7. (83) House - 330 Lucas RESOURCES BLOCK - older trees, shade & screening. - well maintained house $ yard. - well maintained, older house with large, attractive yard - small, attractive house; very nice yard; large fir tree, abundant flowers. - architectural and historical significance house (Greek revival?); very well maintained. - nice trees, bushes I, flowers in the parking. - very nice yard with flowers. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES I 15 NO. SOURCE 1. Governor St. traffic 2. Gravel alley C 16 NEGATIVE IMPACTS TYPE OF IMPACT Noise Dust, standing water, mudholes. IMPACTED PROPERTY 80A, 80, 91, 92 Adjacent properties. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 7 v BLOCK DATA BLOCK F PARCEL ADDRESS 20Fi\G OSE/ACTIV I7Y Oh\::R CkVR OCCue ln 1•.1L;�. 1093 421 Governor A2 SF Crovlr'. Julia % 1094 429 Governor R2 MF2 Krona, Ma6e1 0 1095 819 Fairchild R2 MF -2 Faspaq Ethel 0 1096 811 Fairchild R2 MF -2 Sory, Eli:abeth % C 1097 807 Fairchild R2 MF -2 Mulligan, %athr271 It 1098 805 Fairchild A2 SF Altchirrr.. Cary; Parer I"in. John 6 Dorita t + 1099 410 Lucas R2 SF Sorthup, V,ra 0 1100 804 Davenport R2 SF Slrch•. 3.ru-t Blosrr Cox, riereacr % a 1101 808 Davenport R2 SF Phllllps, IdarCnnt: Re,vrs, T. 3 t:. VN.:r.ce 0 1102 812 Davenport R2 SF Flatt, Adn.m E. % } 1103 614 Davenport B_ being remadeled 11:arh, rh:•rlrs I 0 II04A 020 Davenport R2 5F SrdlaceL, Fnnl % J 1104 826 Davenport R2 SF MclrinA, ]bows % a 1105 830 Davenport R2 SF Bardsvll, Rreer a 1106 415 Governor A2 MF_2 M7rr, A.T., 6 C. Smith % 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Conmlente This bock contabo .the entire nnnge o6 ho"i,ng conditions (round Eli .the neak north aide,, 6nom a4ch.iteetwvaty and U.6-tondcaUy.in.twsting a.tnucttLAe.6 .in very good condition, .to an otdeA, vacant and deten.iohated houee wtdengo.ing in.tmiat aehab.iUta,tion, .to a necentey cona.tnuated Ilntodennll e.tyte house, .to a maeti-6mniey buieding pnesentey widen conatnuction, .to, 6.4naUy, otdeh, stabte, we.ee-maintained home6. 17 FAIRCHILD~ M DAVENPORT / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIMEs MAI 1 cc 0 z w w O C9 BLOCK 8 1 ■ FAIMI Ns� D� DAVENPORT / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIMEs MAI 1 cc 0 z w w O C9 BLOCK 8 1 ■ NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE i 1. i i Trees along Lucas 2. (04A) Rouse - 820 Davenport 3. (93) House - 421 Governor 4. Trees along Fairchild 5. (98) House - 805 Fairchild 6. Trees along Davenport 7.. Trees along Governor 8. (06) House and grounds - 421 Governor RESOURCES BLOCK young trees on northern half, very old, large trees on southern half; visual $ shade. newer house; well maintained. architectural and historical merit; well maintained house $ yard; very nice yard with many blue spruce trees. - young and medium trees; visual $ shade. - well maintained house $ yard. - combination of young and old trees some pine; visual and shade young°tree and visual large, old, lovely pine tree; yard well maintained; visual and shade MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 19 NO. SOURCE 1. Governor St. traffic 2. (03) House t I 20 1 NEGATIVE IMPACTS TYPE OF IMPACT Noise Visual - house is vacant and decrepit yard overgrown (note: structure being remodeled Dust Visual - unsightly and delapidated shed IMPACTED PROPERTY 93, 94, 05, 06. 02, 04A. hlost of block. 06, 28 - 1093 95, 04 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES MOIRES BLOCK 8 BLOCK DATA BLOCK a PARCEL ADDRESS ZONING USE/ACTIVITY OtVf.R Ch\::R Bcc9r. O%Mu I.rls 1. 1107 519 Governor R2 SF Uupld in, Donald _ 1108 827 Church RZ 5F Inuphlin, WnIJ U 1109 A21 Church p2 SF Chocvick, Esther Cent: IW.5.rp, Sels K _ IIID 811 Church R2 SF Ilaifel', Rn, K 1111 B03 Church R2 SF - hvauty shop Ir. residence llCNamia, l'a: ivi S C 1112 524 Lucas RZ RF -2 Rogers, Iloriey K I , A13 604 Fairchild R2 5F Ic4 ria nJ, pctm(s 11. and Veronica 0. K 1114 812 Fairchild RZ SF Nechovve, Josephine Y } 1115 820 Fairchild R2 SF Shay, Rose K ;i 1116 828 Fairchild RZ SF Bcarrs, Lee K .j. 1117 830 Fairchild R2 SF Roskup, Jake \ T. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comil l7,td Iloiiaen on .thud bCock ahe genehat ty tV&U- main.ta.ilTed and ahe eet on targe to.td. Iloude on paheeC 17 •i,d pitedentt y being painted and odhea deemed .to have been aeeent y 6.ixed up. 21 CHURCH M M. M 10 ^- 3 wo a FAIRCHILD � v zz / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES it cc O z cc W O Ei BLOCK 9 n NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (1111) Yard - 803 Church 2. (1112) !louse - 524 Lucas 3. (1113) House - 804 Fairchild 4. (1114) House - 812 Fairchild S. (1115) House - 820 Fairchild 6. (1117) !louse - 830 Fairchild 7. Trees along Fairchild RESOURCES BLOCK 9 i i well maintained with flowered yard. well maintained house E yard. well maintained house $ yard with many trees. well maintained house F, yard. - well maintained house f, yard. - well maintained; presently painting house; many old trees $ plants in yard. - visual; young trees. 8. Trees h shrubs along Governor - trees on private property; visual E shade. 9. (1110) House - 811 Church - well maintained house; possibly historical significance; many plants F, trees in yard. 10. Trees along Church - young trees; visual E some screening; flowers E shrubs. r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES 23 NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. Governor St. Noise traffic Danger 2. (13) Dogs (3) Noise 3. Alley - gravel Dust and standing water (pot holes) 4. (9) Backyard - Two old cars that 821 Church St. look discarded rj j 24 a-. .. ... IMPACTED PROPERTY 7, 8, 17 12, 14 All bordering properties. 8, 10, 15, 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 9 0 BLACK DATA BLOCK Id PARCEL. MIDRE55 ZONING USE/ACFIVIIT OWNER 0%NI'e OC:US rh\I,R IV.. I:S'I. 825 619 Governor R2 SF %aeel, I4,ry 4 Anna Cont: toll, ,Iarguct % + 826 619 Governor R2 NF -Z Nellecler, ,I;me, 0 827 823 Ronalds R2 SF Ettle,on, Barbara 0 828 815 Ronald, RI SF Griffin, bm. K 0 829 813 Ronalds R2 SF Cont: Kinney. KSyne K 0 830 809 Ronald, R2 SF Ruppert, Edwin Cont: Nctoltc Ly, .laoe, K 0 831 628 Luc,,, R2 SF Palil, Pmil C. 832 808 Church R2 SF Ilardel, Anna 5 + 833 812 Church R2 SF Voparll, Virginia. Rlcly . \ + 834 814 Church R2 SF Etherington, Earl K + 835 822 Church R2 SP Greaeel, Ruby 0 836 828 Church R2 SF Shaffer, Paul K 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Colmnente TII,i.a btoeh, bondaing GoveAnoa. St. and .the cemetenlf achose .the ztAeet, seemed tees wlban and mope Aiviat in clwAaeteA .than .the btochs to .the Nest. Baelz yanda ahe targe, open, and undeAu&Uzed. Attu and near panlung areae ane gnavet and open (not tined by gahages ae on mangy btochal. Housing seemed .to be o6 eonwwhat toweA quatdty .than .that .to .the went. 25 RONALDS 3 26 I ms ■ I e 3 26 I ■ I ■ v CHURCH v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Ix z cc W O a BLOCK 10 RESOURCES i BLOCK 10 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees & flowers along Church Street - both old & young; provide shade & some screening; visually pleasing. 2. (832) (louse - 808 Church - well maintained house & yard with trees & shrubs. I 3. I (833) (louse - 812 Church - well maintained. 4,. (834) (louse - 814 Church - well maintained; historical) significant. historically g I S. Trees - two magnificent weeping willows in large yard; visually 4' pleasing; shade. 6. (825) House - 619 Governor - well maintained; garden. i 7. Trees along Ronalds Street - young; visual; shade. 8. (831) House - 628 Lucas - historically significant; needs paint and minor rehabilitation; nicely foliaged yard with old trees (evergreen & deciduous). c i i I 27 l� - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t1I0111ES NO. SOURCE 1. Governor St. traffic 2. Gravel alley NEGATIVE IMPACTS TYPE OF IMPACT Noise Danger Potential dust (freshly oiled at survey) 3. (36) Junked autos (2) 4 pile of bricks Visual 4. (30, Gravel parking 32-36) spaces in alley Dust BLOCK 1 IMPACTED PROPERTY 25, 26, 36 All along alley. 27, 35 All bordering properties except 26. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK DATA BLOCK 11 PARCEL ADDRESS 205156 USE/ACTIVITY OhNCR MER (KCUi hh\LII Iwl'I:S1'. 23.837 831 Brown R2 5F ll,.a, .losoph 4 Lw", X 0 836 827 Brawn R2 SF Swain, sty>e % + 839 815 Brown 92 SF Shal la, Ernest 4 In nc Cont: Srdiaeek. Mr. 840 811 Brown R2 SF :HWIa, Lillian X — 841 801 Brown R2 SF Amcek. Alban J. X + 842 722 Lucas R2 SF Ilaee, W.urrn 4 Oa than X ' 0 843 804 Ronald, R2 SF Begley. Wayne 4 Vienla X + 844 814 Ronalds R2 SF Miller, Albin .\ + 845 820 Ronalds R2 SF hhite, Robert 4 Luthior X (I 846 824 Ronalds R2 SF Dloohy. Edwin f Dorothy X + 847 830 Ronalds R2 SF Cottrell, Cynthia 4 11WLaan, David 11. X 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES CommenU VeAy awLat atmobplteiie on tILL6 btock - eaage to.ta, open ,6 pace, tittle-u.6ed atttey,and kept alwnatd NUcken6, goat) ... Moe.tty otdea stituc mu except (ion 11eubmban° home on tot 41. 29 a J 54 BROWN A RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 1 BLOCK 11 `r 1 i " Q � RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 1 BLOCK 11 ON FLVA Al all RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 1 BLOCK 11 RESOURCES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 1. Trees along Ronalds - mostly young trees; visual 6 some shade. 2. Trees $ bushes along Brown - visual, shade, $ screening. 3. (842) house - 722 Lucas - historical $ architectural significant house. 4. Brown Street - brick paved. 5. Trees along Lucas (public F private) - visual, shade E screening. 6. (839) 815 Brown - large old lovely pine tree in spacious landscaped setting I 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY I. Governor St. traffic Noise 37, 47 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 11 i BLACK DATA PARCEL. ADDRBSS 208150 USB/ACTIVITY Oh\ER OWN :RInh\IN Oil'UE W. St. 23-648 727 Lucas R2 SF Sound, Bad•an K 0 649 727 Brown R2 SF 9nceL, Barbara T 65J 721 Brown R2 111'-2 KlouJ.a. Dorothy + 851 717 Brown R2 SF RoFcr`. llamld X 0 852 713 Brown R2 SF Rogers, Harald 0 SS3 707 Brown R2 SF WOL. Maynard 6 Isabella K 1 55t :24 Dodge R2 SF Prliler Cont: Evans, Bann:d 6 Karen K O 653 720 Dodge R2 SF Miller, W'.. N.D. + 556 703 Ronalds RSA SF Punter, Marshallod 6 s111Je S -�, 857 712 Ronalds R2 SF Saothers, Tcrrr 0 Ann 0 5i5 714 Ronalds R2 SF Ward. Louls 4 Nildrrd t + 859 724 Ronalds R2 SF Rogers, Dolores 860 730 Ronalds R2 SF Ribhle, Martha 3 0 S61 713 Luc,, R2 5F Teubcr, Lorraine K 0 / FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOLLIES S.tabte Aea.identiat Hoek, eniiA cey singCe- 6mniZy occupied, with housee .in geneAnUy good condition ... Spacious yandt and a wide vaki.e,ty o6 .tneee. Many 6f -owe" in yaAds. 33 34 BROWN © 5 1 0 0 ■ rR 1 1 .� RONALDS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES N Q J bLUGK 12 0 0 ■ NMI .� RONALDS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES N Q J bLUGK 12 NO. 1. (56) 2. (58) 3. TYPE OF RESOURCE (louse 8 yard - 704 Ronalds Yard - 714 Ronalds Trees $ bushes along Lucas 4. (48) (louse - 727 Lucas S. Evergreens along Brown 6. Brown Street 7. (51, 52) (louses - 717 F, 713 Brown 8. (53) (louse 6 yard - 707 Brown 9. (55) (louse 8 yard - 720 Dodge RESOURCES BLOCK - well maintained property; large trees; open space. - well maintained with large bed or roses; landscaping. - north half of Lucas; evergreens 8 fruit trees. - large old brick house; architectural 8 historical significance; in good condition but needs minor repair work, beautiful yard. - shade E some screening. - brick paved. architectural F, historical significance. well maintained. well maintained with large old trees. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 35 I j . NO. SOURCE •TYPE OF IMPACT 1. Alley - gravel Dust i2. Dodge St, traffic Noise 36 NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY Adjoining properties. 53, 54, 55, 56. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES td01NES BLOCK 12 , BWCR DATA IsLIVK :3 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Cominent6 Nonthenn hath o6 .the btoeh .i.6 a very ptea6a7.t hes.i.dential area.+ Vehy wet t 6otiaged with yoinhg and otdeh .thew, 6towen6 and shrubs .in both pd.iva.te and pubEic acea6. Yads aLe 6paeiou6 and vehy [ueU-kept. llou6e6 ahe veAy weft -maintained and, beeatme o6 .thein age, have h"ton.ical 6.ign.ijicance. PanCeE 862 .i,6 pahticatmey atthactive... The 6 -unit apan.Unen.t building on paneet 66 4eem6 .to be a good exanple o6 a multi-6antity 6tAuctune exibting xela.tivety hamlol7. ototy .in a 6i.ngf.e-6ain.iey ahea. 7n .tvon6 o6 scale, mateUae and de6.ign, th.ih stAj4e.tuae is viwaty compatible with the noathehn hae6 o6 .the Hock and, addi- ti.ona.ty, has -it6 pahhing area hued shielded 64onl file singee-6wni.ty ahea...The negative e66ect6 06 Eagea GiLoceay Stone and paliz ng tot genena.11y Gael on atZ the boadcni.ng areas but .the paoblem o6 hoindbtown tAa6h Seen6 to paLt&ufa7Lly 6atl on .the no/nthean haC6 06 .thib Hock. Becawe o6 .the peeasat: chacaeta o6 .thi6 area, it seems e.6pecc atf y impontaLt .that .these negative eb6eete be ametioaated. 37 nfss ZONING USE/ACTIVITY o6\I:n p'CC;; INLnI. 8112 729 Ronald, R? SF Ruck, Anna 1 I + i 863 '19 Rnnalds R2 SF Boylc, Cusc.ia S J 864 713 Runnlds R2 8F Dann, 8v11. S I + SAS. 630 Dodec R3A SF Vann, Lillian 6 Ra' Y + 9.6 hill Dodge 113A MR -6• Clarl, `+ 867 712 Church C2 Eagle S.pr P '�10Lci s Ca le FocJ Lent er D / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Cominent6 Nonthenn hath o6 .the btoeh .i.6 a very ptea6a7.t hes.i.dential area.+ Vehy wet t 6otiaged with yoinhg and otdeh .thew, 6towen6 and shrubs .in both pd.iva.te and pubEic acea6. Yads aLe 6paeiou6 and vehy [ueU-kept. llou6e6 ahe veAy weft -maintained and, beeatme o6 .thein age, have h"ton.ical 6.ign.ijicance. PanCeE 862 .i,6 pahticatmey atthactive... The 6 -unit apan.Unen.t building on paneet 66 4eem6 .to be a good exanple o6 a multi-6antity 6tAuctune exibting xela.tivety hamlol7. ototy .in a 6i.ngf.e-6ain.iey ahea. 7n .tvon6 o6 scale, mateUae and de6.ign, th.ih stAj4e.tuae is viwaty compatible with the noathehn hae6 o6 .the Hock and, addi- ti.ona.ty, has -it6 pahhing area hued shielded 64onl file singee-6wni.ty ahea...The negative e66ect6 06 Eagea GiLoceay Stone and paliz ng tot genena.11y Gael on atZ the boadcni.ng areas but .the paoblem o6 hoindbtown tAa6h Seen6 to paLt&ufa7Lly 6atl on .the no/nthean haC6 06 .thib Hock. Becawe o6 .the peeasat: chacaeta o6 .thi6 area, it seems e.6pecc atf y impontaLt .that .these negative eb6eete be ametioaated. 37 W' i 38 i 4 M Q . .RONALDS -.(� CHURCH -�.- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES L BLOCK 13 i i nn `7 f .wr. _mow 1 ! � i GROCERY WVNVIRC4 MCK CHURCH -�.- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES L BLOCK 13 i i nn `7 f EAGLES 1 ! � i GROCERY WVNVIRC4 MCK CHURCH -�.- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES L BLOCK 13 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Church 2. Flowers E shrubs along parking 3. (62) House F yard - 729 Ronalds 4 S. (63) 6. (65) ! 7. (67) 1 8 (63) Trees & flowers along Ronalds (louse - 719 Ronalds House - 630 Dodge Eagle Store - 712 Church Old barn RESOURCES BLOCK i - medium sized; provide shade, visually pleasing, partially screen parking lot. I - visual f smell. - well maintained with white Pickett fence; architectural $ historical merit; trees F, shrubs in yard (including apple trees and large vPpetahle oar,lpn) small full trees with ample foliage; provide shade, visual pleasure; partially screen parking along street (tree limbs extend over sidewalk about 6-7 ft. high). well maintained; architectural F, historical significance; large trees in side yard. - well maintained; architectural merit; shrubs"F, trees, flowers in yard; garden in yard along Dodge. - convience of grdceiy shopping in neighborhood. - possible historical significance; in need of paint. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES 39 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK NO, SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (67)- Hagles Parking Lot Visual - cars, glare, excess paving, trash, incompatibility with residential area B14-19-23 63, 64, 65, 66 Windblown trash 63, 64, 65, 66 Noise - traffic Those bordering Ronalds St. and alleyway. Danger - traffic 'Those bordering Ronalds St. and alleyway. overflow parking Visual at peak times Congestion Noise (people driving around f around looking for space). 2. (67) Eagles Store Visual - architectural (building) incompatibility loading dock Noise Danger (backing in P blocking road). back of building Noise - mechanical Visual equipment (air conditioner $ freezer equipment) 3. Dodge St. traffic Noise Glare Physical danger 4, (66) Parking lot Visual 40 'chose bordering Ronalds St, and alleyway. Those bordering Ronalds St. and alleyway. Bordering areas - Church $ Lucas. Along Church Fa Lucas. Traffic along Lucas.. 810-32 B9-11, 12; 810-31, 32; 62 64, 65, 66 65, 66 65, 66 63, 64, 65 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101REs 13 8WCK DATA 'r I.itivelv ne% nnnrt. nt bisill ldinist PARCH. A!,DWSS Ills 73: C.,Zh ZONING (72 USE/ACTIVITY W-6. ONNIJCCA GI.Lrl, R 1119 '!9 Church C2 SF 0A,. Uelyn t, Imhe, N 1120 '!3 Church 1:2 mr-: (A, Ix,l, luO., 1121 7:1 Church C2 SF irdive. Adeline / Crnt: iMu'phy. J.,zes & 1122 705 Cn.r<h CZ SF ,:..,,d rphy, Tar,, t, 1123 552 C2 (Kathy's Corner) NF -2 Wi.slov / C,,n% S. Uthl,o, 1124 1125 520 C2 C2 $F XF-2 S1111'r. J..'rh limsen, Chrloy x I I 0. 1126 51- Dodge R3A SF Veni.,.n, Mon. 1127 51C lladge R3A SF nm,a. .1. N 112'5 5:2-0. D.J;e 113A IIF -S Krat'e. A. Q. 11 11213 -12 .-.:,Cnild R2 I$F-., K_N.o, Xenn,h X 4. 1130 716 Fairchild R2 IF Kassloq 1111 J., x + 1131 17:4 Fa ,Oild R2 5F sin lJsen, Pnnald I a 1132 7.6 F.Irchild R2 sr III Ades, Chnrlev, x + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES 14011irs Comment6 The noktheAn hat6 o6 t/Uz btock .it zoned C2 whiee the soutlieAn hat6 i6 zoned R2 and R3A. The R2 pant 06 the Litock cmat6 o6 veAy well-maintained ,6t)tuctuAe,6 white the RM and C2 zones ane much mou &un -down, pa4ticuPwAtV the C2 zone. Onty 2 o6 the 8 4tAuctuAe,6 in the C2 a/Lea aAe owneA occupied. The C2 and R3A pitope&Um ane also a66ected by negative impacts 61tom two 6ouAceA - EagZe4 Stone and Dodge StAcet. 41 0 W O 3 1 2 CHURCH 6 7 v -w 1� FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCKI4 I 1 I , co). IVA V � 3 3 i FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCKI4 I 1 I , co). V � 3 3 i RESOURCES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK IA 1, Trees along Fairchild - visually pleasant; shade. 2, (32) (louse - 728 Fairchild - very fine house F, yard; flowers; trees in front; nice well laid maintained house; well maintained, nicely out yard. 3. Trees along Lucas some visual buffering for (32). Q, (24) (louse - 522 Dodge nice older house with bushes in front; basically in fine shape, but could use some new paint. S. (30, 31) Trees $ grass in alley fi back yards visually pleasing; shade. t i I I i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. (27) (louse (poorly Visual - maintained) (dilapidated porch) 2. (27) Junk in driveway (open trailer with 1 trash) Visual, blowing trash IMPACTED PROPERTY 26, 28 28 I BLOCK 1.1 i I 3. Dodge St. traffic Noise 23-28 Danger 23-28 - hardly any sdtbacl: from street. 4. (28) Parking lot Visual 29 I S. (18) Parkine lot Visual 32 6. Church St. (traffic 'G parking) 7. Gravel alley i i i 44 r 4 Noise 18-23 Visual Dust Adjoining properties MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BIJICK DATA N: Vk PARC1:1. AIMMS :0\ISG USE/ACf IVI'TY .lh]1:11 1153 421 I.urae R2 5F Mmnrd,, Rrrn:.. 1134 431 Lucas R2 5F Nilson, 1u:11, R. r I — 1135 721 Fairchild R'_ SF Ileo, N, 0,61e \ I 0 1 I { 1136 71547 Fairchild R2 SF Duffy, Engcnc u 1137 711 Fairchild R'_ SF Ruenster, Soraan 1138 1139 430 Dodgc 426 Dodge RSA RSA SF IIF -2 Nri-,L, Clarence Cochran, Russell S -r 1140 420 Dodge 113A SF Ilornung, Ars. Chas. S I , 1141 416 Dodg. RSA SF Kadcrn, F.dna S 0 1142 4D2 Dodge R3A SF sass, B. Frank L 1143 710 Davenport R2 SP Ch.dacek, Leo T 1144 714 Davenport R2 SF Cerny, Clara S I G 1145 718 1lavenparl 92 SF CIu,Jacek, I..a T 1146 770 Davenport R2 SF (front) Drocn•. Carpet (rear) Brown, Gordon S T 1147 732 nm'enport R2 SF Hoover. VIM., S — MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JEs Cmnmente This .ia ba.a.LcaUy a pteuan.t Hoch, cone,i.4ting o6 genenaUy wetZ-maintained etnuct(ULeb and yande (with onty a coupte 06 exception). Sevena.Z o6 the etAuctuheh have ahch.itectunat signi.6.ieanee... The noncon6onming use (a 6tood, eoveiLing chop) genenatty doesn't seem to .impact the netghborthood deteteAionZy, at Zeut v.i.eua.tty. whetheA Zoading/untoading woutd e66eet the neigh- bo4hood aaa not detenminabte .in ouA aurtvey. 45 Fn FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401MES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (37) (louse - 711 Fairchild 2. Trees along Fairchild 3. (38) [louse - 430 Dodge 4. (39) [louse - 426 Dodge 5. (40) (louse - 420 Dodge 6. Trees along Dodge 7. (4 2) Rouse - 402 Dodge 8. (43) (louse - 710 Davenport 9, Trees - east side of Davenport House - 418 Davenport Trees along alley Business - 720 Davenport RESOURCES BLOCK is - well maintained house 4 yard; visual. - medium size; visual $ shade. - architectural and historical merit; generally well maintained; nice yard with hedges, shrubs. - well maintained house $ yard. i - well maintained house G yard with bushes $ flowers. 1 - young trees on southern half of block; visual, shade $ some screening. well maintained house with large yard. architectural and historical merit; well maintained. several old trees (2 sycamores) along Davenport; visual $ shade. - architectural and historical merit; well maintained house, - visual $ shading. - visual; building of the business enterprise blends in nicely with surroundine residential homes / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES M0111ES 47 S. Alley - gravel Dust All adjacent properties. I 48 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK Is NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Dodge St. traffic Noise, auto exhaust 38-42 2. Adjacent houses - Lack of privacy, no buffering (36, 37) insufficient side of trash 36-37 yards. 3. (34) (louse in need of Visual 35, 33 paint $ maintenance 4. (47) (louse somewhat in Slight visual B-16 - 51, 52 sect of maintenance B-8 - 99, 00 S. Alley - gravel Dust All adjacent properties. I 48 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK Is BLACK DATA BLOCK 1:• PARCH. ADORCSS :0%I,%6 USC/AMVIIY 0X%1:0. O.Slrt •na: r SCL :IIXXLSi. 28.1148 317 Lucas P: MF -2 Shay, Dennis el. 1119 323 Lucas R-' 1117-2 J IWris L. 1150 329 Wos R2 SF ,Inn[O., Gcarg.• 0 IISI 725 Davcrq+u rt R2 SF Rnu•. rt al C 0 1 1152 717 Davenport R2 SF 6elvrr, X 0 11 53 715 Davenport P_' SF 5,.1hersCont: 6Yhroee., —I 1154 713 Davenport R2 SF A.7:,•na X e 1155 711 Davenport R2 SF Million, U,r, A. 5 I U 1156 709 Davenport RM SF 11'eL. Konald aaJ Lnrtenee K. 11r,a IT T 1157 701-03 Davenport R3A 11a.1, l, Dairy Store Iloek, RoaalJ .m3 Lurrence R. Ih+ware 1153 3-'B Nag. _ RM SF shlran,ratrlcia ARncs an Verd isLa k t 1159 320 Dodge RM SF Matt X 0 1160A 3161bdge RM SF SL+her X r 1160 I0 Bl oem ing t en RM Mr -2 Ovnn, lorext. .0 0 1161 710 Bloomington R2 SF Oaks X 1162 716 Bloomington R2 MF -2 Count rJohn Con4 t7aLs. V. X 0 1163 720 Bloomington A2 SF coolly X 0 1164 724 Bloomington R2 SF Hyatt 8 D.orLy 3 + 1165 730 Bloomington R2 SF Walden X 0 1166 315 Wesa R2 SF goose, 1hrfuerite -1• / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Comments A see3ni,ngey s.tabfe, quiet bQoch except boa along Dodge St. Few negative exteanaCitiea aae evident, except boa those generated by .the gaoceny s.toae - which doehn'.t have enough extehi.oa sehvice space. 49 a (2 ,rl), DAVENPORT ,� Iw� LU 3 so v Ir ICA ►� ►1 1 11. /1 LU 3 so v Ir BLOOMINGTONv MiCROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo RIES W+ W%,n IV NO. } 1. 2. 3. (64) 4. (65) TYPE OF RESOURCE Trees along Dodge Trees along Bloomington (louse - 724 Bloomington (louse - 730 Bloomington House - 315 Lucas Trees along Davenport Hawkeye Dairy Store RESOURCES BLOCK 16 - large, full, older trees; visual; shade. - mixture of old $ medium size trees; visual, shade F, some screening. - well maintained; architectural $ historical significance. - relatively newer house but, as opposed to other "suburban" newer houses, it is in character with neighborhood (colonial in appearance,brick). - well maintained with very nice yard (shrubs, flowers, trees). - especially a very large, old, tree in middle of block. - convenience for shopping; well maintained building that is architecturally consistent with neighboring structures. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO, SOURCE TYPE OF IN•IPAcT IMPACTED PROPERTY BLOCK 16 1. Dodge St. traffic Noise 57-60 ` 2. (57) Corner Grocery Visual - congested parking Store (traffic) Also danger - blocking off . 58, 53 j traffic on Dodge from loading 815 - 42-45 zone; blocks sidewalk 52 (trash) Visual - pop 1; ice machines clutter sidewalk; trash around entrance 615 - 42-45 Alley - gravel Dust Bordering properties. ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NEs I lit."Ct DATA 31.04 � PARCEL AIUI;U:55 :OSI.G:I L:;:.IACr:61TYv:\LI 11 !';;• `' 20i7 i Locns R SF I - \ 2058 :2%29 lamas uF-2 _ Derv., — 2059 719 Bionminp.a R2 SI' I Ilae gin, .Inh. F. Lp rgae[ 2059A ' J1Slno inr•on ]I_r, M• R2 %F-2 I R.l a`r, RJ:•f[I 4 .rfJ�r '^---^^-----(�--• 2060 21S Bloomington 92 8F Schlcnk, lits cn Iai:xbtth Sard.• 2061 711 U:rnwinL'ton R2 Sr 206.22 70.1 Rlonmi ngton R3.\ SF )le2p.•n. !i.•'a:J it A.T. Crlr-..r.— 2(163 N1 Ibdgm IRA 71F•2 L 1 2064 220 Dodge Rai SI' Grirm. I,,. VA,r: � 2003 218 nodgn R.1A S1' Clllhul.r r, Ii.•r..,M& Van U 21166 700 1!orAet R3A SF 5e:rtr..aa 4 niton Grocrr 200 712 )hrkot R.Lk )IF -L" Boat.n 4 R'itnor 0 Crv•ccr ro. 2068 R K.rkot R3A ,IF. 12. Ro.itmin 4 Nitncr 1 Or ... r Cu. 2070 726 Rarket RSA SF Orr, Ri.hnr: 4 Graeo U 2071]SO Market RM SF Rr:lt. Sns n e. o.nd r \I:m 11. 2072 209 Lot., RSA SF -r..,. Vuggcr, Reun 6 )h•rvin p Cont 1 I.)nCh. IaL rencc MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES comments AU o6 the hou m and yandb along Hoomington ane vehy weft -maintained -- a very nice btheet, quiet and we t-6otiaged. The hotam ane, aCthough not histonieatty 6i9lu6Lcan.t, Aatheh hanmon.iou6. South 6.tde 06 the Gooch beem6 to be in the p]Locas o6 being eonvented .into apatbnent buit(Unge (tea&i.ng down existing 4tiLuctultes) ... We,6t bide o6 btoch .is genna2ty in a decUmblg ,state. .. PaAki.ng tot o6 apan6nent buitdi.ngb genena-teb aeot 06 tna46ic .in atteyivay. 53 W t7 00 c 54 BLOOMINGTON ' U 5 MARKET 4 v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Moults cc J BLOCK 17' 1 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Market 2. (71) House - 730 Market 3. (57) House $ yard - 225 Lucas 4. Tress along Bloomington Yard Houses F, yards along Bloomington RESOURCES BLOCK 17 - very young trees; visual contribution $ some screening. - architectural f, historical significance. - well maintained with a variety of tress & shrubs. - young trees; nicely spaced; visual, shade $ some screening. - with a variety of large, older trees; open space. - attractive, general appearance. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 55 i i i NO. SOURCE 1. (63) House Visual - in need of maintenance (dilapidated porch, gutters) NEGATIVE IMPACTS TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 2. (64) (louse Same as above plus paint 3, [lodge St. traffic Noise 4, Market St. traffic Noise 5. Alley - gravel with alot of traffic Dust $ standing water � Visual 6. (67,68) Parking lot Drainage 62, 64 B27-47, 62, 63 63, 65 827-47, 62, 63 62-66 66-71 Those bordering alley. 57, 59, 59A, 60, 61, 70, 65 �. 7. (67) Historical building Torn down and replaced by All surrounding properties "C. Emerson Brandt a 12- unit apartment complex House" 712 Market i i I. 1, I 56 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES BLOCK BLOCK DATA BLOC' IR PARCEL AOBRCSS ZONING USC/ACr19iTY OF':I:B CA]..R xcnr, M .Ie nrLSI. 37-2073 117 Lucas RM SF City Propene Corp. I _ 2074 119 Lucas ILIA HF -2 hal h" Cann Xilirr. Reith L. 2075 729 Harket RM MF -3 Fenlon, Roberta Con[: Malone. Pc:mis .I. 0 2076 721 Hark.[ RSA SIF -3 Bleeker, IJn X 0 2077 719 tUrket Rad SF Banccr, Bernard C. 0 2078 717 MArt R13 Sr Rri-. Bernice 0 2079 715 Market BSA SF Saratny/Conn Rric 3 0 2080 132 Dodge RM MF -6• Winter, Riiliaa 0 2081 120 Dodge RM SF Under, Ilenry .A U 2082 114 D.Jgc R3A HF -2 Reed, Danirl A. and hc.mas L. , 2U83 110 Dodge RM SF Miller, Io:a k 2081 704 Jefferson R3.3 mr-Z Rlvlai In.•n rp. nn e.i — 2085 706 Jefferson UA SF T'heln, Tory 1.. 0 2nFb 7111 .laffer.nu R31% SI' Ilyermw. 1're.l.i M. 2087 714 .Jefferson RIA NF -2 G....... M.rr'a re[ J 2088 720 .Jefferson RM 51' Inlr ra, 1%. it qp L Shirley A I 2089 722 Jefferson RM SF Me Laugh I in/Cont: RinJl C T 2090 730 Jefferson RSA Sr t'argnson, J..rs G Map \ + 2091732 Jefferson UA SF liters, I:ceriil r, A — 2092 Lucas RM s••Icant lo[ .i[n ',rage Malt ars. i:ca rill F. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS. DES MOINES Collialcitu Bock .ia 6ain.£g dense y coveted Wth houses and ganageh. No sense o,5 open apace .in .the alley...Partking tot on paace£ 80 .iA we££-seneened on .the solath with hedges anrf a araC£ but 6cAee7ung ezia.ted be(lone the pahk.ing £at and is on .the neighborta piope;Lty. 57 3 W a MARKET JEFFERSON 3 / IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES BLOCK 18 W Nr�Wra. r ��►.minI JEFFERSON 3 / IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES BLOCK 18 W Nr�Wra. JEFFERSON 3 / IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES BLOCK 18 ■ NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (2075) Historical building - "Templin - Fenlon [louse" - 729 Market RESOURCES BLOCK 18 - 1850 house which combines Colonial and Georgian Styles; (need of much maintenance — paint, gutters, porch). 2. (2081) Historical building - "Branch - Linder (louse" - 120 Dodge - 1852 example of transition from Greek revival to Gothic revival (hoodover porch and arch -like brackets of porch); (good condition v nect LL in woodwork' roof 3. Trees along Dodge - elder trees; visual $ shade. 4. (82) Rouse - 114 Dodge- architectural significance (19th century example of gothic revival); very well maintained house $ yard. S. Trees 6 bushes along Lucas - mixture of old f, young trees and a nice bush; visual, shade $ screening. 6. 7. (84) Trees along Market - younger trees; visual, shade, $ some screening. Yard - 704 Jefferson - well landscaped; numerous large pines. ES 59 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIN 1 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK I NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. 2. 3. Dlarket St. traffic Dodge St. traffic Jefferson St. traffic Noise Noise Noise 75 - 80 80 - 84 f 84 - 91 j 1 I I l I I 1 i 60 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK DATA enl nrlvnlr r A..I I.r:... BLOCK PARCEL ADDRESS ZONING USE/ACTIVITY 0h\CR OCCJ . 37•2126 RM Vacant Lot St.." Ca roll., 2129 127 Dodge IIl.\ Sr Simon, Caroline k 0 2130 629 Bbrkot R3A SF B111,11. Levis 4 R 0 2131 625 siarkct RSA Doctors office Bock, T.T., N.O. 0 2132 619 Mork,t R3A MF -i Rain, Ibggte F I 0 2133 _ 611 sktrket R3.\ 0r. 6 MS OfficetUaA.•11 4 Sleeping Rona � T 2134 603 Market RSA 1,I1'.2 Rollace, k;Jter 6 Il,l,n Nikel i \'I,kl +Nett+; 2135 118 Jolnt>on R3.\ MF... Clark, .1.... 4 Loretta 0 2136 112 Johnson RM IN1,1" Carnoy, R",1, i Caren, _ 2137 108 Johnson R3A MF -3 peau, Oe Carla A — 2138 06 Jeffe,on R3A "'pP u1der t. tn,. at, Ilanr,l 4 FJurJy 0 2139 603 Jefferson R3A MF -2 Preston, Martha % 0 2140 610 Jeflcrron RS. SP No l"YN n'.: Sae e, \ — 2142 614-18.1,ff,rson RSA Nf•12' _ `�•"'rr.;, 1� i:: t;•:it: It t, 2143 622 Jefferson RSA SF Vilihan,r, Iio.aN 4 Nm A — 2144A 630 Jeffer,,o 111% SI Rog, n, 1'enwn 4 Pato,: t -+- 2144 109 Dodgc RSA SF Nny,rs, 1,11110 2145 115 Dodge R3A 5P Loap, ConnieFF 0 This Hock is 6aaey caoluded, i4th a inUtfvLe o6 6.tngee-6a/nilly and mutCti-6a2nCey sthnctwtes as iveU a6 • iva doctoh.l6 dUnCcs. Alain.tenalice o6 Guitding6 van.ie6 6.2om very undeA-ma.inta.uled .to a modehn "subu.iban" .type 110u6c necelltey consthucted...PaLkhig nequLLe- me.n.ts o6 .the thio apa tDien.t. bu.CCding6 and .tufo ctbliC6 ahe majoit. souA ce6 06 negative lmpact6. MICROFILMED BY ,IORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 61 z 0 w z 0 62 MARKET Z JEFFERSON 6 1@ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK 26 RESOURCES BLOCK 26 IO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Jefferson - mostly young trees; visual, shade, F some screening. 2. (43) House - 622 Jefferson - historical 13 architectural significance; in need of some maintenance (paint F gutters). 3. (AAA) House - 630 Jefferson - well maintained house B yard. 4. Trees along Dodge - mostly younger trees - visual, shade. i S. (44) Rouse - 109 Dodge - well maintained building. { 6. Trees alongMarket - combination of young, medium E a couple of older trees; 1 visual, shade. i 7. (33) House - 611 Market - converted into clinics (MD E DDS); original house has architectural' significance (remodeled); well maintained house G yard; good example of conversion of residence into commercial; maintained original character of house. i 63 i FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mo171Es NEGATIVE IMPACTS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES BLOCK 26 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY +. 1. Dodge St. traffic Noise - (heavey traffic) 28, 29, 30, 44A, 44, 45 2. Dlarket St. traffic Noise 30 - 34 3. (31) Parking in driveway Visual - (inadequate drainage 30 sideyard and runoff) I; 4. (35) Erosion of soil due Runoff of dirt into street Public parking, pedestrians to non planting of igrass S. (37) House Visual - in need of exterior 38, public view, Central JHS (porch 6 walls) maintenance I6. Jefferson Sttraffic Noise 38 - 43, 44A 7. (40) House Visual - poor maintenance 37, 39, 42 Danger - poor maintenance T` junk in front yard Visual 39, 42 1 8:(42, 43) Adjacent Lack of privacy, breathing 42, 43 f structures space, probably caused by location of 42, which is a I` new apartment building. 9. (31). Parking in back- Visual - entire yard paved 29, 30, 32, 45 i yard 10. (31) Structure Visual incompatibility 29, 30, 32, 45 I I 11. (42) Parking behind Visual (entire backyard paved) 32, 33, 35, 40, 43 apartment building 12. (33) Parking behind Visual 32, 34, 35 i 64 professional offices 13. (35) Unsightly garbage Visual Surrounding properties inadequately hidden ( / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES BLOCK DATA INNCIiI• ADDRESS 20%1,¢6 USE/ACril'117 S]-2146 Iti\ Parking 3146 NS\ 11a r4 ing 2147 227 Padgr BM SF 31.18 615 Uloom6lgton Jilt MF -3 2149 619 Bloomington RSA SF 2150 613 8100minglon RSA SF 2151 609 Bloomington R3A 111:-2 2152 605 Bloomington R3A Sp 2153 601 Illoomingran R3A RF -2 2IS4 224 .I.hnxon 113A IIF -5 2155 220 Jnhnyon R3A AIF -2 2156 602 khrket R3A Farting 2157 612 l:,rkrt R,tt Parking 21S8 618 A4rLnt RA Parking 2159 670 Market R,tA Parking 2160 622 Market RM Parking 2161 628 Market lilt Parking 2162 209 Dodgm R3A SF 2163 21t Dodge R3A SF X", ❑o.pi"l 1 I Merq' I.aJpit al Sc8rar11, Edna .\ i y Parker, 6racr D• % 0 Krrlder, Alga D. I p 0,nxtnd, Iver \' 0 uriifin, Robrrt 6 5 1 rrda Ilro.n. _ hiPnr, Nlcha rd 4 Tari 110Im•r, Rod-anJ q I.l•Vlt• Fngrnr 6 C.lrrir K + Mercy Iio.pital Merry Ilr•id ral Ilorry Ilaxpitnl mmy Ilanpllal Rn.rII Cnnt: !'.•rcr lioxpltal Katt/Cont: h'ilLe. K :ran• Aktrnu 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1,101ries Commeatd HOiuea along Btoom jigton combine .to make a vehy homogeneouz g2oup We bui.tt npprt0xinla.tety at ea)ne .time, wLtll sbn.LeaA matcA'aCisl. No(laee 0n pa4ce.C6 50 and 51 me aet back mole .than .the 0.the ,5 and neate a )Lice divW,tty o6 6acadee. 110spitn-C paitking bbs dombiate .thi,a block and de.Maat 6aom dte ovehaU quaUty as a nee.ident iaC ah.ea. 65 0 Z O i ® BLOOMINGTON �J MARKET v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RES BLOCK 27 /w v I O 0 I 2 I I I i I I i I I _ I ■ �J MARKET v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RES BLOCK 27 /w v I O 0 I 2 I I I i I I i I I _ I �J MARKET v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RES BLOCK 27 /w v I O 0 I 2 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Market 2. (48) House - 625 Bloomington 3. (51) [louse - 609 Bloomington 4. (52) (louse - 605 Bloomington RESOURCES BLOCK 27 i i - older trees; visual $ shading. - architectural $ historical merit; fine, large, old house in good condition (classic revival style). - well maintained $ nice yard with bushes. - well maintained house $ yard. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 67 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 27 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1.(56-61) Nlercy Hospital Visual 1326-30-34 817-64-65-66 Parking Lot Noise 818-79, 80, 81 62, 63, 50, 51, 54, 55 Glare S5, 50, 51, 62, 63 Runoff erosion Dirt accumulation on sidewalk. 2. Dodge St. traffic Noise 47, 62, 63 3. (46) Dlcrcy Hospital Visual 63, 47, 48, 49 r Parking Lot Noise t 1 F 1 68 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK MIA FLOCK PAX11 APOUSS USE:/AMVIIY OKN;: . K OA; 9, IS -11. 3:. , .!ge R3A SF I 1163�3: t 113A 411-2 1 i'd I . K;. 1'.. a 1169 623 Davenport B3A 1IF-3 If.ff,. W.. I + 1170 6221 P., enpo't RM W-2 11r.dA, Lawrence )Ur., 1171 619 Davenport 93A SF C.op, r, J..m,-s 1176 613 Nv,.prt R5A parking lot :W.. U.%ker.ir. V!14s.-Ch 1173 332 Johnson R111% 5F C: ... lochor. Alk -rt Nrothy 0 1174 526 Johns.n R3A XF—I X�k"n. Von,. 1175 310 Johnson a 31% IIF -2 mn I r."e-, I E .1 1176 6U4 Bloomington RSA chu'O'D EE 1177 610 Bloomington RM :In., Lutheran Church 1179 616 Bloomington RM XF-4 Ritt,tr, Hep J. 1179 620 Bloomington 93A .111!4 L.,., 1190 6.'6 81 ... in,t.n RM SF 1181 630 Bloomington R31% SF Mvjyea'. I.J.1n x -I- Ila, IIB: 305 DoJ'. RM SF Krell, Lrncrlere x + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOPIES Comineitt6 Majoa extemiat.We4 come 64om church paAking tot. Uide 6Aom that, tU6 block seem6 to be ive.U-maintained, cuttli much AehabLP,Gtatioji iomk being done. 69 70 BLOOMINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IdOIMEs BLOCK 28 1 RESOURCES BLOCK 28 NO, TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Bloomington - nice old trees in front of Church $ down Bloomington St. 2. (81) (louse - 630 Bloomington - large, old house; very nicely rehabilitated with landscaped yard. 3. 'frees along Dodge - younger trees plus huge, old Mm. 4. (82) house - 309 Dodge - small, attractive house $ yard; very well maintained. S. Trees along Davenport - younger trees; nicely spaced; provide shade E screening; one huge old tree. 6. (75) House - 320 Johnson - architectural $ historical significance; and well maintained; (Gothis Revival) 7. (76) Church yard landscaping around church entrance; evergreens, tress, bushes. 71 i I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 1 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 28 NO, SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Dodge St. traffic Noise 81, 82, 67, 68 2. (68) Large 3 -car garage Visual (blocks view, looks with paving area cluttered, much paving) - 67, 68 3. (76) Gravel parking lot Visual no drainage facilities 71, 73, 74, 75 B29: 88-90 (71 screened his own back yard) Dust 71, 73, 74, 75 Traffic in alley (Sunday) Congestion generally in alley. Noise 71, 73, 74, 75 i 4. Gravel alley Dust (Compounded on Sundays with i Bordering properties. i cars going to church parking lot. J) 72 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1401NES I lil I I: DATA blU A IS\HCF:1. ADUIUSS ZUNI\G USL/ACTIVITY On:Nl:O IJaL0.I:C.l \�'.: �. nb• .:.I 1185 IISJ 421 Dodge 427 Dodge RIA RSA parting SP 5[. ticu:ra auz C,`.crch G.d'Joy, L.v 1 TSI _ 1185 623 Fairchild Ri\ SF \erad. halt•, I 0 1186 619 Fairchild R.1\ SF Nerad, hill i.n, J.. anJ 1167 414 Johnson RM IF Nth artist studln in garage plum Grove A,rv,,. Inc. — 1198 1189 60.1 Davenport 608. 6I0 Davenport 113A RSA SF )IF-: lov rent hauling Aeries, Oiemi St. h'eneeclaus Church ] I I } 1 1190 616 Davenport 113A SF-parsanage St. 'Kenccslacs Church — 5191 630 Davenport R31% Church St. h'encs•slaus Church } MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comment6 A very lace hock consizting o6 oed houses which ahe we,C£-madn•tained, and .the St. Wenemtw Chuneh and aeetony, which ane dominant. The/Le ahe sevelae £ahge gmdeizz. However, tAa66tc congeatti.on generated by church activities .i.s a pubtem on Sundays. 73 NORTH MARKET PARK U) o' FAIRCHILD a .s � DAVENPORT / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES � /I� ' �►- M4 ' .s � DAVENPORT / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (90) Historical house - "Koza - St. Wenceslaus House" - 618 Davenport 2. (89) (louse - 608 Davenport RESOURCES BLOCK 29 i i i - 1882 example of Anglo -Italian style. (Note: incompatible addiLion.) - architectural $ historical merit; in need of minor rehabilitation; visually pleasing. 3. Trees along Davenport - large, old trees; visual, shade. j I 4. (91) St. Wenceslaus Church (built 1893) - attractive, well kept building and grounds. S. Trees along Dodge - small trees; visually pleasant, evenly spaced; some buffering. G. (86) Yard - 619 Fairchild - pleasant yard, trees, flowers, & garden. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES M0111E5 75 NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (83) Parking lot Visual 84, 8S (Church) Dust (cars entering from alley) 84, 85, 86 2. Alley (gravel) Dust, standing water 84, 8S, 86, 89, 90 3. Dodge St. traffic Noise Danger f congestion 83, 84, 8S, 86, 90, 91 83, 84, 91 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK, 29 RWCA IATA KXK PARCE 1. AVURF.5S ZO.SiNG USE/At.-MVIry I I I XCUI: 1: 1192 R3A C2 ii hnui111,trkt sch."'t IH,r.wl !.1.1,n) 1193 514 J.h.,.. RSA it $CW. 1 Of 5, C,.,: A rofi, 1194A 6111-2U Fairchild RM 4F 'r.,maa. ld,ylr.j Curti, 1194 630 Fairchild RM 51: Chclf, P..1 c I + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Colvinent6 Rock coft6i,stA o6 schoot, schoot Band, neighborhood rank, mucic 6choot, and too iteaidenea. 77 z O O CHURCH M. FAIRCHILD v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES a BLOCK 30 j -17 Ghn' VEL '-�t�aiE'�NL 3 cat,;�s D(,P;E411Y �1 JJ - C�AU�L ¢ ® Li¢PcE 5CF1cOL O 1 6 P- 5 2 �-y P P G-2 1 q 1 FAIRCHILD v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES a BLOCK 30 j ■ NO. 1. (93) 2. (94) TYPE OF RESOURCE Historically Significant Building - "Czech Hall" - 524 Johnson (1193) Historically Significant (louse - "Rittenmeyer - Chelf House" - 630 Fairchild (1194) RESOURCES BLOCK 30 - 1900 example of Georgian Revival; monument to Czech community in Iowa City; basically sound; in need of minor repairs. - 1879 example of house with Italian character applied to basic Rectangular Form; distinctive veranda. Horace Mann School - neighborhood School; architectural merit. Horace Mann Playground - slides, basketball courts, tennis backboard, junglegym. North Market Square - recreational facilities; volleyball, softball diamond, picnic tables; open space for recreation and visually pleasing; several small, young trees; neighborhood meeting place. (large shelter for picnicing) 6. Trees adjacent to Preucil School - visually pleasing MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RADIOS -DES Molr¢s 79 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 30 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY s 1. (92) Horace Mann School Noise - children 94, 94A, 93 2. Dodge St. traffic Noise r 94 f, school Danger School 3. (92) Parking Lot Dust 93, school ! - Visual (ameliorated to west by snow fence) B31, 79, 80 t 4. (93) Chimney Danger (of falling) Parking lot. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BIACE DATA Bloc commemu Tit" btoch .1A a mixture o6 Lu2ge, otdeA. homey and neweA, 6maU 6t AuctuneA. The mclUtectunae 6tyem 6eem compatibee except on the NE connen, wheAe .two 6maee, modeAt homes (69, 70) ane next to an oZd, range, 6aiAcy eeaboaate peace (71)... Negative v.L6uat •mpact6 6nom .the gab 6tation bat nlo6.tty on paopehtie8 acAobb Dodge St. i4 AIIUPIi55 20YIS0 USE/ACFIYITY ell nn\.: I 08YIR631 DoJgc PIA SFRln.lrr.l, .lrr<:1,639 J Ronaids RSA SFFAIsr419 Rnnnids P3.\ SF617 873 Rnnalds 613 Roonlds RIA RM SF P:unr,¢an, fiiti erJ L I ca:hy A 1 574 628 Johnson RSA SF gnwklLa, CL,ir rnnn ll•cr:I ler.•r. ' 875 624 Johnson R3A SF Pan toy. Lnulsr \ i 876 616 Johnson R3A SF SchlcnL, Colrt[a 877 878 879 614 Jolmson 610 Johnson 606 Church RSA 93A R3A SF SF 11F-2 Crml ry, .Inac Jchns[nn, rhrl — BSO 408 Church R3A SF Tlsab, 1'.vtha 1'u.• I 0 SRI 6I0 Church RM IIF- 5 rrcrnlrai, 1111013,1 ? 0 R82 620 Church P3A IIF-: Rlrlenstyn. L Fcu.•1.•P.• 1 0 882A 622 Church BSA RF.3 8lcicnscyn, L41,1 L r""I. r I n 843E 8R/ 6IB-30 Chureh C2 ass station 4 cur •a Ah Rn ers, Ilan4.: R I 0 commemu Tit" btoch .1A a mixture o6 Lu2ge, otdeA. homey and neweA, 6maU 6t AuctuneA. The mclUtectunae 6tyem 6eem compatibee except on the NE connen, wheAe .two 6maee, modeAt homes (69, 70) ane next to an oZd, range, 6aiAcy eeaboaate peace (71)... Negative v.L6uat •mpact6 6nom .the gab 6tation bat nlo6.tty on paopehtie8 acAobb Dodge St. i4 81 ii 1 i� / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111ES 101 r z Q) z 0 RONALDS r\f(@18 4 5 � 82 RONALDS r\f(@18 4 5 w zy� CHURCH - v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES W D 0 BLOCK 31 � 1 � w zy� CHURCH - v MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES W D 0 BLOCK 31 RESOURCES BLOCK NO, TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (79) (louse - 606 Church - well maintained. 2. Trees along Church - older f, younger trees; provide shade; visual contribution. 3. ! (71) House - 619 Ronalds - architectural 6 historical significance. 4. Trees along Ronalds - both older F, younger trees; shade & visual contribution. i S.. (71) Trees on 71 - give effect of orchard in yard. 6. (72) House f, yard - 617 Ronalds well maintained; large rear yard. 7, (73) House - 613 Ronalds small, modest but well maintained; large, well kept rear yard. 8. (74) House - 628 Johnson - well maintained; architectural & historical significance. a j 9. Trees along Johnson - older $ younger trees; shade & visual contribution. i 10. (75) House - 624 Johnson - very well maintained. , 11, (76) House - 616 Johnson - attractive, sound structure; in need of paint. 12. (77) Historical building - "Barnes - Crowley House - 614 Johnson - 1840's colonial style house of native yellow-brown sandstone; in need of maintenance; has an incompatible addition. 13. (78) [louse - 610 Johnson - architectural & historical merit; moved to new foundation. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140IIIES M NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 31 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1• (83,84) DX Gas Station Visual - openness, luck of 69, 70 - partially buffered - still incompatible structure greenery, excessive pavement, 82, 82A glare, incompatible structure, 813-65, 66 all except debris debris around building (metal 814-21-25 drums, tires, parts) parked 82A (CV ) cars Noise - traffic 69, 70, 82A 813-65, 66 2. (77) Yard Visual - cluttered 4 unmaintained 3• (8.1) Parking lot Visual, noise 4. (81) Exposed trash cans Visual 5. (82) Exposed trash cans Visual 6. (82) Dog pens $ dogs Visual Noise 7, (82A) Unpaved parking Visual, noise, dust lot 8. (71) (louse Visual - deteriorating F unmaintained 9, Dodge St. traffic Noise, exhaust fumes 76 72, 73, 80, 77, 76, 80 72, 73 72, 82A 81, 72, 82A Most of block. 82A, 81, 71, 72 70, 72 69, 70, 71, 82A 69, 70 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I901MES BLOCK DATA PARCE1. ADDRESS ZONINGUSG'/dCf 11'ITY OM1\I:0. k'CUf. I'.l l.•:.� 73.865 727 Mage it. /1F-7 Hhiti.g. Sam:rl 1 I S96 679 6m., 1:3 SF Burr' I.uln 867 bit Brown RS 111-3 Pes•l font: .lry., ,CtrniJun y3 888 669 619 Bron 017 Brown R'_ R7 sr MF•3 Thaa.uy I'rancis 4 I Vnrot by Aeter.4on, Kent S Fay K % J -}- 890 609 Brown R: MF -2 Suter, Corrtee \ , 891 603 Br..n R7 SF F3rr,u. 7Los. , Clara .3 , 897 'IS .ohnson R7 SF schnidt, Jury S 393 714 Johnson ASA SF stila, Rohrrt , C..iI A 0 894 6W 'noralds RM SF Al" nicety m t ' Pre-,clua Fr,, Kenneth , Rot.'tta S � 893 608 Ronalds RSA MF -7 Pald.'in, Je:m L. Carol I,, % 696 610 Ranalds RSA SF Perinrr, fcrald , tla I' K , 697 61S Ronalds RSA SF White, Poste S _ 898 620 Ronalds RSA SF wit"l, Nolan \ 0 699 630 Ronalds ASA 8F Dirhl, I'dn.: 'JOU 707 Dodge Il3Aae 5F Foams M:31th i•roirrt. Ire. C ll 901 713 rd P3.\ Clinic. M1oa,'I�Y CeorrrJtier 11,3111, ProJnt, me. R MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•Dlls 140111ES Commen to Mos•tty sdngte-6alnitf btock W!.tlt taAge houses, oCdert and weU-maintained. Quiet neighborhood, except bort Dodge St...Rona 6 St. i6 exeepttionatty we e-pCanted. VeAy ptea.6ant abnoapheke here and aeong eou-thertn W6 o6 Johneon S.t... The nunteAy schoot'. (94) and r-Uni.e (01) don't seem .to be ge.neA- ating mangy extehna.Citim (e.g., no obv.iou6 panh.ing phobeems) on a weekday moaming. w pw I 86 BROWN �F �N 11 100h ►t raI r I C�cT, EWA t chi«= 1 RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 W G BLOCK 32 RESOURCES BLOCK 32 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Ronalds - row of large maples, full, closely spaced; visual, shade, some screening. 2. Trees along Brown - young full maples F oaks; visual, shade, some screening. 3. (97,99) (louses - 618, 630 Ronalds - very well maintained houses $ yards. 4. (87) (louse - 621 Brown - well maintained. S. (89, 90) (louses - 609, 617 Brown - well maintained. 6. Trees along Johnson - northern half of block - young maples, ash; southern half - closely spaced, large maples; shade, visual, screening. 7. Sidewalk - southern half of Johnson - old brick sidewalk; visually nice. 8. Brown Street - brick paved. I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I{OIIREs 87 NO I. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT Dodge St. traffic Noise NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY 85, 86, 900, 901 BLOCK 32 s 88 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I90INE5 Bu2CR DATA PARR. ADDRESS ZONING USC/ALTI M Oh\I:N OCi DGI ttT:.<:. 22-675A 719 John:on R2 SF Porfons, ho, G Sall,' 675 529 Bron R2 SF Irwin; irnt: \`andory fit; I I 6mule, $tan II 676-2 523 B,.,n R2 SF Flfl:cr, Fran: 4.: ,sic 677-3 519 Brown B2 MF -2 Radom, Idn.; I+ 478.4 509 Brown R2 IIF -2 Or,.. IJ, Gear,, Cunu Gnn,w.,1J, ihurlc• + 679-5 730 Van Buren R2 SF Vander n'ou". Sumcy 0 680.6 726 Van Buren R2 SF Fn:iryl'.+nt: Ilcan:y, t Thrms 681-7 720 Van Duren R2 OF -2 Carter, PL,ne A �- Ouenther. SnSan 682-8 716 Van Buren R3A PIF -2 Burger, Rarlga ra J. + 683 714 Van Buren R3A MF -3 .\,I:vs, In.rrrl1 0 684-10 702 Van Buren R3A MF - R raf Rail•o, Joxph 4 Juno - 685-11 510 Ronald, RSA SF Scott/Com: 3 0 Ihnlr.r. F,I 686-12 516 Ron., Jn RSA sr Ibaler, P.A. G Flurcnh 3 } 687.13 518 Heralds R3A 21F-2 Slraf, Wel 4 Soman Cont: Sia, Shirley 688-14 524 Ronald, BSA Iowa city Girl, Johnson Conrq -f Group it me 689.15 530 Ronald, RM SF .\rp•cl., Marg Illen 6 S ILov,n C. 690-16 715 Johnm RSA SF Colo, h'ilrrcJ 616,ry N + Cont: Lenoch. John / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOInES ComDleltt6 VeAy quiet neigh- boithood. UIeCGDIaintai.ned house's .in.teAmingted With WA -to poo2tY maintained 6fiAuc.tiftu. W BROWN M 2 O' ■ mur 2 O' 3 RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES z U) z 0 BLOCK 33 ■ .1 -r. ME 3 RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES z U) z 0 BLOCK 33 :j 'i NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (689) Historic house - 530 Ronalds i %s r� 2, (84) )louse - 702 Van Buren 3. Trees along Ronalds i.l r' at1 q (89) Tree at 530 Ronalds 5. Brick sidewalk 6. (90) House - 715 Johnson Y �! 7, Trees along Van Buren �l 8. Brick street - Brown Street V.1 RESOURCES BLOCK - 1880 Swiss style house; one of only two existing in Iowa City in original state; poorly maintained; needs paint; minor structural repairs. - large, old brick F, stucco )louse; very well maintained. - mixture of older F, young maples; shade fi screening. - huge, old elm. - visually attractive. - well maintained house F, yard. - row of large cottonwoods on northern half of block. - visual. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 91 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT j 1. Gravel alley Dust 2. (88,87) Garbage; debris Visual abandoned vehicles 92 I NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY Adjoining properties Adjoining properties MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RANDS•DES MOIIIES BLOCK 33 I BLOCK VAIA PARCH ADDUSS ZONING USC/ACTIVITYNUR �A! OCC :v 21-691 617 Johnson R3A call ms) k RA it r .. 4. 12 619 RM BY Keith 93 621 Johnson MA sr I M.ton. Stephen 94 95 74-253 529 Ronald, $27 R...olds R.'A R.,A AM SF )IF -3. Leone, Peter I —tod Al _111-ILI—d cltl I� 32-696 SIS R.n.lds R3A SP nupp,it ct .1 97 511 Ronald, ICIA Sit Sin,Pp. . it t A 98 630 Van Buren R3A SF Trott, Emil & M-ArY 99 622 Van Bunn I RSA Sr 700 620 Van Buren 93A W-2 5asbu, Letly 70] 508 It RM SF ShAl.. W + + 702 512 Cl ... ech 83A Bit Pnl rend, Na.ld 705 516 church RM Mit-9 RL'o'L". 0 704 5.10 churel. RM SF Lailri. or. 705 524 Church R3A W.2 R ' ndon. L,,rgv Cont: TWL,r. Jahn 4 R.r'.,r., 0 706 530 Church RM 2 V• d, bermiu;Cont: brogli. Alm, + 707 611 Johnson 93A XF-3 Rhodes, Robert & Stary 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES cominefuz A vett nice Mock. The apaxbnelit compeex an pa4cet 95 a vauaUy compatible ibllEth the aAchitectme on the AW 06 the Hock. 93 CA z W m co Z. 94 (7 RONALDS �' CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES OF BLOCK 34 1 t INS, Y Milli �' CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES OF BLOCK 34 1 t INS, Y �' CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES OF BLOCK 34 RESOURCES BLOCK 34 NO. (700) TYPE OF RESOURCE - 620 1. - well Historic buildings - well preserved block containing houses of exclusively 19th many flowers. 6. North side of Church Street century construction; all structures in good to fair condition. 2. (701) Historic building - 508 Church - well preserved house of Midwestern Classic Style; fine yard with planters (flowers). 7. ornamental woodwork; large yard with bushes, flowers, garden. i 3. (698) Historic building - 630 Van Buren - 1875 house of essentially colonial character but extension and young sycamores; visual B shade. of brick end walls above roof line is of Flemish P Dutch Colonial Style; small garage added. 4. (699) Historical $ architectural house - (Greek revival) - 622 Van Buren - in generally poor condition. 5. (700) (louse - 620 Van Buren - well maintained house F, yard with many flowers. 6. (94) (louse - 529 Ronalds - well maintained house F yard with planters (flowers). 7. Trees along Ronalds - old and young sycamores; visual B shade. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IREs 95 m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS I BLOCK 34 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (705) Backyard Trash, junk and 707, 706, 704, 691 assorted paraphenalia 2. (95) Unscreened Visual 96, 92, 707 parking lot 3. Unscreened Visual 704 (03) parking lot 4. Church Street Traffic and noise 701 - 706 i 1 1 i 1 1 l m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BWCK UNTA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES TIU.6 Hack i6 a mixtMe 06 4inqZe-6amity and mutti- 6mittey unite but Aeem,& to be moving tomAd mj,Ltt-6amiey use, thAough nem conAtAurtion and couve&6. oim. The Rock iz chaAactexized by tight., small yaA6 with fittfe open space. 97 U.SE/ALMVITY L 29-1195 519 J.h.,.0 R3A SF c1lut Nut 1196 525 Johnson KSA NI' -2 1197 529 Ch.,,hclffey. R3\ SF Robert & + __T 1198 $23 Church RM SF mOyer,, 1199 521 Church R.,A NF.6' Itl, A.-Tty 4 l, JOrf 0 1100 519 Church RM SF 5 L'o 1201 509 Ch.Och BSA SF I'l NOil Shinoo, 1,1B. -Id 5 l i 1202 539 Van Buren RIA sr Vill"!, T. V,!,.. 1203 522 Van Buren 93A SF fill.),, voll., 1204 204 Ian 'Bren 513 Van Buren R3A NF -10 (2 .3) Sul I Ica n. 13"c C.,t: W.. On I Niched _0 1205 512 Von Buren RM SF 11.uOl. Glen, & Pari` V + 1206 510 Van Buren R3A SP Pah"ba. A 1207 114 ;n., r.,irOhnj BSA S1, Bull, 0 1206 a 514 Fairchild 113A Sr le.j, Ira & Mui IJ 1209 516 Fairchild -J.hn,.h "\ R M F - 'B'_' -2 E M.Wliono - 12-10 - 513 I EIA EMP - M,,On, 1,,uO MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES TIU.6 Hack i6 a mixtMe 06 4inqZe-6amity and mutti- 6mittey unite but Aeem,& to be moving tomAd mj,Ltt-6amiey use, thAough nem conAtAurtion and couve&6. oim. The Rock iz chaAactexized by tight., small yaA6 with fittfe open space. 97 98 CHURCH a FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES yZ z .o NORTH MARKET PARK BLOCK 35 I FAIRCHILD MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES yZ z .o NORTH MARKET PARK BLOCK 35 NO. 1. (05) 2. (95) 3. RESOURCES BLOCK 35 TYPE OF RESOURCE (louse - 523 Van Buren - very nice older house with well maintained yard, flowers & shrubs. Trees - nice, old maples at corner of Johnson f, North Market Square. Trees - Church Street - row of young trees along Church; shade E screening. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES i i C i 99 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 35 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (01) House visual 02, 00 B34-02, 03 2. (99) Parking lot Visual - unscreened lot 10, ()0, 98 3. (01) Yard Visual - junked cars & other trash in back yard. 00, 03, 04, 10 100 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES BWtk DATA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comments 7h.L6 block iz a ztabte s(ngte-hamiZy /tesidenVat a4ea, wfA oney one mufti.-4amity wit. lfouza and yaAd,s aAe gelleAaUy veAy niceey mabita.hted. 101 MHDRESS ZONINC OSE/ACTIVITY UNLR [PARCEL 29-1111 R: ' Fal Child 5 9 R." 1 91"). l." l. dare, 1212 430 Van Buren RM SI: x1l:.. 1213 421 Van Buren N3\ S F 1114 418 Van Buren R3A SF sl.de&' chs'le, 0 1215 111 V.,. Buren R.I.% SF qh.,y. Clr. 1216 410 Van Buren R.;.% SF I,: 1,r. SI. ;`wn I 1217 .106 Van Rare. RM SP 2 re% paaer, L,.I, x 1213 502 D.,cni,.,t U31% SF ta,!,Hch. 5;,11. 1219 508 Davenport R."A SF Fraa. x 1210 511 Davenport RIM SF Poernn, J.I:3 X 1 J 1221 SIB Davenport R3A SF Wagner. It',, x + 1322 522 Davenport RM SF Wagner, Orville & Miry x + 1223 528 Davenport RM SP cr.,heck. "J..ra 1224 530 Davenport RA SF Stick, Jae.' W. N 1225 411 Johnson R3A SF S:.,r., 1226 415 Johnson 113A sr Rohr", M.,rie x + 1227 523 Fairchild RM SF \ovotoy' John x + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comments 7h.L6 block iz a ztabte s(ngte-hamiZy /tesidenVat a4ea, wfA oney one mufti.-4amity wit. lfouza and yaAd,s aAe gelleAaUy veAy niceey mabita.hted. 101 'TI 102 FAIRCHILD NORTH MARKET PARK w� DAVENPORT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111E5 Z 0 U) 0 BLOCK 36 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (18) Yard 2. Row of trees along Davenport 3. (15, 16, Yards 20, 27) 4 Trees on Johnson RESOURCES BLOCK 36 - very attractive 8 well maintained yard with flowers h bushes - visual $ shade. - generally nice combination of yards; one manicured yard; one big vegetable garden; picket fence; alot of flowers. - medium F, large. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 103 NO. SOURCE 1. (11) Parking lot TYPE OF IMPACT Visual - unscreened NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY 13-15, 20, 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK Ii BIP,t:K DATA OLNX MICROFILM BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MINES Comments Thias .is a AaiAty congested Hock, with t/vLee neto apaAbnent buitdings and tots o6 paAking area. Thebe aAc at6o .5eve4at n,Zce, otd homer on toAge tots which ane piteseAving the open space that %einainz oil the beock ... Due to the ho4pitat (diAectty south), there aite many caAz paiLked on Vie stAee+t and much (Aafijic on Van 13men and Stoomington. 105 PARCH ADDRESS O.NiSr, USC/ACT;Vlff O.NI:R NOT. ,a -lD j�h .. %,,n R5A W. 12. Be.,. I ey. n BSA SF Dol lsh, Claudia 12313: jah.5an Rid By 1.1-e I I 1.-52 15 O.v;aaport R3A SF MCI-, t'.':�a Net: 11a ... r. 1:33 %venrort RM SF Buren R3A SF V11a, Julia 1-15 %zi Buren R3,% V.I.., let Dean. Julia 1:36 3:: Va.. Buren R3A MV -13 Clark, Janes Gau$e. DJV!J!Ccnt: Z '..in Buren 93A ENW-2 T,,r, hC' po�.lre. K,-:!n,:h'C.1:1:: 1:.',S 3loonlagWn RM MF -4 V10111. rItz' 1:59 ._.'s BiOO-ingtan 113A SF SF SWeL, Jahn E. Se % + I NO iB:.-. na..ing.a R3A SF le.is, lbetr x 12.: 15:2 Bloamin;ton RM (S r.0 Sparano. Jo.icnh % 3l0a"'n'tolR3A MF -S• Clark, Jae" UA MF -4 Miller, Carl 3!7 J.h.,on RM W-2 L.sden, Clad." I x MICROFILM BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MINES Comments Thias .is a AaiAty congested Hock, with t/vLee neto apaAbnent buitdings and tots o6 paAking area. Thebe aAc at6o .5eve4at n,Zce, otd homer on toAge tots which ane piteseAving the open space that %einainz oil the beock ... Due to the ho4pitat (diAectty south), there aite many caAz paiLked on Vie stAee+t and much (Aafijic on Van 13men and Stoomington. 105 o� zl W m m z 5 106 T DAVENPORT v) BLOOMINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES z O U) z 0 BLOCK 37 � D v) BLOOMINGTON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES z O U) z 0 BLOCK 37 NO TYPE OF RESOURCE RESOURCES BLOCK 37 1. 2. (38) g. 4. Trees House Trees Trees along - 504 along along Van Buren Bloomington Bloomington Johnson - young Oaks, Sycamores; visual. - architectural f, historical significance. - mostly young trees; visual, shade F, some screening. - young maples, etc.; visual, shade f, some screening. S. Trees along Davenport - medium size; visual, shade $ some screening. r� Y� ,x,11 ,r1 C1I 107 1 - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. (36) Apartment building Lack of Privacy, J 322 Van Buren "breathing space" 2. (36) Parking lot Visual 3. (29) Parking lot Visual 4. (42) Parking :lot Visual 5• :Parked cars Van -Buren Street Visual and congestion i IMPACTED PROPERTY 32, 33, 34 37 30, 31, 32 41 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INEs BLOCK 37 PLOCA DATA PtO: F PARCT:I. AIDRE95 :DSI%G USC/ACTIVITY OM\I!P '.: Lncirc block 39 Fltl Ilosplul M,:y IW spiral I _ I I I I / MICROFILMED BY 4JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES Colmnen" Mete ffo6pi,ta.Z'e pa kilig Zo.t has been bnploved thitough .the addUion o6 gn.een d6tand6 and .thee. 109 BLOCK 38 BLOOMINGTON 2 i uo MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Johnson 2. frees along Market 3. Mercy hospital I RESOURCES - medium sized, visual. - medium sized, visual. - community resource. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 38 NEGATIVE. IMPACTS i BLOCK 38 ;. NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY j 1. Nercy Hospital Visual 1 Ground level mechanical equipment exhausts impacts B37 2. Bloomington St. Visual (parked cars), B37 -properties along Bloomington. traffic noise, congestion 3. Mercy Hospital noise, smoke B27 -S3, 54, 55 Idech. equipment Pedestrians 4. Parking lot - unscreened Visual B47-96 5. Parking lot - Visual B47-87 is unscreened f 6. Electrical equipment Visual F, noise B47-87 112 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES BLOCK DATA 5LCCK rntaHonl.. n t Lutl.l Vnn / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Comment6 Th,a .is a very enowded btock tvith houzu genenat y .GI pooh cond-,tion. A tot o6 (ufea devoted to JmAiUng. Alohteg Garage, otd ho]nea tv th aoomb nen#ed out...The bene6it6 06 John'a Gnoceny ane ne.ighboahood-ivLde IulUte .the extehnaX.i.tiee ane concen.tna.ted onU.6 btock (tnaah, conge&ttton). 113 PARCEL ADDUSS 2O\ISG u5E/AC IVIV mn::R P 36.1861 CI Van Buren RSB MF-li .Ii raa Th, Pcl,loa Tru, Or,. 1 Couto 8ml,r, Panirl I843 1:5 fan Buren $138 MF -3 II:pvA, &vf.•rio 1 1863 431 5tsrlot R33 SP S..wy+a, Willi, r, M."par.•t T 18(1-4 Jz] sLtrle[ R30 xr'-10 htil anal !Myvk. John 4 — 1865 421 M.,6et R3R MI'•4 Dr. 'a Cdlc ([rcrao:i (3 1-130/ offi.•o Conn Oardnor, Jaacs 1866 411 Market R38 3 IF.2i• (z•IS unit bldg- Schruci, Christt:m � s:P-J T~ 1869 401 Market R3B Johnb Grocery Alberh.sky, Joh. , 1871 CO Gilbert R38 MF -7 (4 rusl ,1lherhskr, John 1873 114 Gilbert 930 sIF-7 Aiahera:ort: 1873 104 Gilbert RSG St. Fm 1's Luthcraa I 0 ell. r h 1874 410 Jefferson R3B Parking lot la. Pts[. f.3.at lulherar Cluoreh slisannri ',nod 1875 420 Jefferson RS Mr -14 Warren, S. N,/Cor.:: — (n11 .1) S.rRor. Murjarte I876 .t 24 Jefferson RSP MF -3 At.lersbof, IL I 0 1877 428 Jefferson R38 SI' S""'I"R. o""•1 -•r 4 \ O.rrhsra .1 1878 430 Jefferson RSB MF -5 I Cochran, Russell 3 , 0 1879 109 Van sure. R30 SF Graf, gob,rt W. 4 0 A:: hleen 1880 117 Van Buren R30 SF Ilildebrand, S,cu K — / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Comment6 Th,a .is a very enowded btock tvith houzu genenat y .GI pooh cond-,tion. A tot o6 (ufea devoted to JmAiUng. Alohteg Garage, otd ho]nea tv th aoomb nen#ed out...The bene6it6 06 John'a Gnoceny ane ne.ighboahood-ivLde IulUte .the extehnaX.i.tiee ane concen.tna.ted onU.6 btock (tnaah, conge&ttton). 113 lJ im i� cc J 'L, u MARKET 4 I JEFFERSON 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111CS BLOCK 46 VAN I OWN MIA S � JEFFERSON 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111CS BLOCK 46 VAN S � JEFFERSON 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111CS BLOCK 46 RESOURCES BLOCK NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Van Buren - young, medium, f, old maples; visual, shade. 2. (72) (louse - 114 Gilbert - architectural F historical significance. 3. (69) Neighborhood grocery store - convenience; small, locally run store. 4. (63) House - 431 Market i - architectural & historical significance. S. (74) Parking Lot i - basketball playing facilities on parking lot. 6. (73) St. Paul's Church - attractive, neat yard 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES 115 '1 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. (64) Front yard Visual - trash Y 2. Jefferson St. Noise traffic { 3. (65) Parkin lot Parking Dust, visual I 3 4• Dlarket St. traffic Noise S. (66) Parking lot Visual 6. (69) Loading area Noise 7• (69) Trash (wrappers etc.)Visual 8. (69) Parking lot Visual i 9• Gilbert St. traffic Noise 10. (69) Grocery parking lot Congestion entrance NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY 63, 65 73 - 78 66, 61, 62, 76, 77 63 - 69 65 66 B47, 94, 95 71 69 - 73 Traffic along Gilbert FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES AWCK DATA PARCE1. XORESS zONJ N G USE/ACT , IV I TV OI.N:k 54 RSB Mercy llosr I to I 85 4117 Bloomington R38 MF -8 (I m) Apt. ll.,,l I ,[;.I I, 97 H3B Vacant Lot PW_ firl1v A,r,x cant: M[r<y Hospital 85 411 Blo.itington A38 SF 85 230 Gilbert Rill SF S.i t h. .1 hP f. G UN. 40 R3B Vacant Lot storey lWpitall 91 :14 C. I I her[ Win 5F Jo, Leo 92 210 Gilbert Rill SF Chudacck, Jos 4 Leo x I 95 :C-4 Gilbert R311 5F clwjjcek. .10, L'. 0 94 .02 ':.rk,t R311 Tovem Chudice4, Jos Leo 93 410 Market R311 SF Rollo. Rex. Peter + 96 414 s!orket 168 "F-2 Office (Reel p'1 N'l.t'; 1, 1:.111 97 11311 li'lget'/Tom: m,rey 11o,p i:.,: 96 RAR Melly I lo'p. :.I I 90 R30 Mercy I losp i t a I 1900 R3B Mercy H.%pit,l 01 8311 Mercy I lo sp i t a I 02 11311 Mercy Ifo sp i I a I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs colm"ent6 Thio Hock hu zcveAat very otd, 6matt, aAchitectiumUy zignl6icaat hotam, geneAaUy in 6aiA condition... hfeAcy Hmspttae ha,6 intex6peued Land hoedings on .this beock. .. CoAneA o6 GiftleAt and Ifa.tkeit th veAy noisy due to tAa66ic conge6tZon. 117 ■ 2 iia BLOOMINGTON 15 Gi -3 Now. a MARKET A - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS I40I14ES MERCY HOSPITAL SLOCK 47 -- 1 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (91) House - 214 Gilbert 2. (91, 92, Historic buildings - 93) Bast side of 200 Block Gilbert 3. (94) Neighborhood tavern 4. (1895) Historical building - "Nicking (louse" - 410 Market S. Trees along Bloomington 6. (1888) Historic building - 411 Bloomington 7. (89) House - 230 Gilbert RESOURCES BLOCK 47 brick house in so-so condition; architectural F, historical significance. structures all built before 1900. meeting place. - 1854 example of New England Colonial salt -box style; one-story salt -box at rear of house; part of original structure. - shade 6 screening. - excellently proportioned house of the Venetian Villa Style; needs paint but seems to be in good shape. ■ brick house in fairly ugly. condition; architectural 8 historical significance. 119 i / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 17 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. (95,96) Parking lot - Visual unscreened, unpaved 2. (89) Boards piled up in patch of weeds in back yard Visual 3. Gilbert St. traffic Noise 4. hfarket St. 'traffic Noise 1 i i i E 120 F IMPACTED PROPERTY 91, 92, 93 88, 91 89-94 94-97 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES t i BLOCK DATA BLOCK I'AItL'I!1. AIIpIUi55 :0%ISL USE/ACTIY ITI' NNN k.. •,C !.•„ 29-1246 319 \'an Burro Ni.\ SF tiber:s, `fo. ifmrt 1 i — 47 323 Van Burcn RSA 5F Brant, Flsa 3 J 48 331 Van Pure. Rb\ SF Orga., 49 435 Davenport RM SF Carne), ba)nr — 50 421 Nvenport R1\ mr-2 Sirens. Rob.•rt 51 415 Davenport R31% SF chu.I4reA, .I.•I'll. \ I =I 52 411 Davenport 03A SF .bcaF.ar, Tiac/Luno 1-.1j",plsva I I+ 53 330 Gilbert RSA SF Webster. Arthur \ I r 54 324 filbert R31% MF -2 liallaco. Fntrice.'N.-:l !nv e..tors. 10,11m R r.! I — 55 318 Gilbert RSA SF Ries, Warr L. I '. 1 — 56 310 Gilbert RSB MF -2 Posies, Nn C. }• 57 310', filbert BSB SF faFles, No C. 58 308 Gilbert R39 vacant lot RBM.4, Valerie 59 404 PlouminRton U30 RF KrcmennL, C. R. (PDA) \ , 60 412 Bloomington R3R 1,117-2 60 4121, Bl ... ington R33 SF Stach, L•arl .. 61 424 Bloomington 93B SF I'nglert, Mrs. J. It. I 3 I P 62 430 Bloomington R38 MF•8 'u::hler. Sathanirl Cont: ireirn', Nnald _ I fi3 472 Bloomington R3B MF -3 M.D. office soble. it. Dudief' M.D. -I- 64 315 Van Buren P311 SF Wilburn, it. R. 1 , / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Commenta See/ningty a.taHe Rock conai.a•ting oh a mtx.tuAe o6 aiugte-6ani,ty and RRLM-6a7ni,ty obleA hotLaea in good condWon...TrLee-ptaitti.ng along otoonti.ng.ton tuoutd .improve .this btoeh .thhotigh A nee.lang 06 a btwy subset and .the hospi,ta.e. 121 cc W m 122 DAVENPORT j -(g) ^ BLOOMINGTON i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES BLOCK 48 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (56) Historic building - House - 310 N. Gilbert 2. (60) (louse - 412 Bloomington 3. Row of trees along Van Buren 4. Row of trees along Davenport S. (51) House - 415 Davenport 6. (53) House - 330 Gilbert I RESOURCES BLOCK - Greek Revival Style; very good condition. - well maintained house with large yard. - young sycamores. ' - young oaks. - well maintained newer house with attractive yard. - well maintained house and yard MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 123 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 48 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Bloomington St. traffic Noise, parked cars 59-63 2. (46) Nnscreened parking lot Visual 47 i I i I i 1 124 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES ■ I B14h:R oA'fA SLP. A PARCEL ADDRESS CONING USE/ACr1YI1Y OhMR 29.1265 419 Von Buren R31\ 5F Owr..•r: l79cinr. Rnp.•r I \ 66 431 Van Buren NE\ Ni'-_ G: fITf, . le"ophCon:: l'l iur, Mary 1 — 67 425 Fnlrchild R3A SF Aarpar, ARull \ 0 68 421 Fairchild R3A SF Seu:Il, A. .1. SL 69 419 Fairchild RSA MF -2 Yeuci 1, Phos,./ Cont: Rena. _.I. \ _ 70 411 Fairchild RMSF Melt-", Don A I 1 71 430 Gilbert R3.\ SF Hirt, Floyd t i 72 426 Gilbert R51% SF Hurt, Viola 73 420 Gilbert 113A MF -3 Ilanan+J, ,laaes C. p 74 41S Gilbert R3A duple., Paul, Pauline C 75 414 Gilbert R3.\' 711'-3 hilcos, C,,n,va \ 0 76 402 Davenport R3A SF • rm. Yocom, Ilarel \ p 77 404 Davenport RM IIF -2 Brown, Orson S 0 78 414 Davenport Ria SF VCrVAs. Paul W. 3 79 420 Davenport R3A Mr -3 Rha", Jars, I1. I \ 60 424 Davenport Bit MF -S C.Ir.Lr iJS.•, Fn. Cont: Solan, John 81 430 Davenport 113.\ 5F !burer• Ilivhard — 82 415 Van Buren R3A MF -3 pillon. O'rarlCentl Cit, Pr, , 1 #1 #1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES Colmneii to Nolo ed aeong Davenpolit ane targe, Did homes, moat in veAy good condition and neeentey paGn.ted...No nelu apart- memt (ImUding6 on .tlu.e Hoek but many o6 the 4•thuatmeb ane Cange eingte-6am.iey homeb .that have been convehted bort mufti.-4mnity w,e, 125 V 126 FAIRCHILD I 3 Q v DAVENPORT / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES I W cc M m BLOCK 49 RESOURCES / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 127 BLOCK 49 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (74) House - 418 Gilbert - architectural $ historical significance; excellent condition. 2. Trees along Davenport - medium I, young maples, hickories; shade, visual, f, some screening. 3. Trees along Fairchild - old $ medium maples, sycamores; visual, i shade. 4, S (68, 69) (louses $ yards - 419, 421 Fairchild - well maintained. 6. (72) House E yard - 426 Gilbert - well maintained. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 127 NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE BLOCK 49 TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Fairchild Street 2. (82) 415 Van Buren Rouse Traffic, parked cars 66-71 Visual -cluttered yard 81, 1265 and porch I i I 1 �1 1 128 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NE5 ;1 I BWC'K DATA 51.CCA PARCEL ADDRCSS 20RUG USC/ACFIVI'IT Oh]IR ' JCL'c;:C I: %I I'S; 39-1283 531 Van Buren R3A !:F-! S[14a, .B ci � 1!8.1 1285 525 Van Buren 527 Van Buren R3A R3A SF NF.3 Co. RiehuJ Canpbcl ilCrm.: W'lt". Anna \ 0 1236 423 Church 93A SF Davey. sbry Jo I U 1287 419 Church R3A MF -2 Rurtun, K's. , Elsie 1288 415 Church RM IIF -2 Fn irrt, ('.¢rtvWr a 1289 413 Church R3A SF 1.,W.t. Grrtru.!c 1290 52S Gilbert R3A NF -5 Clr..,, Craig + 1291 522 Gilbert N3A MF.2 Gerber, John I 1292 520 Gilbert R3A MF -2 Gerber, Mry L John J 1293 514 Gilbert RM SF Galas, ?bry 3 0 1'.94 512 Gilbert 113A U.3 2 apt. L 1 re Gnnncttr, Jessie % 0 1295 402 Fairchild R3A SF ylentc, PUth11Ja 3 } 1290 408 ra Ir,hi 1.1 ICM SP -!r l.•a. rrr, D.m 6.1 )I, + 1297 412 Fairchild R3A SF Scrt I. Th"I" R 1. 1298 Ill.lairehlld 100 Killn..1n.1 1209 420 Fairchild RSA SF Ibll. David \ 0 1300 503 Van Buren RSA SF Ipsan, >bry 4 Reuss, Eli_abeth A 0 1301 511 Van Buren R3A SF Strub, Charles 4 Srl:i .0 1302 515 Van Buren R5A SF Rogers, I:li:abe:h A _ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Prtac.ttca ly aet o6 the buil itngv on .th" beock arte .in vehy good condition, tuUh evtdence o6 rtecent rtehabiLUation worth and many wet -kept yaada and gandens...No rteeentey conabtucted apant- ment bu,itd.ing6 - oney 6=Uy conveuione. 129 H lc W J u 130 CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMES z W cc m m z Q BLOCK 50 2. (1291) 3. (1290) 4. (1302) f1 S. (1301) 6. �I i) •7. (1297) y $ yard - 515 Van Buren £{ 8. (1295) - 511 Van Buren - well maintained. I Trees ?1 9. - mixture of older 8 younger trees; maples F sycamores. I j`! 10. Fairchild - architectural F, historical significance; well maintained house C yari 3f 1 11. (1283) '• i i 12. i 13. (1296) 14. (1299) RESOURCES TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 50 Historic house - 520 Gilbert - brick cottage in style of 18701s; Italianate; excellent condition; many incompatible additions to the basic structure. Historic house - 522 Gilbert - example of turn of century merging of Queen Anne style 8 Classical Revival. Historic house - 528 Gilbert - example of turn of century merging of Queen Anne style $ rlaceir�l nn..i vel• n...,de .,o,.,r House $ yard - 515 Van Buren - well maintained. House f, yard - 511 Van Buren - well maintained. I Trees along Fairchild - mixture of older 8 younger trees; maples F sycamores. I [louse - 412 Fairchild - architectural F, historical significance; well maintained house C yari House 6 yard - 402 Fairchild - well maintained. Trees along Church St. - very nice row of medium height trees 6 bushes; shade Fr screening. Trees F shrubs on northern half of Van Buren House - 521 Van Buren - well maintained, attractive house f, yard. Fairchild Street - brick paved. I. [louse - 408 Fairchild - well kept house with attractive brick driveway F, sidewalk. House - 420 Fairchild - historical significance. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 131 NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. Traffic generated Congestion in street by school especially in early morning and mid-afternnon Traffic hazard children running across street to and from cars IMPACTED PROPERTY 1297, 1299 Block 49 - 1267 thru 1271 BLOCK so MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES i BLOCK DATA PARCE. AJI MSS 20.AIAG USE/AcriviTy ex7s]:H 12-708 621 \'.n B.rcn P3A SP 709 42,1 Ronalds USA MF -2 I Conivr' Ott., 710423 Rini.ild. RM M17-2 Nil., Ont : Sal ivy. Toil, 713 411 R.n.ldi, USA KF -2 he.,trig, Roger '. An', 712 715 413 Rc..Ilds 409 R.n.lds BSA HIA thiple. SF Maynard Sry.ly 1, 1!1, Aiizraux. RA)e,niJ o 'on N I x 714 405 R.n.lds R3A SF 715 1-24 Gilbert R3A SF 716 els OISIZ Gilbert R6\ MF -3 Yoder, li.,rl B LJ.A 717 r14 Gilbert MIA MF -2 Terry, 718 606 Gilbert HIM MF -2 V,-.it,b, 719 403 Church P3.\ MF -2 H.'g'o. Cl "'iico & yen 720 4111 Church' USA SP ceurgi, 721 412 Church USA SP Vito,li, R.111.10 1, VIII,i 722 418 Church 1422 USAA SF Corny. Josephine A 723 Cl ... rch USA Voting. Milian 724 4:6 Church BSSAA SF P.rg,,, With 715 430 Church PSA SF Pater.,, Lc= A 726 013 Yen Bare. R34 SF • 3 rent, Lare.. Marr Cent: Jod,o. Inc. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DLS 140INES Comments A n,.ce Hock. No eyezoam, atthough it tw,6 noted .that theAe race no exampeez oA exceptionatty 6ine maintenance 6uch as tome obvious on home otheA (itoch. 133 134 RONALDS 2 ^ Elk CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MDIRES BLOCK 51 I ■s � 8 Elk CHURCH MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MDIRES BLOCK 51 I ■ NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (721) Historic house - 412 Church 2. Trees along Ronald 3. (717) Large old house - 614 Gilbert 4. (722) Very nice yard RESOURCES BLOCK - a unique $ attractive example of an Ilalianate house. - large trees F shrubs. - historical $ architectural significance; in need of paint & - pretty flowers; well maintained. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 135 m NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK Sl NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1, (711). Unscreened Parking lot (3 -car) Visual 708 F I1 f I� i 136 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES BI.0L1: DATA PI.O:K PARCIA. ADDRESS .OsM. USE/ACTIVITY T__— Da\I:R � n:;:C.n�;I. I'.'•1. " IP 22.727 721 Van Buren R2 SF 11,:x1. r..J.,un.. 1 728 431 Brown R2 SF I•amr 1. 17,: n 729 427 Brown 112 SF i Ml:our, .l nna I \ 730 417 Brown R_' 5F ILwpen. Irm 731 415 Brown R2 SF Allen, N+rrt 6 `artho 732 409 Brown R2 SF IinpUory, Cha:. I \ I + 733 407 Brown R2 SF Const:mHno, Anthony —�-7 .\ T 731 401 Brown R2 5F Rlcharal.n, 1.1.110 — 735 718 Gilbert R2 IIF -3 Ronoein, IlcwarJ 1 738 112 Gilbert R3A 5F Lepic, Tho -as S lera I.nn I 3 737 4tL• Ronal J, 1t3A MF-• 501.1 r, ��ar:fent: 5ecarity Im',•s:-ra: Ir.a , 738 410 Ronald, RSA MF4 Carter, Shirley 739 412 Ronalds 93A SF Relleeler, Bernard ( , 740 420 Ronald$ RSA 5F Lemsh, B0ssi0 3 I •1- 741 430 Remits R3A MF -2 Muable, sell 742 715 Van Buren PSA SF dunes, Manley P. A t 743 Van Buren R3A Vacant Lot Jones MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comments Houses along Bkolvn St. ane Pange. and otd, geneAatty we t-mabztai.ned, ate singte- 6am ty. Seems .to be a s.tabCe 6Poch - no apa4tijent NLUdings, 6elo 6amity conve&sions. 137 BROWN �_JJ 3\ S 138 Z W cc Q RONALDS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Follies BLOCK 52 NO 1. TYPE OF RESOURCE Trees on eastern half of Ronalds Vacant lot - 420 Ronalds Trees on southern half of Van Buren House and yard - 715 Van Buren Brown Street. Trees along Brown Street House and yard - 427 Brown Brown Street Trees on Norther half of Gilbert RESOURCES BLOCK 52 old and young trees; shade, visual, and some screening well landscaped vacant lot and a beautiful Magnolia tree large, old; shade, visual - well maintained - brick paved - old and young maples; visual, and some screening - well maintained - consists of four old houses in good repair - 3 large maples; shade, visual MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 139 2. (40) 3 A 4.. (42) 5. 6. 7. (729) 8. (33,32, 31,30) 9. s �i is �d Se TYPE OF RESOURCE Trees on eastern half of Ronalds Vacant lot - 420 Ronalds Trees on southern half of Van Buren House and yard - 715 Van Buren Brown Street. Trees along Brown Street House and yard - 427 Brown Brown Street Trees on Norther half of Gilbert RESOURCES BLOCK 52 old and young trees; shade, visual, and some screening well landscaped vacant lot and a beautiful Magnolia tree large, old; shade, visual - well maintained - brick paved - old and young maples; visual, and some screening - well maintained - consists of four old houses in good repair - 3 large maples; shade, visual MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 139 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 52 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY i 1. (35) Garbage Visual, uncovered health hazard 2. (41) Dog Noise surrounding properties j i 1 I f i 1 I { 140 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401NES BLOCK DATA BLOCK PARCEI, A11DRf:SS ZONING USE/AC7 V1W OWNER OCCV711.1.1 • . 744 715 Gilbert R2 SF LII 17. Da%ld u 745 379 Brown R2 Dupl yr 5alrs, jeho K 746 325-:7 Brown R2 SF kaa p.•r/G`rt: Ili I man..1, re L Larrl 3 + 747 323 Brown R2 SF 4illera C,•cil \ + 748 31S Brown R2 NF -2 Duffey, fuprne 749 311 Brown R2 SF Duffey. F.nR1m< + 750 730 Linn R2 W-2 Sala., :rlu, d 751 714 Linn P3A IIF•2 Johnston/coat:Boatman, Dennis I 0 752 304 Ronalds RM SF 3lu:pay, Be ... rd 753 308 Ponalds RSA 5F Druce r, .lauv C + 754 312Ronalds K3A SF Gninmad, Allen 3 0 754A Romlds R7A 'Vneant Iat Mi ln8er, Robert + 755 320 Ronalds R3A SF MoninKer, Robert X r 758 701 Gilbert RM RF.2 St,•ffenaen, Brrt K + 7S7 711 Gilbert RSA MF -2 ILmJriek, ,Uta/Cant: Kreaenak, Charles + / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CommeYLt6 houses on .this btoch ale aU .the oa-iginak stAuctmu and .thele seems to be much aecen.t oR Ln-jokog-kebd hehabf e( eLUou LUohh. 141 90 Z Z J =cMij 16 WE RAF FAR RONALDS / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES 1C� [,!m BLOCK 53 1 RESOURCES BLOCK 53 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (45) Historic building - Reno - Trott (louse - 327-29 Brown - localized interpretation of Greek Revival Style. 2. (55) Nouse & yard - 320 Ronalds - large, attractive, old house (possible architectural significance); with huge, well maintained yard. 3. (56) Nouse - 701 Gilbert - nice older house with well maintained yard. 4. (57) Nouse - 711 Gilbert - well maintained house $ yard. S. (46) House - 329 Brown - historical Pi architectural significance. i 6. Medium sized maples 6 oaks along Brown Street. i 7. (50) House - 730 Linn - architectural $ historical significance; needs paint. 8. Brown Street - brick paved. 9. Linn Street - brick paved. 10. Gilbert Street -Trees - Large, lovely maples; shade and visual 143 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES , NO. SOURCE NEGATIVE IMPACTS i BLOCK 53 l TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (49) ` 2. (55) _ I Unpaved, Visual, dust 48, 54 unscreened parking lot (4 cars) Unpaved parking Dust 57, 54 (is screened) 3. (49) Exposed Garbage Visual and sanitation Surrounding properties I� 1 1 144 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES i SLOCR DATA BLOCK rel nt ivcly n , nod !.u., . PARCEL ADDRESS ZONING USE/Am VITY C'hNER 33.756 611 Gilbert R3A SF Aolo,ick, F.. M. A i 756A 619 Gilbert R3A MF -3 Lrcis, lheonv 0 i 7S9 3133 Ronald, R3A MF -3 Pickering, Geroge 1 I MA 315 Ronalds R3A MF -2 Pickering, Gvorge k 3}- 700 311 Ronalds R3A mr-5 Sale., 1 -ml O 761 _ 6.8 Linn R3A SIF -6 (a ros) Terry, Killian I 0 763 631 Linn RSA MF -8 fLm Invert meat I 0 763 6:0 Linn R3A SF Sue hter, LJ \ I J I 764 611 Linn R3.t SF Schnoehelen, Aihel 3 + 765 3AS Church R3A Dupies Secet/ Raipv, Joe ! [[ 766 314 Church R3A Fraternity Ileadqu.rtcr, Oelci Lhl Fnternf[ 1 T 767 316 Church R3A SF Felseler, Grnrgr 0 768 316 Church RM SP Priselrr. George 0 769 3:4 Church 1[3A SP Qufnn, .lanicc S 770 330 Church RSA SF fborc, Dorothy \ T 771 613 Gilbert RSA MF -6• Llnrk, .lases 0 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Commema Thi.a Hoch .i,e chanactaized by moae varied land w6e.6 and more negative dmpac.6 .than .the btoeha swtAounding .it. The majoa pnohtema have .to do with panning - .illeu46.iei.ent on wneeneened ort unpaved panlzi.ng Qo-td. 145 z z 146 i RONALDS �`r{ CHURCH-� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES W to J _ ii BLOCK 54 r ill m MA I , OWN Miim, CHURCH-� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES W to J _ ii BLOCK 54 r RESOURCES BLOCK 54 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (766) Historic building - - Neo -Jacobean style with three-story octagonal tower having "Michael - 8edman (louse" - 314 Church a roof of the "candle -snuffer" type. Delta Chi Frat. Historic buildings - North side of 300 block Church Trees on North side of Church 4. (59,59A) Houses - 313 E 315 Ronalds - well preserved houses of exclusively 19th century construction. Note: 316 $ 318 Church basically well maintained older structures - shade, some buffering, visual amenity. - very well maintained houses f, yards. I 147 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 2. 3. Historic buildings - North side of 300 block Church Trees on North side of Church 4. (59,59A) Houses - 313 E 315 Ronalds - well preserved houses of exclusively 19th century construction. Note: 316 $ 318 Church basically well maintained older structures - shade, some buffering, visual amenity. - very well maintained houses f, yards. I 147 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS DT 11 V [n NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY i 1. (61) Unpaved, partially screened parking lot (4 spaces) - 628 Linn St. Visual, dust 60, 62 2. (71) Unscreened parking lot Visual 75B, Block 51-15, 16, 17, 18 (71) incompatible structure, lack of side yards, t.ees, etc. Visual 69, 72, 758; Block 51-15, 16, 17, 18 3. (66) Unscreened parking lot Visual 64, 65, 67 4. (71) 6 -Unit Replaced historic building- Bordering - property apartment "Dalton House" - 613 Gilbert building 148 c / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK DATA N:OCK PARCH. ADDRESS :OSIRG USE/ACiYI'fY OWNCR fn>f K'.. •.;; - ir.. \ CJr I1n'.: V .JII 1303 519 ;Jibcrt R3A SF IOICL•1 r, Sall 0 I 1304 '4 3.. Church R.,A '+ i���!'c. nt ,r :nasi raafan erl 1, nInc. firos. fm:rt. Co., 61c. r 1 ` 1305 319-21 Church R3A IIF -4 ❑111/Crnt: Schradan, Janes t , i 1306 317 Church RSA RF - .1 (3 rms) Conarr, S.A. 1307 309 Church R3A SF Kurz, Anna \ I t 1308 526 Linn R3.\ SF•6 I 1309 522 Linn RSA IIF -J Conno:, Strphcn �- 1310 514 Linn IISA YP-2 Dn t: I' AII•orta Conn I'r t.horJ, Fllfrr �. 1311 5116 Linn It3.\ SIF -0 Roro re/fonr: Ikhard. Kllfrrd + 1312 312 Fairchild R3A SF Brunton, Alberta I K T 1313 314 Fairchild R3A W-2 Eckhardt, 'eilfred K 0 1314 330 Fairchild R3A SF ❑Asa/Cour. Thornton, Krnneth 3 1315 324 Fairchild R3A RF -2 hldiirg. Shahan % 0 1314 33o Iblrehild IUA III' -4 Ilwa/font: IIInKIeY. Il4ny e 1317 328 Fairchild RM W-2 Rupp, Stnnl ev Cont: Rupp. Eduard 3 1318 511 Gilbert R3A SF Scholl, DavIJ K 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INEs commen't6 TILT s is ess entiaUy a mU-maintained block composed o6 oniginat louses uldth many positive as.6aA... The no&th side o6 Fai/whitti has &Age houses which ane etose .together, aU taUll Qaage A m% yards, creating attnaetive open spacee. 149 Q J 150 I i CHURCH j FAIRCHILD U _vv MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES I— cc W J BLOCK 55 FINN ' ky LV fa r FAIRCHILD U _vv MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES I— cc W J BLOCK 55 I i f. i NO. 'i 1. 11 t 2. (07) 3. A. (11) 5. 6. {{ 7 — 8. (03) 9. (08) 10. (15) TYPE OF RESOURCE Historic buildings - South side of 300 block of Church Historic building - "Strup - Kurz House" - 309 Church Linn Street House - 506 Linn Fairchild Street Trees along Fairchild Trees along Gilbert (louse - 519 Gilbert House - 526 Linn Garage RESOURCES BLOCK 55 - well preserved houses of exclusively 19th century construction. - 1885 example of a Greek Revival Style house (without portico) which includes decorative details of later styles. - brick paved. - well maintained with open yard with variety of trees - Dogwoods. - brick paved. - row of younger 6 older trees; oaks, maples f, basswood. - 10 large, beautiful maples; thick screening & shade. - architectural F, historical significance. - beautiful, large old home with big side yard; in need of paint. - great big, old, red barn; in excellent:.shape. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RnRIDS.DES MOVIES 151 NO. SOURCE 1. (04) Parking lot NEGATIVE IMPACTS TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY Dust 05 Visual 05 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES BLOCK 55 1 KOCK DATA rAHCirie•i1pjy''AIIDHfSS 2O.NING •,,OSE/ACii A'11Y OhA.a1 1319 419 Gilbert R3d SF Iluv.rrd, Lmra I \ 1320 421 Gilbert NSA MI' -3 units Roth, )%-I, I., C 1321 429 Gilbert NSA NF -5 units- Schseltur u Hass . 1322 Fairchild RSA Vt,.,nt Lot H. PetraL -I 1323 317 Fnlrchild 43,1 MF -1 (3 rms7units it. lima], 1324 311 Ib1rO.11i ILLI HR -J mut+ (3 rns) IYlha all, eil rrr.l ,wu: S!oaof, Lmma I—I 1325 30n Fairchild RSA SF Ronnor, Gustave Cont: I..,ura \ — 1326 430 ),Inn RSA SF FOIL, G.E. % •' 1327 420''-22 Linn RSA HF -6 units Ilovsel D 1329 41. Linn NSA HF -5 units (. ms 7 %''stn., Pur 1, 11. 1329 412 Linn RSA HF -3 l'le.rpern, No', 1330 304 Davenport RSA HF -3 units Ilawlor F/font: 0atres, 1:11rlll E. _ 1331 3DR Davenport NSA HF -2 units Bopp, fJsd rJ 0 1332 312 Davenport RSA MF -3 units John... 1333 314 Davenport RAA SF Ronrellhart, Ihlbrrt C v 1334 320 Davenport 113A Deples Janrs, Walter A 4., 1335 324 Davenport NSA HI' -4 Peet o 1336 332 Davenport R3.A SF De St. Pieter, P.M. E -1- 1337 409 Gilbert R3A HF -2 units Glllespl e. Huby X 0 1338 413 Gilbert RSA SF 1',n, Haman.l 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES A qa btoch w th goad -sized C otdeA, Luef-Uma.in-ta-i.ned houses. buitdbig IpaAcek 211 has staee•t paahi.ng and .is on a P that Zts impact on .the Moe 154 ®FAIRCHILD rlx " " DAVENPORT 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- DES MOINES o~c �W m BLOCK 56 ■ �'7� j77 81� ■ � /� DAVENPORT 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- DES MOINES o~c �W m BLOCK 56 RESOURCES BLOCK 56 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Linn - shade, visual $ noise buffering. Mature trees. 2. Trees along Gilbert - private evergreens; trees $ bushes; shade $ screening. 3. Trees along Fairchild - young. 4. Fairchild B Linn Streets - brick paved. S. (23) House - 317 Fairchild - well maintained house $ yard; possible historical significance; brick entrance. � 6. (32, 33) Garages I -, old horse barns used as garages; poorly maintained but of possible historical significance. 7. Trees - Along Davenport - visual, shade B. (36) House - 332 Davenport - well maintained; possible historical significance; nice fence. 9. (22) Open lot - green space; visual. J 10. (25) House - 309 Fairchild - well maintained; possible architectural significance. 155 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Ido1RES NEGATIVE IMPACTS i BLOCK 56 nn�nonmv NO. SOURCE iYrL yr iivirn�,i +••••��=L� •••�• r 1. 2. (21) (23) Parking lot unscreened Garage Visual Visual - dilapidated 1322, 1320 22, 24, 34 3. 4. (32,33) (35) Old barns Parking lot- unpaved Visual - Visual dilapidated 1328, 1327 1323 i 156 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES 91INIA VATA i'ANq:;.j1 1339 .v,. 5F.35 L0\Iaf. 325 Gilbert MA JSI'; Ai 7I:ITY I SF 5o t1:r rlanJ, U. CIrJe . I n. 1330 331 Gilbert R3A NF -9 ,nits I Y:Caee, George D. — 1341 333 Davenport Rad Duplex Terson, Dolores x 0 1342 319 Davenport R3A SF Dtteis, Everill _ — 1313 315 Davenport R3A SF W3grer, Janes A I T 13:1 311 Davenport RM SF f shop ILvc:at, ILrvin G. I x o 1345 i 3:5-30 Linn R3A RF -3 units 6chrer, Rnvlind f -i- 1346 326 Linn Rad - SF Dobberstein, D.iphc, garter, Nancy 1347 332 Linn R3A 5F 11..ly, A. Josvphir,r I 1349 31S Linn Us: SF Fennell, Joe } -� 1349 1349 I 13:9 1350 4 303 Lina 2 361 M...'inRton j 310 Slooalnst on 315 DlnominRton -ftT-I1 C2 — C C: unto I rl:ta P.I.C. LaunOroau Olo•Resuurces Iin l utr/im::: SAa:La uolnb/Conn. claraa 1101 ob/[rnr SAar2a N"'. /Cont: Llvo d I I —'�� 1 I t� 133; 1323 Gloort lnR[on C2 s:P4 Carrell, Ilo%arJ x I I� 1 1313 301 Gilbert C Gas Scanlon .Moen 011 Co. j 1 C 1353 311 Gilber[ C2 NF -2 Sr[oliely/ton: Fisher, ratricla 1 1 133: 315 Gilbert C2 SF Fisher, 9elvin x — j T I 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES Comments Reaxdeneea 151 and 531 which ahe adjacent .to eomnehc(at paopeAtiea ante in a dieapida.ted state. The nee.t o6 .the beoch .ia in genehaUy good condition. Nausea and yande along Davenpon,t a/Le eapeeiaCty nice, a.Cso a.Cong na th hae6 o6 Linn. 157 z J 158 /n \ DAVENPORT BLOOMINGTON 7 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40111ES �W m 4 BLOCK 57 Ll ION r BLOOMINGTON 7 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40111ES �W m 4 BLOCK 57 Ll kAW BLOOMINGTON 7 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40111ES �W m 4 BLOCK 57 BLOCK DATA 9LOC k r : PARCIil. ADDRESS ZONING USI:/,USIVfIY OFNf.R ••�I � 'eat I A.r 9;0 .. I9±2 6i 119 lber[ _ SI' iur G s'i: ba.•1 1923 LS Gi!brrt C: Mr -5 Hent m9, SI,., 1924 1:7 Gilbert C± Offirrs N l:nl: harp - c:rcl 3.I,�I,t�„ ,t �, 1925 331 Market C2 Taco Grande G III p, Ro:rrl nu•t rt• ct : 1 1926 327-29 Market CI BOUlreanl Rona Gn LrverR, .l'oro—i Tntstre rt .1 0 1- J I 19±] 3:1 Markrt C2 ufiic.y M:aJi-: mr,rr .i-1 .4CR lova 1928 319 Market C2 P.."nR Lot 10.9 I30 Linu C± Parking lot 193U 131 Llan C2 Parking Lot ac 'Abons.• 1931 I1R Lian.. C2 Parking Lot Lr,r Jn,; fnr:"�, • _7 1932 108 Linn - RSR Parking Lot St. dory's Churrb 9emleriCent: 1933 302 .Icffrrsnn RSR SF htrus, M!an' T Gl nsp n. bruer, Ir,ph. 1934 366 Jefferson IUB SF kehb 4 %anq Cook A _ 1935 31R Jeffermn 8311 MIF" 56a., PnO; inn:: 31R Jeff.•r•nn :.rP. et nl 1936 320 Jefferson 636 SI' Leo, I\•uR:+s I k 1937 324 Jefferson R35 SF Anderson, F. M'..rforie k _ 1938 328 Jefferson 93B IIF -3 Ilart, M:irhncl G J"n -}--I 1 1939 113 Gilbert R3B MF•2 Lekin, Ret. B. % u / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES Commen t6 This Mock .i,5 a mixtae o6 comNlehc.iae and uzWenttiaP uaea. Rea•ideneea ane otd, lun.tarita•Cty s.ign.i.6.icant zt uctmu .in genehatey good condition. Recent and emAent nehab.ititation da evident...Con6Ucts between commeh eiat and Amiden.tiaC uisea ane Paagety the neautt o6 .the Wmtinghouae LeaAnbig Ceuteu parthing Pot. 165 Z Z J 166 I BLOCK 59 j MARKET n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401RES m i I NO. 2. (35) 3. (36) 4. (38) ®® CInt._ —.--- _ TYPE OF RESOURCE Trees along Jefferson Street House - 318 Jefferson House - 320 Jefferson House - 328 Jefferson RESOURCES BLOCK 59 large, medium & small size; shade & some screening; one huge maple.,' architectural & historical significance. architectural & historical significance. attractive, well maintained house & yard. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 167 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 59 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (27-31) Parking lot Visual 33, 34, 35, 36, B68-64 Dust 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, B67-46, 40 B58-17, 18 B68-64, 6S Noise, including traffic in alley Entire block. Traffic congestion Properties bordering alley. Standing Water 35, 36 Runoff - sand, gravel, sewer. capacity overflow. Properties bordering alley. Air pollution during rush hour. Properties bordering alley, i Danger - excessive traffic in alley Properties bordering alley. 2. Electrical Equipment in alley Visual 36, 39, 22 3. (27-31) Structure - Visual - incompatible Westinghouse architecture 36, 37, 39, 22, 23 Learning Corp. 4. (32) Parking lot - Visual 33, 34, 35 I unscreened Runoff 35, properties bordering alley, 5. Entrance to large Accelerated deterioration parking lot - use of private property 35 i of 35's private drive 6. Gilbert St. traffic Noise Properties along Gilbert. 7. (24,25) Dumpster driveway Visual - debris 168 1923 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401IIES BLOCK DATA 3UVK MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114E5 Comment6 Thebe ahe no 2es.idenee6 oil thi.6 block except a nectorty... Economy AdveA,taing p4ehent6 mbUmal noise and viwal .impaaet6 and deems .to be ewi6ting haianoiuourty with swuLowiding .land W4e6 (pahlaing and clnviches), Loading artea may phesent prtobtems .in tehms 06 6loclaing .the s.theet and sidewalk. 'I .{ 169 ,\VOAf:53 .051%G Uti!i/ACI'1l'I lY OASial �`n3^�•� ;`, (J::: LI :•.... k',% LLin fS ,Evertlsinp ia.lJ1S N..rla C: Purling Lnt Rrr. r:Anita 213>Ltr:ct 6 S. Dubuque Q ticaleY Ibuur hoslcI 130 Dubuque CS Lco's i unaara .1:ocu Oil Co. 19444S Dubuque St. RSD Church AdJitlon :at DnitaJ ilethrdi$t i hurc:: I I 1 rID46.:e:'ierson St. R30 Charch RrctnrY St. X:C. r % bol it C. h T i I i i ! mi MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114E5 Comment6 Thebe ahe no 2es.idenee6 oil thi.6 block except a nectorty... Economy AdveA,taing p4ehent6 mbUmal noise and viwal .impaaet6 and deems .to be ewi6ting haianoiuourty with swuLowiding .land W4e6 (pahlaing and clnviches), Loading artea may phesent prtobtems .in tehms 06 6loclaing .the s.theet and sidewalk. 'I .{ 169 170 MARKET 3 2 JCrrr-nwl,v + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Z Z J BLOCK 67 I PI 5 3 rrues�j�.�� ic, I u�r I I I� 2 JCrrr-nwl,v + MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Z Z J BLOCK 67 I NO. 1. (46) 2. 3. (46) 4. (45) 5. (42) TYPE OF RESOURCE Historic building - St. Mary's Catholic Church (1867) Trees along Jefferson Rectory of St. Mary's Church 1st Methodist Church Historical building - Geiger - Wesley Foundation house - 213 Market RESOURCES BLOCK 67 - Romanesque doors 6 arches; Gothic structure f, spiral. - Large to medium size oaks; visual, shade. - well maintained building f, yard; architectural I,, historical significance. - well maintained building f, yard; architectural $ historical significance; incompatible, "modern" addition to church. - brick house of the Anglo -Italian style with gable ends. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 6' NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. .Jefferson St. 42, traffic Noise 2. Dubuque St. 44 868-61A 42, traffic Noise 3• Market St. traffic Noise 4. (41) Parking lot Visual Dust S. (43) Gas station - Visual Standard Smell Noise 172 NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY 45, 46 43, 44, 45 42 42, 4S 42, 4S 42, 44 868-61A 42, 44 42, 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES F BLOCK 67 BLOCK DATA il..'K nt rmuton to }A Houses on Md conneA o6 b£ock ane veAy cAalnped, [vZth £.i,tt£e yaAd space and enawded pankting spacu... Aloei o6 .this hock ccimiztrs o6 o£deA houses now Used boa commeaaia£ and/oa )tmidentia£ purposes. lofia aAe genma££y amaU and not ivekt-maintained. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 173 YARL'lil. Al1oRE55 ZONING USE/,=VliY OhTf.0. 1�`LCI 1.4 v;. 36-1917 219 Linn 8311 Electrical —1I Insa-111iaaix Ws 6 Equipment ...acn'11 1918 221 Linn R33 }:i'-3 Trrrc. hi 1l i::. I+ 1949 221 LinnRSR }IF -J l'ePeril. Ku rtl! et at — 1950 223 Bloomington R33 }64 .Intabha, Op.., 5 - _ I'um;t rar 1951 219 Bloomington R3B MF -3 Fell, Ch.•!ter I — 1952 21S Bloomington R3B SF Cort iaiclta. Lce G 9nr::hy, {rat: Sln gleet 1 _, 1953 209 Bloomington . R30 SF Cargl ia, Sanaa i C 1954 205 Bloemington RJR SI' Bachrl,'.lohn A AA hlacn I A + }II'-] }Utinoq .I.M.iCant: I 1955 230 Duhuquc HSB , Bent Lrts Offis O'Connor..lar..o!, Fra9cl \ f 1956 224 Dubuque RJR MF.2 6orJon, .tuba P. \ — 1957 222 Dubuque R38 SF Sa'all, Arthur _ Cont: slnctett, Thcxa! US8 21840 Bnboque RJB MF -2 Ilunter, hill{. G ];mot C n• FcilG 1959 212-14 Dub C2 Parking Lot `trt Co.uque .tirtrtlag Co. 6 Orc3Rrfinet 1960 214 Market C2 Aortae.. Skelly Skill .tm'Alug Co., 0 1961 212-14 Market C2 }B' -J Kcmudy, I'.•ar! J. 0 WbIA 216 Market C2 Sr Keu:ody, Poarl .1. -1- 1962 218 Market C2 Nrklog D.trl ing, Bnrothy 1963.64 220.22 Market C2 Sutton Rallo L Alberhasky/Cont: TY MF -21 19 rms Stappeinro r, 1'rnr!t — 196S 207 Linn C2 Ilaireucs 4 Pant Shop ,VherhasLr, Po } 1966 209 Linn C2 Shecps Ile:ul GNnncher, Fred Cont: B ., fe Rlnit. Vir,W., rZ s 1967 211 Linn C2 Store Apt - _ad floor Scu ert}d r' h , Pr } -1' 1968 215 Linn C2 vacant Shop Schuppere, John rmuton to }A Houses on Md conneA o6 b£ock ane veAy cAalnped, [vZth £.i,tt£e yaAd space and enawded pankting spacu... Aloei o6 .this hock ccimiztrs o6 o£deA houses now Used boa commeaaia£ and/oa )tmidentia£ purposes. lofia aAe genma££y amaU and not ivekt-maintained. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 173 W 174 BLOOMINGTON i I 1 I� 8-/ ® I Iii r I, i" G-7 ro �'O Y•Z i 1I_LECTPlCAL 1 ERUIYMEMj' 1 - - Pz 8-/ Z MARKET'' 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110111[5 BLOCK 68 ® I Iii r I, Z MARKET'' 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110111[5 BLOCK 68 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE RESOURCES BLOCK 68 - provides open space $ greenery on a very crowded block; large evergreens $ e1Lns. - well maintained house F, yard. - row of older houses converted into fairly attractive shops. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES 1. (61) Yard 2. (49) House - 225 Linn 3. (66-68) Buildings 1 ,h 1 T 1 14 RESOURCES BLOCK 68 - provides open space $ greenery on a very crowded block; large evergreens $ e1Lns. - well maintained house F, yard. - row of older houses converted into fairly attractive shops. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (60) Gas station - Visual - blare from cement Skelly $ cars 58 Noise 58, 61 2. Dlarket St. traffic Noise 64, 63, 62, 61, 60 55-58 58 61, 61A 53, 56, 57, 58 unscreened P, unpaved i 7. (53) Parking lot - unscreened Visual 57, 58 { i 8. (47) Electrical Visual X18, 50 Equipment 9. (60) Gas station sign - !! large, lit Skelly 1- sign Visual 58 176 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 68 { 3. Dubuque St. traffic Noise 4. (59) Parking lot - unscreened Visual S. (62,63) Parking lot - unscreened Visual - dust, debris 6. (52) Parking lot - Visual, dust 55-58 58 61, 61A 53, 56, 57, 58 unscreened P, unpaved i 7. (53) Parking lot - unscreened Visual 57, 58 { i 8. (47) Electrical Visual X18, 50 Equipment 9. (60) Gas station sign - !! large, lit Skelly 1- sign Visual 58 176 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BLOCK 68 { 3WCx DATA FW:A DARCI:1. ADDRESS :WSW USI'/ACTIVITY OHSI'.P 1 : 1355 319 Linn Nat! SF I1i11, F:i_al•eth i — 1356 323 Linn R35 SF • 3 ras Lron.i H, Aarpret C 1357 225 Davcnport R33 SF >Ln:9:.ce:, IMns I •. 1.158 223 Davenport M HF -6 units Lvoupach' hilliae I —I 1359 217 Oavc.prt piB Ont h'f lliams, i!.9n G John' �� 1340 Daccnport R38 Lo Vacant Lo[ N'illfacs 6 mis I : 1341 211 Dnecaport RiB SF Day, B.•y 1362 32S Duhuque NSB lIF-6 Larl,erc, Isere S 0 1363 326 Dubuque P33 SF Taylor, llarlon Z.1 1364 SA Dubuque RSB SF Taylor, }..slur. — 1365 318 Duhaquc R30 SF llcflrnr, lieirn S r 1366 314 Duhuquo R38 SF llorcy, At,.., 0 1367 2U2 Blonvington 113B IN-$ units Mill'. S!anlry .0 U 1368 206 Dlnnnington B30 Mr -4 .alts Ro°°nn/fnr.i: L'i:y Irnper:y Coriorailon C 1369 212 Bloomington RiB NF -5 units IW;,,r;ioni: CNy ty D,•rpa r.rtlrn 1370 216 Blonmlogton R38 'SF fru ruts Dura, 6 Itrever, 1 a,•na:c x 1 1371 220 Bloomington NSB ffF 2 unit. Ru.h, guhort x D 1372 122 Bloomington NSB SF 1'an drr .tau2e, Stan 1373 737 Bloomington R3B 4F-2 II 6 I' P,cpertfc.s x U 1374 311 Linn R35 m y lirctln of Frlcnds Ilous. dm. ' d 1375 313 Linn RSB SF Srrr .ng, , Pru y 4 Ilally, Rachel C 1 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES commenta A ve)ty nice ae iderttiat block laUh a.ttnaetive yandb and Nee-m(6i.Mtained sviuctm eA. No Melo apa&tnen.t buiEdi ige; aU nwf.ti- 6antiCg 6.WirtflAu a4e 611DIUd colwcJIb.iOlIA. 177 w O m �O� 178 DAVENPORT OO 3 BLOOMINGTON 1 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES Le 5 BLOCK 69 Owl I 3 BLOOMINGTON 1 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES Le 5 BLOCK 69 I RESOURCES BLOCK 69 j NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 4Ij 1. Historic buildings - North side of 200 block Bloomington - houses entirely of 19th century construction. 2. (1367) Historic building - - altered Queen Anne house of 18801s; so-called pepperlarx House - 202 Bloomington tower (only surviving example). 3. Gardens $shrubbery in back yards along alley}�yys - enhances appearance of alley; partially screen auto. 4. (74) Friend Fleeting House E United Action for Youth - community resource. S. (73) Rouse - 228-232 Bloomington - architectural $ historical significance. _ 6. _ Linn Street - brick paved. I 7. Davenport Street - brick paved. 8. (61) Trees - large pines f, shrubs in front yard. 9. Gardens f, shrubbery in yards along Dubuque - also young trees .in parking. 10. (S7) House f, yard - 22S Davenport 11. Trees along Davenport 12. Trees I, bushes along Linn 13. (60) Large vacant lot - well maintained. shade $ screening. - peonies, f, young oak. - provides open space on a crowded block MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 179 NEGATIVE INIPACTS BLOCK NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPAC'T'ED PROPERTY 1. Dubuque St. traffic Noise 62-67 2. (64) 'Trash storage Visual 63 3. (64) House Visual - deterioration of 65 structure; poor maintenance 64 4. ('58) Backyard Visual gravel 59, 57, 55, 56 parking lot Dust S. Inter3ection Noise 72-74 Bloomington -Linn 180 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 69 RESOURCES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 57 1. historic buildings - South side of 300 block Davenport St. - well preserved houses of exclusively 19th century construction. 2. (41) historic building - Pearson Duplex - 321-23 Davenport - Colonial Style house. 3. (39) Historic building - 325 Gilbert - 17th century design forms worked into "midwestern classic" � design; well maintained house E yard. 4. Trees along Gilbert - large shade trees; shade, visual. i 5. Trees along Davenport - large F, medium size trees; shade, visual. I 6. (45, 46, (louses - 328-30, 326, 322 $ 318 Linn - visually pleasing group of houses; all but one (48) well maintained.1 47, 48) ` 159 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 57 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (41) Rusting Car Visual - being over grown by 1339,1351,1354 vegetation 2. Leaning telephone pole Hazard 1343, pedestrians in alley 3. (41) Side yard Visual - storage for building 1339, 1340 materials unscreened 4. (49) Parking lot for laundromat F, Pagliai's S. (50) Bio Resources rear storage building Visual - unscrcened Visua 1 6. (51) Storage of autos Visual 7. (50) Bio Resources Erosion - drainage from roof 8. (51) Rouse Visual - poorly maintained exterior 9. (52) Cas station 10. (53) [louse fi garage Visual (signs G cars) Noise Smell Visual - pour maintenance - needs paint Adjacent blocks 1351 $ adjacent blocks 1353 1353, 1354 1351 858-05, 06 Block 56 1353, 1351 848-56, 58, 59 1354, B48 -S6, 58, 59 I I 11. (51) Garage Visual - old implements and a 39, 54 bit of garbage - next to rose 160 garden at 54 12. (50) Corrugated iron Visual 51, 42 storage shed (auto) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■ BLOCK DATA PARCEL ADDRESS ZO%ISG USO/.X-TIVITI' 06%1:8 I 16-1903 219 GI Inert C2 MF -4 O:ase, ramal. et al o I , 1904 225 Gilbert C2 Sr Ca_phell, Irene S 1903 229 Gllhert C2 SP Koa Nag. Mary t 1 i 1 1906 319 Bloomington C2 Sh..Ps 0 j 1906A 319 Bloomington C 5111 6rstiaghaase Pa:Rind Lo[ Lra n:iog L'a rpr r+:ion I I 1907 317 Bloomington LS d;ll 8csiinghe;so I 1 Porting Lor L.v ming Cngnmuien 1908 230 Linn C2 SUI Nen inphru•e Parking Lo[ Lra ndnF Co,w..tion — 1909 Korth Linn C2 501 h'ra irghnns.• Partin or Lra rniac fnroa n[ion 1910 218 Li mt C2 $111 hest L:;:hmse Porting Lot Lm rni uf.:br^o:alien I 1911 214 Linn C2 Ilan,urg Inn Graf, Kathleen I I !I P•- (ab"'rl 1912 210 Linn C2 Tu. -L's Place Twk,-r. .Innis J. 1 • I ap..rt.,ut 1913 208 Linn C2 SieLrlo.leon foparil/C.onr Lloyd. 0 0 Tatem I. 2nd,•rsm:. P. 1914 204 Linn C2MI'•2 _ '.0 re. Tarem `tits, '101"LI J (al•oc r) I 1912 200 Linn C2 reor son's ry.areon, G. V. 1%;. rmtey 1918 312 Market C2 Georges'% Bnffet Salth, B. 6 Kan.,&, E. I G )1'r-2 (above) C2 rarklay' Lot City of lout City 1921 330 lLirket C2 Gilpin Paint 8 Kritta, C.Iiffard , Glass • used I Cont: Gilpin Paint i clothes store • Blu—s Bloom I • Barber shop MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIRES Commeltt6 This b£och is dominated by paANng aheaz, most a(, which (uou£d be I gneatty -imphoved by paving and/on ecneening. 161 i 162 z J i 3, BLOOMINGTON MARKET MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOElIES f - cc W m J S BLOCK 58 u Glo z V -h G r i; G60 � 1 MARKET MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOElIES f - cc W m J S BLOCK 58 • MARKET MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOElIES f - cc W m J S BLOCK 58 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (03) Historic building - Wentz - Stach (louse - 219 Gilbert 2. (06) (louse - 319 Bloomington 3. (12,13,14) Small bars on block - 210, 208, 206 Linn Street 4. (17) Drug Store & soda counter ®fi RESOURCES BLOCK 58 - 1847 random ashlar, yellow-brown sandstone house of midwest Greek Revival Style; excellent condition. - possible architectural F, historical significance. - meeting places, recreation. neighborhood resource; convenience for shopping; medical supplies; 8 meeting place. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 164 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 58 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (19,20) Parking lot (municipal) Visual 11, 12, H, 03, IS 2. (06A-10) Parking lot Dust, rush-hour congestion - 11, 12, 21, 18 neighborhood in general 3. (17) Pearson's Drive -up Visual (;cncral public 868-64, 65, 66, 67 hanging sign. 4. (06) Parking lot Visual, dust, trash Adjacent properties A 164 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES F BLOCK DATA BLOCK I'ANCIi I. hPORPSS 2051St USL'/hLTIV I'IY OhX1:N JCCL R�..hV OSG2 •• I•.x�i.l 1376 225 Fairchild RU MF -2 units St cur, Rink, I . 1 1 1377 221 Fairchild R39 MF -3 units Struh, GrI and 1379 215 Fairchild R30 }IF -5 units Scn snn/i.or.[: Richanison G ichcum,n 0 1379 219 Fairchild 03B MF -2 units pithin, Rey C 133D 130 Dubuque 11311 MF -6 units O'Leary, Jehr. I I .• 1 1381 422 Dubuque R39 Will es N.,l la: c, .lames •• 13R2 420 Dubuque 1138 MF -5 units Ihniter/Cont: MI[4uell, et al 0 1363 112 Dubuquo R50 SF xelon, John 1384 408 Dubuque R30 SF Iloffelder, Raya.mil x 0 1E85 2nC Davenport NJU }'�-j Iln il• 1 rm. IW tei\:JI,t: Cui nn, 5396210 ort Ria IIF`6 units Godhcy, n[: AlbensnDna, l Gc,alfre' _ 1367 208 Davenport R30 }IF -A um [s fnthq, nnl e/Con[: Blberam:, :a p• _ 1399 214 Davenport RSB MF -6 units (5 rooms) ire lmaih'Crnr: Ilnu.c 1, Ixy'1:e _ 1399 220 Davenport 1139 SF Peters, Bland, x DavenportRSD 1 apt, 5 ns, 19e4e}•, Rnr x o LinnII38 !IF -7 units (y roans) Murply/Cont: Terry, We. 0. I y M411LLnn R3B MF`5 units (4 rooms) Graham. 113 -el v / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES Commen.ta Th" .iean attAactive btoch wi,tlf many we.0-kept, ofdeA home.,. The NE counen o6 the btoch •ie paxti.cwtanky lice. 181 :W 3 m m 7 D © O FAIRCHILD ?- U3 -DAVENPORT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1401NES .z J G BLOCK 70 ILVA Al 116 MAINI ?- U3 -DAVENPORT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1401NES .z J G BLOCK 70 A 81t*l■E#f1�1E#. ■ ?- U3 -DAVENPORT MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1401NES .z J G BLOCK 70 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE Trees along Fairchild Trees along Linn Trees along Davenport House - 225 Fairchild House - 412 Dubuque Davenport, Linn B Fairchild M RESOURCES BLOCK 70 - especially large maples $ sycamores on east half of Fairchild on the parking. - especially large maples on south half of Linn on the parking. - new, young, pin oaks, honey locusts. - historical 6 architectural merit; a nice wrought iron fence surrounding this E next property. - historical $ architectural merit; transition from Queene Anne to Classic Revival Style; 1850 example of combination of colonial f, georgian style (segmental arched headings). brick paved. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 133 NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY j 1. Dubuque Noise - loud enough to 80-85 to drown conversation on 1 the sidewalk 2. (85) Side and front Visual - clutter of 86 yard construction materials, j torn -up ground 3. (86-89) Structures Visual - poor maintenance (gutters and paint) 4. (92) Parking Area Visual unpaved Dust -piles up in streets i S. (86-89) Parking Areas Dust Visual 1 . a 184 B69; 58-61 90,76 85-90 85,90 i. L FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES a BLOCK DATA BLOCK PARCEL ADDRESS LOSING USU/ACTIVITY OhNER occur.. a - 29-1393 S21 Linn Rad MF -S• Clark, Jnres A. 1394 5:7 Linn Rb\ SF Leo:, Rilllua 1395 533 Linn R3A SF City Property Corp. I J 1396 225 Church R.iA SP rns. Vander Ruble, Steven —I 1397 219-21 Church R3A MF -12 Finkcn, D",ht 1398 215 Church RM SF Kick/Cont: Angolsborg. Adrian 3 i 1399 211 Church R3A IIF -4 Peet, Nicholas D 1400 S30 Dubuque U3A MF -6• Farkus, Ornrge 1401 528 Dubuque RSA SF Berg, C. P. g 1402 514 Dubuque R30 !IF -S M,re, P:nlinc 1403 508 Dubuque R3B !tF.8 (6 ros) Jolmsoa. 01,1Coni: flltchtll. Rnhert A ' 1404 204 Fairchild R36 RP -3 Cnglehart, Mary % 1405 208 Fairchild R3B !IF -2 Smith, Sarah % I` 1406 212 Fairchild R3B !II' -5 Brwsl ry, L. R. S O 1407 216 Fairchild R30 NF -5 Cauthe', Frank and 2lnhrr l 0 ni 6 1408 222 Fairchild 93B )IF -3 (1 m) Brack, Clcaent/Cont: %orb,cl. Betty 1409 130 Fairchild R30 SF McCormick, George K 1410 S07 Linn R36 Uoctar's Offlcc !IF -14 Svo6oda, Larry 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101nES Comments Very dcome Land uee on .this btoch with much o6 .the a/lea devoted .to paAki.ng. The a#Auctuitm ane .Eahgety mutti-,jamify now, with .No new apaxtment bu.i Bing and many 6amiCy conveludom... Maintenance on .the aou.thehn hath eeew .to be much betteA than on .the noAtheAn hath. 185 CHURCH rlyl n W m m G 186 MIA COMM W m m G 186 � AIRCH ILD / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIREs '2 BLOCK 71 I MIA � AIRCH ILD / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIREs '2 BLOCK 71 I NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Linn Street 2. (95) Trees at corner of Linn F, Church 3, (01) House - 528 Dubuque 4. (04) Small garden patch on parking S. (04-06) Three nice homes - 202, 208, 212 Fairchild 6'. Fairchild Street RESOURCES BLOCK 71 - brick paved. - two large corner maples on parking F, medium sized spruces (6) surrounding house; visual, noise buffer (especially for 95). - attractive, well kept home; neat yard; all nice flowers Fi shrubs, big trees; visual. - visual. - well kept older houses, yards; tree on parking. brick paved. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NEGATIVE IMPACTS NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. (93) Parking lot Visual Ill 2.(93, 94) Apartment building Privacy, "breathing space",_ f house very close light 93, 94 together 3, (00) Parking lot 4. Dubuque St. traffic 1 5. (10) Parking lot Visual, noise 99, 01 Noise, visual 1400-1404 Visual, noise 06 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES BLOCK 71 i BLOCK DATA BLOCK 72 PARCEI, ADDRESS 2GKISG USEb\Cr1Y1TY OWKCR C'a]1'R �. r•4 is 22-772 619 Linn R3A SF Ilul•el, Kenneth A + 773 629 Linn R3,\ SF Block, Robert P. A O 774 219 Ronalds 93A SF Ilsrris, Janes K 775 215 Ronalds R3A (4 rMF-7 ns) '.ng, ,loan 1 776 630 Dubuque R3A Fraternity Beta Mu Bldg. Co. d 778 616 Dubuque RM SF re. Raccothart, Gertrude K 779 612 Dubuque R3A MF -2 Connor, Robert _ 780 602 Dubuque 1131% W-2 NCish, Michael S 781 214 Church 113A NF -3 ilulmc, Them, C -r ]SS 220 Church R MF-2SA Parlor Beiuvy Corn°all, Arthur \ -j- 783 226 Church R3A SF . 3 ras. Hickey, Be," L Bartley, .lean A 784 615 Linn RSA SF K.naL, RM,,rt K -�- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Thi.6 .ie a nice btoch with molt houdee on ta&ge taiva. Gei condWon and anchiteatmatty A majora aounee 06 extennaV, 61ta,tertn Uy wah a targe pave W m D 190 ry; RONALDS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id01NES ko Z Z � J BLOCK 72 i mas. WIN MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id01NES ko Z Z � J BLOCK 72 I RESOURCES NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 72 1. (83) Historic building - "flight Hickey (louse" - 228 Church - example of the Anglo -Italian style with typical Tuscan Villa square tower; in needs of paint F, repairs; well foliaged lot with evergreens. 2. North side of 200 block of Church - large, old houses of interesting architectural styles with big yards, alot of shade, nice foliage; generally high level of maintenance. 3. North Linn - brick paved. 4. (72) [louse - 619 Linn - very well maintained house $ yard; architectural $ historical significance. 5. (83) Trees C bushes - large oaks, small maples, evergreens, flowering bushes. 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11DI11ES 191 r . MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 1 I NEGATIVE IMPACTS I BLOCK 72 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Dubuque St. traffic Noise 78, 79, 80, 76 2. (76) Parking lot - Noise, dust, visual 78, 81, 75 large lot (gravel) unscreened except for a low stone wall- Traffic in alley. 3. Church Street Noise, Traffic 80 - 83 i 192ti, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 1 RONALDS ® v / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40114ES BLOCK 73 194 BLOCK DATA BLOCK PARCEL ADDRESS ZONIKf. USE/ACTIVITY Oh\I;R OUT;;; :V.";. 22-735 721 Linn R] SF Phillips, C. A.;Crut: Ca'11, I 786 723 Linn R2 SF Buz Plry , Ilrlrn I _ 787 729 N. Linn P2 SF tornylnl, h'altacr �T \ 1 y i 788 215 Brown 0.3A SF Cug, Juan A p 789 724 Dubuqur IRA Fratrralty Pct. Rho h-., Corp. I -r 790 720 Dubuquc R3A MF -II units Sbaw. Paul/Con:: RulicL. rllA: trs f__I 791 716 Dubuque 93A Frntrrnity phi Kappa .ciya.: Frat,mrty holm.. aan T 792 702 Dubuquc RSA Fraternity Grana Stet. rhi Epsilon Alumni As>ociation T 793 230 Ponalds 93,\ Vagan: lot Drat. Sip t phi Ersllon Alnnni As ... i hint. _ 795 722 Ronalds RIA SF Plat. Suit, Inc. _ 796 228-30 Ronalds 4 7117-05 Linn R3A MF -4 6'onng/Conn l&.1rJs 797 715 Linn R3A MF -4 Lewis/Cont: Ilrbit A + r - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Comments The tenna.in o6 this block is steeply stoped 6nom .the east down .to the iveAt and 61tom south .to non-th. As a &mitt, some o6 .the tots have vehy alkwand .tennain (e.g., paaee.t 88 is .inaccessible 6aom the 6. dcioaek .in 6aont o6 it)... The dominant land "e on .this block is .the 64a.tean4ti.es and thein panlzing areas, even -though some o6 these lots ane wett-seheened...The tack o6 a s.ide=Zk on .the southean hath 06 Dubuque is eztnemety dangmLLs boa pedestitianz. a NO. 1. 2. a .. _ 3.. (85) 4. S. (87) RESOURCES TYPE OF RESOURCE BLOCK 7 Linn Street - brick paved. Trees along Ronalds - old maples on east half of street. House - 721 Linn - possible architectural and historical significance (large colonia style house) Small pebble stone street Ronalds Street Tree- 729 N Linn - visual - visual large, lovely weeping willow tree MICROFILMED BY "ORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES a MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 73 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. South half of Physical danger - no sidewalks Dubuque St. $ steep grade on lawns - must walk in street - ct.n't see oncoming traffic because of_ hill. Pedestrians 2. (93) Parking lot - approximately 16 cars - unpaved - well -screened Dust 88, 91, 95 3. (93) Parking lot - Visual, dust B72-76, 75, 77 B73-95 unpaved, unscreened 4. Dubuque Street Dust, noise, visual 92, 91, 90, 89 pedestrian danger. Traveled heavily by buses, cars and trucks 1 196. ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES BLOCK DATA BLOCK -I- PARCEL 1 ADDRESS ]OSISG USE/AC]l'ITY On\CP X'N!A JOiUa 624 521 Dubuque P3.\ )D-7 tons, \'iota I p 625 5:7 Dubuque P3A /IF•dPeter., Pl."Old �J, 6 E. 626 111 Church RM SF Bald.ln 3 + I 627 530 Clinton R3A NF -2 •rooms Hubbard, fu.one. Cunt: W."". Rl'Urd I -- I 628 $22 Clinton RM Sororlas, Del:n, Dolt.:, Deity Assoc. - Pi Chapter 0 627 500 Clinton R30 Church First Raptlet Church 0 630 114 Fairchild RSB Fraternity Alpha Dela PuMing Corporation 0 631 120 Fairchild. R38 NF -5 Nmnx, Elisabeth + 632 128 Fairchild R30 NF -7 Yount:, Dorothy/Cont: Ilaans Duane& EIL•abet 0 633 515 Dubuque R33 XF-2 Ilcons, Duane O MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RANDS - DES MOINES Commen t6 Th" Hoch .i.6 a mixtuAe o6 oCd, taAge howsee, 6aateAnitie.6 and a chu4ch. The GuiCding6 and Pot6 ane genenatfy quite taage and ma,stPy weft -maintained (except bon NE coua) 197 ® CHURCH OO 'FAIRCHILD. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IREs BLOCK 74 RESOURCES BLOCK 74 NO. TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. (631) historic building - 1877 Gothic Revival House - incorporates more gothic features "Jackson, Swisher, Keyser House" •• than any other Iowa City House; basically in very good condition 120 Fairchild but needs paint. 2. (632) Historic building - 128 East Fairchild - paradigm of "Midwestern Classic" houses; good condition; large yard. 3. (629) f� 4. (626) S. 6. 7. 8. (624) Historic building - "Day House" - 507 Clinton (Replaced by First Baptist Church) I House - 111 Church Trees along Church Street Church Street Trees along Dubuque House - 521 Dubuque - 1857 frame house showing characteristics of the Anglo -Italian style. - well maintained 6 architecturally interesting. - medium sized maples F, honey locusts with large, old sycamores. brick paved. medium E young maples. architectural $ historical significance; Classic Revival Style. / FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES 199 NEGATIVE IMPACTS i BLOCK 74 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY i 1. (29) j Parking lot Visual, dust 28, 30 2. Dubuque St. traffic Noise 32, 33, 24, 25 3' .(24)Visual-28 29 4. '(30) Parking lot Visual, dust 33 i 'j I 200 I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40111Es I J MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 61011jEs Comments This school bu.itdLng is quite ofd and in gook condition. The ptaygnound ahea .is a vatuabEe ne,ighbonhood nemeati.on apace and is obviou6ty haequen.tCy used. 202 MARKET Z CENTRAL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL JEFFERSON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401RES Z O N Z O M2 Q N-0 u � v- G-26 1 JEFFERSON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401RES Z O N Z O M2 NO 1 2 3 TYPE OF RESOURCE Jr. High School Building Trees along Market Playground RESOURCES BLOCK Contra] Jr. High potential neighborhood meeting facility; school plays, concerts, sports, voting, night classes. hickory B linden trees; shade $ screening. neighborhood recreation space. / PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIOINES 203 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT 1. Parking lot'- Visual, dust unpaved, unscreened 2. Market St. Noise 20� NEGATIVE IMPACTS IMPACTED PROPERTY B26-36, 37, 38 The school. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mo1REs BLOCKCentral Jr. Iligh I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron B. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 0 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16, Final Report Douglass Lee Price: 51.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES JORM MICROI-AP r JORM MICROI-AP The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster` Max Selzer - Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Pall Cain'' Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor ' Past Council Members Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader 1 r �k I A complete list of the reports in this P series appears on the Inside back cover. k W HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) CITIZENS' SELF-HELP HANDBOOK Timothy Fluck May 1978 ( (� I I Y North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study i Douglass Lee, Project Leader j I Institute of Urban and Regional Research The Universitv of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110PIES FOREWORD i Funding for the North Side Neighborhoad�en�eofa tion study was provided under the U.S. Dep Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement". The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished as a joint effort of the City s and the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and y Regional Research. 1 We have frequently found, in our neighborhood ' meetings and in other contexts, that people may have gripes which are of such a nature that the complainer could probably achieve an adequate level of satisfaction jsolely on his or her own initiative, if he/she took the right actions. For some individuals, expecting "the City" to do something about a particular problem is simply a rationalization for not doing anything themselves. For others, a lack of knowledge about how to pursue their complaints results in•a compounding of ignorance about the sources and remedies for the problem as well as a festering dissatisfaction with "government", as if local officials should be able to understand and remedy the complaints of individuals who do not express their concerns. This handbook is an effort to provide a base of information to neighborhood residents about what sorts of expectations they can reasonably have i regarding things that bother them, and how they can accomplish those remedies. Tim Fluck is completing a degree in Law as well as his Masters in Urban and Regional Planning. He was assisted in the later stages by Cynthia Fredrickson, an undergraduate in Economics. DBL I 1 i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DLS MOINES CONTENTS FOREWORD INTRODUCTION 1 BUILDING AND LAND USES 3 Background 3 Buildings 3 Signs 7 Outdoor Lights 9 Yards 10 Trees and Shrubs 12 Off-street Parking 14 Trash 16 Noise 18 Self -Help 18 Interest Groups 22 Government Agencies 25 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS 29 Background 29 Street and Traffic 29 Parking 31 Sidewalks 33 Self -Help 34 Interest Groups 37 Government Agencies 37 PEOPLE AND ANIMALS 38 Background 38 People 38 Animals 40 Self -Help 45 People 45 Animals 46 Interest Groups 47 Government Agencies 49 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES APPENDICES A. City Officials B. News Media C. Legal Assistance INDEX iii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES 50 50 52 53 54 D L INTRODUCTION Nobody likes piles of garbage next to their garage. Nobody appreciates a dog barking all night. Nobody prefers foot -high weeds instead of grass in their backyard. Nobody, that is, except maybe your neighbor. If only the whole mess would just go away. But you know it won't. It's going to take some action on your part. Someone has to bring the problem to your neighbor's attention; he may not even realize that it bothers anybody. But even then, your neighbor may not want to clean it up. In that case you're going to have to bring the problem to the attention of other people - your neighbors, interest groups, the city. Don't worry about being a "tattletale", or that you're not being a "good neighbor" by complaining. It's your neighbor's mess that is making the neighbor- hood less attractive. By helping to get rid of his mess, you're being a good neighbor to all of the other people who live and work in the neighborhood. They're depending on you, and that's what being a good neighbor is all about. of course, your neighbor's mess isn't the only problem. There are those crazy kids who squeal their tires down the block. There's that clogged storm sewer that floods the street. And there's the need for a stop sign on the corner where your children cross on their way to school. But what can you do about it? Again, it's going to take some action on your part. Nobody can help you if they don't know what's wrong. That's what this handbook is for - to provide you with the names of people who are interested in helping you. But they can't do it all. It's going MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP1D5.OEs 1I0p1Es to take time and effort by you and your neighbors to get things done. It's people working together that makes a neighborhood a better place. This handbook is arranged according to types of problems. If none of the topics seem to cover your specific problem, you should read through topics si- milar to your problem. Perhaps they'll provide you with some idea of a course of action. But even if the handbook doesn't provides a clear solution, don't give up. Talk to somebody! Maybe together you can find a solution. Each topic in the handbook is divided into four sections: BACKGROUND sections provide summaries of city ordinances that will help to give a foundation to your complaint. The section numbers of these ordinances are in parentheses. SELF HELP sections recommend courses of :action which you and your neighbors can take to c get results. i INTEREST GROUPS sections provide the names of organizations which will help you with your problem. GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES sections list the departments and commissions of the city which will help you with your problem. The appendices located in the back of the hand- book contain the addresses and telephone numbers of interest groups and governmental agencies. 0 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES D 9 U BACKGROUND Buildings BUILDINGS AND LAND USES Iowa City regulates the construction and mainte- nance of buildings primarily through the city zoning, building, and housing codes. i The zoning ordinance is presently contained in Zoning sections 8.10.1 to 8.10.35 of the Municipal Code, Ordinance although a new zoning ordinance is being developed by the City. A zoning ordinance regulates the types of activities which a building can be used for (see 8.10.7 to 8.10.11 and 8.10.26 of the current code) and the size of buildings (see 8.10.22 for height restrictions, 8.10.23 for mandatory setbacks from property lines, and 8.10.24 for lot and dwelling areas). A nonconforming building or land use is one which existed at the time the zoning ordinance became effec- tive, but does not conform to the zoning regulations. Nonconforming buildings that violate size regulations may be repaired and remodeled, but may not be recon- structed or structurally altered (see 8.10.22 D height restrictions, 8.10.23 B9 setbacks, and 8.10.24 C area restrictions). Nonconforming uses cannot be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or structurally altered unless changed to a permitted use. Any nonconforming use which is damaged by more than 508 or is discontinued for 2 or more years must then conform to the use regu- lations of the zone in which it is located. Once changed to a conforming use, it cannot be changed back to a nonconforming use (see 8.10.21). The owner or lessee of an entire building or premises which is in violation of the :zoning ordinance and any contractor or other person who assists in 3 RICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES maintaining such violation can be fined up to $100 and imprisoned up to 30 days. Each day that a vio- lation is permitted to exist after the city gives notice constitutes a separate offense. The city may also sue to prevent unlawful construction, or to correct a violation, or to prevent occupancy of a building or lands in violation (see 8.10.33). Building The construction and maintenance of buildings Code and other structures is regulated by the City Build- ing and Development Code. This set of regulations governs the technical structural requirements (see 9.02), plumbing, gas pipe, and drainage pipe require- ments (see 9.10), standards for heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems (see 9.11), and stan- dards for electrical systems and equipment (see 9.20). I These codes govern any work in the construction, alteration, or repair of a building or structure (see 9.02.4), or any installation, repair, replace- ment,_ removal, or alteration of plumbing, ventilating, or electrical systems (see 9.10.1, 9.11.1, and 9.20.21 respectively). In each case, a permit must be obtained from the city. If the work which is inspected by the proper city official is in violation of the standards, the city may (after notice) sue the owner and the contrac- tors to restrain, correct, or remove.the violation, or to prevent further construction, occupation, or use of the building (see 9.02.4, 9.10.26, 9.11.3). In the case of electrical work, the city can shut off the supply of electricity (see 9.20.35). The owner and contractors may each be fined up to $100 and imprisoned for up to 30 days. Housing The City's Minimum Housing Standards (see 9.30) Code are to protect the health and safety of the occupants of dwellings and of the general public. The City Housing inspector may inspect all dwellings, dwelling 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES units, rooming units, and premises with the consent of the owner or authorized agent between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays. If consent is refused, a search warrant may be obtained (see 9.30.2, 9.30.14). Whenever the Housing Inspector determines there are reasonable grounds to believe that there is a violation, he gives notice to the owner to comply with the regulations. The owner may appeal the allegation to the Housing Appeals Board. If an emergency exists which j immediately threatens the public health, the owner must comply immediately (see 9.30.5). The basic Code standards require certain plumbing fixtures, exits, handrails, windows, adequate lighting, electrical outlets, heating units, screens, safe con- struction, doors, exterior maintenance, fence and down- spout maintenance, minimum floor space, and standards for basement dwelling units (gee 9.30.3, 9.30.6 to 9.30.9). The owners and occupants of dwellings containing 2 or more dwelling units have responsibilities for main- taining areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition (see 9.30.10). Rooming houses and multiple dwellings must obtain an annual permit from the Housing Inspector. Uncorrected violations of the Housing Code result in a suspension I of the permit. In addition to the earlier standards, tj there are further requirements for plumbing fixtures, linen and curtains, room volume, and fire extinguishers (see 9.30.11). Any dwelling or dwelling unit which is so damaged, decayed, delapidated, unsanitary, unsafe, vermin infested, or lacking adequate illumination, ventilation, or sani- tation facilities, or because its general condition or location is dangerous to the health or safety of the oc- cupants or of the public may be condemned by the Housing Inspector, and must then be vacated within ten days (see 9.30.10). 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NE5 New apartment buildings containing five or more apartments must have underground electric and tele- phone installation (see 9.40 and 9.41). tion or emission of smoke which Smoke The producchimney, Requ- ceeds certain technical standards from any capable smokestack, structure, or opening of any kind lations be summarily of emitting smoke is a nuisance and may abated by the Building Inspector'(see 4.24.1 to 4.24.4)• The Inspector has the right to enter at a reasonable hour all premises from which smoke is being emitted has been emitted. or The fire department currently may inspect all Fire certain and cause to e Inspec- buildings and premises to as tions, corrected any conditions liable to causelre or y fire hazards. violations of any ordinance affecting restricted In private dwellings, the inspections are to attics and cellars (see 3.06.3)• dangerous My combustible or explosive material °Y shavings. accumulations of rubbish, waste paper, boxes, accumulations highly inflamable material that is situated so or obstruction to or on fire as to endanger property, or any o indows which is escapes, stairs, passageways, doors, or w liable to interfere with fire fighting or the escape of occupants is to be removed or corrected (see 3.06.3). The following conditions and activities are Nuis_ ams nuisances: building or , 1) the erection or utradeany employment, or premises for any offensive smells, manufacturing which by or by by attracting, flies and rodents, other annoyances becomes comfortuiniurioso r dangerous to the health, public property of individuals or the p (see 7.06.1 A)% offal or any 2) causing or Permitting any filthy or noisome substances tobe to collected or to remain 06.1 B); in in any place the detriment of others (see 7. 6 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3) any condition, act, or thing which is or may become a detriment or menace to public health (see 4.18.1). Whenever any nuisance or its source is found jon private property, the police can give notice to the owner or occupant requiring them to immediately abate and remove the nuisance within 24 hours. The person notified may be fined $20 for every day he or she permit the nuisance to remain. The nuisance may be abated by the police with all costs charged to the owner (see 7.06.2 to 7.06.5). Signs Temporary real estate signs, construction signs, In Political campaign signs, public signs, private General traffic direction signs, holiday decorations and flags, and institutional bulletin boards are permitted in any zoning district (see 8.10.35.2). Signs that are prohibited in all zoning districts include those which advertise a business, product, or service no longer conducted on the premises, swinging signs, painted wall signs, roof signs, moving signs (except barber poles), signs that project over the public right of way, any sign which constitutes a traffic or safety hazard, any sign on public property which advertises a service, activity, product, campaign, or attraction which is not on the premises where the sign is located, and banners, balloons, posters, pennants, ribbons, streamers, spinners, or other moving devices (see 8.10.35.3). It is unlawful for anyone to erect, alter, or re - Permits locate any sign without first obtaining a permit from the Building Inspector (see 8.10.35.18). To obtain a permit, plans for a sign must be in compliance with the sign ordinance and all other laws of the city (see 8.10.35.21). Illuminated signs must comply with the Electrical Code (see 8.10.35.18, 8.10.35.19; for a 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES discussion of the Electrical Code, see Buildings on page 4 ). Every applicant for a permit must obtain insurance for property damage and bodily harm (see 8.10.35.23). Construe- A sign's purpose, placement, size, height, dis- tion tance projecting from buildings, and illumination are regulated (see 8.10.35.2, 8.10.35.5, to 8.10.35.9). All signs except those types permitted in any zoning district, must have a surface of incombusti- ble material. Structural trim may be of combustible material (see 8.10.35.15 A). All signs, except those permitted in any zoning district, must be designed and constructed to with- stand wind pressure of at least 30 pounds per square foot and comply with the Building Code (see 8.10.35.15 B). Fire No sign is to be erected or maintained so as to Escape prevent movement through any door, window, or fire escape. No sign of any kind is to be attached to a stand pipe or fire escape (see 8.10.35.16). Disrup- No sign is to be erected where, because of its tion position, shape, or color, it may interfere with, or of obstruct the view of, or be confused with any autho- Traffic rized traffic sign or signal. Nor can any sign use the words "STOP", "LOOK", "DRIVE-IN", "DANGER", or any other word, phrase, or symbol in a manner that may mislead, confuse, or interfere with traffic (see 8.10.35.17). No person is to place, maintain, or display upon or in view of any street or alley any sign or device which is an imitation of or resembles an official parking sign, curb or other marking, or other traffic control device. Such signs may be removed by the city without notice (see 6.20.12). Any billboard, signboard, or advertising sign whether on public or private property which impairs the view of any portion of a public street or alley so as to create a danger is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 G and pages 6 - 7). 8 /- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011IEs The size, location, and placement of billboards are regulated (see 9.10.35.13). The face of such signs may not be within 300 feet of the lot line of any lot in an R1A, RIB, or R2 zoning district, or within 150 feet of any R3, R3A, or R313 zoning dis- trict, or be visible from or located within 300 feet of any public park, any school, church, cemetary, or public museum. Billboards may not exceed a height of 25 feet above the center of the street grade -level, and may not exceed 72 square feet in area. Billboards must comply with the other sign location requirements of the zoning district in which it is located. Billboards Any person who violates the regulations contained Viola - in section 8.10.35 is subject to a fine up to $100 tions or imprisonment for not more than 30 days (see 8.10.35.24). Outdoor The standards of the city Electrical Code apply Construe - to the installation, alteration, repair, removal, and tion maintenance of any outdoor lighting, except for the installation or replacement of plug connected portable appliances (see 9.20.21). Illuminated signs must also comply with the Electrical Code (see 8.10.35.19). (For further information on the Electrical Code, see Building Code on page 4). The city zoning ordinance currently require3 Nuisance only the properties in the central business area and in industrial areas to shield their outdoor lighting from adjacent residential areas (see 8.10.18 I). The zoning ordinance does regulate the illumination of signs (see 8.10.35.1 to 8.10.35.9). 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIREs However, anything which is maintained by any person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R and pages 6 and 7 above). Yards Grass & Unmowed grass on any inhabited, commercial, or Weeds undeveloped lot, or on adjacent parking areas and alleys must be mowed by the owner or person in charge or possession of such areas. An area is considered unmowed when it contains grass or weeds high enough to harbor rodents, catch debris, or become an annoy- ance or inconvenience to the general public (see VI, t Ordinance -74-2723). I Noxious weeds, as defined by Chapter 317.1 of the Iowa Code or by the State Secretary of Agriculture, must be destroyed by the owner, occupant, or person in charge or possession of the land on which such weeds . grow. Such weeds may be destroyed by mowing or by chemical control (in strict accordance with the product directions and Chapter 206 of the Iowa Code)„ before seed heads have formed (see VI, Ordinance 7402723). Any portion of a lot or undeveloped street or alley that is impossible to mow because of the incline or grading, or is a soil erosion control area, or part of a park maintained as a natural or conservation area, or any area covered by plants of a size and texture compatible with the environment, need not be mowed (see VII, Ordinance 74-2723). After notification by the Turf and Weed Official that a violation exists, the person notified is allowed 7 days to eliminate the nuisance. A person who fails to comply within that time may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned up to 30 days for each day that the violation continues to exist (see VII, Ordinance 74-2723). r 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES No fence which is more than 202 solid and no fence Fences which is more than 2 feet above the curb level (or pave- ment edge when no curb exists) may be located within the triangular area formed by a diagonal line connecting 2 points along the street right of way lines which are 30 feet away from the point of right of way intersection, or a distance equal to twice the required setback, which- ever is less (see 8.10.27 A). Otherwise, fences less than 4 feet high may be located on any part of a lot, and fences less than 6 feet high may be erected in the area at or behind the front of the main building (see 8.10.27 B & C). It is unlawful to erect, maintain, operate, or use an electric fence (see 7.14.16). Barbed wire cannot be used to enclose in whole or part of any lot containing less than 3 acres of ground (see 7.14.17). Any lot on which water at any time becomes foul, Stagnant stagnant, or does not percolate into the ground may Water be filled up or drained in such manner and within such time as directed by resolution of the City Council (see 4.16.10). The premises and grounds of every dwelling must be graded, drained, and maintained as to preclude the ponding of water (see 9.30.8 11). No stagnant water is to accumulate or stand any- where about the premises of a dwelling containing 2 or more dwelling units (see 9.30.10 E). 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES General All articles and things which are maintained by any Nuisances person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public are a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R). Anything which is or may become a detriment to or menace to public health is a nuisance (see 4.18 and page 6 and 7 above). Trees and Shrubs Any diseased, damaged, or dead tree or shrub (or part thereof) which is hazardous to life or property, or which may harbor serious insect or disease pests injurious to other trees or shrubs is to be removed. If the tree or shrub is on the right of way of a street or is on public property, it is to be removed by the City Forester. If it is on private property, the City Forester can order the owner, occupant, or person in charge of the property to remove or treat the tree (in accordance with the standards of 3.38.11) within 30 days (see 3.38.8 C). Any diseased, damaged, or dead tree or shrub which may harbor serious insect or disease pests or which is in such a state of deterioration that any part may fall and damage property or cause injury to people is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 U and page 6 and 7 above). Cottonwood Cotton -bearing cottonwood and poplar trees must trees be removed (see 3.38.8 B). Tree Any healthy tree or shrub which, because of its trimming location, interferes with pedestrian or vehicular traffic in actuality or by creating a sight problem 4 is a nuisance. Trees and shrubs must have a mini- mum clearance of 9 feet over sidewalks and 13 feet over all streets (except for new or small trees speci- fically designated by the City Forester). Shrubs must not be higher than 2 feet above street level } within 30 feet of an intersection. The City Forester will trim such trees on public property and will order the owner, occupant, or person in charge to trim such trees on private property within 30 days (see 3.38.8 A). 12 I' - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES A special permit is needed if any tree or shrub being trimmed or removed will fall on a street, alley, or sidewalk, and special safety regulations are applicable (see 3.38.5). Only city personnel may treat, plant, trim, Trees on remove, or disturb any tree or shrub on any street public right of way or other public property without a permit from the City Forester (see 3.38.3). property No one may establish either an above -ground or Plant below -ground plant container on public property with- Containers out the recommendation of the City Manager and approval ) of the City Council. No container may be placed closer than 20 feet to street intersections and closer than 10 feet to driveways and alleys. The owner must bear all costs of the establishment, maintenance, or removal of plants and containers, and they must be maintained i in their original condition at all times. If the containers and plants are not so maintained, the owner may be fined up to 30 days. The City Forester imay also remove the plants and container which are not so maintained (see 3.38.4). i No person is to willfully damage, cut, carve, Mutilation II transplant, or remove a tree or shrub on public of trees property; nor attach any rope, wire, or nails to them; nor allow any substance harmful to trees or shrubs to come into contact with them; nor set or permit any fire which will injure them, without a permit from the City Forester (see 3.38.6). • Suitable precautions must be taken to warn and Spraying protect the public that spraying is being done (see 3.38.11 C). 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140irJES W Burning The emission of dense smoke is a nuisance (see leaves 7.06.1 J). Anything which is maintained by any person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R). Anything which is or may become a detriment to or menace to Public health is a nuisance (see 4.18 and pages 6 and 7 above). Off -Street Parkin S aces The city zoning ordinance requires a certain required number of off-street parking spaces for any build- ing or land use created. In general, single family and two family dwellings must have 2 off-street parking spaces per each living unit. Multiple family dwellings must have 1h spaces per 300 square feet of floor space (see 8.10.25 A,B). The location of off- street parking spaces on a lot is also regulated (see 8.10.25 D). Screening In a residential zone, or in a commercial or industrial zone within 50 feet of a residential zone, any 4 or more contiguous off-street parking spaces must be screened so as to obscure vehicles parked there from public view (see 8.10.25 C). Grass Unmowed grass on any parking area must be mowed and weeds by the owner or person in charge or possession of such area. Such an area is considered unmowed when it contains grass or weeds high enough to harbor rodents, catch debris,.or become an annoyance or in- convenience to the general public (see VI, Ordiance 74-2723). Noxious weeds, as defined by Chapter 317.1 of the Iowa Code or by the State Secretary of Agriculture, must be destroyed by the owner, occupant, or person in charge or possession of the land on which such weeds grow. Such weeds may be destroyed by mowing or by chemical means (in strict accordance with the produce 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NE5 i directions and Chapter 206 of the Iowa Code), before seed heads have formed (see VI, Ordinance 74-2723). After notification by the Turf and Weed Official that a violation exists, the person notified is allowed 7 days to eliminate the nuisance. A person who fails to comply within that time may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned up to 30 days for each day that the violation continues to exist (see VII, Ordinance 74-2723). Any lot on which water at any time becomes foul, stagnant, or does not percolate into the ground may be filled up or drained in such manner and within such time as directed by resolution of the City Council (see 4.16.10). The premises and grounds of every dwelling must be graded, drained,. and maintained as to preclude the ponding of water (see 9.30.8 H). No stagnant water is to accumulate or stand anywhere about the premises of a dwelling containing 2 or more dwelling units (see 9.30.10 E). Stagnant water The police may order that a motor vehicle which Junked is not in running condition and/or not licensed for vehicles the current year, and is not legally placed in stor- age with the treasurer of Johnson County, be towed away and stored. The owner or operator of an impounded vehicle will be charged with the cost of towing and storage and may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned for up to 30 days (see 7.06.10 to 7.06.15). The police may order that a motor vehicle which Parking is parked on private property for more than 24 hours without without the consent of the owner or tenant of the consent property be towed away and stored. The owner or operator of the impounded vehicle will be charged the costs of towing and storage, may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned up to 30 days (see 6.50). 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES General Anything which is maintained by any person to Nuisance the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R). Anything which is or may become a detriment to or menace to public health is a nuisance (see 4.18 and pages 6 and 7 above). Trash Nuisance It is a nuisance to cause or permit any offal, filthy, or noisome substances to be collected or to remain in any place to the prejudice of others (see 7.06.1 B). Anything which is maintained by any person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R). Anything which is or may become a detriment or menace to public health is a nuisance (see 4.18). Depositing or storing inflammable junk is a nuisance, unless it is in a fireproof building (see 7.06.1 I and pages 6 and 7 above). The fire department may order the removal of any dangerous accumulations of rubbish or unnecessary accumulations of wastepaper, boxes, shavings, or any other inflammable material situated in a manner which endangers property or obstructs fire escapes, stairs, passageways, doors, or window (see 3.06.3). Storage No owner or occupant of a building or premises of may allow any garbage or waste material to collect refuse and remain on the premises. It is unlawful for any c person to deposit or leave any rubbish, stones, wires, earth, ashes, cinders, sawdust, hay grass, manure, filth, paper, snow, ice, dirt, construction wastes, garbage, or other offensive material upon any vacant private property (except when resurfacing or in approved landfills). Any person who vacates a building must remove all garbage from the building and premises (see 3.42.3 C). 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101t4Es Each household and commercial establishment Collection must use a water -tight, galvanized iron, aluminum, or plastic can with a tight fitting cover and handles or a bale. All garbage cans are to be kept closed and in a sanitary condition. All cans must be vermin and fly proof (see 3.42.3 B). In any building arranged for occupancy by 3 or more families, it is the duty of the owner or manager of the building to provide the necessary number of containers (see 3.42.3 B). No garbage can or trash container may be kept upon or adjacent to any street, sidewalk, front yard, side yard, or other place within the view of persons using the city streets and sidewalks. But garbage cans may be placed within 6 feet of the street or just behind the public walk for collection, so long as they are placed no earlier than 6:00 a.m. of the customary day of collection and remove the same day collection is made (see 3.42.3 D). The emission of dense smoke is a nuisance (see Burning 7.06.1 J and pages 6 and 7 above), The production or emission of smoke from any chimney or opening which does not conform with cer- tain standards may be summarily abated by the Building Inspector (see 4.23.3). 17 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES Noise Disturbin th alleys public person may disturb the peace of any street 'Disorderly houses Nuisances Motor vehicle ground, public or private building, ' or any neighborhood, private family, or person by loud or disagreeable noise (see 7.14.6). No person may, permit or allow to continue any quarreling, profane language, or loud, disagreeable noises which disturb the neighborhood or general Public and which occur upon any premises which is owned by him or in his possession (see 7.14.7), Anything which is caused, kept, maintained, or Permitted by any person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (7.06.1 R and pages 6 and 7 above)_ The operation of a motor vehicle which creates excessive noise because it lacks a proper exhaust system or because it is operated in such a manner that causes the motor vehicle, its tires, or any Of its parts to emit excessive noise is a nuisance. Both the owner and operator of the vehicle are responsible (see 6.46.12 B,C E) SELF-HELP Even though it seems as though there is a section in the municipal code that deals with any Problem you may have, in practice there are many building and land -use problems which are not speci- fically regulated. HE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo1RES And, it may take some time until enforcement of the regulations brings results: The different city departments may not be able to deal with your complaint right away; some of the regulations are so complicated that the violator can argue that there is no violation; and, even if there is a violation, most regulations contain provisions for appeal which delay enforcement. Your neighbor might not even realize that something is bothering you. Maybe they've been meaning to take care of the problem, and a little "neighborly concern" from you is all that is needed to get them working on solving the problem. So, if you're bothered by the construction or condition of a building or other land use, try one of the following courses of action. 1) Talk it over with the person in authority (the owner, manager, or occupant) of the pro- perty where the problem is located. You can learn the name of the owner from the City As- sessor's Office in the County Court House (338-2231). Once you explain to the person in authority exactly what's bothering you, allow them to give an explanation and to propose a solution. Try to keep things friendly, but be firm in getting a commitment from them that something definite will be done. You could also provide your neighbor with the names and telephone numbers of some of the interest groups (see page 22) and governmental agencies (see page 26) that can suggest ways of solving the problem. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110INES If the problem is an emergency, contact the police or the appropriate city department right away. 2) Contact your other neighbors. See how they feel about the problem. Arrange for a meeting between the person in authority and you and your neighbors. At this meeting have your neighbors do the talking, so that it is clear that you aren't the only one concerned. If you can't find support from the other neighbors, you should meet with the other person in authority a second time. With or without your neighbors, you should be more insistent about getting the j problem solved. Be prepared to point out any Municipal Code provisions that you believe are being violated and exactly how 1 these provisions are enforced. If the j summaries provided in the Background section are not sufficient, there are copies of the Municipal Code at the City Library (Iowa i Reference 348.02 Iowa). Copies of the Municipal Code may also be purchased at the I City Clerk's desk in the Civic Center. You may also call the appropriate city department to find out if the city personnel believe that a violation exists (see section A of Governmental Agencies on page 25). If nothing is done about a problem with a tree or shrub located on the public right of way, contact the City Forester yourself and explain the problem. 3) Contact city officials and consider making an official complaint with the appro- priate city department (see section A of Governmental Agencies on page 25). Encourage Your neighbors to also contact city officials. Explain to the city official exactly what and where the problem is and when it began. Tell the official if you and your neighbors have spoken with the owner, manager, or occupant of the property and when this occurred. This will demonstrate that you are concerned and that these other people are aware that someone is being bothered. Ask the city official to describe exactly what they are going to do, and how soon you can expect the matter to be cleared up. Try to get a commitment from the official that a specific action will be taken within a specific time, even if it is only a preliminary action the following week. 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES On the day that the official specifies, contact the official again. Ask if the specific action has been taken, and how soon you can expect the matter to be cleared up. (Again, make the official commit him/herself to a specific action by a specific day. Keep calling the official on the specified days until the matter is settled). Remember that some words of appreciation to the official for his/her efforts may bring faster results. 4) Contact other members of the community I for suggestions and to speak on your behalf with both the person causing the problem and with the city department which is trying to solve the problem. ( You should first contact a member of ? the City Council or the City Manager, parti- cularly if you believe that a city depart- ment could be working harder on your complaint (see Appendix I on page 50). The city may also have a citizens com- mission whose members may be of some help to you (see section B of Governmental Agencies on page 26). There are also a number of private orga- nizations which may be of some help to you (see Interest Groups on page 21). Some of these organizations only handle certain types of problems or intervene only on behalf of certain types of people. Remember that you are placing yourself in these people's hands if you ask them to speak on your behalf. If you aren't confi- dent that they will help to get something done, don't have them act for you. You may want to contact local newspapers, radio stations, and television stations to see if they are interested in doing a news S story about the problem (see Appendix II on i page 52) . 5) Consider legal action especially if you and your neighbors have been unable to get results otherwise (see Appendix III on page 53). A lawyer can recommend further courses of action based on the particular circumstances of the problem. 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES INTEREST GROUPS 1) Better Business Bureau Chamber of Commerce Offices 109 East Burlington St. 337-9637 Although mainly interested in consumer com- plaints, written complaints filled out at their offices will be forwarded to businesses. 2) Citizen's Housing Center Tenants United for Action Center East Clinton & Jefferson St. 337-3106 These organizations provide information and assistalice in organizing tenants and home owners to take collective action on tenants' rights, building rehabilitation, and other housing issues. 3) Consumer Protection Service Center East Clinton & Jefferson Sts. 351-0742 Although mainly interested in consumer com- plaints, CPS will work with individuals to help resolve their problems with businesses. 4) Heritage Agency on Aging Legal Services Program Kirkwood Community College Call Toll Free: Cedar Rapids 800-332-5934 Paralegals will provide all persons over 60, regardless of income, with legal information and counseling. 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 5) Protective Association for Tenants Iowa Memorial Union 353-3013 or 353-5861 The PAT will provide information and counseling on landlord -tenant problems to anyone in the community. 6) Free Environment Iowa Memorial Union 353-3888 7) ISPIRG (Iowa Student Public Interest Research Group) Center East Clinton & Jefferson Sts. 354-0742 The above organizations will provide infor- mation on recycling. 8) City of Iowa City - Saturday Paper Pick-up Civic Center 354-1800 ext. 251 The city will pick-up newspapers placed on the curb in cardboard cartons or paper bags at 8:00 a.m. on the first Saturday of February, April, June, August, October, and December. 9) Capitol Oil 729 South Capitol St. 338-8136 They will accept used oil. 10) City Carton 917 South Gilbert St. 351-2848 Cardboard may be recycled here. 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 11) Capitol Propane Gas 729 South Gilbert Street 338-2542 CPC accepts aluminum cans between 8:00 a.m. and 5:'00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 to 11:00 a.m., on Saturday. 12) Green Beverage 850 South Capitol Street 337-7337 GB accepts aluminum cans between 9:00 a.m. and noon on Saturdays. 13) Mellicker Distributor 912 Quarry Road, Coralville 354-3225 Mellicker accepts aluminum cans between 8:00 a.m. and noon on Saturdays. 14) Appliances, Books Clothing, Furniture, Etc. Goodwill Industries 410 First Avenue 337-4158 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES GOVERNMENT AGENCIES A. City Departments These are the city agencies which enforce the city regulations. The city is currently con- solidating some of these departments, so you may be asked to refer your complaint to an offi- cial other than the one listed below. i Department of Housing and Inspection Services Director 354-1800, ext. 331 d This department is responsible for enforce- ment of the Building, Housing, and Zoning Codes. i Inspectors can be reached at the following tele- 3 phone numbers: d Building Inspector ........... 354-1800, ext. 328 r Electrical Inspector ......... 354-1800, ext. 327 1 Housing Inspectors ........... 354-1800, ext. 323- W 324 Plumbing Inspector ........... 354-1800, ext. 326 Zoning Inspector.............354-1800, ext. 325 Fire Department Fire Marshall Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 237 This department is -asponsible for• making fire inspections and enforcing all city ordinances dealing with fire hazards. Police Department Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 280, 281 The police handle nuisance complaints and criminal complaints. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Department of Public Works Director Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 250, 251 This department is responsible for trash and refuse collection. Information concerning the removal of newspapers and bulky trash may be obtained by calling: Superintendent, Refuse Division 354-1800, ext. 264 City Forester/Turf and Weed officer Oakland Cemetary 354-1800, ext. 242 This official is responsible for enforcing the city's weed ordinance and tree ordinance, and should be contacted if there is a problem concerning any tree or plant in the public right of way. B. Citizens Commissions These groups may only have the official power to advise the city on different policies, but the individual members may be of some help. 1 Housing Commission I The commission reports to the city if there i are unsafe, unsanitary, or overcrowded housing conditions. Public meetings are held at 8:30 a.m. on the first and third Wednesday of each month in the Engineering Conference Room at the Civic Center. (you should check with a member to make sure that a scheduled meeting will be held.) 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES MEMBERS TERM TERM BEGINS EXPIRES Robert G. Hibbs, Chairperson May 1 May 1 606 Reno 1975 Res: 338-3175 1978 Bus: 338-4488 Patricia Kamath 505 Iowa State Bank & Trust Bldg. M1975 ay 1 ay 1 M1978 Res: Bus: 338-9419 Stephen Lombardi, Vice 619 Chairperson May 1 May 1 North Johnson 1976 1979 Res: 337-5487 Bus: Carole Ivie 1015 Oakcrest,'F-3 Feb. 22 May 1 Res: 337-4539 1977 1979 Bus: 354-1039 or 354-4498 Jerald W. Smithey May 1 1102 Hollywood Blvd. 1977 May 1 Res: 338-6901 1980 Bus: 337-3147 Cora B. Pollock 2608 Bartelt Rd. May 1 May 1 Res: 351-0956 1977 1980 Mary P. Owens 932 S. Van Buren May 1 May 1 Res: 338-4516 1977 1980 Bus: 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Project Green Steerincr Committee Although mainly concerned with landscaping (trees, shrubs, and yards), the members are also concerned with the general beautification of Iowa City. Nancy Seiberling Route 1 North Liberty, IA 52317 Res: 351-5625 George Mather 606 Holt Avenue Res: 337-9179 Bus: 353-4290 Bernadine Knight 425 Lee Street Res: 337-9140 Bus: MEMBERS TERM TERM BEGINS EXPIRES Mar. 1 Mar. 1 1975 1978 Mar. 1 Mar. 1 1976 1979 Mar. 1 Mar. 1 1977 1980 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES S'PREETS AND SIDEWALKS BACKGROUND Streets and Traffic No person may throw or deposit glass, bottles, nails, tacks, wire, cans, trash, litter, or other debris on any highway. Any person who drops or permits another person to drop such litter on any highway must immediately remove it (see 6.96.6). No person may place any wood, stone, earth, lumber, material, or any other obstruction on any street (see 7.18.19). Any obstruction of a street is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 E). No person is to play football, baseball, or throw balls, snowballs or other missiles on any streets (7.18.13). Any billboard or sign, whether on public or private property, which obstructs or impairs the view of any portion of a street or alley so as to create a danger is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 G and pages 6 and 7 above). No sign is to be erected where, because of its position, shape, or color, it may interfere with, or obstruct the view of, or be confused with any authorized traffic sign or signal (see 8.10.35.17). No fence which is more than 20% solid and no fence which is more than 2 feet above the curb level (or pavement edge where no curb exists) may be located within the triangular area formed by a diag- onal line connecting 2 points along the right of way lines which are 30 feet away from the point of 29 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Littering Traffic obstructions Sight obstructions right of way intersection, or a distance equal to twice the required setback, whichever is less (see 8.10.27 A). Shrubs must not be higher than 2 feet above street level within 30 feet of an intersection (see 3.38.11 C). Noise The operation of a motor vehicle which creates excessive noise because it lacks a proper exhaust system or because it is operated in such a manner that causes the motor vehicle, its tires, or any of its parts to emit excessive noise is a nuisance. Both the owner and the operator of the motor vehicle are responsible (see 6.46.12 B,C,E and pp. 6-7 above). Anything which is maintained by any person to the injury, inconvenience, or annoyance to the public is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 R). Anything which is or may become a detriment or menace to public health is a nuisance (see 4.18). Fumes . No vehicle may be operated on the streets when its exhaust becomes excessive, annoying, and injurious to the public health (see 6.46.13). Any vehicle which creates fumes by reason of not having an exhaust system is a nuisance (see 6.46.12 B,C). Signs, The City Council determines the character of signals, all official signs and signals (see 6.20.1), and the and traf- designation of all through streets (see 6.20.5) and fic lanes truck routes (6.46.4). Bicycles All bicycles owned and operated in Iowa City must be registered and licensed (see 6.24.1). Bi- cycles must be equipped with a headlight and a rear reflector (see 6.24.5 and 6.24.6). �n MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIIus All persons riding bicycles must observe all traffic rules as to traffic lights and stop signs, and must use proper hand signals when changing direction (see 6.24.12). Bicyclists must not ride more than two abreast, and must travel with their bicycles as near the right curb as possible (see 6.24.11). It is unlawful for a person riding a bicycle to be towed by any other vehicle (see 6.24.10). A bicyclist riding in the street may not carry anyone on the handlebars or frame, except infants may be carried when a proper seat is provided (see 6.24.12). The city Police Judge is authorized to revoke or suspend the registration of any person for violating these rules (see 6.24.13). The City Council determines the location, distance, Bicycle size, and the hours or other conditions for the estab- lanes lishment of bicycle lanes (see 6.08.18). Any person who drives or parks a motor vehicle in a bicycle lane may be fined up to $100 or jailed for up to 30 days (see 6.08.19). Parking No person may stop, stand, or park any Where vehicle within an intersection, on a crosswalk, with- prohibited in 15 feet from the intersection of curb lines at a { street intersection, within 30 feet of an approaching I stop sign or traffic light, within 5 feet of a fire hydrant, in front of a private driveway, on a sidewalk, at any place where less than one clear line of traffic between the vehicle and center line is left unobstructed, or at any place where official signs prohibit stopping and parking (see 6.16.2). No person may stop, stand, or park any motor vehicle so as to block an alley (see 6.16.4). Any person who parks a motor vehicle 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 610IREs in a bicycle lane may be fined up to $100 or jailed i for up to 30 days (see 6.08.19). When A person may stop, stand, or park an attended permitted motor vehicle on a public street for a reasonable time to load or unload passengers (or merchandise to or from any business establishment which does not have any alley access), except within an inter- section or crosswalk or street having only a single lane of traffic in that direction (see 6.16.4). Maximum No vehicle may be left upon any street, alley, time or public ground at any time for a period longer than 12 hours, except on certain posted streets (6.16.9). iMethod Except for the loading or unloading of passengers i or merchandise, the operator of a vehicle must park, stand, or stop parallel with the edge of the roadway, with the right wheels to the curb and the curb -side wheels within 18 inches of the curb (6.16.12). No person may allow a vehicle to stand on any street unattended without first setting the brakes, stopping the motor, and removing the ignition key. When on a perceptible grade, the wheels must be turned to the curb (see 6.16.15). Abandoned An abandoned vehicle is vehicles 1) a motor vehicle that has been left unattended on public property for more than 48 hours and lacks current registration plates or two or more wheels or other parts which renders it totally inoperable, or 2) a motor vehicle that has remained illegally t on public property for more than 15 days, or 3) a motor vehicle that has been unlawfully parked on private property for more than 24 hours without the consent of the owner or person in control of the property. 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 610IREs An abandoned vehicle may be towed away and stored at the direction of the city police. The owner or operator of an impounded vehicle may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned up to 30 days, and will be charged the costs of towing and storage (see 6.50). Q4 a e..,. I 1-B No person other than someone employed by or Construction under contract with the city may construct any and permanent sidewalk in the city without first ob- repair taining a permit from the City Engineer (see 9.60.5 B). The City Council may order the construction, reconstruction, or repair of sidewalks. Unless the owners of a majority of the linear feet of the property fronting the area needing improvement have joined in petitioning for such improvement, three- fourths of the Council must approve the improvement (see 9.60.5 D). The cost of constructing or repairing sidewalks (except the cost of grading) may be assessed against the property owner fronting the improvement (see 9.60.5 H to I). No person may place any wood, stone, earth, Obstructions material, or any other obstruction on any sidewalk (see 7.18.14). No owner, tenant, or person in charge of a Snow property may allow snow or ice accumulations to and ice remain upon abutting sidewalks for more than 24 removal hours (see 4.26.1). Snow or ice accumulations which remain longer than 24 hours may be removed by the Public Works Department without notice. The cost of removal is certified to the City Council, who assess the cost against the property owner (see 4.26.2). 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES Litter Any ashes, excrement, stones, dirt, cans, paper, trash, garbage, dead animals, or other offensive substance which is thrown or left by any person on a sidewalk is a nuisance (see 7.06.1 S). Bicycles, Bicyclists must ride in single file on a side - sleds, etc. walk (see 6.24.11). Bicycles are not to be ridden on the sidewalks in any city school zone (see 6.24.8). Pedestrians on the sidewalks have the right of way over bicycles, and any bicycle operated on any sidewalk must turn off from the sidewalk when meeting or passing pedestrians (see 6.24.9). No person may coast or slide down any sidewalk (see 7.18.12). SELF-HELP There are two types of problems that occur with streets and sidewalks: problems that involve fixed objects, and problems that involve moving vehicles. Problems that stand still are more easily i dealt with. If the streets or sidewalks need repair, or if there's litter, an obstruction, or an abandoned vehicle, or if there's a need for a traffic sign, signal, or bicycle lane, your problem is a sitting target. If your problem is of this type, take one of the following courses of action. 1) If the problem concerns a sidewalk or obstruction owned by a neighbor, talk to him/her about it. Explain exactly what's bothering you. Allow them to of- fer an explanation and to propose a solu- tion. Try to keep things friendly, but be firm in getting a commitment from them that something will be done about the problem. If the problem concerns a street, you should contact the Department of Public Works (see Governmental Agencies on page 37). Explain to the official exactly what and where the problem is 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES and when it began. Ask the official to describe exactly what she/he is going to do, and how soon you can expect the problem to be corrected. Try to get a commitment from the Official that a specific action will be taken within a specific time, even if it is only a preliminary action the following week. On the day that the official has specified, contact the official again. Ask if the specific action has been done, and how soon you can expect the i problem to be corrected. Again, make the official commit him/herself to a 'specific action by a specific day. Keep calling the official on the speci- fied days until the matter is settled. Remember that some words of apprecia- tion to the official for his efforts i may bring faster results. I' 2) Talk with your other neighbors. See how they feel about the problem. Arrange for a meeting between either your neighbor causing the problem or the Department of Public Works and You and your neighbors. At this meeting, encourage all of your neigh- bors to speak up, so that it is clear that you aren't the only one concerned. 3) If your neighbor does nothing about the problem, you and your neighbors should make an official complaint with the Department of Public Works or the police (see Government Agencies on page 37), following the suggestions in #3 on page 20. i 4) If it seems as though the problem isn't being dealt with as quickly as legal guidelines and fairness dictate, you may need to contact other people for sugges- tions and to speak on your behalf with the person causing the problem or with the city department which is dealing with the problem. 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES You should first contact a member of the City Council or the City Manager, particularly if you believe that a city department could be working harder on your complaint (see Appendix I on page 50)• There are also a number of private organizations which may be of some help to you (see Interest Groups on page 37). Some of these organiza- tions only handle certain types of problems or only intervene on behalf of certain types of people. I}emember that you are placing yourself in these people's hands if you ask them to speak on your behalf. If you aren't confident that they will help to get something done, don't have them act for you. You may want to contact local newspapers, radio stations, and tele- vision stations to see if they are interested in doing a news story about the problem (see Appendix II. on page 52) . 5) If you feel that further action is called for, you and your neighbors will likely want to consult a lawyer (see Appendix III on page 53). A lawyer can recommend further courses of action based on the particular circumstances of the problem. Problems that won't stand still may require some more work. If you're only concerned with a single traffic or parking violation, report it to jthe police (see Government Agencies on page 37). i Simply calling the police may correct the isolated violation, but it may not prevent future problems. To improve the situation in your neighbor- hood, you're going to have to organize neighborhood support. 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOINES r ■ INTEREST GROUPS 1) Auto Salvage Yards Dewey's Auto Salvage Inc. 106 1st Ave. Coralville Office Phone Number: 354-2112 Salvage Yard Phone Number: 354-4900 Russell's Salvage 2752 S. Riverside Dr., Iowa City Phone Number: 351-4663 Alert Towing & Road Service 1327 Cedar, Iowa City Phone Number: 338-0060 Zoe Zajicek Salvage Rochester Road, Iowa City Phone Number: 351-8118 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 1) Department of Public Works Director Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 250 251 This department is responsible for mainte- nance of the city's streets, traffic engineering, and maintenance of the city's sidewalks. Informa- tion on specific problems may be obtained by calling: Superintendent, Streets 354-1800, ext. 263 Superintendent, Traffic 354-1800, ext. 271 2) Police Department Civic 354-1800, ext. 280 281 The police enforce the city's traffic and parking regulations, and handle nuisance and criminal complaints. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES BACKGROUND People PEOPLE AND ANIMALS Disturbing No person may disturb the peace of any street, the peace alley, public ground, public or private building, or any neighborhood, private family, or person by loud or disagreeable noise (see 7.14.6). Disorderly Any y person (intending or unreasonably creating conduct a risk of disturbing the peace of another) who commits any of the following acts has committed disorderly conduct: 1) using offensive, threatening, insulting, or profane language or conduct; jZ) willfully obstructing the free use of any public sidewalk, street, alley, or entrance to any building or grounds; 3) assault, strike, or wrestle with another; 4) acts in such a manner as to annoy, disturb, interfere, obstruct, or be offensive to others; 5) trespass upon public or private property (which is not owned by that person) with a malicious and mischievous intent. it Vandalism No person may deface or injure in any manner any house or building, or any fence, tree, or improve- ment without the consent of the owner (see 7.14.3). No person may willfully break, deface or injure any i house or building, or any window or door, or fence, I enclosure, tree, or merchandise of another without authority of the owner or the city (see 7.14.15). Human It is a discriminatory practice for any owner, relations lessee, manager, or employee of any public store or restaurant to refuse or deny or discriminate in the furnishing of services because of any person's 38 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, or religion (see 10.2.11). It is a discriminatory practice for any person, firm, or employee to refuse to sell, rent, assign, or sublease any dwelling unit, commercial unit, or real property to any person or firm because of a person's race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, or religion (see 10.2.12). Any person who has suffered a discriminatory practice may make a complaint to the Human Relations Commission (see section of Governmental Agencies on page 48) within 90 days (see 10.2.13). Any person who offers to sell merchandise from house-to-house or upon public streets within the city must obtain a license from the City Clerk (see 5.32.1, 5.32.3). This does not apply to charitable organizations, newspaper delivery people, wholesalers, or farmers; gardeners, or others who sell or distribute fresh fruits, fish, meats, or vegetables (see 5.32.2). The sales person must prominently display the license at all times, and may not harass, intimidate, or coerce any individual, and may not misrepresent any material fact (see 5.32.7). The names of licensed real estate agents ascribing to the realtor's Code of Ethics are listed with the Iowa City Board of Realtors (410 Highland Court, phone number 338-6460). The Board of Realtors is a local association of realtors dedicated to maintaining the integrity of the profession. If a realtor is thought to be engaging in blockbusting or some other unethical practice, a complaint letter should be sent to the President of the Board of Realtors. Another place to take a complaint is the Real Estate Commission in Des Moines, Iowa. Chapter 117 39 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DE.S MOINES Peddlers Realtors of the Code of Iowa requires that all realtors be licensed to sell real estate. The Real Estate Com- mission is a watchdog agency created by the realtors' license law. If a realtor is found guilty of unfair practices, his or her license will be revoked under the license law by the Commission. If the complaint is not cleared up to the person's satisfaction, then an attorney should be consulted about the complaint. Taxicabs Taxicabs must be annually licensed by the city Traffic Control Board (whose members are the Chief of Police, the City Clerk, and the City Engineer). The board is to determine whether the public is adequately served, and the qualifications of any driver (see 5.16.1 to 5.16.4). All fare disputes are to be settled by the officer in charge of the police station. Failure to pay or receive the rate of fare will subject the offending party to a charge of disorderly conduct punishable be a fine not exceeding $10 (or if pay- ment is not made by imprisonment not exceeding 3 days) (see 5.16.13). Public Any misconduct by a city employee should be employees reported immediately to the head of the employee's department (see section A of Governmental Agencies on page 25), or to the City Manager or City Council person (see Appendix I on page 50). Animals Horses, No person may keep any horses, cattle, goats, cattle, swine, rabbits or domestic fowl without an annual and farm permit from the City Health Officer (see section A animals of Governmental Agencies on page 25). Buildings, yards, and enclosures for these animals must be kept clean and free of stagnant water (see 4.20.1). 40 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES No person may knowingly or negligently permit these animals under the person's control to run at large (see 4.20.4) No person may abuse, torture, cruelly beat, kill, or fail to provide necessary food, drink, and shelter to these animals (see 4.20.6). NO Person may ride any horse in any park or Playground,Pt on designated bridle streets or Paths (see 3.34.3 (12)), Pet animals are defined in the city's regulations as all warm-blooded animals, except birds animals raised for food , horses and Purposes (see 4.21.1 F), All pet animals over 6 months old must be licensed and vaccinated against rabies, unless ke t under constant restraint on the P (see 4.21.2), owner s property It is a nuisance to leave an animal confined or tied in any place and failing to provide the animal with sufficient food, water, or shelter (see 4.21.4 E), No animal Property of may be taken or permitted off the it will the owner without being so trained that come to the owner immediately upon signal. A dog may not be taken or permitted off of its property without being on a owner's leash (see 4.21.5 p) Park or NO Person may bring d unless Permit any dog to enter any Playground (see 3.34.3 (11)) the dog is on a leash Any pet animal found off the property of its owner and not under control of a may be competent person impounded by the City Shelter Master (see section A of Governmental Agencies on page 48) (see 4.21.7 D, 4.23.3), No pet animal may be taken or permitted in any food store, restaurant, or tavern (see 4.21.5 D), 41 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIHES Pet animals Cowl No Pets .in s-5 Trespass No pet animal may be taken or permitted on pro - and perty not owned by the owner of the animal without property permission (see 4.21.5 B). No pet animal may be tied damage to any utility pole, parking meter, building, fence, tree, or other object on public property or tied on private property without the consent of the owner or person in charge (see 4.21.5 E). Allowing an animal to cause any damage or to foul by the animal's body, wastes, or by the animal carrying any foul material to public or private property is a nuisance (see 4.21.4). Animal It is a nuisance to keep animals on private wastes property in such number or in such a manner that allows for the accumulation of solid wastes which become a detriment or menace to health (see 4.21.4 A). It is a nuisance to allow an animal to leave animal wastes on public or private property (see 4.21.4 C). Any person who walks a pet animal on public property (including streets and sidewalks) must provide for the disposal of the animal's solid wastes by immediate removal (see 4.21.5 F). Noise It is a nuisance to allow an animal to make ex- cessive noise to the disturbance of persons in the area (see 4.21.4 B and page 6 and 7 above). Animal It is a nuisance to allow an animal to bite, bites scratch, annoy or interfere with any person so as to trouble or harm them (see 4.21.4 D). ' It is the duty or the owner of any animal, or of a person having knowledge of an animal, which bites 42 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MONIES or causes a skin abrasion ❑ fact to the p°n any Person to report such City Manager (see Appendix I on page 50) or the City Health Officer (see section A of Governmental Agencies on Page 25) (see 4.21.10 B, 4.23.13), No Pet animal of known fierce, danger vicious characteristics ous, oris permitted off the vicious of its owner's property.Premises animals annoys an other If such an animal bites or ma y person or other animal, the City Council y set a public hearing on the destruction of the animal (see 9.23.6). Any person who willfully molests, teases, provokes or mistreats a pet animal, or any person other Molesting owner who willfully opens an than the or _ teasin animal to leave a Y door or gate enabling any � Public or Private premises may be fined up to $100 or imprisoned up to 30 days (see 4.21.11, 4.23.10). All dead animals thrown left, or deposited by any person upon any street, alley, sidewalk, lot, or park are nuisances (see 7.06.1 S). No Person may expose any poisoned meat or other Poisoned substance outside of their own dwelling house where such substances may be eaten by any Person or domestic animal (see 4,20,7) The premises and grounds of every dwelling must be maintained so as to Preclude the ponding of water or the attraction, breeding and harboring of vermin (see 9.30.7 H). All pipe passages and openings through walls or floors must be adequately enclosed orsealed to Pre- vent the passage of vermin (see 9. 30. 7 J) . !;very 43 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOLNEs Dead animals Poisoned met Insects and rodents basement window or other opening which might provide entry for rodents must be supplied with a heavy wire screen or other device that will effectively prevent their entrance (see 9.30.5 K). Every occupant of a dwelling containing only one dwelling unit or of the only dwelling unit infested is responsible for the exterminating of any insects rodents, or other pests on the premises. But when- , ever infestation is caused by the failure of the owner to maintain a dwelling in a rodent -proof or reasonably insect -proof condition, the owner is respon- sible for the exterminating. The accumulation of manure, vegetable matter, or animal matter in which mosquito larva or fly larva breed, or any condition, thing, or act which is or may become a detriment or menace to public health is a nuisance (see 4.18.1 and page 6 and 7 above 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES SELF-HELP People Living in a neighborhood like the North Side, where the people have such diverse lifestyles, re- quires a measure of patience and tolerance. But certain types of behavior are simply in- excusable. It is a basic human right to be secure from harm to one's person and to one's property when in one's home and in one's community. No one should ever have to be afraid to live in the North Side. The community has programs to help people before they become wrongdoers. The city has regulations to punish wrongdoers. Both systems depend on you to inform them of people's actions or conditions. If someone violates your right to security, try one of the following courses of action. l) If you know who the person over with them with their re talk it You explain exactly whattheproblemsis, Once allow them to give an explanation and to pro- pose a solution. Remember that most parents will react.with hostility if you suggest that they're not raising their children pro- perly. You may want to provide them with the names of interest groups that will help with the problem (see page 47). 2) If you're met with hostility, try again after they've had a chance to think things over. If the problem was caused by tenants, contact the manager or owner of the building. The name of the owner can be obtained from the City Assessor's Office in the County Court House (338-2231). If the problem was caused by an employee, contact their employee. Speak with your neighbors, and see how they feel. Arrange for a meeting between the person who caused the problem and with You and your neighbors. At this meeting, encourage all of your neighbors to speak up, so that it is clear that you aren't the only one concerned. 45 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3) If you feel more needs to be done, contact an appropriate interest group, the police, or the appropriate city depart- ment. you may want to inquire what these groups will do about the problem before you provide the names of the people involved. If it is warranted, file an official com- plaint even if you're told that no action will be taken on it. That way, the city or agency will at least have a record that something occurred. Animals People tend to feel a great deal of attachment for their pets. Sometimes they permit their animals to do things which are annoying or downright illegal. And it is likely they'll keep on permitting such annoyances, unless you let them know just how annoying or illegal it is. If you have a proble with an animal, try one of the following courses of action. 1) If you know who owns the animal, explain to them exactlyiwhat has happened. Inform them of any city regulations that you believe have been violated and the means of enforcing these regulations. Allow them to offer an explanation for what happened, and to propose a solution to the problem. Try to keep things friendly, but be firm about getting the problem corrected. 2) If you don't know who owns the animal, or if the problem persists, contact the city Animal Shelter or the police (see Government Agencies on page 48). 3) If rodents or insects have infested a building or its premises, contact the residents, the building manager, and the owner. The owners name can be obtained from the City Assessor's office in the County Courthouse (338-2231). If the problem persists, notify the city Building Inspector (see Government Agencies on page 49). 46 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401f4ES INTEREST GROUPS United Action for Youth UAY provides counselling and other services for young people. MEMBERS *Alan Horowitz 1132 Wylde Green Road Res: 354-5430 Bus: 353-4647 Term expires 6-30-78 *Gretchen Holt 921 Bowery Res: 354-1386 Bus: (800) 332-7279 Term expires 6-30-78 Tom Mikelson, Chairman 1523 West Benton Res: 354-1160 Tom Conway 433 South Van Buren Res: 351-5166 Selma Connors Route #5 Res: 338-3558 Dennis Hedges 415 South Capitol, #3 Res: 354-3160 Hanne Hierholzer 501 Kimball Road Res: 338-7658 Mary Larew, Secretary 313 North Linn Res: 337-2264 Roberta Patrick, Treasurer 515 Oakland Avenue Res: 338-0309 Jeff Schabilion 1502 Sheridan Res: 351-7812 Alan Bohanan 405 Iowa State Bank & Trust Building Bus: 351-0221 Karen Sixt Route #2 Res: 351-7757 *Appointed by the City Council 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 1) Anima= ter 111 S. Kirkwood The annual shelter enforces the cit -1800 ext. regulations. Y's animal 2) Human Relations Commission MEMBERS TERM TERM BEGINS EXPIRES Barbara Woodward Vice -Chairperson Jan. 1 Jan. 1 627 Orchard 1976 1979 Res: 337-2963 Bus: 356-3852 Patricia Gilroy 1230 Ginter Avenue Jan. 1 Jan. 1 Res: 351-4611 1976 1979 Bus: 353-6754 Ethel Madison 1500 Glenndale Road Jan. 1 Jan. 1 Res: 351-2197 1976 1979 Bus: 655-2193 Susan L. Davison 407 N. Dubuque g9 Aug' 16 Jan. 1 Res: 354-4376 1977 1980 Bus: Myles N. Braverman 1902 Broadway Jan. 1 Jan. 1 Res: 351-3516 1977 1980 Bus: 338-4195 Mori Constantino 407 Brown Jan. 1 Jan. 1 Res: 338-1001 1977 1980 Bus: Charles A. McComas, Jr. 508 Kenwood Drive Jan. 1 Jan. 1 Res: 338-1947 1978 1981 Bus: 338-7878 M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES c7 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (continued) i 2) Human Relations Commission (continued) TERM TERM MEMBERS BEGINS EXPIRES Agnes Kuhn Jan. 1 Jan. 1 1185 E. Jerfferson 1978 1981 Res: 337-2298 Bus: Steve Munzenmaier Jan. 1 Jan. 1 1104 Yewell Street 1978 1981 Res: 351-0175 Bus: 356-3711 3) Department of Public Works Director Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 250,251 This department is responsible for trash and refuse collection. Information concerning the removal of newspaper and bulky trash may be obtained by calling: Superintendent, Refuse Division 354-1800, ext. 264 i 4) Department of Housing and Inspection Services Director 354-1800, ext. 331 This department is responsible for enforcement of the Building, Housing, and Zoning Codes. Inspectors can be reached at the following telephone numbers: Building Inspector ...............354-1800, ext. 328 Electrical Inspector.............354-1800, ext. 327 Housing Inspector ................354-1800, ext. 323-324 Plumbing Inspector...............354-1800, ext. 326 Zoning Inspector .................354-1800, ext. 325 49 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES APPENDIX A: CITY OFFICIALS CITY COUNCIL The City Council holds formal meetings on Tuesdays at 7:30 in the Council chamgers at the Civic Center, and informal meetings i on Mondays at 1:30 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room at the Civic Center. r f Members Term Term Begins Expires Mary C. Neuhauser Jan. 2 (Council District C) 1976 Jan. 2 914 Highwood 1980 Res: 338-6070 Bus: Carol deProsse Jan. 2 i 1113 East College 1976 Jan. 2 Res: 337-7835 1980 Bus: John Balmer Jan. 2 Mayor Pro Tem 1976 Jan. 2 305 Ferson 1960 Res: 338-9893 Bus: 338-3601 David Perret Jan. 2 (Council District A) 1976 Jan. 2 1015 Oakcrest, 21 1980 Res: 351-2497 Bus: Robert Vevera Jan. 2 Mayor Jan. 2 2839 Friendship Street 1978 1982 Res: 338-2497 Bus: Clemens Erdahl Jan. 2 (Council District B) 1978 Jan. 2 1218 E. College 1982 j Res: 338-9303 Bus: 50 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS (Continued) i ' Term Term Members Begins Expires 1 Glenn E. Roberts Jan. 2 Jan. 2 21 Ashwood Dr. 1978 1982 Res: 338-2326 Bus: i CITY MANAGER Civic Center 354-1800, ext. 201, 202 The city manager oversees the day-to-day opera- tions of the city. He can make recommendations to the City Council, supervises city projects, prepares the city budget and hires and fires city employees. 51 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NORICS APPENDIX B: NEWS, MEDIA NEWSPAPERS The Iowa City Press Citizen 319 E. Washington 337-3181 The Daily Iowan Communications Center 353-6220 or 353-6210 RADIO STATIONS KCJJ Radio RR #4 354-1242 KICG FM Radio N. Dubuque & Interstate 80 Interchange 354-1182 KRNA 93 FM 1027 Hollywood.Blvd. 351-6426 KXIC AM Radio N. Dubuque & Interstate 80 Interchange 354-1181 TELEVISION STATIONS WMT Channel 2 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 395-6189 KCRG Channel 9 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 398-8393 52 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES 1 I APPENDIX C: LEGA1 ASSISTANCE HAWKEYE LEGAL AID 114 E. Prentiss St. 351-6570 Provides free legal services to those who meet income guidelines (all A.D.C., food stamp and social security I automatically qualify). HERITAGE AGENCY ON AGING/LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM Kirkwood Community College, Cedar Rapids Call toll-free (800)332-5934 Paralegals will provide all persons over 60 (regardless of income) with legal information and counseling and will refer cases to attorneys if actual legal representation is needed. STUDENT LEGAL SERVICES I Iowa Memorial Union 353-6537 Law students will provide assistance to students currently enrolled at the University of Iowa who meet income guidelines. If these programs cannot provide you with assis- tance, you can ask your neighbors and friends if they can recommend a lawyer to you. The names of local attorneys are listed in the yellow pages of the telephone books under LAWYERS. You may want to explore the possiblity of using small claims court procedures. For further information, contact: THE CLERK OF THE DISTRICT COURT Johnson County Courthouse 338-7944 53 D r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MONIES Index Abandoned Vehicles 32 Animals 40 Bite 42 Cattle 40 Control 41 Dead 43 ' Excessive Noise 42 Farm 40 Horses 40 In Stores 41 Insects 43 Molesting of 43 Pets 41 Poisoned Meat 43 Property Damage by 42 Rodents 43 Shelter 48 Teasing 43 Vicious 43 Wastes 42 Auto Salvage Yards 37 Barbed Wire Fence 11 Better Business Bureau 22 Bicycles 30 Bicycle Lanes 31 Bicycle on Sidewalks 33 Billboards 9 Bites - Animal 42 Building Code 4 Air Conditioning 4 Drainage Pipe 4 Electrical Systems and Equipment 4 Gas Pipe 4 Heating 4 Plumbing 4 Ventilating 4 Buildings 3 Nonconforming 3 Owner or Lessee 3 Burning Leaves 17 Burning Trash 17 Capitol Oil 23 Capitol Propane Gas 24 Cattle 40 Chimney 17 Citizens Housing Center/Tenants United for Action 22 54 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F City Carton City Council ! City Forester City of Iowa City - Saturday Paper Pick-up City Manager s City's Minimum Housing Standards i Coasting on a Sidewalk Complaints to Human Relations Commission Consumer Protection Service Construction and Repairs Cottonwood Trees Damaged Trees Dead Animals Dead Trees and Shrubs Department of Housing and Inspection Services Department of Public Works Discriminatory Practices Complaints to Human Relations Commission Employment Selling or Renting Property Services Diseased Trees and Shrubs Disorderly Conduct Acts Disorderly House Disruption of Traffic by Signs Disturbing the Peace Dwelling- Premise and Grounds i Electric Fence Employment Discrimination Farm Animals Fences Barbed Wire Electric Position of Fines for Violations Animal Nuisance Billboard or Sign as a Nuisance Building Code Burning Leaves Damaged Trees Dead Trees Diseased Trees Driving in a Bicycle Lane Excessive Noise by Animals General Nuisance Grass and Weeds Grass and Weeds in a Parking Area 55 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 23 50 26 23 51 4 34 38 22 33 12 12 43 12 25 37, 49 38 38 38 38 38 12 38 18 38 5 11 38 40 11 11 11 11 42 9 4 17 13 13 13 31 42 6 10 15 Junked Vehicles 15 Nuisance - Building Owner or Operator of Abandoned Vehicles 6 Outdoor Lights as a Nuisance 32 Parking in a Bicycle Lane 10 Parking Without Consent 31 Public - Nuisance 15 5 Signs that Disrupt Traffic 6 Trash - Burning Trash - Nuisance 19 Zoning Ordinance 16 Fire Department 4 Fire Escape 25 Fire Inspection 8 Free Environment 6 Fumes 23 30 General Nuisance 111 Definition 6, 12 Notification of Violation 6 7 Public Health Goodwill Industries 24 Grass and Weeds 10 Impossible to Now 10 Incline or Grading 10 i Notification of Violation 10 Noxious Weeds 10. Park - Natural or Conservation Area 10 Plant Area Compatible with the Environment 10 Soil Erosion Control Area 10 Unmowed Grass 10 Green Beverages 24 Hawkeye Legal Aid 53 Heritage Agency on Aging Legal Service Program 22, 53 Horses 40 Housing Code 4 Housing Commission 26 Human Relations Commission 48 j Illuminated Signs Insects 43 ISPIRG 23 i Junked Vehicles Definition 15 Fine 15 Owner -Operator Responsibility for Impounded 15 1.5 Vehicles 56 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Littering Highway 29 Sidewalk 29 Location of Off Street Parking 34 14 Mellicker Distributor ! Methods of Destroying Weeds 29 Molesting of Animals 10 Motor Vehicle Noise 43 MowingResponsibility 30 Mutilation of Trees 10 Multiple Family Dwellings - Parking Space 13 19 New Apartment Buildings Newspapers 6 Noise 52 Disorderly Houses 18, 30 Disturbing the Peace 18 Motor Vehicle Noise 18 Nuisance 18, 30 Noxious Weeds 10 Nuisances 10 Billboards or Signs Buildings 8 j Burning Leaves 6 + Burning Trash 17 Damaged Trees 17 Dead Trees 12 i Diseased Trees 12 Excessive Noise by Animals 12 General 42 Grass and Weeds 6 Grass and Weeds in Parking Areas Junked Vehicles 10 16 iMotor Vehicles 15 Noise 18, 30 Outdoor Lights 18 Public 10 Trash 6 Vandalism 16 Weeds - Noxious 38 10 Obstructions on Sidewalks j Off Street Parking 33 t _ Location 14 I Multiple Family Dwellings 14 Rooming Houses 14 Screening 14 Single -Family Dwellings 14 Two -Family Dwellings 14 14 57 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Outdoor Lighting Alterations Construction Installation Maintenance Nuisance Removal Repair Parking Maximum Parking Time Method Permitted Prohibited Parking - Off Street Requirements Location Multiple Family Dwellings Screening Single -Family Dwellings t Two -Family Dwellings j Parking without Consent Peddlers People Discriminatory Practices Disorderly Conduct Acts Disturbing the Peace Human Relations Vandalism Pets Animals In Stores Placement of Garbage Cans Plant Containers Police Department Poisoned Meat I Project Green Steering Committee i Property Damage b Animals Protective Association for Tenants jPublic Employees Radio Stations Realtors I Rodents Rooming House Parking W.J MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9 9 9 9 10 10 9 9 31 32 32 32 30 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 39 38 38 38 38 39 38 41 41 41 17 13' 25 43 27 42 23 40 52 52 39 43 14 Screening of Off Street Parking Self -Help 14 Animals Buildings and Land Use 46 People 18 Streets and Sidewalks 45 Service 34 City Forester/Turf Weed Officer Department of Public Works 26 Fire Department 26 Housing Commission 25 Police Department 26 Project Green Steering Committee 25 Shrubs heights 27 Sight Obstructions 13 Signs 29 Billboards 7, 30 Construction 9 Design 7 Distance Projecting from Building 8 Height 8 Illumination 8 Material 7 Permits 8 Placement 7 Purpose 8 Size 8 Violations 8 Sign Permits 9 Single Family Dwellings - Parking Area 7 Sleds on Sidewalks 14 Smoke Regulations 34 Snow and Ice Removal on Sidewalks 6 Special Permit for Tree Removal or Trimming Spraying of Shrubs 33 13 and Trees Stagnant Water 13 Parking Area Yards 15 Storage of Refuse 11 Streets and Sidewalks 16 Bicycles on Sidewalks 29 Coasting on Sidewalks 34 Construction and Repair 34 Littering on Sidewalks 33 Littering of Streets 34 Obstructions 29 Self -Help 33 Sleds on Sidewalks 34 Snow and Ice Removal of Sidewalks 34 Street and Traffic 33 Student Legal Service 29 53 59 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES Taxicabs Fare Disputes Traffic Control Board Teasing Animals Television Stations Trash Fire Department Ordered Removal Nuisance Storage of Refuse Vacant Private Property Vacating a Building Trash Collection Placement of Garbage Cans Occupancy by Three or More Families Type of Container Trees and Shrubs Damaged Dead Trees Diseased Private Property Public Property Right -of -Way Tree.Trimming Minimum Clearance Shrub Height Special•Permit Trespass and Property Damaged by Animals Turf and Weed Official Two -Family Dwellings United Action For Youth Vicious Animals Waste of Animals Yards Zoning Ordinance W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id01RES 40 40 40 43 52 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 12 12 13 13 42 26 5- 471 1 43, 42, 10 3, North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the Institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Ift, � � R -vii♦o xy. VT '..`� .� .. ,1 i t§ �.an�xJ+ur• f. Serit �jT SYFt. } low Ift, The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES MOINES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pal Foster' Max Selzer' Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain' Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members •' Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) NUISANCE LAW APPLIED TO LAND USE CONTROL Douglass Lee March 1978 Revised May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa, Iowa City Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NEs FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Ap- proach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work carried out by the University's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. Control of neighborhood externalities is the major rationale for the existence of zoning, yet zoning is least effective in the older mixed neighborhoods where land use spillovers are greatest. Nuisance law concepts are ideally suited to dealing with externalities, yet this branch of torts has developed in ways that appear to minimize its utility for control of land use spillovers. This paper attempts to reconstitute the law of nuisances in a way which will allow it to play a much greater role in land use decision making and to perform the functions that zoning fails to perform. I Many people have given me generous and insightful criticism on several earlier drafts: Kevin Laverty, Gary j Lozano, Vicki Williams, Jerry Thompson, Tim Fluck, and students in Andy McKean's Planning Law and Legislation class. Candy Morgan of Iowa City's Department of Human Relations, was extremely patient in explaining to me many of the problems and misconceptions that occurred in previous drafts, and Gretchen Hayne did a superb job of adding substance and citations to the footnotes and the I list of references. i DBL IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORTES CONTENTS FOREWORD i 1 INTRODUCTION Theory of Negative Externalities 3 Objectives of Nuisance Law 7 Major Problems with Nuisance Law Failure to Separate the Nuisance from its 10 Source Imputed Transfers of Property Rights 14 GUIDELINES FOR RESOLVING NUISANCE CONFLICTS 16 Establishing the Character of the Neighborhood 16 Existing Structures and Population Trends and Patterns Natural Suitability Expressed Public Policy Determining Whether Standards Have Been 18 Exceeded 22 Remedies 23 Abatement 24 Damages 25 Condemnation Civil, Criminal and Other Penalties 27 28 Defenses CONSEQUENCES OF CHANGING THE RULES 31 33 REFERENCES ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES INTRODUCTION Several writers have proposed that nuisance law be allowed to play a larger role in land use control;' the purpose of this paper is to offer rules and guide- lines for accomplishing this. Despite the current indifference of most planners and land use lawyers to nuisance law, greater reliance upon it is both feasible and ! desirable. The obstacles (other than inertia) are ! modest, and the benefits potentially great. i I A number of reasons can be cited for turning to nuisance law for land use control: (1) Many land use problems which cannot be dealt with under zoning because they would require retroactive application are natural problems for nuisance law ;2 (2) Nuisance law encourages the resolution of land use conflicts through private actions, rather than government intervention; to the extent that problems can be addressed via the nuisance mechanism, the results are likely to be more responsive to the particular context and trample less heavily on private rights; 1Robert C. Cllickson, "Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls," + The University of Chicago Law Review, 40, 4 (Summer 1973), Th! 681-781; William H. Wilson, "Nuisance as a Modern Mode I of land Use Control," Washington Law Review 46 (1970), pp. 47-120. 2One view holds that zoning and nuisance law serve separate purposes, the former being designed to achieve an orderly arrangement of land uses; zoning thus does not need to be justified on the basis of controlling nuisances. Comment, "Zoning and the Law of Nuisance," Fordham Law Review, 29 (1961), pp. 749-756. This suggests that the rationale for intervening in land use decisions before the fact is different from that justifying inter- vention after the fact, and hence is consistent with our own position. An alternative view might propose that selected aspects of zoning regulation (the portions based on nuisance principles) could be made retroactive without necessarily requiring compensation. Whatever strategy is followed, some means for addressing existing land use problems in existing mixed neighborhoods is needed, and nuisance law concepts are proposed for the purpose. See also Noel, "Retroactive Zoning and Nuisances," Columbia Law Review, 41 (1941). MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11010[S (3) Zoning has its origins in the common law of nuisances, and zoning, as an instrument of public policy, would be greatly strenghtened by being reconnected with those origins;3 (4) Zoning can continue to develop more flexible instruments, leaving nuisance actions to control the side effects of similar but potentially incompatible uses, ' thereby avoiding much of the arbitrary and discriminatory nature of highly refined land use classifications. (5) Nuisance proceedings allow for more options in the resolution of land use conflicts, opening the door to improved social efficiency, i.e., zoning rules out i i many possible land use configurations that would be socially desirable if nuisances were controlled;4 (6) Problems in areas of mixed and changing 1 4� 9 land uses, which are not well handled by zoning, are directly addressed by nuisance law. While the objectives and guidelines described below are intended to pertain to nuisance law in general, the context in which it is being evaluated older, mixed land use neighborhood found lintcities loflall sizes. 3Some states have asserted. legislatively that non- conforming uses are nuisances per se; since such uses may not even be nuisances in fact, or can be made compatible with their surroundings by abating the nuisance aspects, treating nonconforming uses as nuisances per se appears unsupportable; this is an example of tying zoning and nuisance law too closely together., for a purpose that nuisance law is unsuited. 4See report number 1, Impact Evaluation: Purposes,. Procedures, and Guidelines, for a treatment of how before -the -.fact land use decisions can be better controlled while permitting greater flexibility. 2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIRES Theory of Negative Externalities A nuisance, in legal terms, is an interference with the use or enjoyment of property, especially land.5 This is a form of negative externality, of a type which requires some measure of physical proximity for the impacts to be transmitted. A negative externality, in turn, is one of several kinds of market failure. Where market failure can be demonstrated and intervention is warranted, public policy should seek to either create a situation that is as close as possible to what an ideal market would produce or else establish a public purpose which overrides the market solution. An abstracted example of a negative externality is diagrammed in Figure 1. The horizontal axis could represent a number of measures of output, but one which is expecially relevant to the neighborhood context is dwelling unit density. For a given parcel of property, the number of dwelling units constructed upon it (or created by conversion) is associated with a cost per unit, which will, in general, increase with the number of units constructed. This is shown by the private cost (PC) curve, which indicates marginal private develop- ment costs per unit. The marginal benefit of each unit constructed is given by the MB curve, which indicates the willingness of an informed buyer or renter to pay for the dwelling unit; the curve is drawn almost flat (i.e., elastic demand) on the assumption that the number of units to be built on the property in question is small in comparison to the local market. The private developer will construct units until the marginal cost equals the marginal benefit, located at B on the diagram. 5W. Prosser, "Private Action for Public Nuisance," yiE iis Law Review, 52 (1966), pp. 997-998. Another definition is "anything which annoys or disturbs one in the free use, possession, or enjoyment of his property or which renders its ordinary use or physical occupation uncomfortable." See also Ryan v. Emmetsburg, 4 N.W.2d (Iowa, 1942) and Caldwell v. Knox, 391 S.W.2d 5 (Tenn.,1964). 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES cost or value social cost %PC' 3ptimal social and private cost rrivale cost 3 narginal lenefits d d3 d1 density (dwelling units per acre) Figure 1. NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES RELATED TO DENSITY r n 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES In the absence of market failure, the solution des- cribed is optimal and the correct density for the property is determined by private market action. Where negative externalities exist -- specifically, nuisances -- the solution is not socially optimal and a misallocation of resources occurs. Suppose, in the example, that the private solution is achieved by placing an apartment building in a block which is primarily older single family homes, and the combined effect of the bulk of the apartment building, the loss ofrass 9 paved over for parking, the noise and fumes of increased auto traffic, the glare and unsightliness of an unlandscaped parking lot, the increased trash and litter, and the amoral lifestyles of the tenants, results in a decrease in the values of the adjoining properties. The h P , hypothetical private developer, then has created costs which are borne by others, and are therefore external to the developer. For each level of density, the external costs are represented by the difference between the PC and the SC (or social cost) curves. At density dl, the negative externalities have i• a value of DB. If the � developer hto a had pay the external costs in I the form of damages to injured property owners, clearly a lower level of density would result. In the example, this level would be d2 and the amount of damages would be AC. Allowing a level of development of dl leads to a social loss (entirely borne, in this case, by adjoining { property owners) equal to the area ABD, since each unit II of density above d2 creates more social costs than it is worth. One result, then, of failing to control negative externalities is a suboptimally high level of density, and another is the expropriation of values from one group of owners for the benefit of the developer. Oncethe requirement to compensate injured property owners has been imposed, however, the developer will seek 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES A ways to reduce these costs since they have become internal to his or her decision making. Assume that by improved design, landscaping, construction of enclosed parking, and control of trash, the developer can completely neutralize the externalities (to the extent they still exist they are offset by positive contributions to neighborhood quality) at less cost per dwelling unit than the previous pC costs plus damages. Representing this curve by SC'/pc,, the new ideal level of density is d3, and no damage payments are necessitated. Nuisance law has the potential for causing the source to internalize these land use externalities, greatly reducing both the inefficiencies and the in- equities of 'current land use patterns. Zoning, in its pure form, lacks this potential; density controls set above dl have no effect at all and lower densities reduce total cost's but do little to remove externalities. For example, level d is the best that can be achieved with density controls, and external costs are still AC per dwelling unit. Besides the elimination of external costs and unpaid damages, the nuisance -law solution (E) results in net social benefits, equal to the area AEF, over the best zoning solution. It will be claimed that zoning can internalize nuisance effects through design and performance standards, as well as more flexible instruments such as planned unit developments. To a certain extent, this is true, and should be done, but zoning is fundamentally handicapped by its prospective (before the fact) orientation; under Ideal conditions, zoning can result in a high quality G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES environment starting from scratch, but cannot maintain it in the face of change and it can do nothing in neighborhoods where the externalities already exist.6 Such neighborhoods are our primary concern. The example has been presented in the framework of new development or redevelopment, in an existing neighbor- hood, but the same concepts apply to any sort of land use activity in an existing neighborhood. Change in use in existing structures, additions and conversions, greater intensity in the same activity (e.g., a store which shifts from a neighborhood, primarily walk-in service, to a community service with a majority of auto arrivals), or simply laziness (leading to accumulated junk) are all activities (or inactivities) which may lead to negative externalities. Nuisance law is an instrument ideally suited to the task of controlling these undesirable effects. Obiectives of Nuisance Law In merging the theory of externalities with the legal adversary process, a number of objectives can be proposed against which nuisance law principles and proce- dures may be evaluated. Nuisance law will be considered successful in helping to control land use if it can accomplish the following: (1) Cause private property owners to consider the negative external effects of alternative actions in making their decisions about land use activities; 6Two dramatic counterexamples are Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 239 U.S. 394 (Calif., 1915) and City of Ft. Smith v. Western Hide & Fur Co., 239 S.W. 724 (Ariz., 1922), but both of these cases rely almost exclusively on a nuisance law argument to support injunctions against previously existing operations that became noxious as residential development occurred around them. 7 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Moms (2) Encourage the resolution of nuisance problems through private market -like negotiation among all affected parties; (3) Serve as a market surrogate where such nego- tiations fail, i.e., offer last resort arbitration for land use conflicts; (4) Impose the least restrictive solution on the parties that find litigation necessary; and (5) Interfere to the least possible extent (com- mensurate with the above) in private market choices affecting land use. I An enormous range of potentially efficient reso- lutions of nuisance conditions exists, and a good regula- tory or legal process precludes as few of those options ( as possible. Consider some of the ways a nuisance problem can be corrected: payment of damages to injured parties termination of the nuisance -producing activity, redesign, of the activity to eliminate the production of the nuisance, amelioration by buffering the effects of the nuisance on I the property of the nuisance source, buffering on the Property of the owner suffering the injury, acquisition of easements from affected or potentially affected owners,,, and relocation of the activity to another site. Any combination of these or others is a contender for the ideal point E in Figure 1. Major Problems with Nuisance Law Current nuisance law has evolved into a variety of sometimes obscure forms, from its roots in common law, I and this variety has led tocomments implying i P Ying the field is little more than a "residual catchall" for unspecific torts. Nuisance law has developed a handful of i 7Prosser on Torts, 3rd ed., Publishing Co., ].964), P.'592. Most writ-ersMinnwho comment on the field of nuisance law seem to regard the field as messy and confused. G' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MO RIES categories and distinctions as an aid in sorting out disputes, but most of these have not proven to be very helpful or are simply the result of historical accident. 8The closest concept in the law to the model of negative externalities presented in this paper is the private nuisance in fact. A private nuisance is one which affects one or more persons in the enjoyment of an individual right, not similarly shared by the general public. W.G. Duncan Coal Co. v Jones, 254 S.W. 2d 720 (Ky. 1953), Adams v. Commissioners, 102 A. 2d 830 (Md., 1954). Public nuisances are those which infringe upon rights shared as a whole by the citizens of the community. Echave v. Citv of Grand Junction, 193 P. 2d 277, Colo., 1946), Mandell v. Pivnick, 120 A 2d 175, (Conn., 1956). Many kinds of public nuisance (e.g.,disturbing the peace) could just as well be regarded as criminal wrongs as civil ones. A nuisance per se is an act, occupation, or structure which is a nuisance regardless of its loca- tion or surroundings. Dill v. Exel Packing Co., 331 P. 2d 539 (Kan., 1958); Bluemer v. Saginaw Oil & Gas Sery 97 N.W. 2d 90 N.W. 2d 90 (Mich., 19591). Activities "disorderly houses") meeting the criterion are unsurpris- ingly rare. The nuisance in fact is something which became a nuisance by virtues ofits location or surroundings. Lauderdale County Board of Education v Alexander, 110 S 2d 911, (Ala., 1959). Nuisances per se and public ff nuisances are typically enumerated in ordinances and sta- tutes : A permanent nuisance is "of such a character and existing under such circumstances that it will be reason- ably certain to continue indefinitely in the future. This contemplates that it be at one productive of all the damage that can result from it. Hence, the damage is said to be original . . . An abatable nuisance is not ordinarily considered a permanent nuisance." Ryan v. Emmetsbur, 4 N.W. 2d 435 (Iowa, 1912). The implication of this is that a permanent nuisance is one which cannot be separated I from the activity producing it, a determination which I should frequently be outside the technical competence of the court. The distinction between courts of law and of equity has sometimes clouded or limited the remedies con- sidered (damages versus injunction), but the distinction does not seem to be a serious handicap in practice. Tres- pass is an actionable invasion of a possessor's interest in the exclusive possession of land, whereas a nuisance is a similar invasion of the use and enjoyment of land Martin v. Re nolds Metals Co., 342 P. 2d 790 at 792, (Or., 9 Trespass automatically implies some injury even if it is nothing more than temporary and limited posses- sion, but requires a physical invasion of a property right. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES One can get the impression that zoning has cut the heart out of nuisance law, leaving the latter with a few crumbs and loose ends. Yet nuisance law stands ready in most respects to function effectively as a land use control. The obstacles which stand in the way are primarily two: (1) Failure To Separate The Nuisance From Its Source. By far the largest impediment to greater use of nuisance law is the apparent inability to separate I conceptually the nuisance itself -- that which interferes with the enjoyment of property -- from the activity or circumstances which gives rise to the nuisance. Although there are some indications that an awareness of this distinction exists, it is not reflected in judicial thinking at critical points. By failing to distinguish the nuisance from its source, courts have become involved in a plethora of tangential side issues -- which activity i was there first,9 how easily the injured party can defend against the nuisance, 10 how easily the source can abate the nuisance, 11 how long the source has been in operation, 12 I 9Bates v. Quality Ready Mix Co. 154 N.W. 2d 852 (Iowa, j 1967); York v. Stallings, 341 P. 2d 529 (Or., 1959); Kramer 1 v. Sweet, 1969 P. 2d 892 (Or., 1946). 10McCartyv. Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 81 N.E. 549, 13 L.R.A. (N.S.) 465 (NY, 1907); also Restatement of Torts (1939), sections 827 and 828. Godard'v. Babson -Dow Mfg. Co., 47 N.E. 2d 303 (Mass., 1943). 12LouisvilleRef. Co. v. Mudd, 339 S.W. 2d 181 (Ky., 1960); Waschak v. Moffat, 96 A. 2d 163 (Pa. 1953). 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES how much has been invested in the activity,13 the economic or social value of the activity to the communithe whether or not there are alternative locations for either partyl5__ all of which are irrelevant and unnecessary. They simply need not concern the court, if attention and remedies are directed at the nuisance, not the activity. A schematic representation of the relationship between the nuisance and its source is shown in figure 2. The nuisance is identified with the external effects and the impacts of those effects on property rights other than those of the nuisance-producing activity. Whether or not a nuisance exists depends upon both the nature of the effects and the nature of the recipient. By way of example, an apartment building may have tenants who own cars; these cars and those of guests using the unpaved and unscreened parking lot located on the site of the apartment building create dust (aggravated by wind) and danger (especially for children and elderly persons) that reduce the enjoyment of nearby residential property owners and residents. The nuisance can be abated I' or ameliorated by fencing and landscaping the affected properties, by paving and screening the parking lot, prohibiting the residents or the guests from using cars, or by prohibiting the apartment building. Even if the apartment is nonconforming, there is insufficient social purpose to justify tearing it down or closing it up, yet there is equally little reason why the parking lot should not be paved and screened. Finding the optimal solution requires being able to separate the source (the apartment building)from the nuisance (dust and danger to nearby residents). 13 San Antonio v. Cam Warnecke, 267 S.W. 2d 466 (Tex., 1954); Roy v. C euro et Motor Car Co., 277 N.W. 744 (Mich., j 1933). — i' 14Canfieldv. Quayle, 10 N.Y. Supp. 2d 781, (1939). 15Robinsonv. Westman, 29 N.W. 2d 1 (Minn., 19471, / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111[s source nuisance - producing activity Property line Impact Injured party Impact linkages affected NUISANCE party 1 Figure 2. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOURCE AND NUISANCE 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401r4ES Perhaps the most pernicious manifestation of the inability to separate source from nuisance is the balancing test that is frequently used to determine whether the harm is substantial enough to recognize the existence of a nuisance: the harm caused by the nuisance is weighed against the benefit created by the activity. 16 It should be obvious that the existence of a nuisance has nothing to do with whether the activity or land use producing it is socially valuable or worthless, but apparently courts have perceived that their only alternative would be to shut down the activity. This need not and should not be so; the most direct response to evidence substantiating the existence of a nuisance, and normally the correct one, is to abate the nuisance, not enjoin the activity. 16SeeClinic & Hospital v. McConnell, 236 S.W. 2d 384, 23 A.L.R. , Kremer v. Turkey Valley Community School District, 212 N.W. 2d 625, (Iowa, 1973); Comment, Injunction -Nuisance -Balance of Convenience," Yale Law Journal, 37 (1927), pp. 96- 107, and Robie V. Lillis, 299 A. 2d 155 (N.H., 1972). Activitieswill not be enjoined where they are essential to the defense of the nation, Pritchett v. Wade, 73 S. 2d 533 (Ala., 1954); Conn. Heppenstall Co. v. Berkshire Chemical Co., 35 A. 2d 845 (Conn., 1944); or they are the source of livelihood for a substantial segment of the city's population, Riter v. Keokuk Electro -Metals Co., 82 N.W. 2d 151 (Iowa, 1957); or they are a primary activi_y in the state, York vv Stalli_ngs_, 341 P. 2d 529 (Or., 1959); Bartel v. Ridge- field Co., 229 P. 306 (Wash., 1924), or they pay a large amount of taxes, Koseris v. J.R. SimplotCo., 352 P. 2d 235 (Idaho, 1960); or where the public interest would suffer, Store v. Central Hide & RenderingCo., 226 S.W. 3d 615 (Tex., 1950 . A notable exception is Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co., 257 N.E. 2d 870, 40 A.L.R. 3d 590, N.Y., 1970 in which an injunction was denied but full compensation was required. As the court pointed out, "It seems reasonable to think that the risk of being required to pay permanent damages to injured property owners by cement plant owners would itself be a reasonably effective spur to research for improved techniques to minimize nuisance." 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES It is then up to the respective parties to ;negotiate a transaction of property rights if a mutually acceptable arrangment can be found. 17 (2) Im uted Transfers of Ploperty PropertyRi hts.18 A common sense notion holds that once things have been a certain way for a long enough period of time, the actual circumstances become accepted and the process by which they developed no longer of interest; at some point, past wrongs must be ignored and new decisions based on current circumstances. Certainly there must be limits to how far it is possible to go back in time to correct previous inequities, or we would all be immobilized by the threat Of liability hanging over our heads. This common sense has been misapplied on occasion, with the result that private property rights have been discarded when they might easily have been salvaged. 17A number of remedies are available, in combinations, and these are discussed in somewhat more detail below. For example, under certain conditions the court may allow the source activit Property . The Boomerocondemn decision.hasethemeffectent rofsdoingher just that. 18 user has dfull eorossession is the use of property as if the period of time; inPartial cases where adverse ppossessionvis some recognized, it is the same as title in fee simple. Fritts V. Ericson,y3adverse dpossessionm. Jur. 2d 79 (Ariz., 1960�— Ericsoar 1107, 3 easement, Possession Y 'ripen into a prescriptive Anneber v g a private nuisance to continue b Curr �rt�, 28 S.E. 2d 769, 152 A.L.R. 338 Y right. Farmer s Livestock Market, 293 S,W (Ga., 1944); Bradbur Marble Co. v. 2d 139 1908); Thornburg v PortaofePortland h376oP. 2dloo(594 (MY61); Sherlock v. Louisville N.A. � C R (Or., 1962); If the intent is to prevent recover 0., 17 N.E. 171 1888). the doctrine of Y of historical damages, then Present, laches and statutes of limitations would seem and protection from suit for past damages should not future result in conveying re property rights. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES The particular form of the operative principle, referred to as adverse possession, states that nuisances which have existed for a long time (e.g., twenty years) with- out anyone complaining have a right to persist even though they could have been enjoined at a previous point in time. A parallel notion is that anyone who purchases a property subjected to a nuisance does so with full knowledge and is presumably getting benefits equal to the costs. Thus once circumstances have been a certain way long enough, everyone operates on the knowledge of those circumstances and takes them into account. To then attempt to remove the negative effect only leads to windfall gains and losses. While this reasoning has a good deal of appeal, to accept it without qualification is to admit that once an undesirable situation has been allowed to exist, it has a right to exist in perpetuity -- nothing can be made better -- and that is an unacceptable result. There is, of course, the option to buy out or condemn the rights vested in the undesirable conditions, but it is not always necessary to go that far. All that is required is a conceptual distinction between the present and the past: injuries which occurred in the past are sunk costs, and not recoverable, whereas present injuries are another matter. One property owner may have possessed adversely a nuisance easement for twenty years, but that should not imply that that easement is a permanent one, good in perpetuity. By starting the present at the date an objec- tion to the nuisance is registered, liability for past injuries is denied while still creating incentives for the beneficial resolution of currently undesirable situations. 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES r1oplEs GUIDELINES FOR RESOLVING NUISANCE CONFLICTS Resolution of a nuisance by the court can be out- lined in a three step sequence: (1) Establish the normal character of the neighbor- hood in which the nuisance claim is located, and the standards relating to the type of nuisance in that Particular type of neighborhood. (2) Determine whether the standards are exceeded by the nuisance. (3) Select the appropriate remedy. The first two steps are for the purpose of establish- ing the existence of a nuisance, and depend upon a base of empirical information pertaining to the properties affected. Once the circumstances of the situation have been assessed, the correct form of the remedy should be fairly clear. Existence of a nuisance should always imply that the source property owner is liable for the cost of correcting the nuisance bi- compensating the affected parties. 19 The three steps are described in more detail below. The Four vantage points can be used to determine the character of the neighborhood, both with respect to types of activities and also to the associated standards or levels of nuisance tolerance. 19 Where the owner and the tenant are not the same, ! or ownership is complicated, some effort may be required to pinpoint the responsible parties le that responsibility lies with the sourceto�f thencinuisance I still holds. State ex. rel. Webster v. Dau hent 330 S.W. 2d 61; (Tenn., 1975 58 Am, Jur. 2d 67.7; State of New Jersey De L-. of Environmental P roteCt](n V. Exxon Corp., 376 A. 2d 1.339 (N„7., .1.977)• 16 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP]DS-DES PIO1NES 1. Existing Structures And Population. Physical and demographic characteristics can readily portray the type of neighborhood that exists: land use, density, age and quality of structures; age, income, family structure, ethnic composition, etc., of the resident S. 20 2. Trends And Patterns. While the existing character will normally be dominant in setting nuisance standards, it may sometimes be possible to foresee changes which suggest a different character in the future. If the general quality is increasing, then higher standards of nuisance tolerance may be applied; if a neighborhood is evolving toward generally higher nuisance levels, then it is important to ensure that individual property owners do not suffer in the transition. This does not mean that a few owners can or should be allowed to impede change, buc it does mean that their losses, if any, should be compensated to the extent reasonable. i 3. Natural Suitability. Independently of what t is actually there and happening in a neighborhood, it may also be possible to perceive what it is inherently most suited for, and consider that reference in terms of neighborhood character. If nuisances become inter- nalized in neighborhoods where this was generally not the case in the past, the evolution of the nighborhood may switch away from what it was becoming and toward that which would be most suitable. Location, topography, historic quality of structures, population, etc., may help assess the inherent suitability of a neighborhood. 20 Examples of this kind of information are found in report number 3, Land Use Intensity and report number 10, Impact Survey 1976. 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 4. Expressed Public Policy. Current land use plans, zoning, and other expressions of public policy toward the neighborhood may shed some light on the character -- both present and future -- but it is frequently the case that these policies have less force than the three influences described above. where all four are consistent, character can be determined with some confidence; where there are apparent conflicts, it becomes necessary to predict which viewpoint is likely to provide the most accurate picture of the future character of the neighborhood. Determining Whether Standards Have Been Exceeded A reasonably comprehensive list of nuisances the direct negative impacts felt by an affected property -- is provided in Table 1. Some of these impacts are readily measurable, while other are highly subjective. For even the measurable ones, the correct threshold level of tolerance may be difficult to set. Nonetheless, there is as much law and as much regulation based on the most elusive of these qualities as there is on the apparently more objective, and there is reason to believe that existing techniques of impact assessment can be greatly improved. Although relatively recent, effort is being directed at the preparation of manuals and guidelines for assessing negative environmental and neighborhood effects, and a great deal of material is available. 21 The basic prin- ciple is that individual properties should not contribute more than their share to ambient levels of nuisances, and at least approximate levels can be estimated for most of 21Review of some of this material is contained in report number 1, Impact Evaluation: Purposes, Procedures, and Guidelines. IN MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401RES Table I Forms of Nuisances (Negative Impacts) I. suspended particulate matter 2. trash and litter 3. smoke 4. odors and fumes 5. toxic pollutants and pathogens 6. noise WATER BORNE 1. runoff 2. standing water 3. silt and debris 4. toxic pollutants and pathogens ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS 1. slippage -prone soils 2. earthquake stability OTHER PHYSICAL 1. vibration 2. structural undermining 3. physical dangers 4. interference with other activities 5. heat 6. animals 7. fire hazard NON PHYSICAL 1. light, air, and breathing space infringement 2. glare 3. unsightliness 4. privacy and life style conflicts 5. fright, mental depression, and anguish 6. offense to morals I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES h these impacts. cultural norms are constantly changing, but it should be no harder to deal with changing tastes than it has been to make decisions about injuries to morals and give due consideration to mental depression. Within residential neighborhoods, say, different neighborhoods can evolve toward different types of nuisance characteristics, idependently of other attributes (such as income) of the neighborhoods. Some families with live -and -let -live attitudes may like to retain quantities of scrap materials, rebuild, cars, and do what they please when the mood strikes; in return, they tolerate the activities of their neighbors. On the other hand, other households may take pride in well maintained houses, colorful gardens, and a tidy neighborhood. Thus "natural" zones will develop, and a person buying into a neighborhood acquires the standards which go with that neighborhood. A weedy yard in a pristine neighborhood is therefore a nuisance, and can be corrected at the offending owners' expense, whereas the same yard in a hang -loose neighborhood is acceptable. 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110I11Es For most of the items in Table 1, the intent behind them is self evident, but a few comments are warranted. While the list proceeds generally from easily measured impacts at the top to highly qualitative and culturally -based effects at the bottom, there are a few exceptions. Smoke, for example, is actually an aesthetic concern once the particulate, odors, and toxic effects are removed. Health hazards may be carried by air, water, or animal vectors.22 Environmental hazards create nuisance in the form of risk, even when there is no physical danger to adjacent properties: a house which collapses once in twenty years because its foundations are not designed to handle slippage -prone soils still has an adverse impact on its neighbors. Light, air and breathing space have been used to justify setback require- ments and other kinds of design standards, while halfway houses and funeral parlors have been enjoined solely on the basis of fear (often unwarranted) and the mere thought 22Many situations arise with animals, some of which are nuisances and some of which are not,' Rats create dangers for children and pets, and carry diseases that injure humans; hence rats need to be controlled. Pets may be within the bounds of what is normal for a neighborhood or they may be seriously objectionable depending upon the specifics. For example, "The business of boarding, raising, and training dogs in large numbers, in a rural community, such as that wherein the parties' is not a nuisance s hereto live classified if operper se. It would, of course, be so ated in a city, town or village." Robertson et al. v. Shi , 50 S. 2d 699 at 704 (La., 1957), Animals may be sufficient) destructive humans, or multi 1 y (if they attack escape is an unaccepprolifi ally) that the potential for 147 S.W, 2d 388 at 392, (x Turner v. Shro shire, animals will frequently create la4nuisance awhen a rger number mallof number of the same animal do not. 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES ,� of dead bodies. 23 It is worth pointing out that as many, if not more, decisions have been based on the supposedly undefinable and unreplicatable qualities in the non-physical group as on any of the other groups of categories. 24 Remedies In order to effectively apply a nuisance strategy to the resolution of land use conflicts, courts should have available four instruments for use in forming a solution. These instruments may be used in many combinations, i.e., they are not mutally exclusive: 23Bulk controls, including setback lines, are designed to regulate density, provide adequate daylight, and ensure privacy. Thomas Horne, "Zoning: Setback Lines: A Re- appraisal," William & Mary Law Review, 10 (1969) pp. 739 - 754. Large electric signs have been prohibited from operating between the hours of midnight and 7 AM. Shel- burne, Inc. v. Crosson Corp. et al., 122 A. 749 (N.J., 1923). Junked automobiles and other eyesores may be properly regarded as nuisances under suitable circumstances, Parkersburg Builders Material Co. et al. v. Bauack, 191 S.E. 368 W.Va., 1937); State ex. rel. Civello v. New Orleans, 97 S. 440 (La., 1923); Noel, "Unaesthetic Sights as Nuisances," Cornell Law Quarterly, 25 (1937), pp. 1-17. A tuberculosis sanitarium was enjoined in a residential neighborhood on the basis of fear, even though there was no danger of contagion. Everett et al. v. Paschall, 111 P. 879 (Wash., 1910). Funeral homes have been similarly enjoined due to mental depression. Powell v. Taylor, 263 S.W. 2d 906 (Ark., 1954). 24 There seems to be a misconception on the part of some persons that courts and administrative agencies can only handle very precisely defined and readily measurable sorts of impacts. On the contrary, the courts, at least, have evidenced a willinqness to pass highly qualitative and subtle judgments. What may not be recognized is that the strength of an argument is not dependent upon measura- bility but on logic and consistency; precise measurement cannot be substituted for a weak rationale. A yard which is strewn with junk (especially automobiles) or choked with weeds creates a nuisance because it is unsightly, and there is little problem in perceiving the negative impact on the neighborhood even though the standard is aesthetic. Bad case law and bad regulations arise from bad thinking, not from difficult or subtle or judgmental situations. 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1. Abatement. The dominant remedy should be simply the prohibition of the nuisance; most importantly, it should be the nuisance which is enjoined, not the activity producing it. This is true whether or not the nuisance appears to be separable from the activity.25 The only determination that is required to support mandatory abatement is the existence of the nuisance, i.e., a negative externality which is above reasonable levels for the context in which it occurs. Once existence has been established, abatement is implied; it is up to the pri- vate parties to negotiate as to whether the owner of the nuisance source wishes to continue it by acquiring an easement from affected parties at a level of compensation which they feel is adequate. 26 Courts can, but need not establish the value of such an easement; to do so places the court in the position of supplying a form of voluntary j arbitration. 25Injunction against a specific activity instead of against the nuisance itself can be justified if two con- ditions are met: first, the nuisance cannot in any reasonable way be divorced from the activity; and second, the damages required to compensate affected parties would iobviously be well beyond what the source would be willing to pay. There appears to be little reason for courts to make this determination, since requiring abatement of the I nuisance will, if the conditions apply, have the same effect. 26Thecourt may impose a permanent injunction against the nuisance on the grounds that the property owner does not have the right to convey easements which are especially dangerous to life or injurious to health, even if limited to the property owner him/herself. For example, an owner should not be allowed to risk exposure to highly toxic chemicals even if compensation is received. Public health regulations would normally be expected to cover such situations. I 91 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Z• Damages. The existence of a nuisance implies some level of injury to the affected parties. If the issue is a prospective one (a development proposal which will create a nuisance), then damages would not be awarded, Of course, even though a determination has been made that a nuisance would, in fact, exist. Also, if the nuisance currently exists but the injury is de minimus enough to be disregarded by the plaintiff if the nuisance is termi- nated, there may be no need or desire to award damages. Otherwise, some amount of damages probably should be paid. Several principles can be drawn upon for assessing damages: (a) For nuisances which are continuous or recurrent, damages should be awarded per unit of time Actual in , e•g• per day. Jury will I raucus behavior vary, sometimes randomly (outbursts of � ), sometimes periodically (trash spills on the day before garbage collection), sometimes as a function of weather (dust blown by wind), or season (flooding from storm runoff) or time of day (rush hour traffic) , but a damage rate per unit of time is easy to apply and repre- sents an average or expected value. Some kinds of damages may be awarded on an incident basis i.e. each time it happens. 27 (b) Liability for damages should accrue from the time the first objection to the nuisance is raised.28 I i j 27Abatementby self help is permitted in emergency situations (removing an obstruction which is about en cause i flooding), allowiny tog the injured or potentially injured e property the tneed toedoaso can ss nbehestablished oand nthe edamage r as odone sto the source property is not unreasonable under the circum- stances. Where self -abatement was clearly available and not made use of, less..'han-actual damages may as a result. (IA Morrison v. Mar uardt 92 y be awarded owa, 1968). q m. Dec. 444 28 The most signi.ficanL effect- of Lhis guideline is to avoid the question of adverse possession or prescrip- tion(supra note 18). Reasonable attention and effort must- doebe devoted t -o the Pursuit of re1i.or, so that Lhe conflict s not dray on indefinitely, but str.i.cL interpretation re the guideline could require continuous effort at seeking redress and thereby prevent dboutamages based e an objection somwith enoafurther action nuisance being ttakenssubsent quently. oint in the past 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Unless no efforts toward abatement are claimed by the defendent, evidence of the nuisance should also date from the first objection, although previous evidence of damage may still be relevant. This principle relieves a property owner from the possibility of paying damages retroactively, yet creates an incentive for abatement even while litigating the existence of the nuisance. (c) For injury which will continue, or is likely to continue, into the future, either indefinitely or for some specified period of time, the amount of damages should be consolidated into a single value, representing the value of a temporary or permanent easement to continue the nuisance. The easement is put into writing and becomes a form of contract. Terms of the easement should include the type of nuisance, the level which is acceptable within the easement (e.g., noise performance standards), and the duration of the easement. As with any easement, the same or subsequent property owners may wish to renegotiate the easement at some time in the future. I3. Condemnation. If the court determines that a nuisance exists, and abates it, then any subsequent ex- change of easements is a private transaction between private parties, assumed to be voluntary and at arm's length. Damages for past injury may or may not be in- cluded. Alternatively, if the court awards damages for i future injury, permitting the nuisance to continue, an j easement has been conveyed without necessarily having the consent of the adversely affected property owner. If both parties have the choice of refusing the transfer of the easement, then the transfer is a free market trans- action; if the defendent is required to accept damages (in lieu of abatement) for future injury, then a private property right has been condemned and a public purpose is required. Such an action is a strenuous one, and must meet both of the following tests: 25 MICROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111ES (a) A general benefit to the community is created or maintained by permitting the nuisance to continue. Since the nuisance itself is not a benefit to the community, Public purpose implies that the nuisance cannot be sepa- rated from the activity producing it, and the value of the activity to the general community is greater than the injury done by the nuisance. 29 Both of these are extremely difficult to support, but condemnation may be necessary in situations in which the injured party could hold up the nuisance -producing activity for an unreasonable price simply because the only alternative would be to shut down the activity. (b) Either the private property owner creating the nuisance is voluntarily willing to shoulder the full burden of compensating the injured party, or else there has been a commitment of public funds for the purpose of paying the public share of the damages. Clearly the latter option requires action by the appropriate legislative body .30 It is possible that the former would be willing to pay 29 This sounds deceptively like the old balancing test, but is not for two very important reasons: (1) Compensation is being paid, in the form of damages, to the injured party; declaring the nuisance as nonexistent because a public purpose outweighs it constitutes the taking of a private property rhTigt without compensation and is, of course, unconstitu- tional; (2) the benefit of the activity is a public benefit, not a private benefit fully internal to a single property owner. Innumerable examples can be found of property owners being forced to subsidize another property owner or the public good simply because the value of the nuisance -creating activity exceeded the injury of the nuisance, and there is no need for this to happen (supra note 16). 30The public sector may be the source of the nuisance (streets, schools), and courts should be able to abate the nuisance (prohibit trucks, for example) or indicate instead the amount of compensation to be paid to affected parties, as with inverse condemnation actions. A greater presumption of public purpose is implied, but it still must be established that the public purpose can only be achieved with continuation of the nuisance. 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES It is possible that the former would be willing to pay in the absence of the latter, although the court is on shaky ground in concluding that a valid public purpose exists for which the public sector is unwilling to pay .31 4. Civil, Criminal And Other Penalties. To ensure compliance with court directives and respect for legal controls on nuisances, courts should have available sev- eral stronger measures for use when justified. Punitive damages may be warranted in cases of malicious intent or reckless negligence, and fine schedules for failure to comply with an injunction should be steep enough to produce action with satisfactory alacrity. 31A situation may arise whereby a property owner becomes "trapped" as the character of the neighborhood evolves toward a tolerance for higher nuisance levels, e.g., from rural residential to heavy industry; cf. Bove v. Donner -Hanna Corp., 236 App. Div. 37, 258 N.Y. Supp. 229 (1932). Ideally, all owners benefit from the demand that exists for property satisfying those conditions (high nuisance levels are acceptable because all activities create externalities and none are especially sensitive to their effects), but some parcels may be less usable by the new activities and the change may occur too rapidly for the owner to recover costs or disinvest. In such instances, the court -night assess damages against the municipality exercising land use control or against the other activities in the neighborhood. In instances where standards are evolving toward higher levels (lower nuisance tolerance), it is well established that the i burden for reducing or eliminating nuisances falls upon the source activities, even though they may have been acceptable in the past. Hadacheck v. Sebastian, supra; i Spur In Inc. v. Del E Webb Development Co., 494 P. 2d VI , 53 A.L.R. 3d 873 (Ariz., 1972); and from City of Fort Smith v. Western Hide and Fur Co., supra: "The case affords, perhaps, an example where a business established at a place remote from population is gradually surrounded and becomes part of a populous center, so that a business which was formerly not an interference with the rights of others has become so by the encroachment of the population. Under these circumstances, private rights must yield to the public good, and a court of equity will afford relief, even where a thing, originally harmless under certain circumstances, has become a nuisance under changed conditions." (p. 726). The equity, however, is between the private property rights of different owners, not between private rights and the public good. 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES Defenses The first line of defense is with the facts of the nuisance itself: How frequently do the impacts occur and how large are they? Often the defense can show that the impacts have been greatly exaggerated, if not imagined. A second line, and probably the place where the majority of conflicts will turn, is whether or not the impacts are ab- normal for the character of the neighborhood. Simply dis- playing other examples of the same kinds of impact in the same or similar neighborhoods is not sufficient, because these may also be nuisances; what must be demonstrated is that these impacts are typical and expected in such a neighborhood. Hypersensitivity is another defense, which holds that the injured party is especially sensitive to the impacts i cited and is demanding a higher level of protection than can normally be justified. If this is the case, then the injured party has the choice of enduring the effects or securing property rights that will ensure the standards of adverse impact that are desired. People allergic to cats probably cannot prevent their neighbors from owning them if that is the only basis for objection. other, more partial defenses, include the assertions that the nuisance has been brought under control and that the plaintiff has failed to 32 pursue the resolution in a reasonably timely fashion. 32A claim that the nuisance is under control does not deny the previous existence of the nuisance and hence may still require a damage settlement; even if all parties agree that the nuisance is currently acceptable, this provides an opportunity for reaching an agreement on what will be regarded as acceptable levels in the future. Consistency of efforts to obtain relief must be evaluated within the specific con- text: an owner may believe that the nuisance has been ade- quately abated or that the plaintiff has lost interest; the injured party may have waited in order to provide the source owner plenty of opportunity to take suitable action, or may be genuinely undecided about the relative importance of the nuisance, or may have observed that the nuisance was tempor- arily abated but then gradually returned. 28 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES I Protection against diseases and other adverse effects which injure human beings is a well established right, but similar kinds of protection against injuries to plants is less supportable. Action to declare nuisances Of such spillovers as weed seeds blown into a garden, insect pests harbored on a nearby property, and blights ± hosted by a neighbor's trees probably should not be I successful. 33 Many of these impacts are the manifestation I I of highly specialized ecological relationships that occur frequently in nature, and the consequences of intervention are complex if not perilous. Contributory negligence is sometimes offered as a basis for defense. This makes sense only under the balanc- ing test, in that the apparent damages caused by the nui- sance would be inflatedby contributory negligence on the Part of the injured, in an effort to demonstrate that the injury exceeds the value of the activity creating the nuisance. Under more sensible guidelines, the only purpose for establishing contributory negligence is to show that II 33Removalof diseased trees, mosquito breeding condi- tions, and weeds may be Justified on aesthetic or health j grounds, and may be required b y statutel but !f seldom actionable on grounds of injury to plantsy are 1y if the condition arises of human activitynaturally and not as a consequence . Economic damage to crops has sometimes j been the basis for an overstepping of this principle; destruction st depends upon ohickory trees which butdoesnotharmthe hickory ptrees) uand(which destruction of cedar trees which similarly host an apple blight have been sanctioned. Miller v. State Entomologist, 135 S.E. 813 (Va., 1926), Declaring the host as nuisances has the effect of conveying an easement to the owners of fruit trees, without compensation to the hickory and cedar owners. If peaches are socially valuable enough to justify the acquisition of hickory rights within two miles of every peach tree, then the consumers of peaches should be willing to pay for those rights indirectly, in the price Of peaches. If peach consumption is of sufficiently high ! pr to justify public intervention in the market, rio peach tree owners may be given the power to condemn j' hickory rights, but still with f�11 compensaticn. See also Upton v. Feton 4 P. Supp, 565, (Nebr., 1932); Miller v, S_ choene, 276 U U.S. 272, (1928), in /- - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 6101NES justifiable damages need not be as high as actual damages, due to actions on the part of the injured to exacerbrate the negative impacts. 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES CONSEQUENCES OF CHANGING THE RULES Any time the criteria by which decisions are made become changed, a certain amount of transitional uncertainty is created until new rules become familiar. With land use control, zoning offers specific standards by which compliance can be easily ascertained; if the standards are met, then permission to build is necessarily granted. Even if the basis for the standards is obscure, the property owner contemplating development knows what will be permitted. A nuisance law basis for land use control offers less a priori notice to property owners, and appears to be less clear -- and hence more uncertain -- in its administration. Offsetting this particular disadvantage, however, are a number of virtues: (1) A nuisance orientation would be based on logic and reasonableness, which zoning frequently lacks when it comes to specifics. Once the logic is understood, it would be easier to assess nuisance impacts than administer the latest twist in zoning standards. (2) A moderate amount of practice with a nuisance approach would result in design standards, guidelines, and impact criteria that would be as specific as zoning but focused only on the externalities of land use activi- ties and not the irrelevant characteristics. (3) Zoning controls and nuisance controls effectively restrict different aspects of land use, with some aspects controlled by one not controlled by the other. Because a nuisance approach deals only with the externalities, it would allow more development options than does zoning, while still restricting some kinds of destructive develop- ment that are permitted by zoning. 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES (4) Zoning may appear to give rigid protection, but rigidity is actually a weakness both politically and legally when the restrictions as imposed in specific instances serve no apparent public or private purpose. Potential negative impacts should be the sole subject of attention, and litigation on "technicalities" and procedural requirements would be minimized. Residents would have a sound basis for objecting to any land use which did, in fact, injure them, while owners who wished to use their property in ways compatible with the neighborhood would not be interfered with unnecessarily. Zoning does not adequately protect property owners in older mixed-use neighborhoods from the side effects of nearby development. Unless controls are imposed which allow no change at all, such neighborhoods are at the mercy of property owners who are not required to be sensitive to their impacts on the quality of the neighborhood. Shift- ing from a zoning to a nuisance orientation for land use control will require new procedures, new guidelines, and new ways of thinking, but the approach offers a much more suitable instrument for protecting neighborhood quality than the existing practice of zoning. 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RES REFERENCES Berger, "A Policy Analysis of the 'Taking' Problem," New York University Law Review, 49 (1974), pp. 165-226. Bettman, "The Constitutionality of Zoning," Harvard Law Review, 37 (1924), pp. 834-859. Beuscher and Morrison, "Judicial Zoning Through Recent Nuisance Cases," Wisconsin Law Review, (1955), pp. 440-457. Bryden, "Zoning: Rigid, Flexible, or Fluid?" i J. Urban Lawyer, 44 (1967), pp. 287-326. Calabresi and Melamed, "One View of the Cathedral," Harvard Law Review, 85 (1972), pp. 1089-1128. I Comment, "Zoning and the Law of Nuisance," Fordham Law Review, 29 (1961), pp. 749-756. Comment, "The Social Paradox of Zoning and Land Controls in and Expanding Urban Economy," Dicta, 39 (1962), pp. 96-107. j Comment, "Injunction - Nuisance - Balance of Convenience," Yale Law Journal, 37 (1927), pp. 96-107. Comment, "Inverse Condemnation: A Growing Problem?" Tulsa Law Journal, 3 (1966), pp. 169-175. Comment, "The Aesthetic as a Factor Considered in Zoning," Wyoming Law Journal, 15 (1960), pp. 77-84• Ellickson, Robert C., "Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls," j University of Chicago Law Review, 40 (1973), pp. 681-781. Hagman, Donald, Urban Plannin and Land Development Control Law, St. Paul: West, Horne, "Zoning: Setback Lines: A Reappraisal," Killiam & Mary Law Review, 10 (1969), pp. 739-754. Kurtz, "The Effect of Land Use Regulation on the Common Law of Nuisance in Urban Areas," Dicta, 36 (1959), pp. 414-425. FI ICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id DINES Lester, "Nuisance - As a 'Taking' of Property," University of Miami Law Review, 17 (1963), pp. 537-556. Levitin, "Change of Neighborhood in Nuisance Cases," 13 Clev. - Mar. Law Review 340 (1964). Mandelker, Daniel, "The Role of Law in the Planning Process," Law and Contemporary Problems, 30 (1965), pp. 26-37. Martz, Rights Incident to the Possession of Land, reprinted from American Law of Property. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1954. Michelman, Frank, "Property, Utility, and Fairness: Comments on the Ethical Foundations of Just Compensation Law," Harvard Law Review, 80 (1967). Michelman, Frank, "Toward a Practical Standard for Aesthetic Regulation," The Practical Lawyer, 15 (1969), 36. Michelman, Frank, "Pollution as a Tort: A Non -Accidental Perspective on Calabresi's Costs," Yale Law Journal, 80 (1971), pp. 647-686. Mishan, "Pareto Optimality and the Law," Oxford Economic Papers, 19 (1967), 255. McRae, "The Development of Nuisance in the Early Common Law," University of Florida Law Review, 1 (1948), pp. 27-43. Nixon, "Jane Jacobs and the Law - Zoning for Diversity Examined," Northwestern University Law Review, 62 (1967), pp. 314-356. Noel, "Unaesthetic Sights as Nuisances," Cornell Law Quarterly, 25 '(1939), pp. 1-17. Noel, "Retroactive Zoning and Nuisances," Columbia Law Review, 41 (1941), pp. 4?7-473. Noel, "Nuisances From Land in its Natural Condition," Harvard Law Review, 56 (1943), pp. 772-798. Posner, Richard A., Economic Analysis of Law. Roston: Little Brown, and Co., 1972, p. 18. /. - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :d01REs Prosser, Wm. L., Handbook of the Law of Torts, 3rd ed. St. Paul. West, 1971. I Prosser, Wm. L., "Private Action for Public Nuisance," Virginia Law Review, 52 (1966), pp. 997-1027. Ross, "Land Use Control in Metropolitan Areas: The Failure of Zoning and a Proposed Alternative," Southern California Law Review, 45 (1972), pp. 335-364. Symposium, "Planned Unit Development," University of Pennsylvania Law Review 114 (1965), 2. Thompson, "Land Use Allocation and the Problem of Wipeouts From Private and Governmental Land Uses," Environmental Law, 6 ( ), pp, 431-452. Wilson, William H., "Nuisance as a Modern Mode of Land Use Control," Washington Law Review, 46 (1970), pp. 47-100. Winfield, "Nuisance as a Tort," Cambridge Law Journal, 4 (1931), pp. 189-206. MICROFILMED BY DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IME5 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter S. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the Institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES i. -r ..T-�. Yl Y�S. 1'l.i..� . �r�..(.v'�a . .. v' r'�:•:�A fig'" I The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C.Neuhausert Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster* Max Selzer* Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Pelf Cain"• Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members •• Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. F rl HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) ±i } COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION t I J u Douglass Lee A 9 May 1978 )) North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study ( Douglass Lee, Project Leader I I i Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa d Department of Community Development City of Iowa City I y I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. Citizen participation (broadly construed to include Presentations to and discussion with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, as well as neighborhood groups) was given a high priority in the study for two reasons: (1) citizens, whether private individuals, appointed commissioners, or elected officials, possess information and viewpoints about the problems that are essential sources of input and critical review; and (2) novel ideas need testing and time for digestion before they can have much impact. We thus tried to expose as many of our ideas as Possible to public scrutiny, in a variety of forums, and reconstruct them on the basis of the responses obtained. This report describes that process. Besides the commissioners and council members who provided encouragement for the study and time on their agenda for presentation and discussion, many North Side residents devoted time and energy to setting up and attending meetings. Most deserving of special mention are Ken Hubel, Ginny Alexander, Dave Cater, Marsha Linder, Pat Eckhardt, and others who hosted block meetings in their homes. A few copies of the reports from these meetings were produced, under the title, "Meet- ings With Residents of the North Side Neighborhood," and these are included as an appendix to the present report. MP MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIDEs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES ;i Z: CONTENTS r FOREWORD 1 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1 INTRODUCTION 5 j PHASES OF PARTICIPATION IN THE NORTH SIDE STUDY 7 ji Proposal Phase 7 Neighborhood Meetings Phase 9 Public Presentation Phase 13 Revision and Publication Phase 16 Followup Discussion of Final Reports 17 EVALUATION 20 ((� APPENDICES I A. Documentation for the Proposal Phase 22 B. Meetings with Residents of the North Side 46 C. Documentation from the Public Presentation Phase 146 l D. Written Critiques on Preliminary Reports 165 f i t i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A wide range of participation and interaction tech- niques were used in the study, including block level dis- cussions with residents in their homes, public presentations to City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission, general neighborhood meetings, planning and discussion ses- sions with neighborhood civic groups, and extensive meetings and discussions with City and University administrative staff. Some general conclusions drawn from this experience are listed below: - The greater the diversity in a neighborhood, the greater the difficulty of developing a cohesive neighborhood organization. Each subgroup within the neighborhood (homeowners, renters, students, busi- nesses, hospitals, etc.) pursues its own self interest, and these may come into conflict. In order to facilitate planning, conflicts should be resolved within the neighborhood before going to the City for action, since conflicting responses from different neighborhood groups will generally result in no action. One alternative is to work through whatever groups exist, and attempt to achieve consistent positions; the other alternative is to form a single i umbrella group that will develop a unified position for the neighborhood. We worked almost exclusively f with the North Side Neighbors organization, which maintained a single-family homeowners protectionist istance while preservation of a neighborhood with mixed structure types, age groups, and life styles r remained a high priority of the study group. Student residents are especially difficult to involve because they have little at stake in the neighborhood, and are occupied by personal interests that focus on school and related activities. - Innovative efforts need time and nurture before significant public action can be expected. Seeds of ideas need to grow and develop, and perceptions about what is feasible and desirable need time to change. For example, support for alternative parking policies will be different depending upon whether personal ease of parking and access are regarded as most important, or cutting down on traffic and parked cars is the dominant concern. We hope that the final MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES reports issued by the study will stimulate the neighborhood to articulate its own position at some point in the future and support City policies that will accomplish some of the residents, objec- tives. - A full range of community participation activities is essential to the success of any planning project, most importantly because the various citizens, staff, and officials have information and insights are needed in attempting that to solve the problems. Many other side benefits also accrue from community participation: people are given a chance to digest concepts and relationships before being confronted with a choice, support for proposals for change can be developed as the study progresses, citizens have greater confidence in government decisions if they feel that the process is open and above board, cit- izens develop a better understanding of the political process by working with it, politicians and staff obtain some idea of what reactions to various pro- posals are likely to be before they have to commit themselves to a position, etc. Planning should involve a two-way exchange of knowledge and learning between any two participants in the process. - Administrative staff in public and semi-public agencies are frequently -- almost alwayshelpful and cooperative in providing information, and are often willing to devote large amounts of time and effort to explaining regulations, procedures, etc., and reviewing preliminary drafts of reports. It helps to have questions and requests clearly in mind before calling upon local officials, and repeated visits are generally necessary to develop an -under- standing of the work carried on by various persons and agencies and to reach a level of fluent communi- cation. Patience and goodwill are he this flow of information. 1pful in creating The Planning and Zoning Commission can serve as a pre-processor of issues for the City Council, allowing Possibly controversial topics before the council has to get some exposure to face them. With the North Side study, this did not occur for several reasons: specific proposals were offered in the preliminary reports did some instances, but not recommend items for action, so there was little pressure for quick reso- lution; media coverage of Commission meetings was scant or absent, and few citizens or spectators were present; and the interests of the Planning Commissioners MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo111Es were not necessarily the same as those of Council. Frequent contact was made with newspaper and radio reporters, but no serious media campaign was ever mounted by the study group. When conclusions and recommendations are presented in reports, the largest share of attention is likely to come from organizations that appear to be (or perceive themselves as appearing in the report to be) partially responsible for the problems. These organizations sometimes react initially with some hostility, but are usually willing to go over the offending material in detail and present their side of the case. Un- fortunately, their interest in the substance of the problem and associated recommendations is usually limi- ted to defending their lack of responsibility for the problem. Individuals able to take positions or act on the recommendations are likely to be higher up in the organization, but there are occasional exceptions. - Most people do not like to be told that they have a problem to deal with, and they like it less if it appears that they are contributing to the problem in some way. Natural reactions tend to be (a) there is no problem, (b) the problem is the responsibility of somebody else (not the City, not the University, not a particular agency), and (c) everything possible is already being done to solve the problem. There is also some tendency to associate blame for the existence of the problem with the person who brings news of the problem. - Any group or organization operating independently and on its own initiative runs the risk of being regarded with suspicion by other groups. Neighborhood residents viewed the North Side study team as hand -in -glove with the City staff, the City staff tended to see the study team as too close to the neighborhood residents, and the University was apprehensive that the study might stir up town -gown conflicts. While many of these fears are rationally based, most persons with whom we interacted found they could develop working relationships with the study group; yet the study was never completely accepted by any group. Many residents were warmly grateful for our efforts, but others were not and some complained individually to City staff and politicians, with the results that the neighborhood has not, so far, taken any position with respect to our recommendations. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I University researchers and city bureaucracies operate in entirely different environments, and the two styles can be a source of friction. Academics believe in a marketplace of ideas, often naively expecting that bad ideas and bad analysis will disappear simply be- cause they are intellectually defective; in addition, academics can be insensitive to the impacts of what they say on persons in more vulnerable circumstances. Bureaucractic organizations tend to place highest emphasis on loyalty, management control, and protection of the organization from criticism. Universities are also, of course, bureaucratic organizations, and many city officials can be found who are intellectually open, so the distinction between academia and the bureaucracy is not a simple dichotomy. - Any significant achievement in solving neighborhood problems requires strong leadership from somewhere. It is possible for neighborhood organizations, ad- ministrative staff, or politicians to provide this leadership, but doing so is very time consuming and demands an ability to transcend stereotypical roles; there are few who are both willing and able. Working with a number of disparate groups calls for unusual talents nowadays, and the reward (mostly ego satisfac- tion) may sometimes call forth the wrong people or fail to draw out the needed talent. The overall conclusion is that most of the people whom we came in contact with behaved in normal ways according to nor- mal instincts; most persons in the same positions would respond in approximately the same ways. Roles have a great deal of influence on the ways people think and act. Social progress depends upon the existence of some people that are capable of satisfying their normal roles while, at the same time, thinking and acting outside them; i.e., society requires both the orderly norms as well as the individuals who are exceptions to the norms. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 9 INTRODUCTION Because the North Side study group tried to maintain a balanced relationship with all components of the local political system, the community participation report covers a scope much broader than what is usually meant by "citizen participation" (which, itself, is often narrowly interpreted to mean question- naire surveys). Included under the community participation heading are presentations to and discussions with neighborhood groups, presentations to the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission, review by the Johnson County Regional Plan- ning Commission and its Land Use Committee, direct communications with the press, relationships with units within the University, and interactions with staff and administrative personnel at the City. In other words, any communication -- whether technical, Political, or a mixture -- with individuals or groups belonging to the larger community of Iowa City is subject matter for the community participation report. Community participation is an essential study element for a variety of reasons: ideas can be exposed and tested against different standards and perceptions, information used in the study can be checked by letting others review and cri- tique the results, insights into the problems can be gained from Persons with more experience dealing with them in different ways, novel or innovative ideas can be introduced in settings which allow the ideas to develop and mature rather than being re- jected summarily, general community support can be built for ! an approach to solving a problem so that the alternatives have ialready been digested when formal political discussion takes place, etc. A high level of community participation also car- ries with it many handicaps: efforts expended in Public dis- cussion may draw away from greater substantive understanding of the problems, perhaps leading to superficial debate; a "rcpre- i sentative participation process is an elusive myth, since parti- cipation is a result of interest, in part self-interest; the apathetic majority usually pays no attention to i S MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES debate over issues yet may still be in a position to obstruct the implementation of a carefully constructed consensus; members of organizations tend to respond in terms of how a particular proposal will affect their organization and their status within it; some individuals may seek to downgrade or embarrass the project by seizing upon flaws in preliminary or published work. Nonetheless, community participation is a desirable and necessary ingredient in any planning effort, and the objective is to maximize the benefits while minimizing the unproductive aspects. ' The North Side study team attempted to operate in a I fishbowl through the year -and -a -half study, and, while this certainly created its difficulties for the project, there is no real reason in retrospect to operate any differently. Preventing the inevitable mistakes and misunderstandings is a fruitless task, although pains should be taken to be sure l' that all material is reviewed as thoroughly as possible in- ternally, before asking others to react to it. Controversy, far from being an indication of poor staff work, is inherent in the nature of policy making; the absence of controversy is commonly a symptom of apathy or the avoidance of problems. The study staff took their share of abuse, and no permanent damage seems to have resulted from it. We believe that good planning requires the introduction of some unpopular notions, and useful change can only be attained in many areas after waiting out a period of initial negative reaction. 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES PHASES OF PARTICIPATION IN THE NORTH SIDE STUDY A stategy was pursued which emphasized different styles of community participation at different points in the progress of the study, depending upon the level of development of the substantive material and the type of feedback needed. Three main groups were involved throughout, but in varying proportions: (1) residents of the North Side, (2) policy- making bodies at the City and regional levels, and (3) City, University and other institutional staff. The five stages or phases described below are fairly distinct, although there was some overlap in time and many of the same people were involved in different phases. Proposal Phase The Innovative Projects program of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) would not have attracted the City's attention had not the Project Leader been primed and willing to do the preparatory work. Once apprised, the Mayor of the City and the Director of Community Development felt the project was worth pusuing and a Letter of Intent (to submit a proposal, as required by HUD) was prepared and offered to the City Council. No City funds were requested. with one dissent out of seven, the Council gave permission for a proposal to be written. The letter of intent was sent to HUD at the end of March, 1976. Over the Spring a proposal was written, primarily by the Project Leader and student assistants at the Institute of Urban and Regional Research, with the cooperation and aid of City Officials. The substance of the proposal was drawn from ideas the Project Leader had been working on over a period of years, in a variety of professional and academic settings. Before submitting the proposal at the beginning of June, it was reviewed and commented upon by officals and citizens, in accordance with guidelines contained in the Request for Proposals. 7 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 1. Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission, whose seven members are appointed by the Council, reviews planning and development matters and forwards its findings and recommendations to the Council. In this instance, the Commission supported the proposal. 2. Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee. Composed of members of the Council and the Planning Commission, the CPCC reviewed progress on the City's comprehensive plan pro- gram and provided a forum in which planning staff could learn what was expected in the plan. A major theme in the North Side study proposal was the opportunity presented by a parallel comprehensive planning effort at the City level, and considerable effort was devoted to preparing a detailed breakdown of tasks coordinated between the two planning pro- jects -- the comprehensive plan and the North Side study. 3. City Council. In discussing the proposal, the Council generally supported the thrust of the proposal but was concerned that City staff time and effort not be drawn away from other tasks by the project. The proposal was ap- proved, again with one dissent (a different Council member than previously). 9. Johnson County Regional Planning Commission. The regional planning agency reviews grant proposals as required by OMB Circular A-95, and was guided by a need to find the project "consistent with sound regional planning" in the Iowa City area. Representation on the Commission includes rural towns, smaller cities, Iowa City, and the University of Iowa. Both the Land Use Committee and the Commission it self approved the proposal, after fairly brief but intensive questioning about such items as whether the study would pro- pose additional regulation or become involved in code en- i forcement. F MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES wolrus 5. Neighborhood Residents. A group had been formed in the neighborhood several years earlier for the purpose of urging the City to reduce the density permitted by then existing zoning, and the group was called the North Side Neighbors. The primary source of support for the organi- zation came from the homeowners on and north of Church Street, but the rezoning request was not successful. Lead- ers in the North Side Neighbors were contacted informally, and a letter of support was obtained for the proposal. Neighborhood Meetings Phase While the proposal was being evaluated by HUD, a preliminary portion of the study was undertaken using intern- ship funds from the City, the Institute, and the Midwestern American Revolution Bicentennial Administration. The result was the first Neighborhood Impacts Survey (September 1976, not one of the final report series) of the North Side, which formed the basis for subsequent neighborhood meetings. As the first task after the project got underway in the ibeginning of 1977, a series of neighborhood meetings was set up over the spring. The following considerations guided the conduct of these meetings: 1. General Meeting. An initial meeting was organized at the neighborhood level. A flyer was designed and repro- duced by the project staff, but arrangements for the meeting i hall, distribution of the flyers and other contacts with residents, and the agenda for the meeting were left in the hands of the North Side Neighbors organization. About fifty persons attended the meeting. i i 2. Newspapers. Press coverage was encouraged at points in time that seemed critical to stimulating interest in the i study on the part of North Side residents. The major daily -- the Iowa City Press Citizen -- was very helpful and has a MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES well-deserved reputation for high quality coverage of local affairs. Several items appeared shortly before the general neighborhood meeting. 3. Block Meetings. Block -level meetings (up to four blocks at a time) were held for the purpose of drawing out more residents and giving them a chance to find out about the problems identified in the impacts survey, and to present their own views on the subject. Attendance at these meetings was usually less than twenty, and this was small enough so that each person attending could ask questions and discuss Points of interest until he or she was satisfied. Reactions were highly varied: nothing can be done with City Hall, everything is fine as it is, this is a nice neighborhood, the neighborhood has gone down hill, what is a bunch of kids doing with all that (HUD) money? Distrust, pessimism, and conspiracy theories were frequently expressed, but most persons were helpful, interested, and sometimes optimistic; a strong sentimental attachment to the neighborhood was apparent among these residents, including those who had recently arrived. 4. Neighborhood Organization. The North Side Neighbors, although primarily representative of homeowner concerns in the north end and thus not in contact with many segments of the neighborhood, was used exclusively by the study group as the channel for citizen interaction in the neighborhood. One Purpose was to try to strenghten the organziation, but another reason for relying on it was the lack of resources in the Project budget and work program for neighborhood organizing. For a number of reasons, Meetings near the north end of the neighborhood were easier to set up and conduct. (See report number 3, Land Use Intensity, for land use, tenure, and other spatial patterns). 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES I 5. Conduct of Meetings. A brief presentation was made at the start of each meeting by a study team member, explaining the purpose of the study and the impacts survey. Copies of the survey for the appropriate blocks were given to persons attending, and their help was solicitied in adding to the information and correcting mistakes.l This led to discussion of topics in which the residents were most inter- ested. Sometimes the main interests were specific problems (traffic, dogs, parking) and sometimes they were process 'I oriented (residents wanted to review the study results be- fore the City reviewed them), but the focus differed enor- mously from one meeting to another. 6. Writeups. Contact reports, attendance lists, minutes and preliminary block proposals were prepared for all meetings.2 After being reviewed and corrected by the study team, copies were distributed to the hosts of the meetings for circulation among their neighbors. Again, the attempt was to encourage discussion and to reinforce the organization of the residents, but there is little evidence that this occurred; on the contrary, whatever rapport the study group established with the residents seemed to have dissipated by the beginning of the Fall. I i I I• lStep-by-step procedures for conducting an impacts survey and for presenting and discussing it with residents are described in report number 9, Impacts Survey Manual. 2A11 these documents are included in Appendix B of this report. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOINEs i The impacts survey proved an excellent source for topics of discussion (including the generous number of data errors), and the understanding gained about the residents perceptions of the problems and their comments on alternative approaches -- suggested by the study team or by each other -- was invaluable in preparing first the preliminary block proposals and later the reports by functional areas. A City staff member was present at some of the meetings, which allowed for a direct response to some questions and complaints, but also occasion- ally drew out gripes against the City (I pay your salary, why don't I get service?) that were distracting from the intent of the meeting. One of the clearest generalizations that could be derived from persons attending the block meetings was the mistrust and low regard for government in general; because the nature of complaints was frequently such that they could be alleviated by individual action on the part of residents, a Citizen Self -Help Handbook (report number 11) was given a high priority for production by the study team. Block meetings provided the project with useful and essential information, but some segments of the resident population were never reached in this way. Young singles are not likely to be heavily involved in neighborhood groups, and university students in particular have their attention on other things and do not perceive that they have much stake in a neighborhood in which they may live for a few months. Elderly residents were usually fairly well repre- sented at meetings, as were families with children, but renters, commercial interests,and developers were largely absent. D 1.2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES r401RCS Public Presentation Phase In a city with strong university orientation, political activity tends to be concentrated in the Spring and Fall, with a lull over the Summer. Block proposals generated in response to the neighborhood meetings were used over the summer to prepare draft reports for the neighborhood as a whole, on a series of problem areas. Of the sixteen final reports, eleven existed in some draft form by the beginning of the Fall, and five were ultimately published as preliminary reports for discussion. The main purpose behind issuing reports in preliminary form was to elicit discussion on some of the various alter- natives, while they were still in "proposal" rather than "recommendation" form. Secondary purposes were to catch errors and misconceptions on the part of the study team, and to smoke out residents and others who had not expressed their views on the preliminary results. Reports were presented formally to the Planning Commission and the Council in three batches: Historic Structures Inventory, and Neighborhood Site Improvements (October) Streets and Traffic, and Parking (December) Land Use Regulation and Administration (February) Press coverage by the Press -Citizen and the Daily Iowan (the University newspaper) was usually timely, accurate, and in- formative. Reaction to the first set of reports presented was generally positive. The methodology employed was familar and no specific action was suggested or requested. Presenta- tion of the historic report coincided with a proposal placed before the Council to declare a six-month moratorium on new building construction in the North Side, and information contained in the study reports tended to support the general consensus in favor of a moratorium. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NEs Reports on traffic, parking, and land use controls received closer scrutiny and responses were mixed. A major conclusion of the streets and traffic report was that the North Side was severely and negatively impacted by these facilities for the benefit of non-residents. The proposal for a neighborhood fee parking permit system did not meet the resistance expected, but implementation of on-street- parking n-streetparking controls would still require some substantial changes in attitudes toward the use of cars. The land use regulation report did not result in a great deal of discussion in formal meetings, but produced a strong critical reaction from City staff involved in land use regulation and code enforcement. University staff took a great deal of interest in the parking study because the preliminary version seemed to suggest that University parking lots contained a large amount of excess capacity. Several reasons can be postu- lated for mixed reception to these reports: 1. Unwanted Problems. No one, including policy makers, likes to be told that a problem exists that they should do { something about, especially when the description of the problem runs against conventional wisdom. Streets, for example, are for the purpose of carrying traffic, so high traffic volumes means to many people that the streets are doing their job; negative impacts of arterials are seen as nothing new, and smart people manage to avoid living on i them. 'L. Digestion Time. Unless it is a problem that people i have already been discussing, time and patience are needed to convince people that a problem exists. Quite reasonably, a problem exists politically if enough people believe it is a problem and express themselves to that affect. Novel ways of looking at problems are not likely to be instantly appeal- ing to very many people. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES 0 I city and University officials 3. Implied Criticism. understandably resist any implication that they are not doing a good job, and acknowledging the existence of a problem may seem to be tantamount to admitting responsi- bility. At no point did the study team believe that a significant component of any problem stemmed from incom- petent administration by City or University staff, but many conventional and long standing procedures and concepts are criticized in North Side study reports, and administra- tive staff are in many ways bound to those procedures. q. Academic -Professional Conflict. An academic -based research team has almost nothing at stake when it comes to local policy administration. This gives the study team a luable intellectual freedom, but great deal of potentially va it also can be a source of friction. Academics can come in and muddy up the waters without having to suffer the con- sequences or see things through. Academics may also serve up dogma in place of useful policy analysis, becoming disappointed when the political process does not heartily embrace "rational" ideas. Professional hostility toward academics runs deep, and is at least partially justified by i experience. 5. Management Behavior. Administrators like to see things run smoothly, and part of doing so means keeping the agenda for discussion limited to items that are urgent and have a reasonably predictable outcome. This natural desire to stick to fairly safe topics can be exaggerated to the point where any discussion in which different viewpoints are expressed is viewed as controversy and therefore undesirable. Policy makers have little aversion to handling controversial topics (the difficulty comes in dealing with emotionally charged issues that are of widespread interest), but adriin- istrators are seldom eager for heavy debate. oil MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i While it is the responsibility of the Project Leader to ensure that the quality of all reports -- preliminary and final -- is such that conclusions are accurately pre- sented and recommendations soundly based, it is next to impossible to eliminate everything in a report that some reader might object to. A high and continuing level of informal communication among all personnel involved in the project helps to encourage a sympathetic reaction to errors and a greater tolerance for clumsy language, sparks are almost inevitable at someAbout but p that can be done then is to stay calm and t have patience. Revision and Publication Phase , Detailed comments on the preliminary reports came primarily from professional staff in three organizations: the City of Iowa City, the University of Iowa, and Mercy Hospital. Parking concerned the latter two, while the City paid the most attention to land use regulatory pro- cedures. Written forms of some of these comments are in- cluded in Appendix D. Two of the reports -- parking and land use regulation - went through major revisions on the basis of information obtained in response to publication of the preliminary reports. In the case of the parking study, an inappropriate measure of parking lot capacity was employed to assess the University's facilities, although the analysis was not central to any of the recommendations. After several extended dis- cussions with University staff,a consensus position was generally agreed upon. Subsequently, University staff initiated a parking survey in the neighborhood which the study team followed up,and these data are published in the parking report. In the case of the land use regulation and administration report, numerous organizational and procedural changes hed occurred between the time the draft was written 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Molt+rs and the time it was presented, and the study team had not kept pace with these changes. In addition, the language in the report was sufficiently ambiguous as to be subject to considerable misinterpretation. Overall, a great deal of professional time and effort from outside the study group was directed at correcting and improving these reports, but it would be fair to say that the prime motivation for doing so was the desire to protect the professionals' organizations from unflattering comment. Followup Discussion of Final Reports ! Since the final reports consist of the series which includes this one, it is obviously not possible to report i on how they will be received. Completion of a planning process which was begun by the North Side study would require, however, that the full set of final reports have an opportunity to be read and used. Many of the ideas and supporting argument behind the project have not been given general exposure, and parts of the study' are hard to interpret without the context of the entire study to relate to. There has been no attempt to withold information or camouflage intent -- in fact, the scope laid out in the initial pro- posal has been followed quite closely -- but many of the concepts and certainly the synthesis of them are novel; many of the details had to be worked out and the concepts elaborated before a reasonably strong case could be made. The sixteen reports are an attempt to state the case as clearly and thoroughly as is possible at this stage in the development of impact evaluation and neighborhood planning. Several possibilities can be offered for following up on the study as it now stands: rri MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401UES I 1. Opinion Poll. The final report, which contains summaries and recommendations taken from the other fifteen reports, could be distributed throughout the North Side, along with a questionnaire urging residents to read the report and indicate their preferences on the various alter- natives. Not exactly a normal opinion poll, this strategy would supply respondents with overview and background ma- terial on the questions being asked. Residents might be willing to support a fee permit parking system, for example, if the effect on commuter parking and storage were conveyed to them. 2. Policy Maker Initiative. The Planning Commission and/or the City Council might choose to pursue selected items from the list of recommendations, and perhaps ask members of the study team to discuss the proposals. Ini- tiative here would be in the hands of official policy making bodies. 3. Neighborhood Recommendations. The North Side Neighbors or some other civic organization might find the reports interesting enough to develop its own set of recom- mendations for presentation to the City. Such a group would have much more political impact than the study team since neighborhood residents are property owners, taxpayers, voters, and otherwise have a direct stake in the neighborhood. 4. Application to Other Neighborhoods. Other neighbor- hoods in Iowa City or in other cities may find the analysis and proposals of sufficient interest to prompt their appli- cation in another. context. HUD has an interest in facili- tating this sort of exch.nge and transfer of ideas. 5. Catalogue of Choices. Report number 9, Neighborhood Site Improvements_, is a shoppinq list of possible small. capi- tal improvements that would enhance the quality of the neigh- borhood, and this report might be used at a neighborhood meeting as a basis for discussion about what improvements are most desired 18 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES by residents. Community Development Block Grant funds have been programmed through this process in other parts of the City, under the direction of the CDBG Program Coordinator, and the process seems to work very effectively. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I EVALUATION A description has been provided above of the way in which the North Side study was conducted, and analysis offered about the nature and sources of the problems encountered. A natural question to then ask is how should it have been done differently? While it may be hard for the study staff to ad- dress this question being, as we are, so close to the process, hindsight is a vantage point from which at least a few obser- vations can be made: 1. Political Organizing. Throughout the study, project staff frequently expressed the opinion that more effort should be or should have been directed at neighborhood organization and media exposure. Suggestions have included direct organi- zation of'residents regarding meetings and activities, door-to- door canvassing for meetings and proposals, direct efforts to identify and locate unrepresented groups within the neighbor- hood and ensure their participation in the process, a higher level of citizen participation throughout the study rather than during one phase, and greater media promotion of the study to include news coverage and interviews, etc. Two considerations mitigate against this strategy: first, more citizen involve- ment and media effort would have taken away from the substantive content of the study, which was its primary purpose; and second, such a strategy would have been far more antagonistic to city staff and politicians than the course actually taken, which was unsettling enough. Had the study been successful in build- ing a constituency and visibil.ity for itself, local politicians would have been justifiably distressed that Federal money was being used to create rather than solve their problems. Pro- grams of this sort have been tried in the past but few survive, and it would be hard to construe the IIUD Innovative Projects i I program as including an advocacy purpose. The level of effort directed at citizen participation in the North Side project was 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES neither too little to be able to obtain valid feedback nor too much to run the risk of fomenting political disruption, but the line between them is a delicate one to tread. 2. City -University Coordination. Maximum advantage was not taken of opportunities for liaison and coordination with the City. The Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee was empowered to review staff work in development of the comprehen- sive plan, and the North Side study was explicitly integrated into that process, yet the study group never made a presentation to the CPCC. A rationalization employed by the study group was the fact that the CPCC was made up of Commission and Council members, to whom presentations were in fact being made, but - there are at least two better reasons: (1) Substantive results from the North Side study were not sufficiently precise or en- tirely compatible with the framework used for comprehensive planning to be easily incorporated under the schedule actually followed; and (2) The attention of the CPCC was more than fully occupied by plan production matters, and additional items on their agenda were not especially welcomed by either the members f or the staff. Adequte communication took place at the staff level to keep the plan and the neighborhood study consistent with each other, but the two proceeded in parallel rather than in tandem. I i I I i 7i FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NE5 APPENDIX A: DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PROPOSAL PHASE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES PROPOSAL REVIEW AND RELATED COMMENT The formal review process of preparing and submitting this proposal includes the following milestones: Approval of Ip-tter-of-intent by the City Council (seven members, 6-1 vote) on March 30, after brief presentation by Professor Lee and Dennis Kraft. This was a public meeting, but the item did not appear on the agenda because of short advance notice. Article describing Council item In local newspaper on the following day, March 31 , The report is accurate, and provides information about purposes, time schedule, persons to contact, and location of the study neighborhood. Review by the Land Use and Water Resources committee of the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission (thirteen members, i unanimous vote) on May 12. Proposal was discussed but not reviewed in depth. i Approval by the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission (23 members, 19-1 vote) on May 19. This agency is the de- signated A-95 review body, and discussed the proposal in con- siderable depth after a brief presentation by Professor Lee. Approval by the City Council (6-1 vote) on May 25. Since most members had had an opportunity to discuss the proposal prior to the meeting, and all had copies of the full proposal in their packages, the discussion followed a question -and -answer format. Approval by the Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee and the Planning and Zoning Commission (6- 0) on May 20. All of the above were public meetings or notices, and the political prorpss In Iowa City is highly accessible and open. Informal contacts by the project team with residents of the neighborhood, City staff, and other citizens were rewarded by almost universally positive responses. No attempts were made to hold formal neighborhood meetings, although this would occur during the project period. Public Hearings conducted by the Iowa City Committee on Community Needs, on February 11, 1976, brought forth comments from groups of rest - dents of the North Side area Suggestions included improvements to park 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLA3 CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 'iOItIES and neighborhood facilities, and a request for a rezoning study of the north side in conjunction with the comprehensive plan. A recent study by a group known as Project GREEN offered the following commentary about the study neighborhood: "It is hoped that in the not -too -distant future, in accordance with recommendations of'the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission, this preliminary survey may be sup- plemented by a more thorough and formal survey of the entire city. The Committee counted 407 major structurps in the (North Side) neighborhood -- dwellings, apartment houses, stores, business offices, churches, and other such buildings. Of this number it estimates that 180 structures or fully 44 percent of the total, date from the nineteenth century. . . These houses, taken together with the many others of 1 like periods and styles, constitute an absolutely remarkable collection. There are very few places in the country that can boast so large and unspoiled a neighborhood of museum -piece houses as these." I Structures range from very modest to fairly substantial, and while some should be preserved intact, there are many opportunities for adaptive reuse and new development. I 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110HIEs i 2A —Iowa City Press-Cldzen—Wednesday, March 21,1976 Council seeks funds :for near north side An applicatlon for federal ,ands to aid In preserving and upgrading Iowa City's near north side was authorized by the City Council Tuesdaye Council okayed a , of in tole napplication, pr:paredaftertent the U.S. Department of Hodsing and Urban Development (HUD) notified the city that 25 million Is available for fiscal 1976 under HUD's "Innovative Projects Program." HUD's letter notifying Mayor Mary C. Neuhauser of the program arrived only last week, and asked for a letter of Intent from the city "no later than April l," Thursday. Community Development Director Dennis R. Kraft told the Council he and Douglass Lee, University of Iowa professor of urban and regional plan- ning, had been working on a proposal for a neighborhood preservation Program and decided It would fit into HUD's Innovative Projects Program. Theirosal is outlined In the ps letter off Intent, and will be developed In :more detail during the next few months, :.Kraft said. He suldthe program "will not involve additional operating local acosts on ties nor hey city." 25 According to a preliminary drat In - being sant with the city's letter of aft tent, the program would: —"Develop a new set of ordinances and regulations . to control development and land use activities. —"Stimulate resident investment In improvements by protecting that In. vestment from the side effects of nearby activities. —"Integrate commercial and mixed residential uses by determining the conditions under which various categories of land use can beneficially Coexist. orate historic as anelementnt of the Justification and enforcement of neighborhood protec- tion policies. —"Encourage more efficient use of urban land by emphasizing per- formance standards In evaluating the compatibility of higher Intensity uses in existing neighborhoods." The near north side, lying roughly between Brown Street and the central business district, was the scene of an unsuccessful attempt last year to enact zoning changes restricting apartment construction. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 6A—Iowa City PreSs-Citizen—Friday, April 2,1976 Disenchantment "If there is an interest in sub- mitting an application under this program, a letter of intent to file an application should be sent no later than April 1, 1976. . That's the deadline set in an announcement of a new federal undertaking, the Department of Housing and Urban Develop. ment's "Innovative Projects Prograni." Not unreasonable, certainly — every program has to have an application deadline. Except for one thing. The letter announcing the program, from HUD's Omaha office, was dated March 23 and recieved in Iowa City March 25! That gave the city exactly one week to prepare at least enough of a program to be summarized in a letter of intent, to make that available to the City Council and to obtain approval of the ap- plication. Fortunately, it could be done. But only because of a couple of fortuitous circumstances: —The existence at the Univer- sity of Iowa of Institute of Ur- ban and Regional Research, and the record of cooperative undertakings between the UI in- stitute and the city's Depart- ment of Community Develop- ment. —The fact that work which could be developed into such a program already had been un- dertaken in comprehensive planning and other studies. Hence, Iowa City was able to file the letter with an outline of what it proposed to do in a program of neighborhood Preservation for the area bet- ween the business district and Brown Street. It appears to coincide with the procedures and purposes of the new program. Further details can be developed in the months ahead. But few cities are as fortunate as this community in the Professional resources it has readily available. Even Iowa City is not likely always to have a plan in the wings to push through for a speedy filing. In this instance the short time available may work to Iowa City's advantage, enhancing the possibility of obtaining federal assistance because there will be less competition for the $5 million available. Other com- munities, however, justifiably can complain that they have no opportunity to apply for such grants when so short a time bet- ween announcement and deadline is provided. The week provided local governments to develop and decide on a plan constrast shar- ply with the length of time it seems to take the federal gover- nment to reach a decision. It's another reason why citizens in the hinterlands become disen- chanted with Washington. Cditorlol I"IrIn 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MMDIIiES 9ECEIVED M ,Y 1 7 1976 STATE OF IOWA Office for Planning and Programming j 523 East 121h Street. Des Moines. Iowa 50319 Telephone 515/281.3711 ROBERT D RAY I :o+.nor POnFPT F TYSOII D� '.' SfA1L LLI,ARI\LIIOUSI. PROJECT NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW SIGSOFF Date Received: April 2. 1976 State Application Identifier: 761487 Review Completed: May 13, 1976 APPLICANT PROJECT TITLE: Innovative Projects Program, Iowa City APPLICANT AGENCY: City of Iowa City Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Address Civil Center Attention: Mary Nethauser, Mayor 410 E. Washin ton St. FEDERAL PROGRAM TITLE, AGENCY olinunT y Development BlockGrants/Discretionary Tran s AND CATALOG NUMBER: Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Planning and Development Catalog No. 14.219 AMOUNT OP FUNDS REQUESTED: Federal Funds - $ 17i'13U-- -- TOTAL FUNDS - $ 171,130 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: - The proposed project includes the Innovative Projects Program for the Citv of Iowa City. The State Clearinghouse makes the following disposition concerning this application: /_X/ No Comment Necessary. The application must be submitted as received by the Clearinghouse with this form attached as evidence that the required review has been performed. /_7 Comments are Attached. The application must he submitted with till, iuFm Plus the attached comments as evidence that the required review has hr,I, performed. til°A`l: CLEARINGHOUSE COMWN S: ' N i t11-14 Rev. 9-75 _ 7 _kY _ ederal Fund Coordlnat,r 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES RF150r.UTION 110. 7G-.1.56 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION Ge A PROPOSAL TO THE DEPART•I•tENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DF.VELOP'4c.NT FOR FUNDS UNDER THE INNOVA'i i.VE PHOI'r'CTS PROGRAM. ii WHEREAS, the United States of An,. ri.ca, Department of Housing 'nd Urban I' Development is offer.ine, an Innovative Projects Program in the area of hous- ^I, .ing and neighLorhood preservation, and WH& BAS, this program proposes to utilize ra impact analysis approach to I offectuatto neighborhood preservation, and I, Y. IEREAS, this program shall be funded in total by the Department of I; Ituu^,ing and Urban Development, and WHEREAS, the. City Council is •"es.irous of participating in said program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF I; :[Oi9A CITY, IOWA, that the City Manager be authorized to ::ubmlt a proposal to Lhe Urd;ed States of America, Department of Housing and urban Development for funds under the Innovative Projects program. It was moved by - Perret _and srcondrd by that Lhe Resolution as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: - AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: - �I X Balmer X deProsse • X. Foster ' X Ncuhauaer X Perrot X Selzer X Vcvera Passed and approval this 25th day of IF1ay_.__---_---1976. City Clerk 28 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES , 1.1, or ; or North side project e� ay t. authorized T1, . An application for federal funding to upgrade and preserve the city's near north side was authorized by the City Council Tuesday. . The Application seeks $102,759 under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's "Innovative projects program." -'The project was developed .by Douglass Lee, a professor of urban and regional pWmW at the University of Iowa, and would be supervised by him, under the overall direction of Com- munity Development Director Dennis IL Kraft. Lee and staff members for the Object would be advised by a com- mittee made up of near north side ,residents and other citizens. The project would involve an area bounded generally by Dubuque, Jef- ferson and Governor Sheets and Kimball Road. • A variety of methods would be used to (idluence neighborhood quality In the area. :'Among them would be a "per- formance" approach to land use control -+,dealing with the Impact various land uses have on an area rather than with ieatraints on development. The project ajso would use nuisance laws, rather than traditional zoning concepts, to regulate land uses and would apply historic preservation techniques to the area. In addition, the project would develop rehabilitation grant programs tQ be Implemented if funds become available. Iowa City Press—Citizen, May 26, 1976 29 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I johnson county regional planning commission 22%2 Sart, tlibxpie street owo cny, awo 5224p (,3i71 351 81,Sn May 26, 1976 Igpgel Ilff e r , ;rt . , Ms. Mary Neuhauser, Mayor Civic Center 410 fast Washington Iowa City, Iowa RE: A-95 Review: Iowa City FMD Innovative Project Dear Ms. Neuhauser: The Johnson County Regional Planning Commission, at its regular meeting of May 19, 1976, voted to find the above -referenced project proposal "consistent with good regional planning." In accordance with A-95 procedures, please attach these comments to your grant application. Sincerely, Barry Hokanson, Acting Director &I/fb CC: Dr. Douglass Lce Institute of Urban and Regional Research A. 'Thomas Wallace Office of Planning and Programming 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114CS NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORS ORGANIZATION 419 E. Fairchild Iowa City, Iowa 52240 City of Iowa City May 28, 1976 410 E. Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 To Whom It May Concern: ORGAN I7.AT ION BACKGROUND: The "North Side Neighbors" Organization was formulated in August of 1976 by a temporary Steering Committee comprised of twelve concerned North Side neighbors. Goals and objectives are: More efficient use of neighborhood resources toward development of a better quality of e life. Membership is open to anyone interested in the quality of life } in the North Side. The initial open organizational meeting was held September 8, 1975, at Horace Mann School. A second meeting was held October 16, 1975, and permanent committees were elected. A list of committee members is attached. This meeting also included an Open 'j Forum with Ward C Candidates for City Council and it was well attended. A third short meeting followed by the Organization's sponsorship of "Candidate's Night" (with all City Council Candidates and the University of Iowa planning officials present) was held on October 30, 1975, and the Mann School Gym was filled to capacity with an enthusiastic group of citizens. Committee meetings have been called at various times for action regarding Market Square Park improvements, zoning, input for use of HCDA funds and affirmative action requested by members of the North Side neighborhood re: parking, noise level, etc. A Park Improvement Committee is currently active and has been working with the Horace Mann Parent -Teachers Organization to effect ongoing Market Square Park improvements. An organizational meeting and picnic in this park is planned for later this summer. ENDORSEMENT: l"An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement" has been reviewed by this Chairman. This proposal and application for federal funding to upgrade and preserve the city's i near north side Is directly in line with the North Side Neighbors Organizational goals and objectives. The methodology including the seven components as described in the proposal appear very sound and in the best interests toward this neighborhood's preservation and improvement. 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES May 28, 1976 page 2 In behalf of the North Side Neighbors Organization, I therefore endorse and recommend approval, implementation and funding of proposed project. Onr organization would offer support to this project in citizen input and committee or community participation. Our organization has also been quite vocal re: need for a new city-wide comprehensive plan (we have gone on record at Planning and Zoning Hearings and HCDA Commission Hearings) and the proposed project should be of definite value in developing this plan as well. Note: As President of the Horace Mann School Parent -Teachers Organization I would also recommend that this project could request and receive input from that organization, since school enrollment and environmental conditions could be effecof,by implementation of same. Sincerely, Thomas Y Neuz11 Chairman, Steering Committee North Side Neighbors Organization President, Parent-Teacher@ Organization Horace Mann School 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighbors Organization i STEERING COMMITTEE: COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND Tom Neuzil ACTION COMMITTEE: George McCormack Fran Meeks Bob Moninger Peter Dreyfuss Marshall Hunter Barb Russo Jean Cater Jean and Dave Cater Mary Ipsen Johnathan Penner . Marguerite Kuebrick Peter Dreyfues Johnathan Penner .� Ken Hubel PARK IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE: Frank Leone Marshall Hunter Kossia Tomasini Barb Russo Fran Meeks Barb Russo i Reverend L. Carlton i i I 1 f. I I i I I i i i l I '• i 33 FIICROFILMED BY '1 JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES MO RIES �AYIA, p f+' IIIIIIII o° DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT � WASHINGTON, D.C. 204 10 Y ,pl)Np YYY OFFICE OF TME ASSISI ANT Sh CRE T ARY FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH IN bl'I'Lv IIL I'I II Iv Tbnorable Ilary C. Tleuhauser Bayer of Iowa City 410 E. wastdngton Street j Iowa City, Iowa 52240 DearMayor T.0 iaucler • 1 Subject: Innovative Projector Prograrrplicatien TSD. FWP-210 City of lovra City The (BID (Valuation Hoard 'sof preliminary review Of tia subject ng those Th has revealed at it is sufficiently rwritorious to be included anarrg }nse that under serious consideration IMA the Housing and IteigMaChood Preservation Bection of the Irurovative Projects Program. in its review, the Ltraluation Hoard found the projdrecom�endetd that a��efollowingt vsak in certain areas. As a result, the Board to it its oocpetitive clarifications be incorporated in the propD sal standing: I 1) Indicate what measures will 1.,c taken to assure that study findings and reeamxn�tionsawi l be seriously I Considered by the City go relevant agencies. 2) Elaborate on t1e nature of the co"DI-ty involvo'rsrt proposed for this project Lbclosed is a Copy of tic IM C:Cst aryl Price Amlysis fon"'. Please i in acoardanoe with any instructions or Cor{rlete both sides of the fom, re0amDerlations listed above, by cm verting your budget estijDatrs into the appropriate cost categories. please return t1x= Oost and Price Pralysis form and your response to I our oa vents to: rdwin A. Strtirlilerg innovative Project Proclram Ib m 810,2 DepartnrJlt of Ibusing r1nd Orl;lvl Drvelo)><nmt 451 7th Otrent, '-11 Vhsldngton, D.C. 20410 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 2 Your suLrdssion should be ret-urned to and received by Him not later than Friday, Indust 6, 1976. If you have any (Imstions concerning the Program, please call Mr. Stranberg at (202) 7554437. I IMBt caution you that because the madber of applications still under consideration far a needs the S4 million available, this letter artstitutes neitirs an assurance nor an indication that you will receive wiL Innovative Projects grant. i I pan lockirxj fororard to your sutmission. i Sincerely, I � i 1 R. Siegel Cha l xTan Souroa Evaluation Board 4 Housing and Neighboo hood Preservation Innovative Projects Program Dnclos"re i I DDuglass B. Lee j Lroject Coordinator f I 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i ' fP 0: •h ��- �r I r - // crvrr= 6i `/(/ll//CC rC114 Crir inMt r X10 August 3, 1976 '/4vOfl cc E ns vtH• r,�_r.a3Ffl Cf 4,It ✓ r+6' iE I. %GS. [R fsviL %EEflPt V u iFI \': 'Ell 1.1r. Edwin A. St:-rl;,;,erg Innovative Project Program Room 8162 D, rrrtmcnt of !;,using and Iii -bin Cr_velo;ea,:•nt 451 7th Street, S.W. P:ashington, D.C. 20410 Dear Mr. Stromberg: Subject: Innovative ProjcctS Program Application No. INP -210 City of Tuwa City 7his is in response to your letter concerning the subject application from the City OF Tuwa City. As requested in your letter, enclosed is a completed copy of HUD Cost and Price Analysis form as I\cil as Dur I1'.-ponse to your ,c:quest- for clarification of cc !fain areas. If any further i.nfor!1ation is required, we will be happy to furnish a prompt reply. !�I0. C. rely )'/.; 1,•g, -y C. 'nlhauscr i:i)'ri C i �ItC1U51L.US Is 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40I1JES ADDENDUM TO PROPOSAL (retyped) 6/27/78 AN IMPACT EVALUATION APPROACH TO NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT 1. Measures to be taken to assure that study findings and recommendations will be seriously considered by the City government and the relevant agencies. 2. Elaboration on the nature of the community involvment pro- posed for the project. City of Iowa City, Iowa August, 1976 1. Measures Taken to Assure that Study Findings and Recommen- dations will be Seriously Considered by the City Government and the Relevant Agencies. For a number of reasons -- the size of the community, the general absence of machine, ethnic, and class politics, the open nature of people -- the political decision process in Iowa City is very accessible to the average citizen, should he or she choose to exercise that option. Hence, serious consideration of study findings and recommendations is largely a matter of good management, clear presentation, sufficient public discussion, and the usefulness of study recommendations. The Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement is closely related to Iowa City's Comprehensive Planning Program and Neighborhood Improvement Program, both of which are funded through Community Development Block Grant Funds. Information generated by the proposed study will contribute greatly to both programs. The Comprehensive Planning Coordinat- ing Committee is aware of this proposal and wants to incorporate citizen inputs elicited by and findings of the study into the development and implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. The connection between study results and official action is regarded below from three standpoints: organization and schedul- ing of work tasks, the normal political/technical review process, and general community support for the objectives of the proposed project. Organization and Scheduling of Work Tasks. By carefully integrating the proposed project- tasks with those of the related City agencies, project tasks and other work programs will serve to mutually reinforce each other. Also, project tasks will be scheduled to yield timely information for decisions which the City Council, boards and commissions expect to make in the future in the area of neighborhood preservation. Figure 5 shows the connections between project tasks and related city decisions, s - 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES rho I11ES M B C, D, E,F,G H,I project task neighborhood survey City work task Political review methodology incorporated into reviewed by Planning Commission, area plans (14 months) Comprehensive Planning Coordinating Committee, City Council impact measures and performance standards impact linkages and identified problems and resources—lnew development controls, considered conne=tions incorporated into development by council and planning commission guidelines work task (on going) review of existing interim zoning ordinance approval by Planning Commission, regulations and their (6 months) City Council impacts (including — ) revised zoning ordinance enforcement practice) (19 months) historic survey )urban design plan adoption of plan; historic district 12 months) or other designations permit procedures development guidelines (site plan review) 0 housinc rehabilitation -->rehabilitation needs coordination (*--please refer to figure 4, page 24, of the original proposal) grants and loans ri figure 5, Interface between project outputs and political decision process. A iI p+ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES and is an expansion of figure 4 on page 24 of the original pro- posal. For clarity the major interconnections are shown here. Political/technical review process. Omitting, for the moment, imputs from citizen groups and organizations, the following sequence of discussion and recommendation by formally constituted public bodi.cs of the City of Iowa City represents the process by which results of the comprehensive plan improve- ment program will be reviewed and adopted. The proposed project will be a part of this process. (1) Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee Composed of selected members of the Planning Commission, City Council, City agencies, and citizens, this committee was created to review and coordinate the technical staff work and the political review process. (2) Committees of the Planning Commission Special committees for short or long term purposed may be created by the Planning Commission to increase the amount of public discussion and review of proposed measures. (3) Planning Commission Land use recommendations are reviewed by this commission, composed of appointed citizens, before being considered by City Council. (4) City Council An effective action body as well as representative forum, council members are partially selected at -large and partially from districts. Community Su port. The proposal was given thorough airing before being submitted to HUD; various objections and differences were raised, and dealt with, the result being no serious op- position (one councilmember voted against the proposal for minor reasons) at the time of submittal. Hence the members of the several boards as well as city council are already well-informed about the project and understand its implications. Several have expressed optimism and interest in the results privately, and have urged that clear recommendations be presented as a conse- quence of the study. In other words, policy makers know what to expect and are expecting things they can act upon. Preliminary neighborhood survey work has resulted in an expression of interest and political support for the general objectives and many of the specific ones. The community involve- ment component of the work program will give residents an oppor- tunity not only to express themselves but to determine what issues are of highest priority and to place their political weight in the direction they wish to move. A consensus will be developed through small neighborhood meetings, so that much of: the controversy surrounding local land use proposals will be circumvented by prior preparation. 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Elaboration of the Nature of the Community Involvement Proposed for the Project. Because of the small size (under 3,500 population) of the study area, a truly grass roots community involvement is real- istically feasible. It is our belief that an increased level can go a long ways toward restoring confidence and faith in the democratic process, and an important thrust of the proposed project is to encourage residents to take more active roles in dealing with the problems that affect their neighborhoods. We feel it is unnecessary (and perhaps counterproductive), however, to institute formal neighborhood "government,"; community organi- zations will`be encouraged and developed as the response to specific problems, not as an administrative subdivision with delegation of authority. The following steps will be taken in connection with the community participation component of the proposed project: (1) Neighborhood Survey Not an opinion poll, this field survey is a cataloguing by outside observers of the problems and resources in a neighbor- hood. A scaled-down version of this survey has been conducted during this Summer, and a section on apparent zoning code vio- lations has been included for the purpose of illuminating over- ly restrictive regulations as well as evaluating enforcement. The survey is conducted by block and is parcel specific. (2) Block Discussions when a satisfactory survey for a block has been completed, the results will be presented to a meeting of residents, along with the rationale behind them. The presentation will be care- fully constructed to both inform and to solicit feedback; in many ways, the survey is intended as a starting point for en- couraging residents to suggest their own ideas about problems, resources, and corrective measures. (3) Special Advisory Committee A committee representing the neighborhood will be established for the purpose of advising the Project Leader and staff on the conduct of the study. The size and composition of this commit- tee has not been established as of the present date. (4) Neighborhood Discussions From the recent controversy regarding the downzoning of a portion of the study area, many residents are concerned about the quality of new development and conversions of: older structures, and well as deterioration. If:, from the block meetings, a con- sensus emerges with respect to neighborhood policies (parking controls, landscapi.ng requirements, compatible uses), then neighborhood or subneighborhood meetings will. be held to develop support for specific recommendations. 40 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■ (5) Recommendations Project staff, in conjunction with neighborhood representa- tives, will present items to the appropriate public bodies or either for information or for action. positive change agencies, will occur to the extent that various ctheePlanningeCommissionbe reconciled prior to formal adoption by and the City Council. (6) Rxtending the Model Neighborhood Citizens who develop interests beyond the confines of the neighborhood will be encouraged and helped This may behe success - accomplished ful ideas into other areas of the city- ointments to existing by running for elected office, seeking other neighborhoods to board and commissions, helping the study study neighborhood. develop theesame e p (7) Handbooks Informational tools will be developed in the course sher eiof the study which will aid residents of the emsstudy and resources, and in and hoods in identifying their own p seeking protective or corrective remedies. These materials are designed to be useful in communities throughout the United States 41 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Restrictive rezoning plan once againhits stonewall ry By DAVE HEMINGWAY Iii 4,114- Staff Writer The Iowa City Planning and Zoning Com- mission spent 20 minutes Thursday night tabling a controversial rezoning ordinance for the city's near north side, and another hour tabling a proposed, even mere controversial, tree planting plan and ordinance. The rezoning ordinance, which basically would reduce the number of apartments that could be constructed in the typically older -home area northeast of the Ul, was deferred in- definitely. The ordinance had been revived by the commission after the City Council refused to consider the proposal last fall. "This is not a re -affirmation of the ap- propriateness of the present zoning," com- mission member Pat Cain said after the proposal was tabled. Therezoning proposal came to a standstill last year after It was questioned whether the re- zoning would conflict with a 1961 study, generally considered the city's latest comprehensive plan. Thatstudy encouraged expanding the population base in the area instead of restricting It, as the present rezoning proposal would attempt to do. A legal opinion had been sought on the possible difference, out City Ally. John Hayek dismissed himself from the matter, saying a property he owned in the area might mean a conflict of in- terest for him. The City Council did not seek other legal opinions on the matter. Commission chairman Dr. Robert Ogesen said two inquiries concerning the legal opinion "were left hanging," and no study has been completed on the matter since September. He said a study would be made before next February by the city's comprehensive planning staff. Ogesen said that residents in the area would be asked for their Input concerning the re -zoning, through neighborhood discussions rather than requiring the residents to rotnc to the Civic Center. Peter Dreyfuss, 526 N. Gilbert St., asked that the commission study the possibility of imposing a building moratorium in the area until the comprehensive planning staff could complete their study. Ogesen said this suggestion would be con- sidered at the commission's next meeting, June 1`17. When the commission considered the rezoning last fall, area residents said they feared an eventual appearance of "crackerbox" apart- ment complexes in their neighborhood. Area developers, however, opposed the re- zoning, which would require more square feet of land per apartment unit constructed. The developers charged that the more restricted zoning would force them to build in other areas of Iowa City where properly values are higher. The contractors said this would discourage new apartment construction and worsen the low. rent housing situation. They said that rents may be forced higher on new apartment complexes constructed in more expensive areas, which might be followed by other Iowa City landlords. In other action Thursday night, the proposed tree planting plan and ordinance was sent back to the comprehensive planning staff for re- working after several area contractors ex- pressed their disapproval of the measure. The proposed ordinance regulates the planting Of trees in new developments of residential areas, along streets and In parking lots. Similar structures already in existence would not be required to meet these requirements, but assistance would be available to persons who wished to plant trees. Pat Moore, an Iowa City contractor, spoke against the code saying that it took the legislative power of a group "way too far." Don't you people try to be a communist party and tell us how to do it," he said. Moore and other contractors complained that requiring developers to plant trees would be too expensive. Contractors said that the cost required to maintain trees, aside from the cost of purchasing and installing them, was too much to validate the aesthetic effects desired. Rick Geshwiler, city planner, said that the contractors overlooked the main intent of the ordinance. "The main reason for the ordinance Is to provide more physical benefits," he said. In a sheet from the city describing the goals of the ordinance, advantages in cutting down noise pollution, soil erosion and extra Insulation from wind are listed. Daily Iowan, Juno 4, 1976. DWI MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR Rnrlos•DES 1101REs a w Wednesday, October 19,1977—lows City PressCidun-3A North side dispute ends in compromise A 90 -minute debate over a disputed apartment building going up at Gilbert and Church Streets ended In a com- promise with the builder Tuesday evening. Ralph Neuzil, attorney for Schintler Brothers Construction Co., told the City Council Tuesday his client will stop work on the building, after completing the footings and foundation, until after the Board of Adjustment has ruled on an appeal challenging Schintler Brothers' building permit. The appeal was brought by a group of seven north side residents who allege the permit was Issued In violation of the city's zoning code. They followed their appeal with a lawsuit In Johnson County District court seeking an order to stop construction until the Board of Adjustment rules on the appeal. One of the seven north side residents, Kenneth A. Hubei, 619 North firm Street, told the Council Tuesday the city should have suspended the building permit Immediately after the appe.11 was filed. He cited a section of the •nning code saying that an appeal to the Board of Adjustment "stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from." But City Ally. John W. Hayek said that language did not call for automatic suspension of a building permit anytime there is an appeal. Council members LP. Foster Jr., David E. Perret and Carol W. deProsse said they disagreed. Foster offered a motion to revoke the Schintler building permit, but Neuzil protested. "You are going against all the advice you have received from your attorneys, your staff and your manager," Neuzil said. He noted City Manager Neal G. Berlin had said the city staff could find rAbIng wrong with the issuance of the building permit to Schintler. Foster withdrew his motion after Neuzd said bis client would pledge to stop construction, upon completion of the building foundation, until the Board of Adjustment has ruled. In the meantime, Neuzil said he and his client would attempt to resolve the dispute with the city staff and the nortt side residents. City to face lawsuit in building dispute" */7 By 51ARK F. ROHNER Of the Press -Citizen The city will be sued by the dwners of a norlhside apartment project that was shut down at the city's request, as cording to a lawyer representing the owners. William L. Meardon, attorney for Wayne Kempf and Kenneth Albrecht of Iowa City, notified city officials in a letter Friday of his plans to fake the city to court. The letter, Meardon said, "con- stitutes notice to you that we intend to resume construction on the slid three days hereafter," that is, today. However, there was no sign this morning of any activity at the building site, at 902 North Dodge Street City officials theorized that the notice to resume construction was given to set the stage for the court case. In the letter, Meardon said, "you are also advised that we are not attempting to engage in 'self-help,' but are filing an action against you in the District Court of Iowa in and for Johnson County on Monday, Feb. 14, 1977, seeking a declaratory judgment on our legal rights, damages and an injunction." As of late this morning, no such action had been filed, according to the office of District Court Clerk E.J. Wombacher. Kempf and Albrecht halted work on the apartment project in January after questions were raised about the building's compliance with city or- dinances on large-scale residential development and storm water management. Subsequently, the building permit for the 29 -unit project was revoked. Separate questions also were raised as to whether the legal procedures were followed when the building was zoned for apartments In 1967. The City Council later concluded the zoning was legal. Mayor Mary C. Neuhauser sold the Council plans to discuss Meardon's letter In closed -door executive session this afternoon. Iowa City Press–Citizen, February 14 and October 19, 1977. North Side residents fight against construction of apartment building. M16ROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES f401flEs Happy Hollow plan draws criticism V" pe A group of north side residents is skeptical of the city's claims that Happy Hollow Playground can remain a usable park while serving as a storm water storage area. So the neighbors are asking the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to perform "a full- scale environmental impact study" on the question. The city i's planning to use Housing and Community Development AM IHCDA) funds from HUD to create a storm water detention area in the park as part of a Ralston Creek flood control program. _ Wayne E. Begley, 8D4 Ronalds Street, told the City Council Tuesday that residents of his neighborhood are un- convinced by the city's informal en- vironmental review of the project. which concluded a storm water storage area would not harm the park. Begley asked the Council to give the neighborhood an opportunity to present its case. Mayor Mary C. Neuhauser told Begley the neighbors would be given a hearing, but she said the Council is already convinced Happy Hollow can serve the dual purpose. Under the Ralston Creek watershed management program, storm water detention areas would serve to hold back runoff temporarily during a storm, releasing it slowly within 48 hours after the end of a. storm. According to the city's consultants, storm water detention areas would be dry most of the time. But Begley noted in a letter to the Council that "portions of the park already have far too much standing water" following a heavy rain. "if the drainage outflow is further reduced, this problem will doubtless be compounded," he said. Area residents file suit to stop apartment project A group of north side residents seeking to stop an apartment project in their neighborhood have filed a lawsuit against the city. The suit seeks a court order requiring the city to have work on the apartment building stopped. The seven north aide residents earlier isked the Board of Adjustment to revoke a building permit for the project, a 15 -unit structure at Gilbert and Church Streets. in their suit, they argue that the law' requires that construction be stopped until the Board of Adjustment has ruled. Flung the suit are Kenneth A. Hubel, David and Jean Schaal, Claudine Harris, George and Pat McCormack and Janice Quinn. A preliminary bearing on the suit has been scheduled for Nov. B. Iowa City Press—Citizen, December 22, 1976 and October 17, 1977. Other attempts at neighborhood protection by North Side residents. 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs.DLs 140111L5 U1, city officials PG D 31• RG agree t® c®operate Ameeting of Lha top officials of the city and the University of Iowa may the city informed on future Ul plans, herald new city -university coopereUon Berlin said. In the past, the city frequently has on downtown redevelopment and long- relied on guesswork about future range planning. Manager Neal G. Berlin and changes on the U[ campus. City of. flcials Donald R. ZucheW, the city's urban are uncertain, for example, about what steps they will need to take renewal marketing consultant, met Thursday with Ul President Willard L. to handle increases In traffic and Boyd and his aides. sewage discharge resulting from ex - The meeting was called after Boyd pansion at University Hospital. expressed "grave concern" about what might happen to traffic on the campus if the city carries out ZucheW's plan to close some downtown streets and limit through traffic on others. Berlin said he and Boyd agreed that city and university planners would work together on downtown public improvemegfs that will directly affect the university. Examples of these, he said, would be street work on Washington and Capitol Streets where those streets border the U[ campus. But the most significant outcome of the meeting appears to be an agreement to bring the university into the city's comprehensive planning process. "To have a true comprehensive plan, the future plans of the university have to be considered," said Berlin, somewhat at pains to hide his en- thusiasm over the agreement. He said the city -university agreement, to be put in writing next week, will give each a role In the other's planning. It will also constitute a commitment from the unlvesity to keep Iowa City Press—Citizen, December 31, 1976 ns MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo[MEs APPENDIX B: MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS OF THE NORTH SIDE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111[5 Tuesday, February 8,1977—Iowa City press-Om:a3 e UI team to help northside planning M urban planning team from the University of Iowa will meet with the Northside Neighbors Organization Thursday to discuss a study on ways to preserve and upgrade Iowa City's northside residential area. The study, financed by a $109,000 federal grant, is a joint city - university project headed by Douglass Lee, UI professor of urban and regional planning, under the overall direction of Dennis R. Kraft, Iowa City director of community develop. ment. Research assistants for the project are Margaret Barron, Kevin Laverty, Gary Lozano, Gerald Thompson and Vicki Williams, graduate students in urban planning. 11 47 Lee said the study will involve "the evaluation of existing land use controls and alternative means of control, the application of historic preservation techniques to the area, working with northside residents in the identification of existing needs and problems and the direction of future grant monies should they become available." The study's target, the northside neighborhood, Is defined as an area bounded by Dubuque, Jef- ferson and Governor Streets and Kimball Road. The study team plans to work with the Northside Neighbors Organization. The group will meet with the study team at 7;30 p.m. Thursday at Horace Mann School. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t10114Es A FOREWORD Eight meetings were held with residents of the Northside neighborhood of Iowa City during the Spring of 1977. After a general meeting, residents of no more than four blocks at a time were invited to the home of the host for the particular block group, to hear a presentation based on the Neighborhood Survey report and to discuss views and perceptions regarding neighbor- hood problems. All meetings were arranged and hosted by members of the Northside Neighbors organization, an informal citizens' group representing residents of the neighborhood in general but com- posed preponderantly of homeowners. Not all sections of the neighborhood were covered by meetings, and varying proportions of those invited actually attended a meeting, but the most active and interested residents had a chance to discuss their concern with a reasonably -sized (six to twenty) group of their neighbors. Project staff conducted the meetings and took notes on the discussion. Duties of taking minutes and preparing block proposals were rotated among the staff, and the authorship of each item is indicated either with an underline or a byline. Minutes and block proposals have been distributed to the hosts for circulation to the residents. The items in this report --consisting of contact report, attendance list, minutes, and block proposals --are grouped by block; an index map precedes the meeting results. From the information gained in these meetings, a series of reports con- sidering alternative ways to address the problems affecting the neighborhood are being prepared. These will be available for discussion in the Fall of this year. Project staff: Margaret. 13arron Kevin Laverty Gary Lozano Jerry Thompson 98 Vicki. Williams Bill Kcating Doug Lee, Project Leader MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIOINES TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword................................................ 48 North Side Neighborhood Map ............................• 51 Flyer Announcing General Meeting ........................ 52 Meeting One: Blocks 10, 11, 12, 13 Contact Report ...................................... 53 Block Meeting Map ................................... 54 Minutes ............................................. 55 Attendance .......................................... 57 Proposals .......................................... 58 Meeting Two: Blocks 55, 56 Contact Report ...................................... 69 Block Meeting Map ................................... 70 Minutes ............................................. 71 Attendance .......................................... 73 Proposals ........................................... 74 Meeting Three: Blocks 52, 53, 73 Contact Report ...................................... 82 Block Meeting Map ................................... 83 Minutes............................................. 84 Attendance .......................................... 87 Proposals ........................................... 88 Meeting Four: Blocks 51, 54, 72 Contact Report ...................................... 97 Block Meeting Map ................................... 98 Minutes ............................................. 99 Attendance .......................................... 104 Proposals...........................................105 Meeting Five: Blocks 70, 71, 74 Contact Report.....................................•109 Block Meeting Map...................................110 Minutes.............................................111 Attendance..........................................113 Proposals...........................................114 49 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEPAR RAPIDS•DES MOIMES Meeting Six: Blocks 29, 35, 36 Page Contact Report............ Block Meeting .Map......... " " 118 Minutes......... 119 Attendance ....................... 120 Proposals .................... ....................... 122 MeetingSeven: 98, 123 —Blocks 99, 50 Contact Report.......... Block Meeting Map......... " " " 127 Minutes............ 128 Attendance .......................................... ......................................... 129 Proposals .............. 131 Meeting Eight: Block 59 ............................. 132 Contact Report........... Block Meeting Map........... " " 137 Minutes.......... ............... 138' ................................. Attendance ....... . 139 Proposals ........................................... 139 ............................ 142 50 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Ln v - :I�RCHILD2 701 z :�:� L.---�El—_—.� I_—___J L. 3J I— 2—''c7';----JAI---�wl �: •DAVE Lol 69 : 5748 0 X.. °�-'--F• _ . ;----- Ill --JJ �LOOIAINCITO ED tC2 ------ --- MAKYI-I- _; f-' T 6-71 omm. 26 IB 5 • JEFFERSON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES nq Lim, IN - 11,116 un BLOCK MUOM ZONING 0 FTRHRU R S DAY 7:30 HORACE MANN SCHOOL(CHURCH & DODGE) NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 1 AGENDA; 1. Presentation of the North Side Neighbor- hood Preservation Stud � Y (D.. Lee and team). 2. Election of officers of the North Side Neighbors. 3. I Open discussion titions. ion s . of ideas, concerns, ques- refreshments ,l / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOIIICS I Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORIIOOD PRESERVATION STUDY CONTACT REPORT DATE: March 3, 1977 S'TAPP: Doug Lee, Kevin Laverty, Gary Lozano, Jerry 'Thompson, Vicki Williams, Margaret Barron CROUP: Blocks 9, 10, 11, 12 LOCATION: John and Marsha Linder's house, 830 Ronalds Street ATTENDANCE: 15 Residents TOPICS/ DISCUSSION: Eagles Grocery Store: parking, alley, noise, garbage Traffic: parking too near corners, insufficient parking around multi- family houses, trees blocking sightlines at corners, Dodge and Governor Streets traffic Historic Preservation Mixed Lifestyles Happy Hollow Park Horace Mann School Emma Goldman Clinic Brick Streets Aggressive Realtors Alleys FOLLOW-UP: 1. need to contact Linders for verbal feedback 2. need to distribute draft proposals for residents to comment on 53 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INE5 MOCK iZ PATL ., ,,Lw,.y JAY 7 i Wki ■ Jit M, � zw� i Wki ■ Jit BLOOM it PAJI , aMY JAY 7 AM iml 'gr (Ir P-5- _(O lmm�gmwm g�IrA p��Iw On al 'gr (Ir P-5- _(O lmm�gmwm g�IrA p��Iw On al M, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONES li I CV1 MOCK —p W,Tc. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONES li Iowa City/IIIRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY MINUTES March 3 Blocks 9, 10, 11, 12 Linder's I -louse Introduction of the project and the survey: Doug Lee Resources and Negative Impacts: Kevin Laverty Code Violations: Gary Lozano Issues discussed: Eagles: 1) parking lot: unscreened 2) alley: excessive traffic, noise and dust, expense of yearly graveling 3) noise and lights: loading and unloading trucks at night 4) garbage Traffic: 1) parking too near corners: problem on Ronalds and Governor corner; need better pavement markings or curb extensions into street 2) insufficient parking around multifamily residences and Emma Goldman Clinic 3) discussion of possible solutions; parking in yards versus parking on streets; strategies for limiting the number of cars 4) tradeoffs between easy access to private property and discouraging through traffic In residential areas 5) trees too near corners -- block sightlines 6) Dodge and Governor -- two way traffic: negative reaction; trucks going up Dodge are noisy Historic Preservation: general favorable reaction Mixed Lifestyles and Population Groups In the Neighborhood: generally supportive of the concept Happy Hollow: 1) new apartment building very unpopular: (M. Linder announced meeting with lawyer to fight zoning variance) Horace Mann: 1) strong sentiment in favor of keeping this neighborhood school 2) problem with children left in the schoolyard before and after school hours 55 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140NES Emma Goldman Clinic: 1) strong negative reaction to locating the clinic in this neighborhood by some; weak support from others 2) traffic problem: cars parked along all nearby streets -- no off-street parking at Emma Goldman Clinic Brick Streets: 1) strong support 2) dislike concrete patches -- one resident had success in complaining to the city Aggressive Realtors: 3 residents (Mona Cermak, Dolores Rogers, and Ed Dlouhy) have been pressured to sell property Alleys: 1) excessive traffic 2) cost of yearly regraveling I 56 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401MES r ATTENDANCE March 3 , 1977 Blocks 9, 10, 11, 12 Linder's House Name Address Barb Ettleson 823 Ronalds Dolores A Rogers 717 Brown Jeff & Jane Tegeler 721 Brown Mona Cermak 912 Brown Ed Dlouhy 824 Ronalds Mrs. Wayne Kenney 813 Ronalds Wayne Begley 804 Ronalds Marshall Hunter 704 Ronalds Luthiera White 820 Ronalds Mr. and Mrs. Terry Smothers 712 Ronalds Genny Alexander 508 Brown Albert Souek 801 Brown Mildred Ward 714 Ronalds Louis F. Ward 714 Ronalds Mr. and Mrs. Linder 830 Ronalds 57 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Phone 354-2451 338-8341 338-1317 337-2466 338-1545 338-2158 354-1853 337-7167 337-7441 338-8515 354-3326 338-1004 337-3338 337-3338 338-8993 1 DRAFT --For Discussion Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862, Extension 30 BLOCK PROPOSALS: BLOCKS 10, 11 12 13 G. Lozano In response to the concerns expressed during the March 3rd neighbor- hood meeting held at John and Marsha Linder's home, 830 Ronaids Street, the following draft proposals have been prepared. The concerns expressed generally fall into the following categories: 1 . problems concerning vehicular traffic, 2. problems concerning the parking of automobiles, 3. needed public improvements, 4. preservation of historic resources, 5. maintaining the present character of the neighborhood. Each of these categories are broken down Into particular problems as seen by neighborhood residents. These problems are commented upon and, where possible, proposals for actions which will help solve the problem are offered. I PROBLEMS CONCERNING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC Problem 1 Excessive thru traffic in alleyways, especially in the vicinity of Eagles grocery store. (See Map 1) Comment. This problem is seen to cause hardships to property owners ! who must pay the high maintenance costs (regraveling) of alleys with large amounts of thru traffic. Increased danger to pedestrians and children playing, I noise, and dust are also seen as problems. The residents do not want the alleys paved because they feel it would be too expensive and that for their own f uses, gravel is satisfactory. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111Cs �r BM :: ->T. I !12� �unw,, G�Lduy� Cl�Mic R"Iz5 5T 13 Ct{u %A ST. �7 MAS 4wy �wbo PARK r pesm\4 V"-U� �rc�Al s Rroblw�.4 II- ParL;w1 TOC cIw. -1 c"mm, n � Pra (±t I — fxctss%ot, i6tk - -Nr %c MCK5 IOJ IJZJ1 59 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAFIDs•BEs IiBIREs 1 Proposals. Effective means should be utilized to prohibit/discourage thru traffic in alleyways. (a) Construction of speed bumps --would discourage thru traffic but would also inhibit bicycle traffic, which may be well suited for alleys. There is also the potential of Injury to drivers who are not aware of the bumps. (b) Blocking one end of the alley --would prohibit thru traffic but would also reduce the residents' access. Also, may cause problems with City garbage collection. (c) Make alleys one-way-- could substantially reduce thru traffic in specific, problem alleys. Would also make space available for alleyway landscaping/beautification. Resident access would, however, be somewhat reduced and program would have to be coordinated with City garbage collection routes. Problem 2 Thru traffic on Dodge and Governor Streets causing problems of noise, danger to pedestrians, and vibration. (See Map 1 and Diagram 1) Comment. Truck traffic on Dodge and Governor generates excessive noise. However, residents feel that this problem was worse when Dodge Street was two-way and north bound trucks shifted gears going up the hill. Thus, a prime concern is that north bound truck traffic not be allowed on Dodge Street. Semi -trailer trucks servicing Eagles store contribute greatly to the above pro- blems by loading, unloading, and moving through the neighborhood late at night and early in the morning. Proposals. la) Prohibit loading and unloading operations at Eagles grocery store between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 60 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES ARK ROAD 10,300 U Be 0 z 0 8 iZpcHESTE g k"� +200 t oo ung 1975 AVIR41 I DIAGRAM 1 DAILY TRAMC FLOW (A,7T) V�NICLFs �a opt ' DA`( waw: 1 of FLWQ kwysl eucna�emac, 61 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES ■ ■ A (b) Investigate the feasibility of an alternative truck route to replace Dodge and Governor and returning these two streets to two-way use, prohibiting all truck traffic from Dodge Street. Problem 3 Thru traffic on residential streets resulting in danger to children and I pedestrians. (See Map 2 and Diagram 1) Comment . Although concern was expressed both for the problem of thru traffic and for the desirability of easy access within the neighborhood, it was generally felt that thru traffic should be discouraged on residential streets. Proposals. (a) Increased use of two and four-way stop signs on residential streets to discourage thru traffic. (See Map 2) (b) Use of other means such as traffic diverters or maintenance of narrow street width to discourage thru traffic. (See Map 2) PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE PARKING OF AUTOMOBILES i Problem 4 Autos parking too close to intersections and blocking the path of turning traffic. I Comment. The specific problem area mentioned was the corner of Ronalds and Governor. (See Map 1) Various complaints to the City have not i resulted In any action. I Proposals . I (a) Establish and enforce no parking zones, through signs and curb painting, a sufficient distance back from problem street corners. 62 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CHAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES I I i 'H 12, il 1H Ro4LS sT I!3 W V /� CZfSCSf� I � �{ Ct{uRc NAWy } auk PARK —%6r SDHs VF I co bW--L BLOCKS 10) 11,12,13 63 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 (b) Effectively prohibit parking near corners by widening the i "parking" in those areas while maintaining a turning radius which does not inhibit circulation. (See Diagram 2 below) . oa as I Problem 5 On -street parking requirements generated by non -single-family uses i that have not provided sufficient off-street parking, resulting in congestion on residential streets and increased pedestrians in vicinity of these uses. Comment. The Emma Goldman Clinic (see Map 1) and single-family conversions to apartments were the two specific problem areas cited. The clinic was seen to generate parking congestion throughout the neighborhood while the problems stemming from single-family conversions were concentrated in the Immediate area of the conversion. Proposals. j (a) The Emma Goldman Clinic should be required to provide i sufficient off-street parking so as to remove Its negative Influence on the neighborhood. (The current zoning code requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of floor area for clinics --Section Il. 10. 25.) It should be noted, however, that this solution --requiring the clinic to acquire an off-street parking area --will result In the decreasing of neighborhood green space and this fact should be weighed in any decision. 64 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES (b) Off-street parking requirements for apartments and single- family conversions should be enforced. (Current requirement Is 12 spaces/dwelling unit for multi -family dwellings --Section 8. 10. 25.) Once again, the tradeoff between neighborhood green space and off-street parking areas should be considered. NEEDED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Problem 6 The need for public improvements was expressed and are included below as proposals under the following categories: (a) Happy Hollow Park . It is proposed that the City plant additional trees and provide more picnic tables for the park. Other than that the neighbors were generally content with the facilities. It was not felt that tennis courts were needed at the park. It is proposed that the Hayek property adjacent to Happy Hollow Park be purchased by the City and used to expand the parkland. (b) Street Landscaping. It is proposed that additional trees be planted by the City In the street parkings. Existing foliage, which constitutes a traffic hazard by blocking vision at intersections, should be trimmed or removed. It should be noted, however, that these two proposals can be in conflict with each other in some areas. Much depends upon whether the neighborhood's environment Is viewed from an "automobile driver's" viewpoint or from a "resident's and Pedestrian's" viewpoint. (c) Brick Streets. Brick paved streets are seen as a positive resource for the neighborhood and as something to be preserved. It is proposed that when future utility work requires removing a section of brick paving that the original bricks be replaced as standard procedure. Additionally, where other 65 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES used to ,patch up" sections previously removed, these materials have been patches should be replaced with brick paving. (d) Strom Markings. it is proposed that the City clearly mark pedestrian crosswalk areas throughout the neighborhood with paint or, if possible, some more Permanent method (for example, the deliniatton of crosswalk areas with contrasting colored stone or brick). i (e) Sidewalks. When damage is done to sidewalks and curbs by the City in doing maintenance work, the damage should be quickly repaired at j City expense. (f) Sim s. it was reported that some gravel all "wash out" S during heavy reatnstorms. (See Map 1) It is proposed that the City investigate this problem and take corrective measures. t PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Problem 7 The historic resources of the neighborhood (houses, barns, etc.) are unprotected and are in danger of being lost. i Comment. The neighborhood, being part of Iowa City's original "goose town" and originally inhabited by Czechoslovakian immigrants, is seen as having much historical significance. Some of the buildings possess architec- tural merit as examples of 19th and 20th century architectural styles while others have local historical merit as the homes of prominent figures or by virtue of being constructed from locally produced materials. The Neighborhood Impact d additional Surveyidentifies recognized architecturally significant structures an structures potentially possessing architectural or historical significance. 66 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Proposals. (a) That a detailed survey be taken to identify historically and architecturally significant structures. (b) That these structures be protected and the history of the neighborhood be made known through the creation of a Historic District. MAINTAINING THE PRESENT CHARACTER Or THE NEIGHBORHOOD Problem 8 The existing single-famLly residential character of the neighborhood is ,. being threatened by multi -family apartment redevelopment. j Comment. This concern about the erosion of the existing character of 1' the neighborhood, as exemplified by the controversial North Dodge Street i multi -family redevelopment, is utmost to the minds of many of the residents. They fear the increased problems of parking, traffic, noise, transient residents who "don't care about the neighborhood," and incompatible lifestyles which such redevelopment is likely to bring. Developers, who are seen as rich, influential outsiders who care nothing about neighborhood quality but rather are simply concerned with cramming as many units as possible on a given lot, are seen as the main force behind this threat and this view is reinforced by experiences of pressure from local realtors wanting to buy residents' properties. Proposals. (a) That the existing R2 zoning designation be maintained and the two parcels zoned R3A on Blocks 12 and 13 be returned t I to the R2 zoning classification. I (b) That recourse agalnstrealtors who unduly pressure residents to sell be made available to neighborhood residents. t t 67 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401RES Problem 9 Horace Mann School is viewed as a very important neighborhood resource, which, because of declining enrollment, is seen as in danger of being closed and having its neighborhood pupils transferred to other schools. Comment . The continued existence of the school is seen by the residents as crucial in maintaining the desirability of the area to families with children' and therefore in maintaining the existing character of the neighborhood. Proposal. Horace Mann School should be maintained in its present function and protected from possible threats of closure. G1:] MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY CONTACT REPORT DATE: March 15, 1977, 7:30 p.m. STACr: Margaret Barron, Kevin Laverty, Jerry Thompson, Julie Vann CROUP: Neighbors from Blocks 55 & 56 LOCATION: Pat & Bill Eckhardt's home, 314 Fairchild ATTENDANCE: 8 Residents TOPIC: Introduction to survey of north side neighborhood; discussion of issues confronting the north side; correction of survey DISCUSSION: Ranged from trees, traffic, parking, noise, dust development to housing rehabilitation, code enforcement, mixed lifestyles FOLLOW-UP: Specific questions about the tree ordinance and responsibilities for repair of alleys and replacement o� trees should be answered 69 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES C1DCK _ 55- . - R,TC a5M[Y.&Y 0 70 I L,Ltxx w„ PITC 0awlYM is r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES i Iowa City/ITIRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY MINUTES_ Block Meeting (55 & 56) March 15, 1977, 7:30 p.m. 314 Fairchild (Pat & Bill Eckhardt) 1. Margaret Barron opened the meeting by explaining the purpose of the research and introducing the survey of the northside neighborhood. Those in attendance made comments about the survey -- correcting and supplementing the information it contained. 2. Discussion turned to the topic of tree care being rendered by the city. Residents were irate with current city policy which leaves the trees looking like umbrellas which yield no shade. Neighbors felt that it was good to keep branches away from power lines and transformers, but unnecessary to trim the others as much as has been the practice In the past. Some home owners have caught the city workers and stopped them from continuing, at least on their own property. A question arose about whose responsibility it was to replant when diseased trees are removed. 3. Traffic problems mentioned by this group included the noise and dust created by large volumes of traffic, the need for a north -south bikeway on Linn Street to remove bicyclists from busy Dubuque Street, the congestion on Gilbert Street, traffic in the alleys (Block 56) and parking problems. Possible alter- native solutions mentioned were to add a traffic light at Church Street and Dubuque Street to facilitate access, to extend use of calendar parking especially In the 200-300 blocks on Gilbert Street near John's Grocery, to upgrade Dubuque Street by straightening it arid painting It, and to make Ronalds Street one-way off of Dubuque Street. 4. No one wanted to see Gilbert Street made into a one way or four lane street. *Doubts were raised about the justification for predicting an Increase in the volume of traffic flowing on Dubuque Street. Kevin explained that the main factor influencing the projection was proposed residential development of the "Peninsula" area. 71 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES 5. Residents Indicated problems with parking enforcement and main- tenance of alleys. With the pressure on the streets in front of their dwellings being so great, residents expressed possessive feeling with respect to use of alleys. 6. Housing rehabilitation was brought up by Julie Vann of the City's Department of Community Development. She explained the grant program. One neighbor expressed the feeling that the quality of housing was Improving due to increased private investment. Julie's inquiry about the quality of sidewalks yielded the response that they are not too bad. Most of the housing rehabilitation money has gone to fix interior plumbing and electrical systems of residents who are considered high risk by private financial/lending institutions in Iowa City. 7. Inspection of housing units has been limited to those renting units since they must obtain an annual permit to stay in business. Some private residences have been inspected, but refusals are honored. 8. Neighbors did not perceive any problems with the mixture of lifestyles which exists. They enjoyed seeing young and old living in the same area. 9. Trash cans on the parking strip are viewed as a problem. There are too many without tops and which are left out in the open for days. Julie Vann suggested that the remedy to this situation might be the filing of complaint } , forms with the city. Citations can be issued for this activity as well as failure to maintain property in terms of mowing grass and shoveling sidewalks. The i garbage collectors have been known to condemn cans which are beyond hope. 10. Residents wanted to know how the collection fee for garbage service i was established. They recognized that It was fairly low. 11. Certain owners rent their houses to Individuals on a rooming house iformat. This method was sec:: as a means of circumventing regulations which i applied to those converting houses Into apartments. Parking was the main spillover concern. 12. Two Individuals who might be able to provide a natural history of their neighborhood are Alberta Brenton and Minnie Gaens. i 13. Meeting broke up for refreshments at about 9:00 p.m. 72 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES 73 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOINES 0 ATTENDANCE March 15, 1977 Blocks 55 & 56 Eckhardt's house Name Address Pat & Bill Eckhardt 314 Fairchild Laura Howard 419 Gilbert Ms. Arp 311 I'airchild Mr. & Mrs. Folk 430 Linn Mrs. Brunton 312 Fairchild Mr. Thornton 320 Fairchild Mr. Shaal 511 Gilbert Mrs. Gillespie 409 Gilbert 73 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOINES 0 Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 extension 30. BLOCK PROPOSALS: BLOCKS 55 & 56 K. Laverty These draft proposals have been produced in response to ideas expressed at a meeting held Tuesday, March 15, 1977 at Pat and Bill Eckhardt's home. Concerns disucssed at the meeting fell into these categories: 1 , control of the impacts of traffic 2, preservation of a "mixed" (i.e. , age, lifestyle mixes) neighborhood 3. preservation of historic resources 4. improper management of garbage stored for pick up 5. tree cutting and planting procedures Each of these bears at least some relationship to the neighborhood study. For each concern, we have made a statement of the proglem and commented on possible solutions. In several cases we feel that a specific proposal produced by our study could have some impact in terms of solving the problem. Preliminary proposals are, therefore, included where appropriate Control of the Impacts of Traffic Problem 1: Excessive traffic on residential streets and in alleys creates noise, dust and danger to pedestrians. Comment: Everyone egrees that through traffic is detrimental to a residential area. However, residents often demand (and get) a high level of access for their personal auto travel. The problem lies in the fact that the rational driver will use a residential street if it is the most convenient route to get where he or she is going. Autos flow through a street pattern like water or oil, choosing the path of least resistance. Residential streets 74 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101ME5 should be designed to discourage through traffic while minimizing inconvenience to residents who drive. Through traffic should use streets such as Dubuque Street and Market Street, which were designed to serve as arterials. (See attached Map 1, traffic volumes in the North Side.) Proposals: (a) Discourage through traffic in alleys by making them one- way, blocking access at one end, or constructing speed control bumps. (b) Increase the number of intersections with two-way and four-way stop signs. (c) Mark or construct pedestrian crossings and bikeways. j (d) Use traffic diverters to prevent through traffic. These would I be constructed diagonally across an intersection (from northwest to southeast or northeast to southwest) as shown on Map 2. Autos would be j forced to turn left or right, depending upon which way the diverter was i approached, which would make the street unsuitable for through movement. j Curb cuts in a raised diverter would allow passage of bicycles, shopping carts, and baby strollers. There would be no actual street closings or ireduction in access to property. An incidental benefit of a diverter would be a permanent diagonal pedestrian crosswalk. 1 Problem 2: Auto access to the neighborhood from Dubuque Street and i { Market Street is difficult and sometimes dangerous. Comment: Three exsmples were brought up at the meeting (see Map 3): Gilbert Street between Market and Bloomington (narrow because of parking), the intersection of Church Street and Dubuque (difficulty in making left turn onto Church and other movements), and the intersection of Ronalds Street and Dubuque ("blind" entrance from Ronalds Street). Each of these situations can be solved through traffic control, but it must be kept in mind that improved access for residents is also improved access for through traffic. Solving these problems could increase through traffic, if measures to discourage f it (such as discussed above) were not implemented concurrently. f 75 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i ROAP 10,300 D0 g N M `Q]5N AN N p h O [2 3W '^1co awo at,� ruuQcu _gr. SAM ROCHEStEP DAILY TRAFFIC FLOW (ApT) V ,w_N«tes SaQcl I.C. OE tT. cF ?LWQ 40, s I E1.Y v%ftew� DN. 76 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I Exsvl)4 Coke II Z I, II I I II I I I' I II I I II I I RRISeD cuRps I I I p�p W rM curs FoK PEpE6Y AW05, 8'KeS,tfc it I I I it I I II I i �I t , I I II it II �� fliGYaE FAt ZeHILT) STRUT MAP 2 : DIVFRTER EXAMPLE AT IFAS ZML_D AA LAN S*MEM . 77 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES DIFFICULT LE Fr TVFA; 111 WaD FOQ TRAFFIC L14,l}t P BLOOMIUC41DN) F I c MAWT NA¢Roul Mpp3: Poltm of s»m-; DIFFICULT AVM ACCESS *70 PASS ➢IFFIcuuvr Foe cAe5 To 17K Ncko SIDE. W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Proposals: (a) Install a stop light at the intersection of Church Street and Dubuque Street with a left -turn arrow to allow southbound traffic on Dubuque unobstructed entrance to Church Street. (b) Prohibit travel on Ronalds Street from Linn Street toward Dubuque (i.e., the segment will be one-way from Dubuque Street). Preservation of a "Mixed" Neighborhood Problem 3: The closing of Horace Mann and Central Junior High would be harmful to children and parents who currently live in the north side and in addition would discourage new families with children from buying and investing in homes in the neighborhood. Comment: A neighborhood such as the Ibrth Side -- with its historical character and convenience to places of work, school, shopping and entertain- ment -- naturally attracts a wide variety of residents: parents with young children, parents with grown children, students, retired people. Our project ("An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement") is focused directly uponprotecting the resources of the north side and reducing the impacts that arise from mixed land uses and lifestyles. We are convinced that families with young children are a strong resource and an essential component of that mix. Proposal: The school district should make a commitment to keep Horace Mann and Central Junior High open. Preservation of Historic Resources Problem 4: Historic resources (homes, barns, carriage houses, brick street) are unprotected except through private efforts. I r 79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Ido1NEs Comment: Historic preservation is a maj or element of our study. While none of the current project staff is an expert in this area, we are aware (through, among other things, our personal tastes and discussions with neighborhood groups) of the value of historic resources to the residents of the north side. However, the private owner of a historical home often believes slow disinvestment leading to demolition to be the most financially sound course of action. The decision to destroy the historic resource is rational from the perspective of the owner but detrimental to the neighborhood and the public interest. Proposal: (a) Undertake an historic inventory, to foster general public awareness of historic resources. (b) Create an Historic District to encourage the maintenance of historic buildings. Improper Management of Garbage Stored for Pick-up Problem 5: For certain multiple -unit buildings, garbage cans are unsightly, the lids are left off, cans are knocked over and the contents strewn about, etc. Comment: The City's Solid Waste Ordinance requires trash cans to have lids and be taken in after collection. This kind of regulation is almost ' impossible to enforce in every instance. The ordinance does state that 1 i residences with four or more units must have trash containers that are "approved by the City Manager". Requiring these multiple -unit buildings t i to provide for trash storage other than large numbers of trash cans could solve some of the problem. Proposals: (a) Enforce the provision of the Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance. (b) Require houses or apartments with six or more units to store garbage in large covered containers (such as dumpsters) which are shielded from public view. [E MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOItIES B i ! Tree Cutting and Plantin Procedures Problem 6: Excessive cutting of public trees by the City reduces shade, noise buffering, and general visual appeal. Also, procedures an new tree planting are unclear. Comment: Our survey identified trees on the parking as an extremely important resource throughout much of the north side. Fairchild, Davenport, Gilbert and Linn Streets all have excellent public trees. This resource should be Protected and additional trees planted. The adoption of Iowa City's ' Tree Planting Plan indicates a favorable public direction. Better communication between the neighborhood residents and the City Forester should ease any misunderstandings. Proposals: (a) Limit cutting of Public trees to cases in which the Protection of Public health or safety is necessary. (b) Encourage the planting of vegetation (trees, shrubs, flowers, even vegetables) on the parking. f i r 1 I f I 81 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES r CONTACT REPORT DATE: March 30, 1977 STAFF: Kevin Laverty, Vicki Williams, Gary Lozano GROUP: Blocks 52,53, 73 and border area to the north LOCATION: David and Jean Cater's house, 319 Brown Street ATTENDANCE: 12 Resident$ TOPICS/DISCUSSION: 1. Neighborhood Survey 2. Neighborhood Parking Problems 3. Brick Streets 9. Properties in Area Managed by Banks and Trusts 5. Iowa City Rehab Program 6. Planned Redevelopment in Neighborhood 7. Inflation in Property Values 8. Single-family Conversions 9. Traffic on Brown and Ronalds Streets 10. Mixed Lifestyles 11. Horace Mann School 12. North Gilbert Street POLLOW-UP: 1. need to distribute minutes of meeting to participants 2. need to formulate and distribute draft proposals to residents for comment. W, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 OLOGC 13 AQC.,9UNCY. ky 14 =�:ss�ri _ Gael .o • s��s hrv:µ BLOCK. RITC aamy M 13 A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Prvy Know00 11 1 40 , l 1 li CYL .6N1' rCvj4 OLOGC 13 AQC.,9UNCY. ky 14 =�:ss�ri _ Gael .o • s��s hrv:µ BLOCK. RITC aamy M 13 A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Prvy Know00 11 1 40 , l im m hrv:µ BLOCK. RITC aamy M 13 A MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Prvy Know00 11 iJu1M BLOCK 5t VATC.,IMY y 2 i 1 40 , l im m ='i iJu1M BLOCK 5t VATC.,IMY y 2 i ■ Iowa City/NRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 MINUTES Block Meeting (52, 53, 73) March 30, 1977, 7:30 p.m. 314 Brown St. (Jean & David Cater) Introduction to Study Project and Explanation of Block Maps - K. Laverty Block Map Errors Noted Block 53: parcel (51) - Code violation (no off-street parking) - actually an MP -3 parcel (53) - not owner occupied - not SP (rented as rooms) parcel (49) - not owner occupied Discussion The following is a listing of the concerns expressed at the meeting in the order they were discussed. 1. The Nolan property on Block 53 was well maintained before he owned it but has "gone down" in the last few years. 2. The properties in the neighborhood that owners, usually elderly persons, have turned over to banks to manage as a trust are generally not being well maintained. There is a need to communicate with these banks and trust com- panies and inform them of problems with their properties. Although they have been cooperative in the past, one problem is to find out which properties are In this category and how to contact their managers. 3. The study group was asked what we will do with the information we gather, and further, what the Citv thinks are the problem with the neighborhood. If the City has no opinion on the matter, then why should we be spending govern- mental tax money on the study? Study staff discussed the role of citizen input and the City's desire to bring planning closer to the community. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I k L 4. Questions were asked about the City's rehab. program and why this area wasn't being served. Answered by Julie Vann. 5. The problem of the replacement of bricks when street work is done was seen as important. The problem was seen as a failure of the city staff (Public Works Dept.) to communicate to utility companies and contractors that they must replace the brick. Residents are tired of having to harass the workers and the City staff to replace the brick and also of having to be "watch dogs" over the streets. They feel that the City is failing in its job. 6. Because the study project stresses the identification of positive and negative neighborhood impacts, a resident expressed the opinion that it seemed to be pitting neighbor against neighbor, and rather than working against each other, neighbors should be working with each other in pressing the City to become more active in solving neighborhood problems. Discussion ensued concerning the importance of identifying existing problems in the neighborhood and developing an atmosphere in which these problems could be discussed in a "neighborly" way. 7. Automobile parking was seen as a major problem in the neighborhood. The following points were made and discussed: - If calendar parking was originally established for snow removal purposes and we no longer have snow removal, then why do we need calendar parking? The additional purpose of calendar parking, i.e., discouraging street storage of automobiles, was discussed. - The police are seen as harassing the neighborhood by ticketing parked cars at exactly 8:00 a.m. (or even slightly earlier). - The University is seen as the cause of the parking problems in the neighborhood and it is felt that they should provide additional parking space for students. - People who live in the neighborhood need on -street parking because most of the area was built prior to the automobile era and that is why many places have no off-street parking space. - There are many students who park in the neighborhood and then take a Cambus to campus. Many of their cars have "52" license plates. - Large housing projects (apartments and fraternities) should be made to provide sufficient off-street parking. The existing regulation of lZ spaces per unit does not take into account that you may have several unrelated individuals living in one unit and all owning cars. The City should develop a regulation that acknowledges this problem. - The residents feel that much of the parking problem is caused by too many non -related people living together in what was originally a single- family home. The fact that some houses are generating as much as $1200/month in rents is the basis of the incentive to rent out. In fact, the opinion was expressed that single family conversions to apartments is the single most important problem in the neighborhood. FIS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111Es 8. The ability of a realtor to purchase a property and have it spot zoned to allow multi -family redevelopment constitutes a problem in the eyes of the residents. 9. A resident expressed concern about a rumored apartment complex development on N. Gilbert St. and felt that such a development would constitute a threat to the neighborhood. 10. Most residents believe that both the friendliness and the diversity of people who live in the neighborhood is an asset. As compared to new large apartment buildings, converted houses are an asset in that the people living in them are generally more friendly. 11 . Soda bottles and cans strewn along Brown Street constitute a neighborhood problem. 12. One elderly resident said he recently moved into the neighborhood because it was a place where he could afford a nice home and it seemed like a nice area. His home was put on the market and bought the very same day'. He wants the neighborhood to stay as it is. The fact that the value of a house is now not set such that a person of moderate means can afford to live there but rather is set by the redevelopment potential of the land is seen as a problem. In other words, the (historical) availability of low cost homes in the neighborhood is seen as a resource for the entire city and the rising costs of housing is a problem. 13. It was felt that neighborhood residents sould all work together to keep the area zoned R-2. 19. Illegal conversions to apartments (by R-2 allowances) are also considered a problem. Realtors contribute to the problem by attempting to sell properties telling the buyer that he can rent out 3 or more apartments when he knows this is illegal under R-2 zoning. 15. It was generally felt that housing inspections are probably good for the neighborhood. 16. There was some expression of the need for a place where residents can borrow tools and for some work, -trading possibilities to be advertised. 17. The speed at which cars drive down Brown and Ronalds Streets is considered a problem. 18. Horace Mann School is a vital resource of the neighborhood and crucial to the area's ability to attract families with children. 19. The possibility of North Gilbert Street being enlarged for through traffic is seen as a threat for the neighborhood. Em MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Phone ATTENDANCE Blocks 52, 53, 73 March 30, 1977 Caters' house Name Address David and Jean Cater 314 Brown Street Enid Cancella 5 Bella Vista Horace Amidon 830 N. Dodge Wendy Brown 328 Brown Street Virginia Alexander 508 Brown Street Mori Costantino 407 Brown Street Wanda Matthess 828 N. Gilbert Irene E. Murphy 304 Ronalds Street Mr. & Mrs. Alvin Longstreth 222 Brown Street Lawrence Carlton 810 N. Linn M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Phone Iowa City/NRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone: 353-3862 BLOCK PROPOSALS: BLOCKS 52, 53 & 73 Vicki Williams These draft proposals have been produced in response to ideas expressed at a meeting held Wednesday, March 30, 1977, at Jean and Dave Cater's home. Concerns discussed at the meeting fell into these categories: 1. street parking regulations, 2, present and threatened disinvestment in property and conversion to apartments, 3. preservation of a "mixed" (i.e., ages, lifestyle mixes) neighborhood, 4. street maintenance. The North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Groups is trying to deal with concerns like these in an attempt to gain a comprehensive under- standing of the dynamics of the neighborhood. For each item listed above, a problem statement has been made, followed by comments and observations expressed at the meeting and by our group. Preliminary proposals are included where appropriate. It must be understood that policy proposals involve trade-offs to varying degrees and we are attempting to identify these trade-offs so that the most viable alternative can be selected. STREET PARKING REGULATION'S Problem 1 Calendar parking creates inconveniences for residents by requiring cars to be moved regularly. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES uolrlrs Comment: The rational driver will park in the most convenient and cheapest place. Because of the location of this neighborhood in relation to the bus lines, downtown, and the University, parking is a major problem for the residents. There are too many cars using this area (see problem #2) and any parking plan will have to take this fact into consideration. Following are several alternative proposals, each involving trade-offs, costs and satisfaction to various degrees. Proposals• a) Off-street Parking. The parking regulations of the Iowa City Zoning Code could be enforced, requiring residents to provide paved, off-street parking space according to the number of dwelling units contained in each structure. In some cases, such enforcement could cause undue hardships because land is not accessible or the cost of compliance is prohibitive. Creation of off-street parking also reduces the amount of green space on the property and for the neighborhood as a whole. In addition, there is no guarantee that removal of residents' cars will decrease the demand for on -street parking in the north side. b) Calendar Parking. Calendar parking restricts parking to one side of the street, alternating with even and odd dates. In addition to facilitating snow removal, the number of parked cars in the neighborhood is limited, congestion is decreased, and street storage of automobiles is discouraged through the use of this control. The amount of parking space for residents and guests is also reduced, however, and there is an added inconvenience of moving cars or receiving tickets. Because parking is allowed on only one side, the streets are wider, lending themselves to increased traffic flow and higher speeds. X IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I c) Parking Permits. As previously mentioned, one of the attractions of parking on the north side is that it is free of cost. If a price were attached to the use of -)n-street parking, through the required purchase of permits, then the metered lots downtown and the University lots and ramps could better compete for patronage. The -demand for parking in the north side would be decreased. Purchase of permits would have to be open to anyone, since the streets are public property. Residents, however, could have priority purchase to insure adequate space. Graduating costs with distance from the central cores of activity (downtown, University) would keep the demand from merely shifting to neighborhoods outside the regulated areas. d) Metered Parking. Used in conjunction with parking permits, one or two meters on each block would allow limited parking for guests or others who wanted to park in the neigh- borhood but didn't have a permit. Due to the nature of metered parking, rapid turnover would be facilitated while maintaining a price for the privilege of street use. The last three of these proposals would require strict enforcement by police in order to be effective. This is an indirect cost passed on to the community as a whole. Problem 2 There are too many ccs using on -street parking, and residents and guests have trouble finding spaces. Comment; People who live in the neighborhood need on -street parking because most of the area was built prior to extensive use of all MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES E automobiles and many lots have no provision for off-street parking. The University is seen as one of the major causes of parking problems in the neighborhood because students park here and take the CAMBUS to school. Also, apartment units and fraternities do not provide adequate off-street parking. Proposals: a) Parking requirements for multi -family dwelling units could be allocated according to more realistic criteria, since the 12 space rule is inadequate when 3 or 4 car -owning students share an apartment. Developers should either have to provide more land for parking, build underground facilities, or pay for tenant on -street parking through permit parking or some other system. If more site land is used, then regulations will also have to be formulated to insure preservation of a certain amount of green space per lot. b) The University should provide more parking for students. Perhaps some of the vacant University land obtained for dorm construction could be used for this purpose. Students are supposed to register their cars with the University, but i there is not adequate enforcement of this rule. Cars parked { in the north side could be periodically checked, even to the extent of tracing registration, and students could be fined for not parking in University -provided facilities. Since University freshmen and sophomores are required to live in dormitories, the feasibility of restricting them from bringing cars to school could also be investigated. 91 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES DISINVESTMENT AND CONVERSION Problem 3 Disinvestment in property has negative impacts for neighbors. Comment: A problem in neighborhoods with development pressures is that the value of the property is in the land rather than in the condition of the structure. Houses that have not been maintained, either because they are not owner occupied, because they have been converted into apart- ments, or because the owner anticipates selling the property, for redevelop- ment create detrimental effects on the neighborhood. There were particular instances cited where elderly persons have turned their property management over to a bank or trust company and the institution has failed to maintain the property . Proposals: a) Complaints could be made to absentee landlords or 1 managers when neighbors feel justified in doing so. This is } 1 not always effective, or easy, since in some cases it is diffl- 1 cult to trace ownership or responsibility. b) The building and housing codes of Iowa City embody constraints on how far a structure is allowed to deteriorate and still be habitable. The City is presently involved in inspecting dwelling units in the north side; however, enforcement is manda- tory only for rented property. If a resident suspects code viola- tions, the Housing Inspector could be notified at 359-1000, ext. 323 or 329. Callers do not have to identify themselves and will not be involved in any further action. An inspection will be made within 29 hours if at all possible, followed by administrative procedures forcing compliance. 92 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES c) Incentives for redevelopment can be reduced by forcing developers to pay the costs of intensified land usage. Because of the economic benefits of high density development, these owners should bear the burden of protecting the neighborhood from any negative impacts by buffering, providing adequate i parking, and landscaping. Problem 4 Conversions that exceed the R-2 zoning limits are taking place in the neighborhood. iComment: R-2 zoning permits up to 2 family dwellings per lot j "provided, however, that no more than 3 persons not members of the family +i may room in each living unit . .. " Residents are aware of instances where 1 these limits are being exceeded. There have also been reports of realtors promoting higher density to potential buyers in order to make a sale. Proposals; a) Zoning regulations such as that listed above are j hard to enforce. However, if residents feel that flagrant abuse is causing negative impacts, complaints can be made to the Zoning Commission at 354-1800, ext. 325. The caller need not identify him/herself but will need to give the address and type of violation. An inspection will be made at no cost to the occupants and administrative action will be taken. b) The Board of Realtors have their own self-regulating committees (grievance committee and professional standards committee) to handle unethical or incompetent members. In i 93 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IdOIREs I this process, the complainant does have to identify him/herself, i along with providing the name of the realtor, the name of the 'r firm (ask for a business card if possible), the date of the occurrence, the property owner, address, and an account of the incident. The committee will then take action. If the violator is not a registered realtor, the Board is powerless and complaints should be directed to the Chamber { of Commerce (337-9637), PRESERVATION OF A MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD Problem 5 I The closing of Horace Mann and Central Junior High would be harmful to children and parents who currently live in the north side, and in addition would discourage new families with children from buying and Investing in property in the neighborhood. Comment: The residents voiced strong support for a "mixed" neigh- borhood, including a variety of age groups and lifestyles. Families with young children are a valuable resource and an essential component of that mix. Proposal: The school district should commit itself to keeping Horace Mann and Central Junior High open. Problem 6 The price of real estate in the north side is becoming prohibitive for persons of moderate means (families with children, retired persons) because of speculatory developers who inflate the bids. 94 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES i 1 Comment: Low entry prices, increasing investment values, and minimal property taxes are desirable in any neighborhood. Competition for property will inevitably accompany a convenient location, however, and the person willing to pay the highest price is awarded ownership. If neighbors can keep a close watch on transaction of property and make a commitment to know what is going on in the area, perhaps an informal linkage can be maintained between families who want to sell and those who want to buy in the north side. We can't propose any solution to the high cost of property and the right of developers to purchase it. Main- tenance of R-2 zoning is probably the only formal control measure available. STREET MAINTENANCE i Problem 7 Bricks are not replaced after they are torn up from the street for j various maintenance reasons. i Comment: The residents of the north side view their brick streets as a valuable resource and they object to patches of cement used to fill holes i i resulting from utility repair, etc. Utility companies do not voluntarily replace bricks because it is more time consuming and costly. I The city has had little formal control over maintenance procedures in the past, however, an ordinance is now under consideration which should help alleviate the problem. With adoption, any street disrupting activity will require a permit, and part of the obligations include replacing street materials in kind. i Proposal: An awareness campaign should be conducted to inform all citizens of this ordinance and support should be voiced. In the meantime, residents who are aware of street crews not replacing bricks can report , r E 95 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES such failures to the Street Division of the Public Works Department (354-1800, ext. 263). Neighbors expressed frustration at being forced into the role of "watchdog" . The more frequently brick replacement is enforced by resident complaints, however, the more likely others will accept their responsibility to preserve the character of the north side streets. 9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOLMEs 1 Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY CONTACT REPORT DATE: April 7, 1977 STAFF: Margaret Barron, Vicki Williams, Gerry Thompson, and Kevin Laverty. GROUP: Neighbors from blocks 51, 54, and 72. LOCATION: Jim and Claudine Harris' home, 219 Ronalds St. ATTENDANCE: 8 residents, Ginny Alexander, city staff person (Susan Sheets) . TOPICS/DISCUSSION: 1. Introduction of survey 2. Corrections to survey 3. Upkeep of structures 4. New apartment buildings 5. Zoning 6. Previous downzoning attempt 7. North Side Neighbors 8. Historic preservation 9. Developers 10. North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study 11. Parking 12. Alleys 13. Availability of grant monies 97 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES r- 7<1KDS ►E I) OCK L PAIL a,ukny Jur l4 O-OLK _ ! 1,17:.raMLy'+r 15 m MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP105.OES MOINES BOCK SL P.IC er 5LYVLy %�Ay IL Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 (ext. 30) MINUTES Block Meeting (51, 54, 72) April 7, 1977, 7:30 pm 219 Ronalds St. (Jim & Claudine Harris) 1 , Introduction iThe purpose of the study and of the block meeting was presented by Margaret Barron. The survey results for block '72' were discussed. The large unpaved, unscreened parking lot on this block may be a code violation or a non -conforming use, depending on when it was first used for parking. The consensus of the meeting was that the prior structure on the lot was torn down around 1969 or 1970, making it likely that the lot is a code violation. 2. Corrections to the Survev j Reference Correction lj) Block 54 parcel 773 parcel 771 (# 2 on Resources list) Block 72 parking area identified should be a parcel 75 I (p-2) on parcel 74 3. Upkeep of structures 1 Ed Rupp opened the general discussion by saying that the neighborhood's i big problem is landlords who don't keep their houses "up". He noted a house next to his own as an example: the landlord has done no work on it for four years Ken Hubel asked, what is the reason? Is disinvestment occuring as a prelude to putting up a new apartment building? 4. New apartment buildings i One staff member asked what persons thought about new apartment buildings. The reactions were all negative, with architectural incompatibility, Increased population density, and "people don't like them next door" being cited as reasons. Ken Hubel felt that the new apartment building on the SE corner of Church and Dubuque was "good" but most new buildings are 99 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DLS MOINES "excrescenses". Persons at the meeting indicated that what they liked about the Dubuque -Church apartment building was the paved and hidden parking and the fact that landscaping was done properly and at the same time as the structure went up. 5. Zoning Jim Harris said that R3A zoning encourages disinvestment in existing single-family houses and that this needs to be corrected through a density reduction. Harris' lot under R3A zoning will accommodate 12 units*, and he said he is approached about three times per year by persons interested in purchasing his land. He also noted that legal covenants reducing the allow- able dwelling units per lot can also be used to reduce property value. Jim Harris expressed the opinion that present zoning is "too dense period", suggesting that the new ordinance should start with 25% of current density, with incentives provided, allowing increased density in exchange for certain amenities. Several people at the meeting have heard the story of a property on Linn St. in the R3B** zone whose owners were subjected to blockbuster type Pressure by interested realtors. Janice Quinn asked whether a "Clark -type" apartment could be built with access just from the alley. The question was answered that it wouldn't be possible on a parcel that did not have street frontage. 6. Previous downzoning attempt Margaret Barron asked about the proposal to rezone portions of the North Side into categories allowing lower density. Jim Harris gave a brief recount of the situation and indicated that the city's refusal to'act upon the proposal was based upon two legal cases that were not applicable. He said that the people who have invested in property and want to'develop arenot just big developers. * The three blocks included in this meeting are in the R3A zone, which requires 1,000 square feet of lot area for each dwelling unit. Jim Harris' lot is 00 feet wide and 150 feet deep. ** The R313 zone requires 750 square feet of lot area for each dwelling unit. 100 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7 North Side Neighbors Ken Hubei noted that the defeat in the downzoning instance was the motivation for starting North Side Neighbors. He said that the organization is such that developers would not feel comfortable as members, and for a lot of residents the organization provides a feeling of solidarity and of not being alone. B. Historic Preservation Susan Sheets of the City asked whether anyone had thought of the North Side as a historic district. She indicated that Adrian Anderson of the .State Division of Historic Preservation was eager for someone from the neigh- borhood to come in and start the process. Jim Harris replied that, in explan- ation, what Sue was talking about was listing the area on the Federal Register of Historic Places (like Summit Street) and that any initiation of an historic district with police power has to go through Planning and Zoning and the City Council.* Several people made comments on the historic house on College Street that was demolished for an apartment building last summer. Jim Clark's tearing it down was considered "a shame" and "disgusting" . 9. Developers Jerry Thompson, reacting to a general negative depiction of developers by people at the meeting, asked who they are, how are they perceived, is there the possibility of dialogue? Ken Hubei replied that the North Side Neighbors had not sought dialogue and that they probably could. Jim Harris said that developers have heard what the neighbors have to say before, refering to the downzoning hearings of three years ago. Neighbors have let developers know what they think of the absence of plantings, incompatible structures, and parking impacts, while the position of developers is "we have a right to buy property and replace structures in this area". Ken Hubei expressed the opinion that in some cases some "neighborliness" might have a positive effect on persons who are not large-scale developers. * Actually, Jim's statement is incorrect. A state law passed last spring allows residents of an area to set up an Historic District under a commission that can control development and other changes, etc. The procedure established requires approval by the State Division of Historic Preservation and a referendum of residents, but would not go through the City government. 101 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NEs s Jim Harris said that replacement is not going on extensively; the neighborhood is not attracting large scale developers, who mostly operate on the periphery. Real estate prices are in fact going up, but nothing like the 10% or So annually that is occurring -in the suburbs. Harris said that, as a result, the organization of developers interests in the North Side alone would not be strong enough to prevent downzoning. 10. North Side Neighborhood Preservation'Stud . Jim Harris said that the conflict between neighborhood protection and Investment in property has to be dealt with on a political rather than a pro- fessional planning basis. He said that he could not supporta parcel -by - parcel decision-making process. The fear is that the Board of Appeal is at least one-half development interests, and that the neighborhood would have to go down and exert pressure time and time again. Ken Hubel said that while the idea of impact zoning was initially appealing the mechanics were very difficult, and that the neighborhood wants something it can be confident of rather than having to be alert about every parcel. Ken Hubel asked, what will our study do, say by the end of the summer. Margaret Barron replied that we will make policy recommendations to Iowa City, and that we are holding the meetings to help the neighborhood define what the problems are, what strategies residents want to support, and what proposed solutions might be. The project staff indicated that a second meeting will be held on all blocks to discuss possible recommendations. Ken Hubel asked whether the project has a commitment to impact analysis The project staff indicated that the impact analysis framework was much broader than any particular zoning proposal, citing as an example, the fact that the distinction between "good" and "bad" apartment buildings is made on the basis of impacts rather than on use Per se. Jim Barris said that the city staff would like to see problems go away through a gimmick, that basic problems need to be solved in a political arena. Ken Hubel said that the destinyof the North Side Neighbors is in their own hands Jim Harris said that the neighborhood needs alternatives to ours out of the study rather than a predetermined solution. Ken Hubei said that he could see the North Side Neighbors supporting m,iny of the Study's recommendations, but that NSN's tacit approval should not be presumed (and the project staff should insure that such presumption block meetings. is not made) just because NSN has organized these Dave Schaal said North Side Neighbors would want to review draft Proposals before they are seen by city staff. 102 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Ken Hubel asked the staff, what have we gotten out of our meetings? Margaret Barron gave some specific examples of problems which were brought + to our attention through the meetings. Vicki Williams said that information has also gone to other way, with residents seeing that there are not simple answers to many of their problems, nor easy solutions to their complaints. 51 11. Parking Jim Harris said that less rather than more off-street parking should be sought: make it hard to find a parking space to discourage cars rather than encouraging them by mandating lZ spaces per dwelling unit. 12. Alleys Jim Harris said that the alleys are a potential resource for east -west pedestrian and bicycle movements and would also bolster the espirit of the area. The group reacted with much support of this idea. l 13. Availability of grant monies { Sue Sheets said that HCDA money probably could not go to historic ), preservation, but that site improvement money could go to alleys. 14. Other topics (these ideas were not discussed in depth) Jim Harris suggested that the city act on behalf of threatened houses. f He brought up the idea of buying land on Bloomington Street (south side between j Linn and Gilbert) adjacent to an historic brick house, and that threatened houses could be moved there. Jim Harris said that there is a "financial barrier" preventing high-rise 1 apartments in Iowa City and that this problem should be solved. j In response to a specific question about traffic in alleys, Claudine 1 Harris said there is some but that it is not a problem. She did note some problems turning into the alley behind her house from Dubuque Street because of parked cars. 1 i 103 MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES M0114ES i i ATTENDANCE Blocks 51, 54, 72 April 7, 1977 Harris' house Name Address Phone David Schaal 511 N. Gilbert Ed Rupp 330-3325 328 E. Fairchild 354-3043 John Birkbeek 624 N. Linn James Harris 219 Ronalds St. 338-2325 Ginny Alexander 508 Brown St. 338-1459 Susan Sheets 354-3326 Civic Center 354-1800 (ext. 314) Janice Quinn 324 Church 338-9520 Claudine Harris 219 Ronalds Kenneth Hubel 619 N. Linn 338-1459 Tom Mathews 338-4327 1508 Center Ave 104 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Iowa City/NRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 BLOCK PROPOSALS: BLOCKS 51, 54, & 72 Jerry Thompson These draft proposals have been produced in response to ideas expressed at a meeting held Thursday, April 7, 1977 at J. & C. Harris' home, 219 Ronalds Street, Problem 1 Il ` Landlords allowing dwellings to run down. j Comment: Disinvestment was viewed as a prelude to development of the property at a higher density/income-generating level. ? Proposals: j(a) Reduce incentives for disinvestment through continued i attempts to down -zone. i (b) Enforce housing code vigorously to force maintenance ! at minimum standards. (c) Encourage inclusion of legal covenants in land trans- actions. The restrictive covenants route is probably unrealistic i since the property value would be reduced by restricting density } and since courts are unlikely to restrict development rights in perpetuity, ? (d) Establish north side as an historic district in order to add value to existing structures and as a ground on which to argue against further development which threatens to be destructive of history of the place. i 105 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Problem 2 Lack of meaningful dialogue with developers. Comment: Neighbors were unequivocal in their negative opinion of large developers with several investments in the north side. The threat perceived was both economic and political, but not ideological. The developers prevailed in an attempt by the north side's single-family dwelling owners to down -zone the R3A part of the neighborhood to a lower density zone. The north side neighbors were organized in response to the failure of the down -zoning effott. The neighbors at this meeting revealed in their comments a total lack of ongoing discussion with large developers with several investments. Communication between these two groups could result in softening some of the harsher impacts resulting from maximum density development. Neighbors conceded the existence of less compatible development when zoning was less restrictive as is the case on the north side with the R3A zone classification. They also pointed out, however, that construction and development could proceed in a manner designed to minimize the i negative impacts to proximate homes by doing such things as buffering and landscaping as soon as possible. The animosity toward developers who displayed such sensitivity was significantly less. Proposals: (a) Bring the opposing groups together to discuss their conflicting interests. i (b) Open some alternative lines of communication to reduce the amount of misinformation being conveyed. (c) Maintain firm political stance through a strengthened North Side Neighbor Organization. 106 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Problem 3 Neighbors' perceptions of the NSNPS and the project in general. Spokespersons for the neighbors voiced two concerns: (a) A fear that the project was locked in to the proposals and basic philosophy of the grant application, i.e., impact analysis; and (b) a fear that the citizen participation would be misused or misrepresented in the recommendation/proposal stage of the research process. Comment: Most of the questions brought out a general lack of understanding of the role which the NSNPS would assume in relation to the City's planning and administrative processes. Much of the uncertainty will be resolved as time progresses and the roles evolve. Proposals: (a) Maintain a policy of full disclosure of information made available to the neighbors and the City. The NSNPS's preliminary draft proposals and minutes are not subject to this general policy of disclosure, but constant attention should be given to insuring that openness is fostered and trust maximized. (b) Begin to circulate draft proposals to both sides and to monitor reactions. (c) Attempt to gain approval of proposals through reasonable compromise from interested parties. When a suitable compromise has been reached, formal approval by interested parties could serve as an endorsement of the NSNPS's final proposals. (d) Maintain NSNPS's independence to make proposals based on sound reasons and accurate research findings. 107 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111[5 (e) Continue to classify the role of the NSNPS as it evolves. (f) Clarify NSNPS's commitment to impact analysis and parcel -by -parcel decision making. 108 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES a II I Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY CONTACT REPORT DATE: April 21, 1977 STAFF: Kevin Laverty, Bill Keating, Vicki Williams GROUP: Blocks 70, 71, 74 LOCATION: Mr. & Mrs. George McCormick's house 230 E. Fairchild ATTENDANCE: 7 residents TO PICS/DIS C C USIO N: I. Neighborhood survey 2. "Block -Busting" 3. Parking problems 4. Utility and city maintenance practices S. Trash cans 6. Apartment developments - new and coverted units 7. Historic preservation 8. Neighborhood charm FOLLOW-UP: 1. Need to distribute minutes of the meeting to participants. 2. Need to formulate and distribute draft proposals to residents for comment. 109 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 7� PITC a X7KY .l'nr 20 UCCK. 71 .MTC.,YRVLY J -V K RIP PIMKV 1 u,._. ,I i.,..ui.-,.�,c, u C%f ..V5 G C �, .. 0 NuK. -JLL- 110 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I901':ES PIMKV 1 u,._. ,I i.,..ui.-,.�,c, u C%f ..V5 G C �, .. 0 NuK. -JLL- 110 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I901':ES Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 MINUTES Block Meeting (70, 71, 74) April 21, 1977 230 E. Fairchild (Mr. and Mrs. George McCormick) Kevin introduced the project and distributed the surveys. The following corrections were noted: 1) The property at 202 Davenport is owner occupied. 2) 422 Dubuque is a large duplex. 3) 225 and 221 Linn both contain three units. 4) There is no G-1 parking in back of the property at 208 Fairchild. 5) This space should be allotted to the lot to the left. 6) 208 Fairchild is a MF -4. 7) 212 Fairchild is a MF -8. 8) 513 Linn is a MF -14 and there is no doctor's office located here. 9) 202 Davenport should be recorded as a MF -3. 10) 508 Dubuque is not owner occupied. 11) A comment was also made that the house at 408 Dubuque is not in estate proceedings. Mrs. McCormick mentioned that she and her neighbors have had a problem with realtors trying to "block bust" in the neighborhood. She made a complaint to the city attorney and a comment had been on the news warning people about the practice of pressure buying. Parking was seen as a major problem in the neighborhood. The houses are close together and many have been subdivided into apartments so there is not adequate off-street parking for the residents in the neighborhood. Also, University students and others park in the neighborhood because of its convenient location. Calendar parking was not seen as an effective solution. At first it was suggested that the streets be widened and cars be allowed to park on both sides. Kevin pointed out that the number of cars using the neighborhood would probably double if calendar parking was eliminated, resulting in a worse problem. Other suggestions included reserve parking for the residents, and the City purchasing scattered parcels of land for reserved and/or rented space for multi -family units that could not provide the required off-street parking. It was also felt by some that the University 111 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110114Ei 1 should build another parking ramp on one of its vacant lots to provide parking for students in the dorms. Kevin pointed out the trade-offs resulting from each proposal, such as alternative land uses and spending public money for private uses. The question "How do you enforce the City's screened parking lot policy?" was asked. Complaints were voiced concerning the City's attitude toward the near north side. Examples were given of utility and City maintenance practices that were detrimental to the neighborhood, such as not restoring private property to its former condition, not notifying residents of forthcoming work plans, not replacing trees, etc. It was felt that the City gives prefer- ential treatment to other neighborhoods that are not as highly developed and takes the attitude that property in the near north side is owned by absentee landlords who don't really care about the quality of public services. Such an attitude forces residents to constantly battle for satisfactory services or else disinvest in their property. Trash cans left on the parking was seen as another problem in the neighborhood. Mr. McCormick suggested that the City should confiscate any containers left out the day after garbage pick-up. i The residents agreed that apartments per se are not bad but mentioned i differences between converted houses and new apartments of unconforming architecture that are crowded onto a lot without adequate parking, screening, landscaping, etc. It was felt that regulations should be developed and enforced relating to landscaping around such structures (how much and how soon). It is also a concern to the neighbors what these new units are replacing. Residents are aware of the historic structures in their neighborhood and value them. One house in particular, 225 Fairchild, was cited as an important neighborhood resource that residents fear losing. Residents expressed an attachment to the neighborhood. They enjoy living here and want to preserve and maintain the neighborhood. It was pointed out that the original city hall of Iowa City is located on Block #k59. 112 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 ATTENDANCE Blocks 70, 71, 74 April 21, 1977 McCormicks'house Name Address Joette Dohnaum 202 E. Davenport Bill Quinn 202 E. Davenport Gilbert Engelhardt 204 E. Fairchild Sally Smith 208 Fairchild Betty Norbeck 222 Fairchild Home 22 Montrose George McCormick 230 E. Fairchild Pat McCormick 230 E. Fairchild 113 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Phone 338-2804 338-2804 337-2860 338-7344 338-6014 351-7259 351-7259 Iowa City/NRR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone Number: 353-3862, extension 30. BLOCK PROPOSALS: BLOCKS 70 71 74 K. Laverty These preliminary proposals have been produced in response to ideas discussed at a meeting held April 21, 1977 at George and Pat McCormick's home. Concerns discussed at the meeting fell into these categories: 1, insufficient parking 2, relations with the City and with utility companies 3. preservation of historic structures 4, improper management of garbage Each of these bears some relationship to the neighborhood study. For each concern we have made a statement of the problem and commented on possible solutions. Preliminary proposals are included for the purpose of stimulating discussion, both at the block level and throughout the neighborhood, of specific recommendations that might be produced by the study. Insufficient Parking Problem 1: Insufficient parking is available on the street for residents and their guests. Comment: Residents of some of the houses, apartments, and rooms in this area have insufficient off-street parking. These residents, plus guests of all residents, must "compete" with commuters and other non-residents (mostly residents of the University dormitories) for limited on -street parking. The calendar ("odd -even") parking regulation does a great deal to reduce 114 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES n storage parking. (On nearby blocks without calendar parking, there are apparently many more cars which are stored for days at a time.) A "residents only" parking regulation idea suggested at the meeting could not be implemented because streets are financed by the City's general funds and by revenues generated by all auto users. Another idea, providing parking for residents on lots to be purchased by the City,would reduce the housing supply and would be prohibitively expensive. Proposals: (a) Supplement calendar parking with a "Residential Street Parking Permit" system. Under this process, the City would sell parking tags, which when displayed on a vehicle would permit it to be parked on any unmetered street in the North.Side. The tags would be valid, for one year and priced so as to correct the current encouragement for non-resident students and commuters to park in the north side rather than in university storage lots and at downtown metered spaces and lots. Daily permit tags could be issued for guests. (b) In order to make short-term "live" Parking available, provide a i few metered spaces on each block. This would provide a better chance for visitors to find a parking space. jRelations with the Qty and with Utility Companies Problem 2; Public facility and utility maintenance and construction 1 jprocedures have been done without pre -notification of residents and without restoring private property to its previous condition. Problem 3; Although residents are willing to pay for and plant new trees on the parking (i.e. between the curb and the sidewalk), they will i not make the investment if there is the possibility of the City's removal of these trees for construction projects or other reasons. i Comment; Several residents indicated that the frustration they feel that results from problems like these discourages private investment in the 115 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 neighborhood. This is complicated by a feeling that the City and the utility companies view the north side as an area populated by students, transients and others who do not need or deserve the respect shown to neighborhoods which are predominantly single-family houses. In dealing with specific problems, residents must be willing to accept some responsibility for being "watchdogs", because the City simply does not have enough staff to monitor the actions of every contractor or utility crew. Residents should also realize that many persons on the City staff sympathize with their frustrations. Most importantly, it should be s ) realized that communication of problems to the City is a two-way street and that viewing the relationship as being between the people and a City staff which serves and represents will be infinitely more constructive than talking in terms of "us" and "them". Proposal: The City should publish and distribute to residents a "fact sheet" concerning whom to call and what to do about residents' i ) most frequent complaints, including the problems stated above, the practice of patching brick streets with asphalt, and improperly stored garbage (see below). 't i 1 Preservation of Historic Structures Problem 4: Historic structures which are of great value to the neighborhood and to the community are not protected. Comment: Many older homes are vulnerable to disinvestment and redevelopment because those actions are often more profitable than preserving the existing structure. What replaces older homes is also a problem; many of the new apartment buildings ;a the north side are architecturally inrompatible, create additional on -street parking, have unscreened parking lots which are visual eyesores, are not suitably landscaped, and are crowded onto lots so as to reduce "breathing space. " 116 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I e Proposals: (a) Establish portions of the north side as an Historic District with the power to preserve specified structures of special value and to regulate redevelopment. (b) Amend zoning specifications of permitted uses and densities, to include performance requirements for landscaping, buffering, open space between structures, and architectural compatibility for new construction. (c) Enforce the City Code requirement of buffering for parking areas consisting of four or more spaces. Improper Management of Garbage Problem 5: Trash cans and lids are left out on the parking. Also garbage can be strewn about if lids are not replaced on cans. Comment: The City's Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance requires that trash cans have lids and that they be taken in after collection. As stated previously, this is the type of regulation that is almost impossible to enforce in every instance. Residents should try some "neighborliness", bringing their complaints to the attention of the owners or occupants of the houses at which these problems occur. Proposal: Enforce the provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal Ordinance discussed above. 117 ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINLS CONTACT REPORT Date: April 26, 1977 7:30 p.m. Staff: Bill Keating Kevin Laverty Jerry Thompson Group: Block Meeting (29, 35, 36) Location: Mr. & Mrs. Keith 930 N. Van Buren Attendance: Eleven north side neighbors. Topics: Junk autos... garbage... parking... the North Side Study in general. Discussion: Primarily on parking problem. Follow-up: Residents requested that the NSNPS initiate a petition to the City Council regarding their desire to see calendar parking. 118 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401tiES BLOCK Al— p/"., !(Rr,Y IL• v BE KDCK ]G BAIL "a= J& Vi MIN FI- G O68 Fes_ CV2 ry'S NSt; JJKLLYjj L CV4 FN�ua D,Mgw,T 111- I i 119 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDs•DLS Mon1Es S%+RMKT BLOCK ..Ii_ MINUTES Block Meeting (29, 35, 36) April 26, 1977 430 N. Van Buren (Mr. S Mrs. Keith) Kevin distributed copies of the survey to those gathered and began the discussion with an explanation of the survey. One homeowner (508 Church) was cited as being a continuous eyesore for the neighbors because of old cars parked on the property and junk everywhere The property had been listed in the survey as both a negative impact and a code violation. (See Block 35) Garbage was mentioned as a problem where four or more units were being rented. Cans were everywhere with the lids off and sacks stacked around so that stray dogs could tear into them and scatter the contents. Neighbors wondered if dumpitors and private garbage disposal was required under present regulations . Parking was the dominant topic of discussion. Residents complained that students stored their vehicles in the neighborhood during the week. The 48-hour parking restriction did not prevent storage presumably because it was too difficult to enforce or it was not being enforced. Although a great demand exists for the free parking space in this neighborhood, the key to solving the problem seemed to be the number of people who stored their vehicles. Most neighbors at the meeting felt that calendar parking, especially on Van Buren, would eliminate the people who desired to store the cars. It would be less convenient to move one's car every twenty-four hours as would be required by a calendar parking scheme. Kevin suggested that the problem was a result of rational behavior on the part of those utilizing the area for parking. It was free and relatively close to places they need to go or live. If calendar parking was instituted, there would he less of a problem with snow removal In the wini-r; there would be less traffic congestion due to more room for movement on the street; and fewer people would see the desir- ability of parking in this area because of fewer places. Kevin threw out the idea of an annual parking fee for use of neighborhood streets to put the parking "facilities of the neighborhood on par with storage lot fees and other parking arrangements. Neighborhoods indicated its unwork- ability, but no specific reasons were cited. 120 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JES Citizens at the meeting mentioned inconsistent enforcement and prefer- ential treatment by city hall as a sore spot. Specifically, developer Clark has been allowed to do what others have been denied, Prusell School has permission to use Horace Mann School parking facilities when taxpaying citizens don't. In discussing the North Side Study in general, one resident wondered aloud why tax dollars had been spent on the survey and were supporting this study. Obviously none of the project staff could "tell him something he didn't already know" after living in the North Side. This person predicted that nothing would result from the meeting except a good deal of talk. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401RES ATTENDANCE Blocks 29, 35, 36 April 26, 1977 Keith's house Name Address R. J. Vitosh 530 N. Van Buren St. Roger Cozine 419 N. Van Buren St. Mary Ann Cozine 419 N. Van Buren St. Chas & Mabel Sladek 418 N. Van Buren St. Lolita Anciaux 519 Church St. Valva Vitosh 530 N. Van Buren St. Marian Gaffey 529 Church St. Doris Havel 512 N. Van Buren St. Glenn Havel 512 N. Van Buren St. Mr. & Mrs. Keith 430 N. Van Buren St. 122 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id011jE5 Phone i Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862, extension 30. BLOCK PROPOSALS - BLOCKS 29 35 36 K. Laverty These preliminary proposals have been produced in response to ideas discussed at a meeting held April 26, 1977, at Mr. and Mrs. Richard Keith's home. Concerns discussed at the meeting were: I. Cars "stored" on the street for days at a time 2. Storage and disposal of garbage from apartment building 3. Sanitary problems created by dogs in North Market Park i Each of these bears at least some relationship to the neighborhood study. For each concern we have made a statement of the problem and commented on possible solutions. Preliminary proposals are included for the purpose of r stimulating discussion, both at the block level and throughout the neighborhood, of specific recommendations that might be produced by the study. I "Store_ dors Problem 1: Long-term storage reduces the number of spaces available for i residents and guests. i Problem 2: Excessive parking on both sides of streets makes traffic movement difficult. Comment: Because this area is not covered by the calendar (odd -even) parking regulation (see attached map) , many cars are "stored" for days at a time. The problem is made serious because many University students who live in the dormitories do not have nearby parking for their cars and find the streets of the North Side preferable to University storage lots which cost $8/month and are actually further away. While in the North Side as a whole the problem is too many cars Period, this area's 123 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES AW COV690 ?I CALUIDAZ (ODD-Eveti 'PAUI rJ Rei," o crivu►1 � � U ftl+uNup � _ DOQdC 'B�oDnloD�l C7 C7 D D C � MAU� � D C s�estoa� CD C D D D C d 12 ' 1 t_4 J 124 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tI01NE5 u I i problem seems to arise from the fact that it is the area closest to campus without calendar parking. The city's 48-hour parking limit is practically unenforceable. Proposal: Extend the limit of the calendar parking regulation eastward to Dodge Street. Storage and Disposal of Garbage Problem 3: Plastic trash bags used for storing garbage are torn by dogs and the garbage is strewn about. i Problem 4: Multiple -unit buildings often store garbage in large numbers of trash cans, many of which have lids off and thrown about, creating both an eyesore and the possibility of spilled and blowing trash. Comment: The City's solid waste disposal ordinance requires that single- family homes and houses with less than four dwelling units store garbage in covered trash cans. Houses and apartment buildings with four or more units are required by the ordinance both to store garbage � in "containers approved by the City Manager,' and to privately provide for hauling to the Iowa City dump. Enforcement of these provisions seems desirable, but official enforcement should be supplemented by some "neighborliness": residents and owners of the offending buildings f should be told as nicely and directly as possible that they are responsible I( for a nuisance to the neighborhood and should correct the situation. Proposals: (a) Enforce the provisions of the solid waste disposal ordinance (b) Require houses or apartments with six or more units to store garbage in covered containers (such as dumpsters) which are shielded from public view. r i 125 r MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 1 �.._. .tea^ •. Sanitary Problems Created by Docs Problem 5: Dog waste in North Market Park is a health hazard to young children who play there, including students who attend Horace Mann School. Comment: We have been told on several previous occasions of their problem. Apparently a number of dogs run loose in the neighborhood; this is compounded by the fact that dog owners find the park a good place to "walk" their pets. Enforcement of regulation relating to dogs is probably as difficult as that of any public ordinance. Proposals: (a) Prohibit "walking' dogs in North Market Park except for specified areas away from Horace Mann School. (b) Increase efforts to prevent dog owners from letting their pets roam free. 126 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11on1Es Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY CONTACT REPORT DATE: April 28, 1977 STAFF: Jerry Thompson, Margaret Barron GROUP: Blocks 48, 49, 50 LOCATION: Mrs. Marie McIlree's house 411 E. Fairchild ATTENDANCE: 6 residents TOPIC S/DISCUSSION: 1. 48-hour parking on Fairchild Street 2. Traffic congestion due to Willowwind parents dropping off and picking up school children. 3. Absentee landlords - weeds in the alley, and inadequate provisions for garbage storage. 4. Zoning - possibility of a zoning category between R2 and 113A. FOLLOW-UP: i. Need to distribute minutes of the meeting to participants. 2. Need to formulate and distribute draft proposals to residents for comment. 127 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES h FTF- ..I BLOCK 60 FATE"SrKw r-+�Z_ IMOCK .,, PAIL.,5LRVCY dt,Y F -ST VO LYq LY6 c L n_ --- JI�v,.Iyiu � z M �d tYACK •tn %I r. 5Lxy'14r 7D , 128 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone: 353-3862 MINUTES Block Meeting (48, 49, 50) April 28, 1977, 7:30 p.m. 411 E. Fairchild (Marie McIlree) .1 . Attendance Project Staff: Jerry Thompson Margaret Barron Neighbors: Marie McIlree Mary Bakas Renatta Webster Tom Scott Mary Melesurgo Dan Melesurgo 2. Introduction Jerry Thompson presented the survey and the purpose of the study. It was suggested that Mary Bakas' owner investment mark be changed to a + due to the fact that she has made improvements on her house since the time the survey was taken. 3. Parking Fairchild Street now has 48-hour parking. This is a problem for a number of reasons. First, the streets are congested because both sides of the street are continually lined with cars. Secondly, residents who have no driveways have difficulty unloading groceries in front of their houses. Third, parents of pupils at Wlllowwind have no place to stop to pick up children, and the frequently block the street completely. Fourth, 48-hour parking is difficult to enforce and therefore some storage of vehicles on the streets occurs. 129 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Mrs. McIlree reported that she started a petition last October, which she circulated to the neighbors, asking for calendar parking. She gave it to Mr. Miller at the City and talked to Mr. Berlin and Mr. Plastino. When she checked back with them to see if anything could be done, they appeared to have lost her petition and said that they would have to wait until all of the traffic regulations are revamped before anything could be done. Mrs. McIlree also talked to Mr. Shanhouse at the University. The neighbors at this meeting voiced support for calendar parking on Fairchild. Mrs. McIlree said that two of her neighbors refused to sign her petition; one was a nondriver and there were no cars in the household; the other operated a rooming house for which there was insufficient off-street parking. 4. Absentee Landlords in the Neighborhood Problems with absentee landlords include failure to clear out weeds In back yards next to the alley and inadequate provision for garbage before it is collected. Mrs. McIlree reported success in asking one landlord i to take care of the weeds in the alley. The neighbors supported the idea of requiring dumpsters at rooming houses and apartment buildings to cut down on the problem of dogs and cats getting into garbage bags and spreading debris in the alleys. i 5. Zoning Tom Scott introduced the idea of proposing a new zoning category between R2 and R3A. He is a landlord as well as a resident In the neighborhood and feels that apartments which are not too dense and are well maintained are preferable to deteriorated housing. In addition, the housing quality will decline if investment money is not able to enter the neighborhood. On the other hand, the R3A density allowance is too high; something greater than 1000 sq. ft. per unit is needed, perhaps 1500 sq. It. 130 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES Name Mary Bakas Marie McIlree Renetta Webster Tom R. Scott Dan Melesurgo Mary Melesurgo ATTENDANCE April 2 Blocks 48 McIlree' ; Addre 514 N. Gilbert 411 E. Fairchi 330 N. Gilber 419 E. Fairch: 408 E. Fairch 408 E. Fairch 1; MICRDFI JORM MI CEDAR RAPIDS 1 r Iowa City/IURR North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study IURR Project Phone 353-3862 ext. 30 Block Proposals: Block 48. 49, 50 Jerry Thompson The draft proposals presented here were developed from ideas and concerns generated at the block meeting held on April 28, 1977 at Mrs. Marie McIlree's home. The ideas and concerns fall into the following general categories: 1. Parking problems, 2. Property maintenance by absentee landlords, 3. Effects of R3A zoning and alternatives. Each problem area is outlined and courses of action are proposed in the discussion which follows. Problem 1 Congested parking conditions produce negative impact. Comment: The proximity of this portion of the north side to dormitories invites use of the 48-hour parking zones for storage of students' vehicles. Storage is facilitated by the lack of enforcement of the 48-hour requirement. Residents without driveways have difficulty locating parking space and gaining access to their dwellings during peak usage. A related problem of the excess demand for parking is periodic traffic congestion. The primary source of traffic is the Willowwind School which draws students from all parts of Iowa City. The students arrive and depart primarily by auto. It was the fear of the neighbors at this meeting that a critical situation might develop if emergency vehicles needed to gain access to the area during this time. Proposals: a) Off-street Parking. The parking regulations of the Iowa City Zoning Code could be, enforced, requiring residents to provide paved, off-street parking space according to the number of dwelling units contained in each structure. 132 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i In some cases, such enforcement could cause undue hardships because land is not accessible or the cost of compliance is prohibitive. Creation of off-street parking also reduces the amount of green space on the property and , for the neighborhood as a whole. In addition, there is no guarantee that removal of residents' cars will decrease the demand for on -street parking in the north side. b) Calendar Parking. Calendar parking restricts parking to one side of the street, alternating with even and odd dates. In addition to facilitating snow removal, the number of parked cars in the neighborhood is limited, congestion is decreased, and street storage of automobiles is discouraged through the use of this control. The amount of parking space for residents and guests is also reduced, however, and there is an added inconvenience of moving cars or T receiving tickets. Because parking is allowed on only one side, the streets are wider, lending themselves to increased traffic flow and higher speeds. c) Parking Permits. As previously mentioned, one of the attractions of parking on the north side is that it is free of cost. If a price was attached to the use of street parking, through the required purchase of permits, then the , metered lots downtown and the University lots and ramps could better compete for patronages. The demand for parking In the north side would be decreased. Purchase of permits would have to be open to anyone, since the streets are public goods. Residents, however, could have priority purchase to insure adequate space. Graduating costs with distance from the central cores of activity (downtown, University) would keep the demand from merely shifting # to neighborhoods outside the regulated areas. d) Metered Parking. Used in conjunction with parking permits, one or two meters on each block would allow limited parking for guests or others who wanted to park in the neighborhood but didn't have a permit. Due to the nature of metered parking, rapid turnover would be facilitated while maintaining a price for the privilege of street use. e) Parking requirements for multi -family dwelling units should be allocated according to more realistic criteria, since the 112 space rule is inadequate when 3 or 4 car -owning students share an apartment. Developers should either have to 133 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IFIOIRES allow more land for parking, build underground facilities, or pay for tenant on -street parking through permit parking or some other system. If more land is used, then regulations will also have to be formulated to insure preservation of a certain amount of useable open space per lot. f) The Willowwind School might be persuaded to help alleviate the traffic congestion by providing a more systematic means for loading and unloading students who are being transported by auto. In addition, Willowwind School should be required to comply with present zoning regulations which call for three parking spaces per classroom. At present the school has space in the back yard for some parking spaces. g) The fear of not being able to maneuver emergency vehicles, especially large fire engines, into the neighborhood because of parked vehicles should be investigated. h) Mrs. McIlree's petition for calendar parking on this block should be followed up. City officials informed her that no action could be taken until the new traffic and parking ordinance was reworked. Perhaps, this effort should be joined with the desire of residents on Blocks 29, 35 and 36 to extend calendar parking. Problem 2 Absentee landlords often fail to cut weeds down and to make adequate provision for garbage containment. Comment: Uncontrolled vegetation is unsightly, especially if it is fast- growing and if the property owner is absent. Some experience at dealing with this problem suggests that it is the result of oversight by landlords rather than willful neglect. Garbage containers may not be adequate for rooming houses and apartment buildings. Inadequate containers allow animals to break open garbage sacks and spread the contents throughout the area. Proposals: a) Absentee property owners should be informed of conditions which impact the neighborhood negatively, ideally, communication between neighbors 134 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES I i �r9 p.. themselves would produce optimal adjustment to land use. A more formal s*r, j grievance procedure involving the North Side Neighborhood Organization { (NSNO) could be developed to deal with problems of this type. The neighbor affected would be required to initiate the process by filing a grievance with the N. S. N. 0. The N. S. N. O, would review the complaint, determine its merit, and act on It accordingly. A b) Uncooperative property owners who are in violation of nuisance ordinance (Chapter 7.06) or the minimum housing standards (Chapter 9. 30.6) f may be cited in complaints to the City Attorney, City Housing Official or i { City Forester. . ; c) Garbage dumpsters could be required at rooming houses and apart- ment buildings where present facilities are inadequate. The City presently requires (Ordinance No. 75-2790) that containers made of metal, fiberglass or plastic be used. The containers are to be 20 to 35 gallons in size with j tight lids. The weight of the container and its contents are not to exceed 75 pounds. The owners of apartment buildings with more than four units must make arrangement for commercial collection. Commercial containers must be waterproof, leakproof and covered. 1 Problem 3 The R3A zoning of sections of the north side neighborhood allows develop- ment to occur at a density which is too high. I Comment: Mr. Tom Scott, who is a resident with development interests i in the north side neighborhood, felt that development which was not too dense and was well maintained was preferable to deteriorated lousing stock. His main concern was that the R3A zone classification permitted density which was too high, viz., one unit per 1000 square feet. He indicated, however, his resistance t to any effort to down -zone the area from R3A to R2 because of his own investments. He would support a zone category which would require less dense development. 135 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MBIIIES i Proposals: a) Create an intermediate classification which would allow develop- ment to occur at a ratio greater than one unit per 1,000 square feet. Mr. Scott suggested that one unit per 1 , 500 square feet would be more appropriate for redevelopment on the north side. b) Create a redevelopment scheme which would utilize criteria, such as performance standards and useable open space, as the determinants of allowable density rather than square footage requirements presently being used c) Continue to solicit the views of those with development interests in the north side. 136 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 CONTACT REPORT DATE: May 4, 1977 STAPP: Bill Keating, Margaret Barron GROUP: Block 59 LOCATION: Joan and Mike Hart's house 328 E. Jefferson ATTENDANCE: 6 residents TOPICS /DISCUSSION: 1. Traffic lights. 2. Westinghouse parking lot - drainage & dust problems. 3. Traffic in the alley. 4. Traffic and trash problems around John's Grocery Store FOLLOW-UP: A i 1. Need to distribute minutes of meeting to participants 2. Need to find out the city's schedule for installing traffic lights on Gilbert Street. 3. Need to formulate and distribute draft proposals to the residents for comment. 137 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIOS•DES t401NES IAIDV ,- BLOCK 5� PA -FF- OFsueVEY Jm-f zi CV4 -11 -.1u1 138 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY NRR Project Phone Number: 353-3862 MINUTES Block Meeting (59) May 9, 1977, 7:30 p.m. 328 E. Jefferson (loan and Mike Hart) iJ I I 1. Attendance Project Staff: Margaret Barron Bill Keating Neighbors: Joan and Mike Hart Sister Winifred Morgan Rete Lekin Mrs. M. A. J. Smith Mrs. Hugo Sippel 2. Introduction The purpose of the study and of the block meeting was presented by Margaret Barron. The neighbors wanted to know the size of the grant and how much of it was to be spent on salaries and what the neighborhood would get out of it. I 3. Traffic Lights I The neighbors agreed that their biggest concern was that traffic lights be installed on the corners of Jefferson and Gilbert, and Market and Gilbert. Mrs. Hart estimated that two or three accidents occur each week on the Jefferson and Gilbert corner. Sister Winifred Morgan passed around a letter she had received from the City in October saying that these lights were scheduled to be installed this summer. Bill said that he understood the problem but wanted to mention that traffic lights cost around $20,000 each. The neighbors agreed that the cost of damage to property Justified the expenditure. 139 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Concern was also expressed for the bicycle routes on Jefferson and Market, which need protection from the traffic. 4. Westinghouse Parking Lot - Drainage, Dust and Visual Externalities This parking lot is paved and slants toward the alley, causing drainage problems in back yards and basements south of the alley. Dust and dirt in the air was also a complaint and it was felt that the parking lot and the traffic in the alley contribute to this pollution. Neighbors also objected to the appearance of the parking lot; they appreciate the fact that one large tree was left standing in the middle of the lot, but complained that the lot is not neatly kept, including the fact that the cement barriers separating the lot from the alley are always out of place. Most of the neighbors seemed to feel that it was the externalities caused by the parking lot and not the use of the land, per se, that was objectionable. For example, some neighbors felt that an apartment building on this lot, if it had adequate drainage, would be preferable to the parking lot. The neighbors did not know of any instances of block residents taking these complaints directly to Westinghouse, but the didn't feel that this would be effective, especially since Westinghouse is now an absentee landlord. 5. Traffic in Allev Noise, dust, and dirt from traffic in the alley was discussed. In addition, it was felt that there is a traffic hazard from cars emerging I from the alley onto Gilbert Street without stopping. The possibility of i placing barriers in the alleyway, forcing users of the parking lot to exit onto Market or Linn, was discussed. This idea was considered feasible and desirable by some, while others felt that speed bumps in the paving would be cdequate to slow traffic down while presenting fewer problems for garbage trucks and fire protection. 140 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 6. John's Grocery - Traffic and Trash Windblown trash, almost entirely from John's mentioned as a problem for most of the neighbors. 'A "John" is a desirable and responsible neighbor, they him do more to control this trash, such as providing I and picking up loose paper around the store more freq Traffic around John's is a problem because of especially late at night. A second traffic problem is fact that trucks unload from the street; some neighbor drivers leave the trucks parked in the street longer th, while they take a coffee break. Some neighbors also felt that the truck that co John's between 5:30 and 6:00 p.m. is unnecessarily n The neighbors were unanimous in agreeing that John's is an asset to the neighborhood and they empha that the owner made a genuine effort to be a good neigl 191 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION Iowa City/IURR NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY IURR Project Phone Number 353-3862 N Block Proposals: Block 59 M. Barron These draft proposals have been prepared in response to ideas and concerns expressed at the block meeting held on May 4 at Mike and Joan Hart's home. The concerns discussed fell generally into these categories: ; 1 . The Westinghouse Parking Lot and the drainage, dust and noise problems it creates; t 2. Excessive traffic in the 'alley, with a particular problem of cars # emerging onto Gilbert St. without stopping, 3. Traffic lights on Gilbert St. at the Jefferson and Market comers 4. Noise and trash from John's Grocery Store. I Problem 1 Westinghouse's parking lot is a source of dust and noise as well as drainage problems for the rest of the block. This large lot holds approximately 80 cars and is covered with gravel except for a paved strip next to the Westing- house building. The exact legal status of this parking lot is unclear due to conflicting reports from city officials. Mr. Robert Edberg, the zoning inspector, reported that the parking lot is on land that has not yet completely settled into the foundation of the building that was located on this lot. For this reason, the paving requirement was waived until February of 1978. Mr. Don Schmeiser of i the planning department said that Westinghouse is required to oil this lot to cut down on dust problems. Neither were sure If the zoning code's screening irequirement applied here. According to Mr. Schmeiser, no regulations exist that would address the drainage problem. Proposals: 1 . Complaints from neighborhood residents might be effective In encouraging the zoning officials to investigate this situation and clarify the legal status. Residents can call Robert Edberg at 354-1800, extension 325 to register d complaint. Residents are not required to identify themselves but must give the address and type of violation which will be inspected within 24 142 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES hours, at city expense. A letter will then be sent to the violator, detailing the violation and giving a time limit for correcting it. A second inspection will be made at the end of the time limit. 2. It is apparent that the storm drainage system on this block is in- adequate, given the present pattern of land use. It is likely that this would be very expensive Lo correct, since this drainage system is old and it would not be possible to expand the capacity of one section of the system without expanding the capacity of all sections that it feeds into. However, the city should adopt an ordinance requiring that developers show that runoff will be controlled on-site when any change in land use is made. This would prevent situations such as the Westinghouse parking lot from developing and would provide some leverage in future changes in the use of this parcel. Problem 2 Excessive traffic in the alley causes noise problems and a traffic hazard at the Gilbert Street exit. (See Map) A number of measures could be used to address this problem, including the following: Proposals: 1. Stop sign at Gilbert St, exit -- 2. Construction of speed bumps 3. [farrier in center of alley 4. Make alley one-way going east. The barrier in the center of the alley would cause some problems for garbage collection and fire protection. Speed bumps, with a stop sign at the Gilbert Street exit, would cut r down on through -traffic in the alley and slow down all traffic. Problem 3 i The crossing of two arterial streets, Gilbert and Jefferson, is a traffic hazard and the neighborhood residents have been pushing for a stop light here and at Gilbert and Market. It appears that the city will respond at some time this summer, and the problem will be alleviated. 143 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES Problem 4 Noise from John's Grocery Store caused by late-night customers and early -morning trash collection. Trash from John's blown into neighbor's yards. Traffic congestion from delivery trucks parked on Gilbert St. for longer than it takes to unload. Proposal: 1 . The existing positive relationship between the owner and the neighbors should be used in this case. A friendly delegation of neighbors should speak to the store owner to increase his awareness of both the neighbor's support for the sotre and the specific problem areas. Neighbors might be able to supply John with information such as which delivery'trucks cause the biggest problem with blocking traffic for longer than it takes to unload, or suggestions on the best sites for garbage cans for customer's use. 0 144 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES 0 r Ln Ln 2 J AARKET Yo6Iem#2. �n.4iwLl LT I j de7=q L °�a TACO &at GRANDE C WESTTn4 Hoo ST F,1 RA :Ii4 SGT � f Yo6Iem#2. w —J } �ARKZU2 1 1 JEFFERSON �'roble►►��3 �,�� �`fl,fs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES �n.4iwLl LT w —J } �ARKZU2 1 1 JEFFERSON �'roble►►��3 �,�� �`fl,fs MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES I 11 I 1 I APPENDIX C: DOCUMENTATION FROM THE PUBLIC PRESENTATION PHASE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES i The University of Iowa Iowa City. Iowa 52242 Instituto of Urban and Regional Research N246 OH Oakdale Campus (319) 353.3862 ,hu April 28, 1977 Iowa City/Institute of Urban and Regional Research NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION STUDY D. Lee, Project Leader GOALS, OBJECTIVES METHODS AND RESULTS Goal: To protect neighborhood resources while allowing change to occur. Objectives: 1. To carry the planning process to the neighborhood level. 2. To provide a demonstration to other neighborhoods and communities. 3. To involve residents, through neighborhood organizations, and encourage neighborhood pride. 4. To develop new methodology (instruments, procedures) as needed. 5. To reduce conflicts from land use impacts. 6. To create a favorable climate for private investment. Methods: 1. Compilation of neighborhood inventories (including historic survey). 2. Review and evaluation of existing and proposed legal controls. 3. Citizen participation (meetings, discussion of reports). 4. Study of linkage trees between impacts and sources. 5. Coordination with planning and grant administration. 6. Preparation of reports documenting methods and making recommendations. Expected Results: 1. A planning process (working example). initial survey general meeting block group meetings 147 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES Expected Results continued: meeting reports (minutes) block proposals neighborhood proposals and recommendations presentation and discussion with other groups (council, CCN, CPCC, P & ZC) 2, Technical Support for Innovation. impact categories and measures impact linkage trees controls and performance standards 3. Recommendations. transportation land use / community facilities (neighborhood improvements) historic preservation implementation (legal instruments) r f 1 1011:9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES l • ,/8._,11111 41 1 A �%� / �w((l /� n1 wanmrtaovv ■ (((//f (//L/ LI Ir.IryF (;pr. 1110.'P 5i:'irl 07 /J A Ib April 4, 1977 Professor Douglass Ii. I.ce, .Ir. Institute of Urban ;utd Regional Research University of low,, Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Dear Dr. Lec: '111c lows City Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the Neighbor- hood Impacts Survey and has directed me to relay the following comments. The document appe,u•ed well organized, and the diagrams and charts greatly facilitated reading and comprchonsioil. Clearly these data will be useful for your project and to the (:ity. However, the Planning and Zoning Commissi.ort felt that the document would have been strengthened by greater attention to the following area;. First, the report lists many code violations which are instead cases of non-congtlinnce with the existing code. The majority of the cited "code violations" pertaining to parking, sign and yard regulations are exempt frum the present Spec IFications since they existed prior to the adoption Of the appropriate section of the zoning ordinance (or of the ordinance itself). 'Therefore, the code violation sections arc misleading and not helpful in distinguishing actual Violations which perhaps should be prosecuted. The ()tiler major cuncero of the Commission was the Ilse of value judgments throughout tho survey. There wits ;I hies evident which was not considered appropriate for an objective document. For example, the frequent use of "attractive," "nice" and "vi:au;llly ple;tsing" to describe houses or yards overlooks the wide v;n•icty of opinion as to what is "visually pleasing." If there are reasons for listing as resources structures which no longer exist, this is not made clear in the document. For examples, see pages RI, 219 and 297. In addition, i have cnclused on a separate sheet a list of apparent errors noticed while reading the survey. i,lost of thes For your information. e are minor but are included 149 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Professor Douglass R. Lee, Jr.. April 4, 1977 Page Z Thank you for the opportunity to review the report and we look forward to hearing of further progress in this project. Sincerely, � l_LL.//'�� /c,yc Patt Cain, Chairperson Iowa City Pluming and Zoning Commission Enclosure /Sc 150 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7 The University of Iowa Iowa City. Iowa 52242 Instituto of Urban and Replonal Research N246 OH Oakdale Campus (318) 353.3882 N Y Ms. Patt Cain, Chairperson Planning and Zoning Commission City of Iowa City Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 f E Dear Patt: May 4, 1977 Thank you very much for transmitting to us the Commission's comments on our Neighborhood Impacts Survey. The review and criticisms that we have received from a number of sources have all been very con- structive and helpful. I am sorry that we have not had a chance to give the Commission a presentation on the survey and how it fits into our overall work program, and I hope we can arrange such a meeting at your earliest convenience. 1h., Two points which you raise in your letter imply either a misunderstanding of our objectives or a disagreement with them, and I would like to try to clarify our position so that we can discuss these questions at a subsequent time: (1) The term "violation" is being interpreted by the Commission and others to mean "enforceable violation," whereas we were simply noting non- compliance with existing regulations. Perhaps "non-compliance" would have been a better choice of terms for semantic reasons. Of greater significance, I think, is our purpose in noting instances of non-compliance: we are attempting to evaluate the regulations with respect to what impact they would have on the problems we observe, were they to be -- or had they been -- complied with. We do not have the logal skills to determine which examples of non-compliance could be legally enforced, and we explicitly avoided compiling a list of violations to be used for enforcement purposes. We are interested in the efficacy of the regulations, not the uniform enforcement of them. 151 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401N[S Patt Cain /. May 9, 1977 (2) We are somewhat perplexed by the objection to what are seen as "value judgments" on our part. The primary purpose of the report and most of its content Is an inventory of specific elements of the neighborhood which have positive ur negative value. Historic architecture, brick street paving, Goosetown gardens, large shade trees and well-maintained houses are objectively observable and generally regarded as having positive value to the neighborhood; barren parking lots, heavy traffic, run-down structures and lack of green space are also observable and have significant negative Impacts on neighborhood quality. This approach Is one of the Innovative aspects of the project, but we are convinced that it is possible to inventory things of value and make this information useful for planning. The survey is only Intended, however, as an initlal effort. We are currently engaged in block -level discussions with neighborhood residents to assess which items should be added or deleted and how Important they Orr. While we have some professional competence of our own to note items which add to or detract from neighborhood quality, the survey's value will be greatly strengthened if it represents a consensus of the residents' attitudes. We are learning a great deal in these discussions, but we are also finding a gratifying level of correspondence between our estimates of the determinants of neighborhood quality and those of the residents. My apologies for taking so long to reply to your letter, but I have been laid up pretty much since the project began last January. We enter Into our summer phase as of the 16th of this month, and anytime after that would be convenient for us to meet with the Commission. Please let me know what we can do to help communication, T have onclosed our quarterly report, which Includes our current work program. DL;I)p Enclosure i Hest regards, Dough s Lee Project Lcador 152 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES M r City to hear plan to save older homes I.ee said. The study focused primarily on the impacts different land uses have on one another. "By concentrating on controlling of impacts, rather than the control of land uses, you can find a way for coexistence of all kinds of life styles;' he said. Lee is hopeful the results of the proposals w -til stimulate private in- vestment, amendment of land use con. trols and more citizen involvement In the decision making process of what happens to a neighborhood. •' if people realize their neighborhood doesn't have to deteriorate, forcing them to move out, people may put more money in their homes; Lee said. "Once people in the neighborhood start to invest more money in their homes instead of leaving. they will want more say in what happens in their neighborhood and form citizen groups. "Change of land use controls from traditional zoning to zoning that evaluates impact on the neighborhood, hopefully will create a more pleasant and diverse neighborhood," he added. By GREG SMITH Staff Writer 9-11111 Saving old architecture, slowing down or stopping apartment building con- struction and decreasing. the flow of traffic in a north Iowa City neighborhood will be'proposed ,in a series of recom- mendations to the City Council starting Monday by UI Prof. Douglas Lee of the Institute of Urban and Regional Research. Lee is the project leader of the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study of the blocks between Dubuque and Governor streets, and Jefferson and Brown streets. The heavily student - populated area was examined after the city requested a study be made, and a grant was furnished by the U.S. Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment. Proposals for site improvement of the area will be presented to the city in a series of proposals explaining the dif- ferent sections of the study. Monday's proposals will be made during the council's afternoon informal session at 1:80 p.m. Problems in saving the older ar- chitecture of the neighborhood will be presented to the council first. "Older houses are vulnerable to neighborhood decay;' Lee said. "There are people who would like to see the older houses in this area saved or preserved but don't believe that the houses can still be saved without a lot of money: I hope to, by showing what I have found out about the houses, be able to provide enough evidence to show that these houses can be saved." There are many reasons older houses start to deteriorate, Lee said. Older houses are closer to the downtown see - lion where there is more noise, and businesses will start creeping Into the neighborhood. "Currently In Iowa City a pattern of developers buying a house and letting it deteriorate, tearing it down and building a multiple dwelling apartment has caused some of the older houses to decay," Lee said. "Once ad apartment building is built without enough parking or with an open gravel parking lot, people In the neighborhood will stacl to move out for fear their land value will go down. It is not that all apartiments or businesses are bad for a neighborhood. They can add to the diversity of the neighborhood if built to fit into it." Proposals to be made to the council later will include suggestions on how to slow down traffic through alleys and residential streets, to build bicycle paths, increase street lighting and improve sidewalks. "The study of this particular neigh- borhood was made because of Its collection of a wide variety of people and activities in one area," Lee said. "The area has characteristics typical of urban neighborhoods'you would find in larger cities. The study can be used to compare other typical older neighborhoods with a mix of housing, stores and multiple dwellings; an area where people should be able to live moderately and con- veniently." Freezing the area in time Is not the intention of the study nor the proposals, Daily Iowan , October 17, 1977, p. 1. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JE5 Neighborhoods In some neighborhoods, particularly on the near north side, people had indicated that they did not want multifamily buildings scattered throughout single-f;,mily neighborhoods because this altered the character of the area and created parking and traffic problems. lluwever, in the general survey the majority of re:;pundents felt that small multifamily complexes should be scattered throughout tlo city including single—family residential areas. Deterioration of absentee landlord housing was cited as a problem and suggestions were made for some "reward" system which would encourage rehabilitation and maintenance. Stricter zoning and design standards were advocated, as well as "less strict zoning". Most people (71v) responding to the general survey approved the presence of small convenience stores and offices in their neighborhoods, but the majority did not want large shopping malls. 85' of the respondents wanted to live within 1-4 blocks of a city bus stop and 52% would like to be within the same distance of a park or playground. Industry, highways and mobile home courts should be a minimum of 10 blocks from their neighborhoods was the opinion of most residents. Extract from the Preliminary "Citizen Participation Report," Iowa l City Department of Community Development, September 2, 1977, t describing the results of a questionnaire distributed to all City households. e 154 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Page 6 --The Daily Iowan—Iowa City, Iowa—Tuesday, October 18, 1977 North side seeks'historic'status By RHONDA DICKEY Staff Writer Hoping to preserve an area of Iowa City that is "a record of American domestic ar. chitecture," representatives from the North Side Neigh- borhood Preservation study presented their preliminary findings to the Iowa City Council Monday during an informal session. Kevin Laverty, a research assistant at the UI's Institute of Urban Regional Research, said the main problems indicated in the study involved traffic and land use. A common land use problem, he said, is the "ex- treme juxtaposition" of ar- chitectural styles that results from placement of a modern apartment building next to an older home. The primary goal of the study, which was conducted during the past summer, is to protect neighborhood resources while allowing for change, Laverty said. He said these resources are defined broadly to include residents as well as buildings. The study area is bounded on the south by Jefferson Street, on the north by Brown Street, on the east by Governor Street and on the west by Dubuque Street. Also included In the study area is one square block area ad- jacent to the western perimeter that is bounded on the south by Fairchild Street, on the north by Church Street and on the west by Clinton Street. Elaine Baxter, who Daily Iowan, October 18, 1977. catalogued the potential "historic structures" in that area, said she inventoried every building on the North Side that was built before World War I. Noting that the area Hes en- tirely within the original boundaries of Iowa City, Baxter said many of Iowa City's first schools and churches are located in the study area. Baxter said the neighborhood represents "an unbroken record of holy America — how Iowa City — lived during that period;' andadded that the neighborhood is of a type that was once common but is now vanishing. She recommended the creation of a historical district to preserve this area. The Iowa Legislature, she said, has enacted legislation that FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t101RES provides for creation of historical districts; com- missions are set up In designated historical districts to review proposed construction in the district and to issue construction permits for projects that are approved, she. said. Properly values in a historic district tend to go up following the designation, Baxter said. This sometimes causes displacement of residents who can no longer afford the rising property values, but she added that the designation also stabilizes the neighborhood and protects the neighborhood's resources. Mayor Mary Neuhauser said she believed this displacement would be significant. Iowa City has always had displacement, she said, mentioning urban renewal as one cause. Neuhauser said the Idea of preservation and rehabilitation of structures has often been attacked on these grounds and, she said, "I don't know why;' According to Baxter, the city may use federal Block Grant funds, among other sources, to finance the Improvements. The council also looked at design plans for the City Plaza. the pedestrian mail on College and Dubuque streets. The design plans are based on preliminary plans that were amended, based on suggestions from the council. Jack E. Leaman, project manager for. Associated Engineers of Mason City, the council the surface would be paved in brick, and a 100-f1. strip along the edge would be laid in to form a herringbone pattern. He also suggested a change in the focal point at the intersection of College and Dubuque streets. Instead of the solid granite focal point that was originally planned, Leaman said, he recommended that the granite ' center be surrounded by older brick laid in to give the illusion of depth. Leaman said he favored using the brick because it is "more local, more unique to Iowa City than a granite square." Councilor Carol deProsse said she also approved the use of the brick because the effect I� "much less cold." City asked to aid north side preservation By MARK F. ROHNER Press-Cinxen City BMW oar 19.11 Iowa City's north side now has a written record that few neighborhoods can boast of — a 112 -inch thick in- ventory of some 100 pre -World War I buildings still standing In the 50 -square - block area. B's pari of a unique neighborhood preservation project undertaken by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban Regional Research. The City Council saw the first products of the effort Monday afternoon —the historic structures inventory and a list of physical improvements for the city to consider making In the changing neighborhood, one of Iowa City's oldest. "This is a real example of a towm- gown joint effort," said project leader Douglass Lee, professor of urban and regional planning. "It's the kind of thing that ought to be encouraged on both sides." Lee said the historic structures In- ventory presented to the Council Monday is intended "to say this is a neighborhood worth preserving." Right now, he said, the north side is "a neighborhood dominated by the automobile" and characterized by "incompatible land uses." Although the neighborhood has many well preserved Victorian homes, "on almost every block you'll find a plastic new apartment building," Lee said. Their impact on the neighborhood is "more than just style," he said. Their negative influences also include traffic, parking problems, lack of open space and high population density, he said. The purpose of the city -university project is to study the detrimental ef- fects of incompatible land uses and find ways to minimize them. Lee said later stages of the project will include recommendations on traffic, parking and land use controls. One step being looked at is designating the area an historic district. The point of such a designation is "not that it keeps out new buildings, but that the new buildings that are built blend in very well," said Elain Baxter, who made the Inventory of historic struc- tures during the summer. "This is the type of neighborhood that once was common in America and now is vanishing," she told the Council. Unlike some historic areas that typically get attention, she said, the north side was — and still is — a neigh- borhood of unpretentious homes and working people. "These houses provide a record of American domestic -architecture starting in the 1M and moving all the way through the 19th century," Baxter said. She said 'she found a surprising degree (if -interest in the area's history when she contacted residents of the neighborhood during the summer — and not just among homeowners: "Renters, too, were very proud of living in older buildings," she said. Along with Baxter's report on historic structures, the Council received a report outlining improvements that might be made in the north side. Those Included such things as traffic lights, crosswalks, traffic diverters, bicycle lanes — even replacing concrete pat- ches In the north side's brick streets with the original brick pavers Iowa City_ Press–Citizen, October 18, 1977, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401REs I'rescotation of North Side Area Stud_ Professor Douglass Lee, 1'roject Leader of the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study, gave a slide presentation and brief introduction of the study. I'rohlems with motor vehicles and land use inconsistency were two of the major subjects studied, he said. Elaine Baxter gave a presentation on the report entitled "Ilistoric Structure Inventory." The approach to historic preservation was an innovative one, she said, and "preservation" meant conservation and protection of resources. The inventory identified and recorded those structures within the North Side Neighborhood which possess historic or architectural significance up to approximately World War 1. 1lie North Side Neighborhood lies within the original area of Iowa City and is primarily a residential neighborhood of middle and working class people. f•Is. Baxter called the North Side Neighborhood "a fine example of a Victorian neighborhood" and suggested establishment of an historic district. Vicki Williams gave a presentation on the report entitled "Neighborhood Site Iflip rovenients Program" and stated that an attempt had been made to define physical i` public improvements for the North Side area. No attempt had been made to determine whether the proposed improvements would be worthwhile on it cost/benefit basis. 'Me projects noted in the report are candidates, among many, for the City's capital improvement funds, she said. Professor Lee indicated that an attempt would be made to provide additional reports by December. She reports will contain more detailed proposals and analyses on r streets, traffic, parking and land use, he said. j 'Y extract from the Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission, October 20, 1977 157 MICROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111Es M 1 1*1ding freeze passes,' bwl By MARK F. RORNER complaining for several years thnt o rrar-cwu.aryasiw A).1- 77 apartment buildings are deslroyh their 19th -century neighborhood. Apartment building and most other types of new construction on the city's The Council took the extra north side will Come to a halt for six step of enacting the moratorium at single meeting, immediately after mom' The City Council voted unanimously public hearing, suspending parliamentary rules calling for a v eto TM&Y to impose a building permit at three successive Council meetings moratorium on a 50 -square -block area north of the business district enact an ordinance. The freeze on the building permits Council members feared the stretching enactment of the ordinance will take effect upon legal publication Friday and run for six months, or until over three weeks would defeat th a new city zoning ordinance is adopted, purpose of the moratorium b signalling builders that the whichever Comes sooner. It will affect all new construction and expansions, moratorium was in the offering, then except new single-family homes and giving them enough time to obtain building permits before the nverns of existing homes to duplexes.;At moratorium took effect. This will give us breathing space to a hourlong public hearing on the moratorium, two lawyers told the get an ordinance that I think will reflect the desires of the of this Council they believe the building permit people com- mgnity," said Mayor Mary C. Neuhauser. freeze is iUegaL William L. Meardo said he was The moratorium is Intended to appearing to "put you on notice — politely — that I do not feel there is preserve existing conditions until the Council decides whether zoning on the authority for this proposal" Meardon north side should be changed — represents three north aide property owners, one of whom has possibly to restrict apartment con- straction in the area. threatened to take the city to court if the North aide residents have been moratorium is enacted. "If it turns out you do not have authority ... and someone sustains damages, I U M they have a valid complaint," Meardon Bald. Another lawyer, J. Patrick White, charged that the city had "cut several corners" In bringing the moratorium before the CounclL . a . White agreed with Hayek that the law Is not clet,, "nd sold "that fact in itself au�� w very persuasive. You're Protected by tith he ICon property of rights United States." Iowa City Press–Citizen, November 2, 1977 (excerpts) 158 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401tIL5 ew Most of the others who spoke at the hearing were In favor of the moratorium. So was most of the ordinary standing-room,onty audience, as Mayor a Neuhauser established by asking for a a show of hands. Kenneth Hubel, 919 N. Linn St, ap- to themed Neas ighborhood spokesman for Association, which la trying to put a stop to apart- ment construction in their 19thcentury neighborhood. e "We're dealing with an historic Y area," Hubel said. "We're dealing with a Iowa City roots, and I think that has to be very carefully considered." He said that builders may incur some lass because of the moratorium, but that without it, homeowners would be the losers. If a large and unsightly apartment building is built within 9 to a feet of a residential home, the loss to the ad- Jacent property can be very real and from $10,00o to $15,000," he asserted. Jeanne Smithfield, who rents her home on East Fairchild Street, said she was in accord with homeowners in -her neighborhood. "We have the same values, we have the same Interests as the homeowners In the very important neighborhood," r o usto live in a quiet neighborhood where we know one another." The north side was under Con- sideration several years ago for rezoning to restrict apartment con- st uction, but action on the zoning change was deferred pending com- pleUon of a new comprehensive city plan. The new plan may Include a similar rezoning proposal, although city of. ficials Say the moratorium is not an Indication of that. Nevertheless, the moratorium Is aimed at builders who may be anticipating more 'restrictive zoning In the aro. The moratorlum affects two areas. The larger Is an area bounded by Dubuque, Brown, Governor and Jef- ferson streets, plus an adjoining area between Governor and Dodge streets north of Brown. The smaller Is an area along North Dodge Street Cast of Prairie du Chien Road, Selzer ""11 "The breathing room given us by a building moratorium on the north side is particularly important to help us plan bow to rectify the damage in this long- established ongestablished neighborhood," District B incumbent Councilman Max Selzer said Monday. Speaking at a coffee held at the home of George McCormick, 230 E. Fairchild SL,. Selzer said he would work to establish a historical district which, he said, would help to preserve 19th centuryarchitecture and ensure that new buildings would blend with the old. "It has become clear that the social cast, that is the cost to all of as, the neighborhood, and the entire com- munity has become too high to permit further concentration of automobiles and dwellings in this area," Selzer said. "We must move quickly to prevent this problem from becoming worse. But this is only part of the problem. We must also use long-range planning to correct these problems, and to - provide for proper land use in the future. It is.one thing to change existing zoning in established neighborhoods, and this should be done by regular review, but we must maintain a balanced com- munity.,' Roberts Tuesday evening Roberts attended a coffee at the home of John and Sophia Lenoch, 715 N. Johnson SL Roberts said he was In favor of the north side building permit moratorium in order to give the Planning and Zoning Commission *time to reconsider the zoning ordinance for that area. He said there should be some changes In the present zoning ordinance for that area "keeping In mind the an. vironmental impact and the welfare of the present neighborhood." "With the proper communication, the rehabilitation program can benefit many families mid their homes in that area," Roberts said. council campaign i Bolnick Ott A-1' Ira Balrdck, at -large candidate for The City Council, said Monday that he Pas interested in a recent proposal to save older homes in the city's North Side. The recommendation was made to the City Council Monday by UI Professor Douglas Lee of the Institute of Urban and Regional Research, following a study of the architecturally 'significant homes in the north side neighborhood. Bolnick said that currently there is a Rend for businesses to buy older homes, allow them to deteriorate into Substandard housing, and then tear them down to replace them with a parking lot or a new office building. This has a detrimental effect on the neighborhood where it occurs. "H we don't enact some clear prin- ciple for where we want development to occur ... then every neighborhood in this city is threatened by this process," $olaick said. Rolnick spoke at a coffee at the Carl Ogren residence, 5 Melrose Place. Erdahl Clemens Erdahl, District B City Council candidate, said Monday that "the general election will offer the voters the opportunity to elect someone to the City Council who has a primary interest in neighborhood preservation. It's an especially clear cut choice because my opponent, Max Selzer, has not forcefully argued for nor strongly supported any ordinance or regulation which would protect older neigh- borhoods "If people in separate areas of town who- have neighborhood problems — traffic, zoning or building deterioration — recognize this opportunity, they can form a strong base of support for the election of a Council Member who will see that their problems are dealt with rather than Ignored." ' Erdahl spoke at the home of John and Marsha Linder, 830 Ronalds Street. reports of statements by candidates for City Council, Iowa City Press– Citizen, October and November 1977 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1IOIt1ES Erdahl Speaking at a coffee Thursday, Clemens Erdahl, District B Council Candidate, discussed his views on the effects of excessive traffic in neigh- borhoods. "Neighborhood preservation, which I and others have publicly urged for three years, has finally become popular dining lids election," Erdahl said. "I'm :glad people are waking up to the need ;but I don't like to see candidates ;oversimplify the many excellent suggestions brought up by people living In a variety of neighborhoods. "A moratorium on the northside and the creation of a historical preser`atfon district are good steps to take. However, the deterioration is a corn. Alex and widespread problem that :necessitates an active strategy throughout the older part of Iowa City. "I believe we must turn things around to avoid the need for another renewal 'project. We can preserve the older neighborhoods if we recognize the ef- fects that traffic, lack of code en- forcement in rental housing, high. density zoning, overloaded sewers and flooding have on various older neigh- borhoods. "The lack of clearly defined arterial routes causes many drivers to take :short cuts through neighborhoods, :causing undesirable traffic that is j dangerous to pedestrians. Some un- planned short cuts develop Into traffic routes and eventually cause pressure for widening or extension. We cannot allow this to happen "'Ibe more we 'encourage macs transit the less pressure there Is for street widenings High bus ridership can also lessen the tremendous amount of on -street parking, which is so detrimental to many neighborhoods. Erdahl spoke at the home of Pam Ehrhardt, 1028 E. College SL a 0 Twomway on Dodgel Governori By MARK F. R01Br'ER PMCillun City ECaw T) .12--n A return to two-way traffic on Dodge and C-overnor streets and a permit system for on -street parking are among ideas being offered to solve the north side's problems with the automobile. The proposals are the results of a federally financed studs of ways to improve and upgrade Iowa City's north side neighborhood. The Planning and Zoning Com- mission heard reports on two aspects of the study, traffic and parking, at Its meeting Thursday evening. Project leader Douglass Lee told the commission the neighborhood has "a very, major problem with the along arterial streets to reduce the effect of traffic noise in the nelgh- borhood. —Barriers to discourage through traffic at certain intersections. Some of the barriers would block traffic en- tirely, while others would allow turns, but no through traffic. --Controlling the use of alleys for through traffic by barricading them, Installing speed control bumps, designating them one-way or building raised medians In streets at alley in- tersections. —Providing crosswalks and signs for pedestrians and building a pedestrian overpass on Dubuque Street at Brown Street. —Expanding the system of bicycle lanes. —Restoring brick street surfaces that have been patched with asphalt. —Installing traffic signals at Church automobile, both in the form of traffic and in the form of storage." Lee is with the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research, which, along with Iowa City's Department of Community Development, Is conducting the study. A $109,000 federal grant is paying for it. A report by Kevin Laverty of the Ul institute says that restoring two-way traffic on Governor and Dodge — and providing left turn lanes and traffic barriers at certain Intersections — would reduce speeding while still allowing through traffic on those streets. The report suggested both streets continue to be designated as Iowa Highway 1 routes, and that nor- thbound truck traffic be banned on and Dubuque streets, Gilbert and Jefferson streets and Gilbert and Market streets. The city already plans signals at the latter two intersections. —Marking left turn lanes on Dubuque Street and Governor Street (f( Governor reverts to two-way traffic). —Moving curbs out from the sidewalk at Intersections, "necking" the streets down to make parking Impossible and allow easter turning Into the streets. Laverty also proposed that the city reduce property tax spending for streets to a minimum and push for legislation to allow local fuel taxes and registration fees to pay street ex- penditures. Dodge. Vicki Williams of the Ul institute concluded in a separate report that the north side's parking problems stem as much from outsiders' cars left on north side streets as from the estimated 2,000 cars owned by north side residents. Commuters and residents of UI dormitories "rind the neighborhood a handy and free place to store their cars," her report said. Moreover, it continued, many north side residences do not have enough off-street parking for the occupants. She said a permit system might be Instituted to control parking on north side streets. Although the city would have to make permits available to anyone, she said, the possibility of giving priority to north side residents shoold be investigated. She said scattered parking meters in the area could provide short-term parking for guests and others who did not own permits. Permit parking would tend to en- courage commuters and students to use municipal and university lots that are often more than half empty, she said. Williams also said the city should take steps to control off-street parking by requiring green space on residential and commercial lots. Additional suggestions in Laverty's report on traffic included: —Landscaping and sound barriers NORTH SIDE Turn to page 2A. Iowa City Press -Citizen, December 2, 1977, p. 1. fI ICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DCS I101RCS The Daily low'an—Iawa City. Iowa—Monday, December 5.1977—Page 5 Study suggests 2 -way travel on Dodge By TOM DRURY Staff Writer Two North Side businessmen disagree on the effect the proposed return on two-way travel to North Dodge Street would have on traffic problems in the area. The proposal results from a federally financed study to determine ways to improve Iowa City's North Side neigh- borhood. Returning two-way traffic to Governor and Dodge streets, the study says, will — along With the placement of traffic barriers and left -turn lanes in certain intersections — decrease speeding in the area. Harold Rogers, manager of Harry's Dodge Street DX service station at the corner of Dodge and Church streets, agreed Sunday the return of two-way travel would slow traffic and make the streets safer. "I know it'd be a lot safer," Rogers said. "I'm standing here watching the cars and I'd say there's not one going less than 30 Imiles per hour)." Bobby Bagwell, manager of the Hawkeye Dairy Store on the comer of Dodge and Davenport streets, disagrees with Rogers and the study. "I'm used to the big cities," Bagwell said. "When they change a one-way street to a two-way, there will be more accidents," he predicted, due to congested traffic. Bagwell said Dodge Street has a lot of accidents — Rogers estimated "probably 12 in the last six months," with two occurring last Friday — but he blamed inadequate traffic controls, not one-way traffic. The reason motorists speed south on Dodge Street, Bagwell said, is because there are no traffic lights or stop signs on the road. "They need more lights and more stop signs," Bagwell said. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS I101;fLs Like Rogers, Bagwell said marking of the one-way street, particularly for drivers coming out of alleys, is inadequate. "With this school here i Horace Mann School, 521 N. Dodge), it's quite hazardous," Roger said, adding that school children on bicycles have been hit by automobiles near the school. The study of the North Side situation, financed by a $109,000 federal grant, is being con- ducted by the UI Institute of Urban and Regional Research in conjunction with Iowa City's Department of Community Development. Members of the groups reported on two parts of the study, traffic and parking, to the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday night. In addition to the proposed changing of Dodge and Governor streets into two-way streets with traffic -slowing barriers and left -turn lanes, the traffic report, given by Kevin Laverty of the Ul institute, suggested banning northbound truck traffic on Dodge Street and keeping both streets as Iowa Highway 1 routes. The parking report, given by Vicki Williams of the UI in- stitute, suggested crowded parking conditions could be improved by discouraging drivers who are not North Side residents from using neigh- borhnod streets as -handy and free" parking spaces. She suggested that the use of scattered parking meters and a parking permit system giving priority to North Side residents could improve the situation. Commuters and students could use municipal and university lots that are often more than half empty, she said. Other objectives of the traffic problems report were discouraging the use of alleys by through traffic; building a pedestrian overpass at Dubuque and Brown streets; and installing traffic signals at Church and Dubuque streets, Gilbert and Jefferson streets, and Gilbert and Market streets. The report also suggested adding more bicycle lanes and restoring brick streets that have been patched with asphalt. North side traffic plan opposed By MARLENE PERRIN Plewcillen Reoorler v -u•17 The City Council reacted unfavorably Monday to parts of a preliminary proposal to solve automobile congestion in the near north side neighborhood. The proposals, results of a federally financed study of ways to improve and upgrade the neighborhood, included restoring two-way traffic to Dodge and Governor streets, completely hsrricading some Intersections, placing barriers at other intersections to allow turning but no through traffic and expanding a system of bicycle lanes. Kevin Laverty of the University of Iowa Institute of Urban and Regional Research, which Is conducting the study with the Iowa City Department of Community Development, presented recommendations on streets and traffic. He urged the city to adopt a long-range goal of requiring operators of vehicles to pay the full cost of streets. "The city should move toward not spending general funds on streets," he said. "That's not a realistic kind of proposal," Mayor Mary Neuhauser Laverty said residents on Brown Street have complained that motorists are using It to travel between Dodge and Dubuque streets, and some of them ! are traveling 30 to 40 miles an hour. "Forty miles an hour on Brown Street would bottom you out," Neuhauser responded. Berta pointed out that traffic studies do not always support contentions of residents in an area. "Sometimes there Is a great variance between people's perceptions and reality," he added. But Laverty said that even one or two vehicles speeding down Brown Street would be "a real problem." Barricades and intersection diverters would en- courage motorists to use arterial streets like Church Street to cross the area, he said. "Most of those arterial streets are nothing but traffic jams," Vevera said. "If someone uses a side street instead, he's done us a favor." Vicki Williams of the In Institute presented it separate report on pu,:ing In the area. Her recommendations Include a permit system to control street parking In the aren. Councilman -elect Glenn Roberts joked that "we might just put a fence up around the neighborhood and give each resident a key." Berlin, mindful of the controversy arising from the fencing off of streets downtown and the subsequent removal of thus- fences from sidewalks, noted, "We have some extra fences." said. "Are you aware of the low state of maintenance of the roads In Iowa City? It's a pathetic situation," she said. "We resurface and resurface to keep going, because we don't have enough money to replace streets I don't know bow we are going to get through this spring." When project leader Douglass Lee said he "hasn't heard of anyone from Iowa City lobbying in Des Moines for more road use funds," Neuhauser reacted angrily. "I resent that kind of talk that we haven't been doing anything. I'm on the governor's coalition which is trying to do just that. We have been working on this for years," she said. She added that her No. 1 priority for available funds was intersections where fatalities have occurred, "and each of those cost $150,0011 minimum." Councilmen John Balmer and Robert Vevera expressed opposition to returning Dodge and Governor streets to two-way traffic. "The one-way traffic on those streets makes it in some way easier to get around in this community," Balmer said. "I was deathly against making them ono -way in the first place," Vevera said. "But now that they are, they are two streets on which we have no traffic problems. Now that we have something that works, we don't want to go back." When Laverty proposed barricading intersections at Brown and Dodge Streets and Ronalds and Dodge streets to prevent through traffic, Balmer responded, "You want to completely block those off? You're kidding, aren't you?" City Manager Neal Berlin said, "Blocking off streets Is really a problem, particularly for emergency vehicles and snow removal equipment. That's why we make every now sub. division end their streets In cul -do - sacs." Iowa City Pross—Citizen, Decomber 20, 1977 P. 1. 16"2 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1701NI5 Dorm residents may have to pay to park By MICHAEL S. WINETT Staff Winter East side dormitory residents who utilize nearby free on -street parking spots may either find themselves without those spaces or paying a fee to use them by next fall. The City Council has accepted for consideration the preliminary version of a study that recommends permit parking as the chief solution to excessive demand for on -street parking spaces In the North Side neighborhood. Over 2,000 cars currently use on -street parking in the North Side, according to estimates contained In the report. The North Side neighborhood is bounded by Dubuque and Governor streets and Brown and Jefferson streets, with the exception of the portions of Fairchild and Church Streets between Clinton and Dubuque streets, which are also included In the neighborhood. The change to -permit parking would mean that only cars displaying permits would be allowed to park in the area. The number of permits would be limited, and a fee, meant to reduce the demand, would be charged for each permit. "We would hope that the city wouldn't do that because it would make things very hard an our students," said Philip Hubbard, vice president for student services. Vicki Williams, UI graduate student and author of the parking study, said, "The purpose of the study is to highlight tradeoffs and come up with a workable solution which would be in the best in- terest of the neighborhood." The preliminary report was submitted to the City Council on Dec. 19 as one section of a comprehensive study of the North Side, which was funded by a $109,000 Innovative Projects grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The North Side Is just about the oldest neighborhood in town, 'said Bill Keating, assistant planner in the department of community development. The study was made to "prevent further deterioration in the neighborhood," he explained. "The North Side neighborhood is unique because of its location and age," Williams said. "Other neighborhoods might have similar problems, but they're highlighted in the North Side." The convenient location of this neigh- borhood in relation to downtown, Mercy Hospital, the University and the bus lines encourages heavy usage of on -street parking space by commuters. University students who live in the dormltories find the neighborhood a handy and free place to store their cars," the report states. The preliminary parking study em" phasizes that a comprehensive approach combining a variety of controls and strategies Is needed In the North Side. "Parking Is a very complex problem. We have to approach it from all directions at once," Williams said. One manner of approach was to solicit the opinion of North Side residents in a series of eight meetings held throughout the neighborhood. Open discussion of the problem and alternative solutions will facilitate better planning, Wllllams said. UI parking coordinator Wiliam Binney did not want to speculate on possible Increased student demand caused by permit parking. "We would have to see what the effect would be before changing any procedures," Binney said. Student Senate President Doug Siglin said he thought any reduction in parking spaces caused by permit parking will affect students. "I don't think there is any way it could have a beneficial effect on students," he said. Despite interse lobbying. Iowa le0atas are confident that mandatory deposit bottle bill wdl pass.. seat stay. page seen. Northwestern hands Iowa Gagers third conte• once loss. 62.59...see stay. page twoNe. Derni dgmg echoes cry d no alnunsl IN aaments for legislalas In oaice...See story. page eight. UI freshmen just ain't what they used to be.. Is" story. page sih. Iowa tax hps... See story, page three. Datly Iowanr Tanuary 20, 1970, p. 1. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1100JES Readers: north side Parking issue To the Editor: DT,, Jam2*7.74 I must take issue with Student Senate President Doug Siglin's statement on the front page of the Dl Jan. 20. In Michael S. Winett's article headlined "Dorm residents may have to pay to park," Siglln says of the proposed permit Parking of Iowa City's North Side: "I don't think there is any way It could have a benficlal effect on students." Siglbt is overlooking some im. portant facts In making this statement. Primarily, it is obvious that all of the residents of the easWide dorms who operate automobiles Lettere in Iowa City would not be able to take advantage .of the free parking in this area. Ther are far more students than there are places to park. Therefore, only a select few can park for free. The vast majority follow the normal procedure of registering their cars for placement in a UI storage lot and paying the associated fee of $31.50 for the academic year (a point that highlights the DI's poor choice of headline In the article; most dorm residents do pay to park). A system under which all automobile owners would be required to pay a parking fee Is certainly more equitable than allowing a few to park for free. Undoub. tedly, a city charge for North Side parking would lead to more applications for UI storage. This Increase In revenue would provide at east the basis for expansion of parking faculties, if necessary. Additionally, Slglln Is forgetting about off. campus students living in the North Side neigh- borhood. Where are they to park If all the available spaces surrounding their residences are full? Since they pay for upkeep of the city streets, either through direct taxation ur as part of their landlord's taxes passed on In rent, shouldn't they be given priority In parking their cars In this area? Clearly, benefits for the student do exist in the Proposed program of permit parking. 1 do not mean, In writing this letter, to support the permit Parking program wholeheartedly, There are logistic problems that could result (Should Inhabitants have to pay to park in front of their 1 GA perms residence? Would visitors In the area be required to obtain a special, temporary permit?). These issues will have to be decided by the city council. However, the benefits of some program of this nature clearly outweigh the Inequities inherent in the present system. Tom Hail N312 Hillcrest Daily Iowan, January 77, 1978. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRLS I I I i I 1 1 APPENDIX D: WRITTEN CRITIQUES OF PRELIMINARY REPORTS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES City o4 Iowa city DATE: February 3, 1970 10: Jerry Thomh:.on I'ROM: Angela Ryan RE: Land Use Regulations and Administration Jerry, first of all let me say that I think this is going to he very helpful for the community and I think a lot of people will appreciate your efforts. I am going to dictate my thoughts as I go through this and so please don't hesitate to ask me to clarify them at some later date. You start with a discussion of rezoning. I to give a background paragraph or two about and that zoning must be done in accordance that one limitation on rezoning is that it with the comprehensive plan. For example, low density to high density for a specific be challenged as not in accordance with the as spot zoning. think it would be good the initial zoning process with the comprehensive plan, must also be done in accordance you speak of rezoning from development. This could comprehensive plan as well Section 414.6 does not require the planning and zoning commission to hold public hearings on rezoning, only on the initial zoning ordinance Of course, the Council has to hold a public hearing. On page 3 you state that the City Council's review will be favorable if the master plan contemplates the use for which application is made. Clearly, the rezoning as well as the initial zoning has to be in accord- ance with the present comprehensive plan. No. 2, you state the present zone was temporary. Except for a moratorium, no other zone classifica- tion should be viewed as temporary. Some states allow holding zones butcI don't believe that this would he allowed under Iowa law. You may want to look at Business Ventures vs. Iowa City and the recent City of Decorah case where an agricultural classification and an RIAon class used as a holding pattern and the Iowa Court dis- approved of this. No. 3, it is near a zone which allows the desired use. Again, I see problems with this. There should have been a reason for its initial classification and there should be a good reason for changing it, No. 4 is good. No. 5 is good. No. 6 is good. On page 4 you set out the initiative and referendum procedure. However, the Iowa City Charter specifically states that zoning amendments may not be done by initiative and referendum. In addition, I believe you would have to follow the procedure of Chapter 414 and this would pre- empt an initiative referendum even if the charter were amended. (Correction: It allows initiative for over 2 acres - still 414 problem. Section.364.6 states a city must comply with the state's procedure if the state has set one out. You may also be aware that Chapter 303 of the Iowa Code provides for petition in establishing a historic dis- trict. Page 9, the standards for obtaining a variance were very well 166 MICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES II set out in a memo by Andy htccKean that you may want to look at. i would dispute that the hearing is conducted in a very formal manner. page 10, you state that Board members will discuss the matter among themselves and come to a •recision. I would make it clear that their discussion is in public under the public meetings law.Page 10, Board of Appeals. You may not be aware that the Housing Cortmission has just been made the hearing board for appeals from the housing code. The Board of Appeals now hears appeals only for the building elide. i would replace the word "edifice" with "structure" or "building", (might also rr:phrase. the expression construction of good quality housing stocl". ! meets a minimum standard for health and s I would say that !lllllj i a fr, say that most code violations torr t Page 11 - 1 would is required under Chapter 413 of the low,, Codrnfr,r multiplesn which state if the Housing Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that a violation exists, the Owner is notified of the violation j by means of a corrective letter calling for voluntary compliance. I would rephrase this section to state that basically a housing inspector makes annual inspections of multiply, dwellings and rooming houses and responds to complaint calls on all dwellings. if the inspector receives a complaint, fie investigates w found . 1( the property violation, a correctivn letter is sent to the property owner. The property owner may appeal the determination of thy. housing Inspector within ten days of the corrective letter. q magistrate doesn't really give an enforcement crier. One of the demeanor Options under the Code is to cite the property owner for a mis- which is punishable by a fine of up to $100 and imprison- ment up to 30 days, Another option is to file a petition in District Court to enjoin further occupancy if there is a circumstance which endangers public health or safety. Page 12, no. 1, unreviewed development. Jerry, I don't know that I understand what you're saying. The buildin.y inspector approves the plans of the dwelling and at that time would see a cite plan which would set out the size of the dwelling, its set -back f'017. Che street, from the lot lines, the height of the structure.+", the number of parking spaces. He or she would visit the site at regular inter- vals and inspect for compliance with the Uniform Building Code. OU,rr inspectors would inspect for compliance with the plumbing code, the electrical beviolatingothe setibacksror heighturequiremnnts bocause they would staf(person would be on site at regular interval;. You stateCUmt if the building meets the requirements of thy. tuning ordinance, the project continue•, to rempleti°n r,ifhmrt review by the Beira ce Atbl,. ment, Planning and Zoning, DCII staff ar City Ccuncfl. As you are aware, the rale of the Board of Ad.jusUnent. and P Z is set by Chapter 414. I guess I disagree with you th,it tile. staff flee', not review because as I Stated, the people from Lhe building department have to approve, every major sLep iu construction. You state Lhat.e the cty dwts of nave not wile mev by adversely '"VCUd by a rtmximnn a builder's density dwelling are not solicitod nor are the neighbors notified of a builder's intent to develop a parcel unt.11 Lhr pro,ier.t is underway. The implication would seem that you feel multiple.. niay only be allowed if the neighbor; approve. Obviously, neighbors have notice that they arc living in r,hdt is presently are RIA or P3fi rune where apartment'• arc 167 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIMES allowed. A property owner ha,, the rigt,t to rleve.lop property at the density to which it is pr^sr:ntly zoned. You may want to read Pellf7dr•I vs. CiLy of pos t•foines. Again, land use has to be based on the ern;, prehens+ve plan and not on neighbor preference. You ray be aware that there has been discussinn Of a design review ordinance in Iowa City. I havo extensive matrrrials on this topic and 1 feel that it would not be authorizer) under our' present enabling legislation. You seem to be authorizing it: cnviro;,mental impact statement at a municipal level. 1 realize• they are doing this in California but again their enabling legislation is much broader than ours. No. 2. Unccmtr'olled negative effects. You state that one source of negative effects is the nonconforming use which isn't subject to regu- lation because of its existence prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. As you are aware, a nonconforming use is allowed to con- tinue to exist, but it cannot be rebuilt or expanded. In Lheory, it is supposed to disappear after' Its natural lifespan. The only alterna- tive is to provide for an awortization of non -conforming uses. in light of Stoker-IdcCray vs. City of Des tloines, it is unlikely that this would meet. with a favorable reception from the Iowa courts. You state other sources include variances. The case law in Iowa is very specific as to when a variance may be granted. While I feel the Board of Adjustment has often been too generous, the solution is a better educated Board of Adjustment and more appeals of the decisions of the Board of Adjustment by the City and neighbors who are. adversely affected. the present zoning ordinance requires buffering near the boundary of zones. Dbviously, Maximum development in a zone is legal. Therefore, if it is later deLermined that it is zoned to an unacceptable density, the correct approach is to downzone. As to outright violations, a ne.inhhor may enjoin the violation and the City can improve its enforcement efforts. i Page 14. A tenant does not have standing to Protest to trigger a section 414.5 extraordinary majority vote. Again. 1 think its in,por-- tant to make it Clear that the extraordinary majority vote applic; I only to a rezoning, not to development which is authorized by the Ipresent zoning classification. You state the decision-makinq process should he designed to make the winners Success contingent upon adopting measures which account for. i the cost to the losers. If Vol, mean requiring development in a manner that will buffer the adverse. effects.fine. If you mean ContraCL zoning and a give and to C negotiation with ear•h development. I think you have prohlom;. Page 15. 1 ;pink the floatirr, zone concept is good for thing,, like neighhorhoud cunrnereial centers where you realize that, then! will one neighborhr'LJ tu!RmCr'cial Comer within d certain, geographic area. I also helieve planned unit developments are an excellent tont. However, 1 would have problems ellow;rIq a greater density in a floating zone in a low density area. i think this would conflict with the uniformities provision of Chapter 414. 1 also think there is a prOW ein with flexible MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES technical requirements because of tfu, charge that the zoning ordinance is discriminatory in itpplicaLion. You state a dialogue induced by political inr.rntives would force the developer to Seek neighborhood input and to concede certain aspects of the development in the namr. of public intersst. Again, I have problems with a negotiating process each Lime a developer wants to build. property owner has the right to fix standards to which he may be assured if he complies to the standard; he may build. Otherwise the action of the municipality could be voided as arbitrary and dis- criminatory. You may want to loot: at the cases in which zoning ordi- nances provided that a ce,tain use could be allowed only when a portion of the neighbors signed a petition in approval. There is an Iowa case which allowed a grocery store in a single family residential area when 60% of the neighbors approved. There is also a U.S. Supreme Court case in point and I am aware of similar cases from several jurisdiction,,. Basically, the holdings were that you cannot hold a property owner to the whims of his neighbors, and that such zoning is not in accord- ance with the comprehensive. plan. 1 also think, leaving everything to the political process world heighten tensions because there would be no safeguard or predictability for the neighbors. They would constantly have to be at a fevered pitch ready to attend every meoling to protect their rights. Lack of coorJhwtion. You may be aware that the City has both housing and inspection services under the direction of Mike Kucharzak at this time. i think that he is doing a good jo!c in coordinating building inspection, fire inspection and toning administration in particular. Page 19. First of all, spot zoning is invalid. i.econdly, any rezoning must be studied by planning and Toning and there must be public hearings by the City Council before action. The role of the. Planning and Zoning Comunission and the Board of ArljustUment art, set by Chapter 414. There- fore, it would he invalid to refer minor rezoning to the Board of Adjust- ment. in addition, since we are about to have it new comprehensive plan and a new zoning ordinance, it is hoped that the number of rezoning ordinances will be greatly limited. I disagree that the granting of a variance andthr rezoning of a small area of land are similar. For one thing, a variance would not allow a different land use. Comnonly, a variance would be given to a rrguireinent in the building code for example, a sethack requirerrr•nt for accessory buildings because of the topography of the lot. the garagr could not be placed within the required setbacks. 'rhe.refore, a variance would be given tg allow placenxmt rr the garage in a diffe;u�t location. This i% a far cry from a rezoning which would allow a different use, for example multiple dwellings in a single family dwelling area. You will rr!call that a variance can only be given when there is a unique hardship running with the land and it will not harm the general area. there is an luwa cast.- in which the Board of Adjustment allowed a duplex in it single family home by vari- ance, and the Supreme Court held that this was an improper use of variancr•c. I i,ui't slre.st, enough that. the role of the City Cornr_il and the toard of AdjuArient are diffnrenL. The Council mule,, the law, Lhe Board of Adjustment. has it limited role in ru•antinq some variances on the basis of 11,11-d'Inp and granting special exceptions on Lhe basi•, of the stand,u;1, ,et forth by th-• f.nunril. iL : true Lhdt, a srrarrh Ivr an arLiun of the Board of Adjuament is b.j%ed upon 169 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i whether there is substantial evidence in the record to justify their decision. However, if they exceed their authority clearly they would be overturned and their authority is in a very limited area. Page 20. Condition issuance of building permit.;. I think it would be helpful to read some of the cases on the issuance of building permits. For example, the chapter in McQuillan Municipal Corporations. Basically you must have standards and anyone who meets all of the set forth standards must be allowed to build. You speak of the discretionary control of the building inspector. Ile has no discretion. If a person meets all the criteria the property owner may file a mandamus action to get the building permit. There are a number of cases on Point. I have assembler) a number of cases on wrongful revocation of building permits in the Yoder v. City file that you may want to read. With regard to demolition of a structure, control of demolition has been done through historic preservation ordinances. Chapter 303 would allow such control. However, the enabling legislation is limited to historic building in an historic district. Again, I could give you sites on demolition cases. The standards is usually that you can prevent demolition of an historic building if you can show that the person can still obtain a reasonable return with the building. Most ordinances provide for purchase of the building by the City within two to six months from the time of denial of demolition, or the demolition must be allowed. Again, construction of additional units would depend upon the density for which the area is zoned and the ability to meet requirements for parking, minimum housing code, whatever requirements the City would set out. Again change of use - certain uses must be allowed as a matter of right within a zone. Again look at cases which condition certain kinds of buildings upon approval of the neighbors. Page 22. I think you guidebook suggestions are good. You may be aware we are getting a new Municipal code and I think some of this is in the process of being improved. I disagree that there is concurrent jurisdiction. the code vary clearly defines the various roles of the Board of AdjustmeI think nt, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council, the 3oard of Appeals and if each group does their job properly there should be no confusion. Page 23. I disagree that properties enjoy being categorized as nonconforming uses. They usually have higher insurance rates and are limited in their ability to expand or rebuild. I also disagree that the City is benighly neglecting older section -in code enforcement. You state that when pressed to enforce the code provision against a land use which generates a complaint the code enforcement division will attempt to settle the controversy without formal action. I think code enforcement generally relatesinot meeting for example the minimum housing code. It is not addressed to land use but rather help safety provisions. The only situation in which the land use is in violation which seems to come up is when a home occupation grows beyond that originally anticapted. I would say that it is rare to have a land use that is in violation. I would agree that the code enforcement people will attempt to obtain compliance without formal action. However, I do not believe that they compromise and allow an illegal land use. Obviously if they were to do so, a land owner or any party could file a mandamus action to re- quire compliance or to enjoin the violation. I also disagree that illegal uses are not brought to the intention of the enforcement or moved against. All multiple dwellings and rooming houses must be inspected annually by Chapter 413. There has been discussion in the past of allocating other duties to firefighters. You may want to discuss this with Candy Morgan and learn the reason why it was decided 170 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES not to do this. The present zoning code states that police and other municipal employees have a duty to report violation which they observed in the performance of their duties. Many reports are made. Many of the antiquated provisions are in Chapter 413 and the City would not have the power to change those provisions. Page 25. I don't understand your negitive effect section. I think that the zoning code should provide for harmonious land use and I don't understand the separate set of regulation. I also don't understand how parties would have a cause of action for abetment or damage. I am assuming that you are not saying that all apartment houses are common law nuisances. I think you have to also look at 36ff'4.1 which states that we cannot legislate private civil relationships under home rule. Therefore, a municipality could not create a new torch. Page 28. I never did like CahlTrrtl I think a better solution for the City to pass a noise ordinance and site offenders of that ordinance for a misdeamor or enjoin violation in district court. The neighbor would also have the right to enjoin violation in district court. The number of personnel needed to arbi- trate such neighborhood disputes would be immense. Page 34 Page 37. In your example of a single family structure being converted to a multiple family, a site plan for the parking lot would presently be required under the Tree Ordinance. I don't understand this sentence. "Cases of different intensities of the same land use and cases of different land uses, either in nonconforming in character or located near zone boundries which are located approximately to each other, will be typical." You can't develope something nonconforming. All driveways and parking lots presently must be hard surfaced. Garbages picked up weekly.` Therefore, I don't understand how either of these would be effected by performance standards. Again we cannot create private civil actions which would make one party pay damages to another party. Page 38. You say "the City should be open to reasonable proposals which deviate from the specification of the zoning ordinances". This would create problems with the unif rmity requirements of Chapter 414. Rather the zoning ordinance should provide for planned unit developments as it does. Again, I think that the flexibility is available in a planned unit development and there will be more flexibility with the density zoning concept in the new zoning ordinance. Again you state public improvements might be waived and more density allowed in exchange for the provision of special amenities. The new zoning ordinance will allow some density bonuses. Any such provision must be clearly set out in the zoning ordinance and applied uniformly to all similarily situated to avoid discrimination and arbitrariness. Page 39. You state the strict prohibition of uses could be made in negotiable proposition. See Chapter 414 which requires uniform provision within a zone. Again read the cases which allow uses when the neighbors consent. The Iowa cases a grocery store in a residential neighborhood if 60'4 of the neighbors signed a petition. The Court held that this was arbitrary subjected the W 171 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i property owner to the whims of his neighbors and not in accordance with the comprehensive plan. Again the procedure for rezoning and for granting a special exception is in Chapter 414. You may find it helpful to read some of the cases on special exceptions which would be in the code annotated under 414. Page 40. A special exception is not a nonconforming use. Rehabilitation fund page 40.You may be aware we are doing some housing rehab but we are limited by both Federal regulation and regulations of Chapter 403A. With regard to a property tax moratorium, the City is bound by State law in property tax assessments. At present the only authority for a special district is Chapter 303,the historic preservation district and this is for limited purposes. Jerry, I realize many of my comments were fairly repetitive. I would urge you to read Chapter 414 of the Iowa Code and many of the cases cited in the code annotated. Cases of special interest would be Reahmann v. City of Des Moines, Stoner McCray v. City of Des Moines, Crowe v. I would also urge you to read the sections in Laws in Planning and Zoning which is both in the Law Library here and at the Law School. It has good sections on comprehensive plan, rezoning, noncomforming uses, sub- division regulations. I In the file of Yoder v. City, I have assembled a number of cases on building permits and the revocation of building permits. I i Zimmerman v. O'Meara, 215 Iowa 1140 (1933) i i , 172 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES -?Mgt r Y ii �..•` ., '}ice!;t S 1 DATE: flay 5, 1978 TO: Douglass B. Lee FROM: Angela Ryan, Assistant City Attorney, and Dennis R. Kraft, Director, Department of Community Development RE: Northside Neighborhood Presentation Study This report is based upon the premise that the Northside is zoned improperly and will continue to be zoned improperly. It attempts to create new mechanisms for prohibiting or restricting the construc- tion of new apartments while retaining them as a permissible use. It would seem appropriate to begin with a discussion of zoning in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The author could set out the competing interests in the zoning area; to preserve the charac- ter of a primarily single-family neighborhood or to provide high density housing in close proximity to the University and downtown. If the reasonableness of the former interest is clearly demonstrated, it would seem that the remedy is to rezone the area to a lower den- sity. The author implies that a developer need only apply for the rezoning of an area from a lower to higher density, and it will be granted. If this rezoning is not in accordance with the comprehensive plan, the residents may challenge the validity of the rezoning as spot zoning. In addition, the residents within 200 feet of the property to be rezoned may file a petition in protest, and the Council must pass the rezoning by an extraordinary majority. The reasons stated by the author for granting a rezoning don't reflect Iowa law. There are no "temporary zones until a definite use by the property owner is contemplated." The use is determined by the comprehensive plan as implemented by the zoning ordinance. The author suggests that initiative and referendum be used to rezone an area. While the Charter provides this procedure for tracts in excess of two acres, there is some question whether that procedure would be held in conflict with state law. In Business Ventures v. Iowa Com, 234 NW 2d 376, the court held that zoning is a delegated power, and, therefore, it must be strictly construed. X364.6, 1977 Iowa Code states: "a city shall substantially comply with a pro- cedure established by a state law for exercising a city power . Section 414.6 states: "In order to avail itself of the powers con- ferred by this chapter . . ." It then sets out the duties of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. X414.3 states: "Such regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan . . ." It would be difficult to show that a rezoning by in- itiative and referendum is in accordance with the comprehensive plan. A recent California case upheld zoning by initiative and referendum; however, this power was expressly given to cities in their Constitu- tion. This is not the case in Iowa. 173 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rdolNEs The author states that if a building complies with the zoning code, it is constructed without review by the staff. In addition to the review of the plans prior to the issuance of a building permit, inspectors visit the premises at different stages of construction. Violations of the zoning code as well as the Building, Plumbing and Electrical Codes would come to their attention. He states that comments of neighbors are not solicited and they are not notified of the builder's intent to develop. If the proposed structure is in compliance with all City regulations, the builder has an absolute right to a building permit and he can file a writ of mandamus to compel its issuance. Rehman"v. C�t of Des Moines, 200 Iowa 286. _ 174 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIos•oLs MOINES The author states that a nonconforming use is not subject to regulations because of its existence prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance. While the use may continue for the life of the building, it may not expand or rebuild; therefore, it will be eventually phased out. He states that variances create "uncontrolled negative effects." A var- iance may not be granted for a use; it merely allows the property to vary from a particular characteristic, e.g, side yard requirement, upon a finding by the Board of Adjustment that the variance will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hard- ship, and the spirit of the ordinance will be preserved and substantial i justice done. k Page 14 states: "The interest in property which is held by a tenant may be sufficient to qualify that person as a valid voice in protest." If he is using the term "protest" to mean that which triggers the requirement for an extraordinary majority, he is in conflict with + §414.5 which limits standing to property owners. + He states: "The decision-making process should be designed to make the winner's success contingent upon adopting measures which account i for the costs to the losers." Such a process would be invalidated as discriminatory and contract zoning. 1I i the author speaks at length of "political clout." i I e then states: "The appointed status of the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of Adjustment affords an objective consideration of the merits of the NSNO's concerns without being to- tally insensitive to the political pressure that might be exerted." The role and authority of the members of these bodies are defined by Chapter 414, Iowa Code. If he is recommending that members of these bodies be subjected to political pressure in their decision-making, I find that objectionable. Should either body act beyond the scope of t r its authority, both the City and injured parties have a legal remedy. On page 19, he states: "Since the difference between the granting of a variance and the rezoning of a small area of land is more in name I than effect, An alternative is to refer all such minor rezoning and adjusting that is being done . . . to the Board of Adjustment. 174 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIos•oLs MOINES These so-called legislative determinations occur in an ad hoc or Piecemeal fashion in spite of the facade of pre -stated standards and certainty, Again, a variance may not be given for a different use; therefore, it differs substantially from a rezoning. Chapter 414 sets forth the pro- cedure for rezoning and it cannot be delegated to the Board of Adjust- ment. If the decision to rezone is not made in accordance with the comprehensive plan and is indeed ad hoc, it may be challenged as invalid He also states that it would be easier to overturn the decision of the Board of Adjustment in District Court than that of the City Council. The decision of the Board is reviewed on the record, while a challenge to the validity of a zoning ordinance is de novo. The author advocates the *itional issuance of building permits and a process of negotiation with the developer prior to its issuance. He suggests that comments .from the neighbors might lead the City to im- pose conditions with regard to alternative site development or timing of construction stages. Such a process would be held invalid as arbi- trary and discriminatory. The City can impose reasonable police power regulations with regard to noise, parking or storm water detention, but these regulations must be app situated. lied equally to all those similarly The author advocates an impact assessment ordinance. He stated that under nuisance law, the courts require that substantial harm be proven as a matter of law and thereby restrict the number of "impacted people" who may obtain relief. He proposes that the City create an adminis- trative procedure with the awarding of damages for people who are in- jured by their neighbor's activity, which does not constitute a nuisance The City would be creating a new tort or private civil action. This is clearly beyond the authority of cities under Home Rule. X364.1 states: "The grant of home rule powers does not include the power to enact private or civil law, except as incident to an exercise of an independent city power." He gives the example of a bar whose music disturbs the residents. While the City does not have the authority to require the bar to pay money damages to the neighbors, it can regulate noise under the police power. Therefore, a better remedy is simply to enacta reasonable noise or- dinance and apply it fairly and equally throughout the City. I do not understand how residential perfonnance standards differ from reasonable police power regulations. Obviously, we can require sani- tary disposal of garbage and off-street parking. I can't think of an example of "odors from unusual garbage which do not constitute viola- tions of housing or health ordinances or aesthetic dissonance result- ing from disinvestment." Under Incentives for Development, he states that the city should be open to rea sonaTile proposals which deviate from the specifications of the zoning ordinance, for example, public improvements might be waived 175 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 61o1rIEs f and more density allowed in exchange for the provision of special amen- ities which would benefit the neighborhood. This would seem to be ar- bitrary and discriminatory and lack the uniformity required by Chapter 414. The author suggests that certain uses be allowed in residential areas if the neighbors consent. The City can provide for neighborhood con- venience centers by zoning and it has the authority to permit a number of uses in residential areas by special exception. However, consent zoning has specifically been held invalid by the Iowa Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court as arbitrary, discriminatory and not i in accordance with the comprehensive plan. Again, the authority to make land use decisions has been delegated to the City Council under Chapter 414. I find no basis for the statement: "Unless the illegal use is clearly contrary to the public health, safety and welfare, it is unlikely that the City will enforce the code." The author should point out that any person may enjoin an illegal use as well as bring it to the attention of the City. If staff is not following the directions of the Council or the City Manager, this could be remedied administratively. The report is generally negative with regard to the competence of City staff. While I may be biased, I have not observed a lack of co- ordination or a "benign neglect" of code enforcement. In a country which requires search warrants and a presumption of innocence, compli- ance with City regulations shall never be total. However, I believe staff generally attempts to enforce City codes in a conscientious and even-handed manner. 176 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Id01nEs n,w b. ,a �: i w....• DATE: March 2, 1978 IC: Neal Berlin, City bIanager FROM: Michael E. Kucharzak, Director, }lousing F, Inspection Services RE: Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study Land Use Regulation and I reviewed the draft of this report about a month ago and at that time made my comments known to Jerry Thompson. At the time I reviewed this document for Jerry I didn't put the pieces together properly that this Was 'Part of the con- sulting study, but rather I thought that this was one of our legal interns doing a piece of personal research. This of course does not affect my error correction however, the seriousness of some of these errors is tempered somewhat by the assumption that if indeed this is one of five studies, then it does in turn represent a 520;000 document and should be written to reflect that cost. The concerns of the Building Official began on page 10, Paragraph 2, The Board of Appeals. The third sentence speaks of "Chapter 9.02 of Iowa City's Dtuticipal Code Adopts the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 103A Code of Tota as Amended." This is an incorrect statement. The City of Iowa City adopted the Uniform Building Code and amended same to become the Iowa City Building Code. We do not follow the State Building Code. Farther along in that paragraph the author speaks as follows, "the certificate Of compliance is permission for the developer or builder to proceed with con- struction." This is exactly the opposite of fact. The Certificate of Compliance states that the building is finished, not beginning constnaci%ton. I gather that the author was talking in terms of a construction permit. The paragraph goes on to say "without it, any activity to develop or build is engaged in at the risk of the applicant." Again, assuming that the permit was what the author wished to talk about, it is more than a risk of the applicant but it is a violation of Rmicipal law guilty by punislmient as a misdemeanor. The author goes on "if the Building Official denies the application for permission and the Board of Appeals upholds the decision, any construciton which has occured nay be wasted." Again, the statement is in error and if the application for a building permit has been denied, the construction would be ordered torn dawn. The last sentence also is incorrvvt as far as the purpose of the building codes. The sentence states "the end result which the Board and Building Official seek to achieve is the construction of (ILIAlity housing stock." The intent of the codes of the City of Iowa City are health ;and safety. The author then goes on to say in the next paragraph "the Board of Appeals hears cases arising from implementation of the lousing Code, Chapter 9.30 Iowa City Rmicipal Cale." Since the time of authorship and certainly within the most recent months unknown to the author this appeal function has been changed and removed from the Board of Appeals, and rather a (lousing Appeals Board has been established to deal with ]lousing Code appeals. 1 further recommend the word "enforecaent" rather than "imp)ementation". 177 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MINES To: Neal Berlin From: Michael L. Kucharzak Re: Northside Neighhorhood Prese n ation Susdy 3/2/78 The closing sentence on that page "chapter 9.30 of Iowa City's code goes beyond the minimum standards set by Section 413 of the Code of Iowa." This can't be further from the truth and the fact that the City Code does not cover Chapter 413 of the Code of Iowa is quite }clown to the Council inasmuch as they arein the process of and have been in the process since June of last year in revising the (busing Code to bring it into conformance with Chapter 413. Page 11. First paragraph, the author states "complaints about existing housing conditions generally come from tenants; some violations, however, are discovered through systematic surveys." This is not a fact. The majority of complaints come from neighbors and most, not some, violations come through systematic surveys initiated by the City. The paragraph goes on with the author stating "if the housing Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that a violation exists, the owner is notified of the violation by means of a corrective letter calling for voluntary compliance.compliance." AllThis is violations not so, there is no corrective letter going out on voluntary observed are followed by an order to correct condition of premises. This is to bring our procedures in accord with State tort liability laws mandating action on violations uncovered through a municipal inspection procedure. The author states in the following sentence, "the board may affirm, modify, and reversecitetthedutndstions called for in the compliance letter." Again, t and responsibilities of the board we would suggest the following, "The Board may affirm, modify or reverse the actions of the housing Inspector." The text goes on and the author states "certain circumstances of non-compliance may so endanger the public health or safety that faster compliance is appropriate." We don't understand what is referenced by "faster compliance", and if the author is eal wi nuisanes and threats to about halthemandgency orders which safety,thenthis shoulddbe more clearlycstated.�iate The final sentence needs some modification. "Failure to comply with this order can result in a fine and imprisonment as well as revocation or suspension of the Certificate of Occupancy in the case of rental units." The error lies intthehat fact that we don't suspend or revoke the Certificate of occupancy. I suggest the author was talking about a rental permit or rooming house license. Still reading in this same section, page 13, typo error last sentence of the first paragraph - externalities. Page 18 - two typo errors, in the first paragraph - the word decisions and in the last five lines - the word negative. Page 23 - Section 4 - i?Iforcement of the existing regulations: The staff strongly recormends the deletion of the last part of the sentence which reads ,...or being benignly neglected by City officials responsible for code enforcement." The staff is most concerned that this reference be deleted from this text inasmuch as considerable federal dollars have been invested in the Northside Neighborhood over the last couple of years and over three quarters of our code enforcement dollar is being spent in this particular neighborhood. I think it's not only a concern but it is also a insult to ignore the fact that these federal 178 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES riolnEs dollars have been spent along with the dollars necessary to pay for the northside study as wholly federal dollars which wen coupled along with the contributions being made by the general fund of the City of Iowa City, will show that a high contribution of public dollars per structure is being invested in the preservation and maintenance of the northside neighborhood. xt The next sentence aloestwithionab ecsourcehand borders one content ofhtheelibelousraph is not factual, is one of q 9dhen pressed to enforce the code provision against a land use which generates a complaint, the code enforcement division will attempt to settle the controvf the ersy e not brouht to enforcement al action.TelrarelyIlegaludetected Orses which rmoved against because ofethe shortage enstaff available to make detections z d the unpopularity of Unilateral action of ainst uses whhhealtht sin no psafety orwelfare, itissunlikelthe y by local government ag gal use is clearly contrary to the public that the City will enforce the code." all of 28 dealing with The text as it appears at the bottom of page 26, all of 27, the example spoken to as "homeowner V is questionable merit. The author has chosen an example regarding noise from a bar offending his peace and quiet in his residence. The author could have rearheediaould bethe cwellaadvisedt the ito hoose another ty has an ce regarding noise emission from bars, example for his scenario. ion This completes the general coements on the land use re Iealoealanesearcn;stni�ersity stud report as prepared by the Institute o r an an g eetion Services owa. It should be noted that the Department of Ilotsing f, Insp ent of merely reflectthejointauthorshipofthe cthelCitytand thetUniverhis sity of Iowa rt SO as to pTheestaand ff has serious problems with the philosophical content,the suggestedsolutions p ntification and reflected ch muof the approach to the problem idehe staff to in is particular study. It tswas nol<e feel ias afconssultant to theattempt al City, the with responsibility for the content rests with the author. The staff's concern goes beyond the publication of this document but rather focuses on the potential conflicts that may occur when the City decides to go.in for be expected incorporate the document, its research administration of the Department of (lousing additional federal funding under the adminis and Urban Development and may and feels this conclusions as a contanributebasis nothingrto enhancelourdabilitylforsadditionalf f«leral dollars and may in effect reduce our chances to obtain additional dollars if we are programatically going to ignore the final product of a study received considerable funds Iran the Department of housing and Urban Development. It you need additional infolmltion regarding our feelings about this we would be more than happy to provide same to you. 179 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES I i CITY OF r_;p,/IC r .I 1,1[1 1•' 41() E \A/ ',` I I May 9, 1978 Douglass B. Lee Chairman, Urban & Regional Planning Program Room 346 Jessup Hall University of Iowa Iowa City, IA 52242 OWA CITY Re: Requested Time Extension for North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study (�19) Jul 1 �% Dear Doug: As I indicated to you earlier on the telephone, the time extension request for the above mentioned study was referred to me for comment by Neal Berlin. Specifically, prior to the approval by the City for the time extension, we have certain concerns that we would like to see addressed. Our biggest area of concern relates to the Land Use Regulation and Administration Report. This report contains numerous misleading statements and an appreciable amount of inaccurate information. I am attaching memos on this report from Mike Kucharzak> Angie Ryan, and myself on this report. Some of this information has been conveyed to Jerry Thompson earlier. It is also my understanding that he held discussions with several City staff people prior to the publication of this report, but that the comments made by City staff were not reflected in the Land Use Regulation Report. I believe these memos should be relatively self explanatory; however, if they are not please do not hesitate to contact either Mike, Angie or myself. Secondly, we also have some concern over some of the information in the Streets and Traffic Report. Specific concern here centers around the apparent lack of empirical data to substantiate some of the conclusions that were drawn. Specifically, comments are made about the reduction in property values which have occurred on the North Side because of the traffic problems in that area. However, there is no data presented which substantiates this opinion. This report also has weaknesses in some other areas which would benefit from additional substantiating data. Specifically, neighborhood residents have talked to me about some of the conclusions as stated in the study and have indicated that they were not in agreement with the statements made. RM MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610111Es Another problem with the Streets & Traffic Report relates to the entire section about property tax payments and street users being exempted from paying property taxes. This does not appear to be true. Please let me know what steps you plan to take to correct the deficiencies noted in this letter and the attached memos. Very ruly yours, Dennis R. Kraft Director Department of Community Development bcl/23 cc: Ileal G. Berlin, City Manager Angela Ryan, Assistant City Attorney 181 MICROFIL14ED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES HIRES The University of Iowa COPY Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Institute of Urban and Regional Research N246 OM Oakdale Campus (319)353.9882 May 17, 1970 Dennis R. Kraft Director Department of Community Development City of Iowa City Civic Center Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Dennis: Your letter and attached memoranda with continents on two of our reports was received by me recently, and I wish to express my appreciation for the information you and the other City staff members have provided. I realize that Mike and Angie, in particu- lar, have gone over the Land Use Procedures and Administration preliminary report in cons derable detail, and have devoted a great deal of time and effort to articulating their reactions, both as to specifics and in general. we readily acknowledge that there are weaknesses in our work, and the primary purpose in presenting these reports in preliminary form was to obtain the sort of criti- cal review that City staff has undertaken. Ida are making every effort to incorporate this feedback into our final reports. while j I cannot respond to every point that has been raised by the City staff, there are a few comments I can offer by way of clarification: 1. It is not our intent to impugn the competence of City staff or hinder in any way the City's competitive ability to secure uage which stems to suggest this grant funds from HUD. Any lang will be removed. 2. Funding for the North Side study was obtained by myself, from HUD, and the Institute is serving as subcontractor --indirect- ly, to HUD --for the execution of a study design approved by both HUD and the City. The relationship between the Institute and the City is an unusual one, and one which depends upon good faith on the part of both for a successful endeavor; we are not, for exam- ple, a "consultant" to the City. The City's interests should be served, but so should those of HUD and the University. 3. The report receiving by far the largest volume of com- ment (one of sixteen final reports) was presented in February, series.the last in a provided gthy and conents almostimmediately, andappat rentlyMikengenerateddhisiaed nti I[:PA PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Ito IRES Dennis R. kraft 5/1.7/7a short time later. Following the presentation, Jerry Thompson and Dave l;oesher have worked steadily to revise the preliminary version. Since we have only just now seen yours and [like's com- ments --well over two months after thev were ret down on paper -- your threat to obstruct an extension in time for completion of the project unless your "concerns" are "addressed", with less than three weeks remaining, seems perverse and smacks of harrass- ment. If the reports were to be issued by the end of May, they should already be at the printers. 4. With respect to your comments on the Streets and Traffic report, presented in January, we can readily supply moredocu- mentation. One need simply ask the nearest realtor about• the effects of traffic noise, fumes and danger on adjacent property values, or refer to several studies comparing otherwise similar properties on quiet versus noisy streets to establish that traf- fic lowers property values, but we will include these in our report. As far as street users not paying property tax goes, that is factually correct; specific individuals may be both pro- perty taxpayers and street users, but street users do not pay for property taxes on the land used for streets. Other taxpayers must then make up the shortfall. 5. Your statement, "Specifically, neighborhood residents have talked to me about some of the conclusions as stated in the study and have indicated that they were not in agreement with the statements made," is not sufficiently specific for me to take much action. I cannot claim that all residents will concur with every statement we make, but if you could tell me who the resi- dents were and/or what they objected to, we could at least consider their objections. I must emphasize that, extension or no, we have very little in the way of either time or money with which to do more than produce the final reports as they now stand. If the City has ad- ditional comments --either substantive or cosmetic --to make oil our reports, we must receive them very soon. I have no cause to com- plain about the cooperation we have received from City officials in the past, and I do not expect to have reason to complain in the future, 'vie are striving to produce a set of reports that the City, the University, and HUD will be able to stand behind with pride, and I believe that that result is still possible. M; ,de cr_; ileal !in_rl m, City Angela Ryan, Asst. Michael Y.ucharzak, and Sincerely, Douglass D. Lee Project Leader Manager. City Attorney Director of. Housing Inspection Services 183 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MONIES 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY .I /Il . .I 1.111 1•' /Ill 1 V,//�,fl III I' If A I 'J 11" 10//• ' .I1 ( iI dl/'✓%/V ) (30J :S`,li P,)"!) ! May 24, 1978 i Mr. Douglass B. Lec Associate Director Institute of Urban F, Regional Research N246011 Oakdale Campus University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 iRe: Publication of Innovative Grant Report Series r Dear Doug: y We are in receipt of your memo of May 18, 1978, and the mock-up of the cover and credits page for the Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study report series. We i reserve judgment on the format for the reports at this time, and wish to bring to 1) your attention other matters which concern us: 1. Pursuant to Section 20, Part g, of our grant agreement with HUD, we are ` required to obtain advance written approval from HUD prior to final publication of any grant -related reports. We are, therefore, requesting that prior to final printing of the reports, you submit to us, copies of the final drafts, so that we can submit them to HUD for clearance. 2. A question has arisen as to who retains ownership and publication rights to the reports upon completion of the project. It is the City's position that since we are the grant recipient and prime contractor, and the Institute the Sub- contractor, that we retain ownership, publication and distribution rights. In the mock-up of the cover and credits page, it appeared that the reports are being published under Institute cover, and hence our concern. 1 3. Although there is no specific provision in our contract with regard to the number of printed copies of each report which will be furnished to the City, we do expect that a number sufficient to meet the needs of Council, P$Z, Staff, as well as any interested citizen, be provided. 4. The mock-up of the report indicates that a $2 fee will be charged for each report. Since this project was financed 100 percent out of federal monies (including printing costs), the City does not intend to charge anything for d them. If any reports are to be distributed by the institute, we suggest that you make a separate press run, with the Institute absorbing the printing cost, and thus a $2 fee would be justified. 184 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Mr. Douglass B. Lee fay 24, 1978 Page 2 rom t attention to these matters. If Position on h furtese matters, er We would appreciate your p P clarification or have other questionsselfaor18�11hKeatings please feel free to contact either my Sincerely, 4� Dennis R. Kraft Development Director of community P DRK/ssw 185 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140I1qEs . CITU OF I I/I/ cAIIIIL' /1I()I \/,#", IIII ,I dI I May 24, 1978 Mr. Douglass B. Lee Associate Director Institute of Urban F, Regional Research \'2460H Oakdale Campus University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Re: Your Letter of May 17, 1978 Dear Doug: OWA CITY Thank you for your response on the Northside Neighborhood Preservation Study. My initial question is one of attempting to determine more precisely what you are going to do relative to making amendments in the reports. On page 1 of your letter of May 17, you indicate that you readily acknowledge weaknesses in the work and that your primary purpose for presenting these reports in preliminary form was to obtain the sort of criticism that the City staff provided. You also indicated that you were going to be making every effort to incorporate this feedback into the final reports. On page 2 you indicated that "extension or no," you had very little in the way of either time or money with which to do more than produce the final reports as they now stand. Specifically, are the reports going to be amended to reflect the changes or are they going to be published essentially in the preliminary draft form in which they were initially distributed to us? I certainly appreciate your not wanting to impugn the competence of the City staff or hinder in any way the City's competitive ability to secure future funds from IIUD. In that the statements contained in the draft report were misleading, their removal will be appreciated. I would agree with you that the relationship between the Institute and the City is an unusual one and that the project will certainly be promoted by the mutual exercise of good faith. However, the grant was awarded to the Institute via a contract with the City, therefore, it is still my impression that the Institute is functioning as I "consultant" to the City. It is also my understanding that representatives from the HUD Area Office share this opinion. I would agree that the City's interest should be served and the research should be useable. Likewise, HUD's interest in developing a model that might benefit other communities is important. However, I do not see the University fitting into this in the same way, i.e., the University's benefit IS to have the opportunity to do the research, providing students and faculty with an interesting project to work on. The University will be recognized based on their ability to complete sound research, however, the University is not intended to be a major beneficiary of the study as are the City and [IUD. The HUD contract discusses this in further detail. 9M. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Mr. Douglass B. Lee May 24, 1973 Page 2 In your letter you also indicated that my transmission of Mike's comments to you seem "perverse" and that they "smack of harrassment." 77iis was certainly not the intent. Essentially, every comment, that was included in writing, was made by Mike earlier to Jerry Thompson. The information contained in his memo was not new information. It is unfortunate that you choose to treat it that way. Additional documentation will be appreciated in the area of the adverse impact of traffic on property values, personally, I don't particularly care to ask the nearest realtor about the effects of traffic noise, fumes and danger on adjacent property values. What I was referring to in my letter was substantive information which documents this statement. I am still of the opinion that persons who use streets in Iowa City are, for the most part, the same people who are also paying property taxes. A vast majority of people in Iowa City are paying property taxes either directly or indirectly, and virtually all these people also use the streets in Iowa City. In my statement about the specific neighborhood residents, indicating they were not in agreement with certain statements made, I was attempting to give you some helpful information relative to the citizen participation effort of your study. I do not expect that all residents will concur with every statement that you made. Persons making comments to me did not indicate that they wished these to be forwarded to you and for that reason I will not divulge their names. I'm sure that if they want to contact you they will do so on their own, or perhaps by this time they have already done so. I agree with you,completely, that it is most desirable that you produce a set of reports that the City, the University, and IiUD will be able to stand behind with pride. We are looking forward to the final draft reports. Very truly yours, 464 Dennis R. Kraft Director of Community Development DRK/ssw cc: Neal G. Ren in, City Manager Angela Ryan, Assistant City Attorney Michael Kucharzak, Director of (lousing & Inspection Services 187 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES i l; The University of Iowa COPY 7 Iowa Cily. Iowa 52242 t( � Institute of Urban and Reglonal Research n N246 OH Oakdale Campus 7 (319) 353.3862 June 2, 1.978 ma Dennis R. Kraft Director Of Community Development City of Iowa City 410 S. Washington st. Iowa City, IA 52240 r Dear Dennis: ' With respect to your two letters of May 24, we agree to ad- here to all of the policies listed below, which cover, I believe, the points you have raised in your letters: 1. As I mentioned in my previous letter, the reports upon which City officials and staff made comments -- both oral and wri Alltcommentsave receiv d havebeen beenvcarefullyreflect consideredena inoking•re- 4 visions. 2. A complete set of copies of the final reports in camera- ready form will be distributed prior to publication to the follow- ing offices for their review and comment: IIUD (-,TM (Washington), A IUD TFM (Kansas City), IIUD Area Office (Omaha), and Iowa City's Department of Community Development. (As of this date, I have received nothing from Bill Keating regarding the report Ile is authoring; so as to avoid holding up the others, his report may not be included in the above distribution.) 3. The Institute has generously offered to serve as the distributor of the final reports after the- are I, the City also wishes to distribute reports by mailltanShwouldllike information to this effect printed in the City's copies of the }' final reports, we can arrange this if given a reasonable amount of lead time. The reports will not be copyrighted, and publication is not restricted on research reports produced ii itv auspices- On the mockup of the covers, credit isdgiven ltorboth the City and the University although the arrangement of the type can and will be altered to better suggest the joint participation. 5 ! T 188 I i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Dennis R. Krafte/a/7e %t 4. Please indicate how many rantr of copies the City wishes r, to have for .its own purposes. vithin reason, we should be able to supply your needy without dif:f.iculty. Since report number 16, Final Report will contain summaries of all the others, it is my expectation to run off more of these than of the others, and ; perhaps the City would find it most convenient to rely primarily upon this report for general distribution. 5. Any fees charged by the Institute for reports will be i used solely for the purpose of recovering Institute costs in- t curred in producing and distributing the reports. If there are any other ambiguities which I can clear up for you, please let me know at your earliest convenience. ; Yours truly, Douglass Lee Project Leader C DL:de j cc: N. Berlin M J. Vann f, i I i i iI t 9 �y 189'i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series i I l �1 Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron B. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15, Annotated Bibliography Loma Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each `! Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the Institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 r ............. . ... I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IMEs �R �-�� .; =n'.. ::.Lr2p.5. ..4,.):F..'., -C. r..,e y.ir a{ :ti i� i..'�.ib.' l• rl,;. � .. .. •. ... -...ai 1'(hF q Y:'r. -. I1 f�11 �J �_1 I'4,A1o1 i.., .. _ a': ilk.: , t{ .. .a 1 �49i•� L ' CITY OF IOWA CITY, Depetline( ,1TNE UNIVERSITY OF IOW4,Jn q 41 a 1 �. �p �IAi i7Ll. 41• aii: ll zA a, nV.p� � IV ♦1.� „a cd y..:1 I4Yl. ��pi; 4 , The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perret Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster* Max Selzer* Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain** Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members • Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) GRANT PROGRAM COORDINATION Bill Keating June 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401NES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program, in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City, and the work accomplished by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. The City of Iowa City has developed housing rehabilita- tion and neighborhood site improvements programs as part of its Community Development Block Grant program. Rehabilitation grants and loans have been made to residents of the North Side, and the site improvements program has also recently been extended to the neighborhood. This report describes the eligibility requirements and procedures for participation in these programs, plus other programs that the City and the neighborhood might participate in at some future date. DBL MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 INTRODUCTION , , , , , , . 2 NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD - PHYSICAL OVERVIEW , , , , , . 2 I. EXISTING CITY SPONSORED PROGRAMS . . , , , , , . 3 A. HOUSING REHABILITATION , , , , , . . 3 I. CDBG Rehabilitation Programs .3 2. 312 Loan Program 10 B. NEIGHBORHOOD SITE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM . , . . . . . . 11 C. MINIMUM HOUSING INSPECTION , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 13 II. OTHER FEDERALLY SPONSORED GRANT AND LOAN PROGRAMS . . , , , 14 A. SMALL CITIES PROGRAM , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 14 B. MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAMS , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 15 1. Urban Renewal Mortgage Insurance . 15 2. Home Mortgage Insurance for Low and Moderate Income Families. 16 3. Insured improvement Loans - Urban Ranewal Areas . 16 CONCLUSION , . . . 18 APPENDIX A .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 APPENDIX "B .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 APPENDIX "C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES SUMMARY Neighborhoods, regardless of their age, represent a substantial invest- ment by both the private and public sectors. Like any physical asset, neighborhoods will, if permitted to, deteriorate over time. Conversely, if sufficient care and maintenance is provided, older, well established neighborhoods can provide substantial returns to investors (homeowners, city government) indefinitely. These returns often take the form of rising property values, tax base and tax revenue. In neighborhoods like the north side, where physical deterioration is the consequence of years of homeowner disinvestment, the attraction of new capital in the form of individuals and families willing to rehabili- tate existing homes is difficult, at least on a large scale. If physical conditions can be substantially improved and financial incentives pro- vided, a substantial portion of the risk involved in investing in older neighborhoods is eliminated. 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIo111Es INTRODUCTION While it is one of the objectives of the North Side Neighborhood Preser- vation Study to develop the potential of private initiative in resolving many of the problems and issues facing the neighborhood, there remains a number of problem areas where public sector intervention is both warranted and justified. Two of these problem areas, property disinvestment and the provision of neighborhood site improvements, merit special consideration since it can be argued that normal market mechanisms are incapable of providing satisfactory solutions. It is the purpose of this report to outline the details of and the policies regarding Community Development Block Grant programs currently sponsored by the City which offer potential as corrective measures for the above mentioned problem areas. In addition, several federal programs which offer potential for neighborhood revitalization, and which could be utilized by individuals or city governments, are outlined. NORTH SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD - PHYSICAL OVERVIEW The north side is a mixed use, predominately residential, historically significant neighborhood. The housing stock, while aging, is still larggly sound as evidenced by a recent exterior housing survey in the area . That survey found over 60 percent of the residential buildings to be "structurally sound" while an additional 33 percent were found to have only "minor deficiencies." Owner occupancy, while declining in recent years, predominates in several areas in the neighborhood and is scattered throughout. With its proximity to both the university and the CBD, the neighborhood has come under increasing pressure for higher density redevelopment. Additionally, because of its age, public infrastructure (streets, alleys, sidewalks, etc.) in the area is showing signs of deterioration. These factors, combined with a high concentration of low-income and elderly residents has resulted in significant amounts of property disinvestment. In contrast to this general trend, a resurgence of interest in older homes and more conveniently located neighborhoods, has produced a renewed interest in the north side. Although relatively small in numbers, these interested individuals and families are responsible for the renovation and rehabilitation of many of the north side's architecturally significant homes. In order to stimulate further interest in the revitalization and conser- vation of the north side's housing stock, conditions which enhance the climate for investment should be established. These conditions should include the provision of a stable and rejuvenated physical infrastructure as well as some favorable financial incentives. IExterior Housing Survey, Department of Community Development, City of Iowa City, Summer 1977. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES EXISTING CITY SPONSORED PROGRAMS A. HOUSING REHABILITATION The rehabilitation of the existing housing stock is an extremely important component of any comprehensive neighborhood revitalization strategy, particularly for the north side area. Since homeownership is spread across a wide range of social and economic groups in the area, rehabilitation financing must be equally diverse. The City of Iowa City currently sponsors four types of rehabilitation financing. All four rehabilitation programs are designed to provide the financial incentive, without which many homeowners would be unable or unwilling to undertake substantive rehabilitation efforts. Each separate pro- gram is targeted at a different income class with the level of subsidy or financial incentive, increasing inversely with economic status of the individual or family. For example, individuals with adequate financial means to carry out a rehabilitation project might be reluctant to do so, given the uncer- tainties of the investment unless he could receive financing on favorable terms. At the opposite extreme, an elderly homeowner unable to afford any outlays for rehabilitation may only be induced to undertake a re- habilitation project if the work is 100 percent subsidized. The following section describes the City -sponsored rehabilitation programs in terms of the type of assistance available, eligibility, etc. The reader should gain a general understanding of the programs and for those who may wish to participate in them, an outline of the procedures which are followed in initiating and completing the pro- cess, is provided. 1. CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Program The CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Program is currently funded out of a $500,000 appropriation of Community Development Block Grant monies. The program has been allocated an additional $400,000 for fiscal year 1979. The program was developed at the staff level with the rules, regulations, and policies tailored to the specific needs of Iowa City. Three categories of financial assistance are available to home- owners in the north side, depending upon their need and/or fin- ancial status. Grants of up to $5,000 are available to low- income homeowners over 60. Forgivable loans up to $5,000 are generally available to low-income households. No interest loans up to $17,400 are available to low- and moderate income families with a 15 -year payback period. In general, as a result of MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOFIIEs rehabilitation work financed in whole or in part by a rehab- ilitation loan or grant, the property must, at a minimum, conform to the Rehabilitation Standards. The following sec- tions outline City policy in regard to the Rehabilitation Programs. Goals The following goals have been adopted to serve as guidelines in implementing the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Program: a. Provide financial assistance to low and moderate -income homeowners, who are currently living in substandard housing units, for the purpose of bringing those units up to minimum housing standards. b. Revitalize deteriorating neighborhoods where homeowner disinvestment has caused the neighborhood to decline. C. Conserve the existing supply of housing by extending the life span of existing structures. Rules and Regulations The following rules and regulations have been adopted to govern the operation of the Housing Rehabilitation Program with re- gard to applicant eligibility, includable costs and adminis- trative procedure. Criteria vary between grants, loans and forgivable loans and hence each is treated separately. Al- though these rules and regulations are by no means exhaustive, the reader should gain a general understanding of the require- ments for participation in the program as well as what types of activities are eligible. (1) Rehabilitation Grants Applicant Eli ibility Criteria. Homeowners wishing to appy for rehabilitation grants must meet the following eligibility requirements: (a) The applicant must be the owner -occupant of a 1 or 2 dwelling unit structure that is all residential in character and is within the City Council designated rehabilitation area, or The applicant must be a purchaser -occupant of a 1-2 family all residential dwelling under a land sales contract in effect for at least twelve months, and is within the City Council designated rehabilita- tion area. (b) The applicant must be 60 years of age or older, or handicapped. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOIRES I (c) The app2licant must have a maximum adjusted gross income not in excess of the following: $ 5,750.00 for a 1 person household $ 6,555.00 for a 2 person household $ 7,360.00 for a 3 person household $ 8,165.00 for a 4 person household $ 8,855.00 for a 5 person household $ 9,430.00 for a 6 person household $10,120.00 for a 7 person household $10,810.00 for an 8+ person household (d) The applicant must have liquid assets3 not in excess of the following: $20,000 for a 1 person household $25,000 for a 2+ person household Eligible Costs. Costs which can be financed out of a rehabilitation grant fall into four basic categories: (a) Requirement of Code. When necessary to meet a specific requirement of the Rehabilitation Stand- ards4 a rehabilitation grant may be used, to the extent necessary for: i. The rehabilitation or removal of elements of the dwelling structure, including basic equip- ment, and of other improvements to the proper- ty such as garages, fences, steps, walkways, and driveways. The term "basic equipment" in- cludes such items as heating furnace, water heater, and electrical and sanitary fixtures. ii. The provision of sanitary or other facilities, including the provision, expansion and finish- ing of space necessary to accommodate those facilities. iii. The provision of additional or enlarged bed- rooms, if required by the Rehabilitation Stand- ards. iv. Grading, filling, or landscaping of the grounds, if required by the Rehabilitation Standards. 2To calculate adjusted gross income see Appendix A. 3For purposes of the Housing Rehabilitation Program, liquid assets are defined as property that can be readily converted into cash without appreciable loss in value such as: savings accounts, and/or stocks and bonds. Equity in the dwelling to be rehabilitated or a motor vehicle when used for transportation to and from employment or school is not considered when computing liquid assets. 4Defined as the Requirements of the Minimum Housing Standards Chapter 9.30 of the Municipal Code. For details of the Minimum Housing Standards see Appendix C. 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DF.S MOIRES (b) Energy Conservation Measures. A rehabilitation grant may provide for specific energy conservation measures such as storm windows, caulking and weatherstripping, and attic and wall insulation. (c) Fire Protection Devices. A rehabilitation grant may be used for the installation of early warning fire alarm devices such as smoke detectors. (d) Incipient Violations. In order that a property may be brought up to and maintained at the Rehabilitation Standards level, a rehabilitation grant may be used for rehabilitation work necessary to correct in- cipient as well as actual violations of the Rehabili- tation Standards. An incipient violation exists, if, at the time of inspection, it is thought that the physical condition of an element in the structure will deteriorate into an actual violation in the near future (such as within a year or two). Some examples of incipient violations include: (i) A furnace may be expected soon to become inopera- tive or hazardous because of its age, condition or use. A rehabilitation grant may provide for the replacement of the entire furnace. (ii) A roof has one or more small leaks that can be patched at low cost, but the roof probably will continue to develop leaks. A rehabilitation grant could provide for replacing the entire roof. Other incidental costs which may be financed out of rehabilitation grant funds include those associated with the removal of architectural barriers, build- ing fees and other related costs. (2) Rehab I Loans i Applicant Eligibility Criteria. Homeowners wishing to apply for no -interest rehabilitation loans must meet the following eligibility requirements: (a) The applicant must be the owner -occupant of an all residential structure containing not more than 2 dwelling units. (b) The applicant must have a maximum adjusted gross income not in excess of the following: / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES noIIJES $10,000 for a 1 person household $11,375 for a 2 person household $12,750 for a 3 person household $14,250 for a 4 person household $15,125 for a 5 person household $16,000 for a 6 person household $16,875 for a 7 person household $17,875 for an 8+ person household (c) The applicant must have liquid assets not in excess of those established on the table in Appendix B. Eligible Costs. Rehabilitation loans may be made to finance three categories of costs associated with a rehabilitation project: (a) Requirement of Code. When necessary to meet a specific requirement of the Rehabilitation Standards, a re- habilitation grant may be used, to the extent neces- sary for: i. The rehabilitation or removal of elements of the dwelling structure, including basic equip- ment, and of other improvements to the prop- erty such as garages, fences, steps, walkways, and driveways. The term "basic equipment" in- cludes such items as heating furnace, water heater, and electrical and sanitary fixtures. ii. The provision of sanitary or other facilities, including the provision, expansion and finish- ing of space necessary to accommodate those facilities. iii. The provision of additional or enlarged bed- rooms, if required by the Rehabilitation Standards. iv. Grading, filling, or landscaping of the grounds, if required by the Rehabilitation Standards. (b) General Improvements. A rehabilitation loan which includes funds to cover the cost of meeting the requirements of the Rehabilitation Standards may include, in addition, funds for general improve- ments the owner may wish to perform and can finan- cially afford to do. The maximum dollar amount available for general improvements shall be limited to 50% of the cost of correcting to Rehabilitation Standards, and incipient work. 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES (c) Incidental Costs. A rehabilitation loan may be used to finance those costs incidental to the rehabilitation project including building permits, architectural services, appraisal fees,title reports, fees for recording and filing, termite inspection, bank serving charges, hazard insurance, current accruals for taxes, insurance and special assessments, credit reports and debtor's life insurance. (3) Forgivable Rehabilitation Loans Applicant Eligibility Criteria. Homeowners wishing to apply for forgivable rehabilitation oans must meet the following eligibility requirements: (a) The applicant must be the owner -occupant of a 1 or 2 family dwelling which is located in the designated area within the city. (b) The applicant must have an adjusted annual income for the household which does not exceed: $5,000 for a 1 person household $5,700 for a 2 person household $6,400 for a 3 person household $7,100 for a 4 person household $7,700 for a 5 person household $8,200 for a 6 person household $8,800 for a 7 person household $9,400 for an 8+ person household (c) The applicant must have liquid assets not in excess of: Applicant under 60 years of age or who is not disabled: $10,000 for a 1 person household $15,000 for a 2 person household $20,000 for a 3 person household Applicant over 60 years of age or who is disabled: $20,000 for a 1 person household $25,000 for a 2+ person household Eligible Costs. The eligible costs are the same as those for Rehab I loans. 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK FOR CDBG REHABILITATION PARTICIPANT The following steps cover the typical procedure for initiating and completing the rehabilitation process: (1) Prospective participant completes questionnaire interview and then is advised as to general program objectives and the avail- ability of assistance to meet participant's needs. If applicant ap- pears to be eligible, a credit check is performed through which data is verified to confirm homeownership, income, assets, etc. (2) Property is inspected and all needed repairs are listed room by room, interior and exterior. (3) Work write-up is prepared including cost estimates. (4) Feasibility of improvements is discussed with applicant based on the work write-up, the property's value, and the purposes of the rehabilitation program. (5) Financial arrangements are defined based on applicant's eligibility for a grant and/or loan, and applicants are advised of the conditions under which such financial assistance is made. (6) Construction contract is re are! including specifications or improvements quality, quantity, and brand of materials) to submit to two contractors for bids. i (7) Conference is held to finalize arrangements for contractor selection, financial arrangements, and work completion process. (8) Improvements are supervised regularly to assure quality workmanship and satisfactory project completion. (9) Follow-up inspection of property is performed, after all improvements have been made and financial arrangements are completed, to assess participant's satisfaction and complete forms to close out participant's file. Timing. Since circumstances vary considerably from applicant to applicant, no set time framework can be established. Based on experience to date the admin- istrative procedures can take from 45 to 60 days. Actual work time will depend in large part on the availability of contractors. N MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nolnEs 2. 312312 Loam Program The 312 housing rehabilitation program provides low interest loans to homeowners who are unable to secure funds elsewhere at comparable rates (currently, the rate is 3%). The program provides up to $17,400 in rehabilitation financing for single family homes; that amount is expected to increase to $27,000 under revised guidelines under consideration. Eligibility Requirements. Eligibility for the program is based largely on the ability to repay, ratherthan on income or assets. Additionally, the property's debt carrying capacity is taken into consideration. Eligible Costs. Eligible costs are essentially the same as for the CDBG rehabilitation program. Procedures. The City rehabilitation staff takes applications for the 312 loan program. The applications are then forwarded to HUD regional offices in Kansas City for processing and appraisal. Under revised procedures which are expected to be implemented in the near future, local staff will be permitted to conduct both property appraisals and inspections, and hence speed up the process considerably. North Side Applicability. There are numerous structures in the area which have been allowed to deteriorate, but which retain their original architectural character. Many of these homes have already undergone extensive restoration largely through privately financed efforts. The availability of low cost loans can make the rehabilitation and restoration of these structures even more appealing. Funds available for the 312 loan program are currently in short supply, however, it is expected that additional funding will become available in the near future. Additional Information. Additional information on any of the rehabilitation programs may be obtained through: Housing Rehabilitation Programs Civic Center 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 354-1800, Ext. 328 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tdO1NEs PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS The physical character of a neighborhood is determined in large part by two components: First, the nature and condition of the housing stock; secondly, the condition of public improvements. Traditionally, private homeowners have been responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of their property and the adjoining portion of unpaved right-of-way. Cities, Iowa City included, traditionally take on only the responsibility for the maintenance and repair of streets, alleys, sidewalks and underground improvements such as sewer and water mains. Utilities are normally responsible for their respective improvements, such as electric or telephone lines. Providing streetscape amenities, such as trees, has until recently been largely at the whim of the individual property owners. Public involvement in enhancing the physical character of neighborhoods by providing improvements other than streets, alleys and sidewalks is a relatively new phenomenon and is based on the assumption that such improvements benefit more than the individual homeowner, in addition to stimulating private investment in the housing stock. Neighborhood Site Improvement Program Developed in response to the need to revitalize and improve public infrastructure in targeted rehabilitation areas, the Neighborhood Site Improvements Program was originally funded out of second and third year CDBG allocation totaling $190,000. An additional allocation of $220,000 has been made for fiscal 1919. Initially implemented in the Longfellow School area, the program is now ready for implementation in the north side area. The program is designed to supplement the Housing Rehabilitation Program by providing public investment in physical improvements and thereby create a healthy climate for private investment in the housing stock. An extremely strong citizen participation element is present in the program, with residents involved in all phases of the process. As developed, this process involves four steps: a. The neighborhood is divided up into several areas and meetings are held with residents to explain the program and to solicit area residents' initial suggestions for site improvements; b. City staff then develops more provement proposals, including distributes these proposals in naire to all area residents; 11 refined and specific im- sites and locations, and the form of a question - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES C. A general meeting is then held in which residents discuss the merits of a vote on each proposal; in turn, each pro- posal is ranked according to its relative importance to the neighborhood. d. These specific recommendations are then forwarded to the City Council for their ultimate approval and authoriza- tion to begin work. Some general guidelines have been developed with respect to the type of improvements which the City will fund under this program. Overall, each proposal is considered on its ability to meet the following criteria: (1) Initiated by Neighborhood Resident. It is considered considered consistent with the citizen participation emphasis of the program that proposals be derived, at least in rough form, either through the neighborhood meetings, surveys, or through individual citizen contact. (2) Affordable Implementation Costs. Proposals which exceeded the approximate budget allocation for that area were automatically excluded. In addition, such high cost items as alley paving which would consume a considerable portion of that budget, while benefiting a relatively small por- tion of the area properties and residents were normally eliminated. (3) No Long -Run City Budget Impacts. This criteria prohibits Re implementation of a project which would require long run capital and/or operating expenditure commitments by the City. (4) Within Staff Capability to Implement. This criteria is intended to assure that the actual work could be per- formed by City personnel, or that it could be negotiated for contract through City staff. (5) Conformity with Program Goals and Objectives. Simply stated this criteria is designed to assure that the proposal will contribute to the revitalization of the neighborhood either through direct physical improvement and/or stimulating private investment/improvement. (6) Conformiwith HUD Regulations. The proposal must fall under thety list of eligible activities as defined by the regulation governing the CDBG program. (7) No Alternative Funding Sources Currently Available. Pro- jects which could receive funding under other grant pro- grams would generally receive a lower priority. 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nOINEs North Side Applicability At neighborhood meetings conducted at the outset of the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study, residents expressed their opin- ions regarding what they considered to be some of the major physical problems in their respective areas. These problems were analyzed and solutions proposed in a preliminary report entitled "Neighborhood Site Improvements Program"5. Although some of the proposals outlined in the report would fall outside the established guidelines for improvements, they represent a starting point from which residents and City staff can gain an understanding of the types of physical improvements which could benefit the north side area. It is extremely important that area residents be involved in the CDBG site improvements program when the program begins late in the spring of 1918. Presence at the initial neighborhood meetings, and subsequent participation in the survey questionnaire and other meetings is essential to the success of the program in eliminating blighting influences and enhancing the overall physical environment of the north side. Additional Information For additional information contact: Department of Community Development Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa 52240 354-1800, Ext. 324 C. MINIMUM HOUSING INSPECTION In an effort to assure safe and sanitary housing in renter -occupied dwelling units, the City, with funding from the Community Develop- ment Block Grant Program, has undertaken a systematic program of rental housing inspections in the central portion of the city, in- cluding the north side. These inspections will be performed periodically and at each in- spection a notification of compliance or noncompliance is issued. A reinspection is then performed to verify the improvements made to noncomplying structures. If all requirements have been met, a certificate of compliance is then issued. Follow-up inspections are performed until a noncompliant structures satisfies code re- quirements. Depending upon the particular code violation or viola- tions involved, owners are given one to six months to correct de- ficiencies before a follow-up inspection is scheduled. Inspection of rental units in older neighborhoods is extremely im- portant, not only for the health and safety of the renters, but also it provides some measure of assurance to surrounding property own- ers, that investments which they may wish to make in their property, won't be detracted from by a poorly maintained building next to them. 5North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study, Vicki Williams, Author. 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES II. OTHER FEDERALLY SPONSORED GRANT AND LOAN PROGRAMS A number of federally -sponsored grant and loan programs are currently available either to individuals or local governments for a variety of purposes including mortgages, housing rehabilitation, neighborhood im- provements, etc. The following is a discussion of some of these pro- grams and their applicability in the north side area. A. SMALL CITIES PROGRAM As a result of statutory changes included in the Housing and Com- munity Development Act of 1977, HUD has substantially revised the regulations governing discretionary community development block grants. The discretionary program is now entitled The Small Cities Program. The Small Cities Program is designed to provide grants to local governments to undertake the same community development activities as may be funded in the entitlement grant program. Given this continued broad definition of eligible activities, it would appear that a variety of neighborhood conservation/revitalization programs could be retained or instituted by the City. Two types of grants are available through the program - comprehen- sive and single purpose. These two types of grants can be differ- entiated largely by the number of activities undertaken under each. The comprehensive program grant application is evaluated on the following criteria: 1. That the comprehensive program addresses a substantial por- tion of the identifiable community development needs within a defined concentrated area; 2. Involves two or more activities that bear a relationship to each other excluding administration, planning, and management, and which either in terms of support or necessity, are car- ried out in a coordinated manner; 3. Have a beneficial impact within a reasonable period of time; 4. Be developed through assessment of the applicant's community development, housing, and economic needs. The single purpose program provides funds for one or more projects consisting of an activity or set of activities designed to meet a specific community development need. Funds are available to address serious problems with housing needs or economic conditions which principally affect persons of low and moderate -income, or public facilities which affect the public health or safety. 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOINES The amount of money available for to the city's population, as well posed. Preliminary indications a maximum amount available will be comprehensive programs. North Side Applicability_ these programs varies according as the activities which are pro- -e that in most instances the :wo million dollars or less for Because of the multiplicity of problems (homeowner disinvestment, deteriorating relatively well defined boundaries, and of low and moderate -income individuals, be targeted as the small cities program comprehensive grant. facing the north side infrastructure, etc.) its its high concentration the area is well suited to area, particularly for a Such a grant would permit existingprograms (housing rehabiliraLlul, site improvements, code enforcement) to be continued and acqulsisibly be expanded. Additional programs such as op en saceclearance of structures which are beyond rehabilitation and a revolving loan fund for single family home purchases by low and moderate -income individuals are all program possibilities which could contribute significantly to the rejuvenation and revitaliza- tion on the neighborhood. MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAMS While homeownership in the north side has been on the decline in recent years, there remains a substantial proportion of owner -occupied dwellings in the area. Due to the modest nature of the single family structures in the neighborhood, they represent tlan anportant icuarly for housing resource for the.community, p art moderate -income individuals and families. e income the vidual Fora variety of rasons, ageeor locati nuofnthehf structure,mortgage�financing or family, is often difficult to obtain, making homeow } rship impossible or many. One way of making mortgages easier to secure is to reduce the risk to the lender. The federal government, through the Depart- ment of Housing and pUrban Development sponsors a number of mortgage guarantee designated urban qualifies fore numbers. of t The north sid, newal ofadditif is part onalfederally-sponsoredemortgageea, guarantee programs. The following is a brief description of these programs and their applicable rules and regulations. 1. Urban Renewal Mort a e Insurance: Section 220 The section 220 mortgage insurance program is designed to pro - or rehab- vide for oniofustructures9located�innce federallytherchase assisted urban ilitrenewal or code enforcement areas. 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES DIOINEs 2. 3. Structures containing one to 11 units are eligible for the program, and the amount of mortgage which is insurable varies according to the number of units in the structure. Single family units qualify for up to $60,000; two or three family structures up to $65,000; four family structures up to $75,000, plus $7,700 for each family unit over four. There are no income limitations for the program, however, the property's debt carrying capacity is a major consideration in determining eligibility. HUD will generally insure up to 90 percent of the first $25,000, Plus 95 percent of the next $10,000, plus 80 percent of all amounts over $35,000 up to the statutory limit. The Section 221 program is primarily designed to provide mortgage insurance for individuals displaced by government action such as code enforcement, condemnation, etc. While this type of action is not foreseen on any significant scale in the north side, there are structures which are beyond economical rehabilitation and could be subject to condemnation at some future time. This program willinsure mortgage up to $31,000 for single family homes; $35,000 for two family homes; $48,600 for three family homes; and up to $59,400 in four family homes. The individual or family is required to provide only a three percent down payment. Insured Improvement Loans - Urban Renewal Areas: Section 220(h The Section 220(h) program is designed primarily to insure mortgages which can be used to finance substantial home im- provements, repairs and alterations to structures in urban renewal or code enforcement areas such as the north side. Structures having one to 11 units are eligible and the program will insure mortgages of up to $12,000 per unit up to four units. Structures containing five to 11 units are eligible for a maximum of $40,000. While this program may more aptly be described as a housing rehabilitation program it does have potential beyond the normal confines of existing rehabilitation guidelines. First, a structure does not have to be in sub -standard condition to qualify, and hence, an individual with a structure in relatively sound condition could build an addition or other substantial improvement through the program. Secondly, since existing rehabilitation programs are designed primarily for single or two-family structures, this program offers multiple dwelling unit owners the opportunity to make substantial improvements in their structures at favorable terms. 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INEs Additional Information Additional information on all mortgage guarantee programs may be obtained from: Department of Housing and Urban Development Des Moines Insuring Office 259 Federal Building 210 Walnut Street Des Moines, Iowa 50309 (515) 284-4512 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110I11ES CONCLUSION While dramatic changes in the physical condition of the north side cannot be expected to occur overnight, as a result of implementing the programs described in this report, it can reasonably be expected that over a two to three year period substantive improvements will be evi- dent. Experience in other cities undergoing neighborhood revitaliza- tion indicates that such efforts begin very slowly, but as improve- ments are made, and homeowner investment follows, the rate and level of additional private investment accelerates. Property values typically begin to increase as the area and its existing housing stock become more attractive. A noticeable increase in the care and maintenance of all property (including renter and owner -occupied) becomes evident as property owners realize that such efforts enhance the value of their property and can often mean a substantial return on it. IU MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIREs APPENDIX "A" CALCULATION OF ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME 1. Add together all earned income (wages, etc.) and multiply by 90%. 2. Add together all fixed income (social security, etc.) and multiply by 75%. 3. Total the adjusted income. 4. Subtract $300 for each dependent child under 18. 5. New adjusted total income. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES APPENDIX IIBII TABLE OF MAXINRN ASSET LEVELS AI).11 •, I_I17 911. s,no % to,000 1I.ow U.M. :0,ao :C." :0.W :P.M. Mow S, Or.19 ], ]0f.0 1• r,s00 15.M )0,000 Mwo )0,000 .101M.101M:O,OM MIN 1,NIf •,0001• 9,wo 11,no )e,wr 20.000 :O,wO :0,000 :0,000 :0,000 1,1i9.f1 1,Sw 1. I,S00 11,]00 11,000 >0, 000 :n, ay :O,MO :0,ro0 %,CIM 1,%r.lf 7.000 ,. 1.wo 2,7fo u,wo ]0.000 ]0.000 :0.040 :o.om MM ),ul.n >,Sw 1. 7.sw 13,000 13,000 MON :0.000 :0,000 20,000 1,%I. r9 117,000 1,000 a ),000 11,130 11,000 11,000 MON w.wo ]o,w0 10,000 I,i%.91 I,sw le 1,]00 IL,sm Is,Ow 13.000 11,wo 13,000 70.000 :0,000 1, %0, 9, ;,wo le 6.000 9.7s0 11.000 I1,Ow I),Ow 11,4700 M. 10,000 1,tl0.M t.500'. ssw 9,000 13,0:0 IS.M ".Wo 13,000 u,wo 1v,000 10,000 to S.Ow I, iio I],ow 14,wo Ii,000 11,00] 13.000 11,000 10,49'.M 10.00 ,e lsw n,000 13,000 11,000 13,000 S6.0" II'M 14,91;.;r II,Ow I. )sw 11,000 13,000 14,000 15'M11,000 13,4%.;; 100,000 11,000 to 110,000 it. 12,000 13,000 ),.No 1S.ow 11.9%.% 11. wo,• lo.wo IO.aw Il,wO t],000 13.m14,000 11,419.1; 13.Sw 1. lo.wo IO,wo lo.w0 11,wo 11.000 11,000 11,9%.h U.= to 10,w0 MM II,Ow 11.M Il,sw le IU.a IO,Ow II,Ow 11.%r.% 14,000 is 10.000 10, ON 01, % u,sro 1. 00,000 ]1,990.99 IS,mo Is IO,ow IS,OL% IS,sro I. lo,ow Is.9)I.lf 11,00 a • 10,w0 11,4ff.% II,Sw 1• 10,000 11,%7,1, 13,0w 1• 10.000 11,471.1; It,sw a MON Pd]n.H Handicapped or elderly individuals and families are allowed assets of the following amounts: 1 person $20,000 2+ person $25,000 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRLS APPENDIX "C" MINIMUM HOUSING CODE CHAPTER 9.30.1 GENERAL PROVISIONS 9.30.1 General Provisions. The following general provisions shall apply in the interpretation and enforcement of this ordinance. A. Lein•slatiye Finding. it is hereby found that there exist and may in the future exist, within the City of Iowa City, premises, dwellings, dwelling units, rooming units, or parts thereof, which by reason of their structure, equipment, sanitation, maintenance, use, or occupancy affect or are likely to affect adversely the public health (including the physical, mental, and social well-being of persons and families), safety, and general welfare. To correct and prevent the existence of such adverse conditions, and to achieve and maintain such levels of residential environmental quality as will protect and promote public health, safety, and general welfare, it is further found that the establishment and enforcement of minimum housing standards are required. B. Purposes. It is hereby declared that the purpose of this ordinance is to protect, preserve, and promote the physical and mental health and social well-being of the people, to prevent and control the incidence of com- municable diseases, to reduce environmental hazards to health, to regulate privately and publicly owned dwellings for the purpose of maintaining adequate sanitation and public health, and to protect the safety of the people and to promote the general welfare by legislation which shall be applicable to all dwellings now in existence or hereafter constructed. It is hereby further declared that the purpose of this ordinance is to insure that the quality of housing is adequate for protection of public health, safety and general welfare, including: establishment of minimum standards for basic equipment and facilities for light, ventilation, and thermal conditions, for safety from fire and accidents, for the use and location and amount of space for human occupancy, and for an adequate level of maintenance; determination of the responsibilities of owners, operators and occupants of dwellings; and provision for the administration and enforce- ment thereof. C. scope. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply uniformly to the con- struction, maintenance, use and occupancy of all residential buildings and structures, where applicable, and shall apply uniformly to the alteration, repair, equipment, use, occupancy and maintenance of all existing resi- dential buildings and structures within the jurisdiction of the City of Iowa City irrespective of the date of construction. D. Title. This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Housing Main- tenance and Occupancy Code of the City of Iowa City, hereinafter referred to as "the Housing Code". CHAPTER 9.30.2 DEFINITIONS The following definitions shall only apply in the interpretation and enforcement of the Housing Code: Accessory Structure shall mean a detached structure which is not used, or not intended to be used, for living or sleeping by human occupants. 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Adjoining Grade shall Itean the average elevation, of the ground which extends three 3 feet from the perimeter of the dwelling. Yproved shall mean approved by or in accordance with regulations established by the Housing Inspector. Attic shall mean any story situated wholly or partly within the roof and so designed, arranged, or built to be used for business, storage, or habitation. Basement shall mean a portion of a building located partly underground, but having three and one-half (31-,) feet or more of its floor -to -ceiling height above the average grade of the adjoining ground. Bath shall mean a bathtub or shower stall properly connected with both hot and cold water lines. Cellar shall mean a portion of a building located partly or wholly underground and having less than three and one-half (3�) feet of its floor -to -ceiling height above the average grade of the adjoining ground. Central Heating System shall mean a single system supplying heat to one (1) or more dwelling units or more than one (1) rooming unit. Communal shall mean used or shared by, or intended to be used or shared by, the occupants of two (2) or more rooming units, or two (2) or more dwelling units. Court shall mean an open unoccupied space, other than a yard, on the same lot with a dwelling. A court not extending to the street or front or rear yard is an inner court. A court extending to the street or front yard or rear yard is an outer court. Dining Room shall mean a habitable room used or intended to be used for the purpose of eating, but not for cooking or the preparation of meals. Duplex shall mean any habitable structure containing two (2) single dwelling units. Nelling shall mean any building or structure, except temporary housing, which is wholly or partly used or intended to be used for living or sleeping by human occupants and includes any appurtenances attached thereto. DwellinocaUnit shall mean any habitable room or group of adjoining habitable rooms ted within a dwelling and forming a single unit with facilities which are used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, and eating of meals. Egress shall mean an arrangement of exit routes to assure a safe means of exit from buildings. Extermination shall mean the control and elimination of insects, rodents, or other pests by eliminating their harborage places; by removing or making inac- cessible materials that may serve as their food; by poisoning, spraying, fum- igating, trapping; or by any other recognized and legal pest elimination methods approved by the Housing Inspector. Family shall mean one (1) person or two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption or placement by a governmental or social service agency, occupying a living unit as an individual, housekeeping organization. A family may also be two (2), but not more than two persons not related by blood, marriage or adoption. 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- M 14011JES Garbage shall mean animal and vegetable waste resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking, or consumption of food; and shall also mean combustible waste material. The term shall also include paper, rags, cartons, boxes, wood, excelsior, rubber, leather, tree branches, yard trimmings, and other combustible materials. Habitable Room shall mean a room or enclosed floor space used, or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, or eating purposes; excluding bathrooms, toilet rooms, laundries, pantries, foyers, or communicating corridors, closets, storage spaces, and stairways. Housing Inspector shall mean the official or officials of the City of Iowa City appointed to administer the provisions of the Housing Code. Infestation shall mean the presence, within or around a dwelling, of any in- sects, rodents, or other pests. Kitchen shall mean a habitable room used or intended to be used for cooking or the preparation of meals. Kitchenette shall mean a food preparation area not less than forty (40) square feet in area. Kitchen Sink shall mean a sink of a size and design adequate for the purpose of washing eating and drinking utensils, located in a kitchen, properly connected with a cold water line and a hot water line. Lavatory Basin shall mean a handwashing basin which is properly connected with both hot and cold water lines and which is separate and distinct from a kitchen sink. Living Room shall mean a habitable room within a dwelling unit which is used, or intended to be used, primarily for general living purposes. Multiple Dwelling shall mean any dwelling containing three (3) or more dwelling units. Occupant shall mean any person, including owner or operator, living, sleeping, cooking in, or having actual possession of a dwelling, dwelling unit, or a rooming unit. Operator shall mean any person who rents to another or who has custody or control of a building, or part thereof, in which dwelling units or rooming units are let, or who has custody or control of the premises (for rooming houses, see Rooming House Operator). Owner shall mean any person who has legal title or equitable title, or has custody or control of any dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit as executor/ executrix, administrator/administratrix, trustee, or guardian of the estate of the owner. Permit shall mean a certificate certifying that the unit for which it is issued was in compliance with the applicable provisions of this Chapter when last inspected. Said Certificate shall expire one (1) year from the date of is- suance, unless sooner suspended or revoked as hereinafter provided, and shall be renewed annually. Person shall mean any individual, firm, corporation, association, or partner- ship. 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IMEs Plumbinc shall mean ario include all of the following supplied facilities and equipment: gas pipes, gas -burning equipment, water pipes, garbage disposal units, waste pipes, toilets, sinks, lavatories, bathtubs, shower baths, in- stalled dishwashers and clothes washing machines, water heating devices, catch basins, drains, vents, and any other similar supplied fixtures together with all connections to water, sewer or gas lines. Premises shall mean a platted or unplatted lot or part thereof, either occupied or unoccupied by any dwelling or accessory structure. Privaa shall mean the existence of conditions which will permit a person or persons to carry out an activity commenced without interruption or interference by unwanted persons. Refuse shall mean waste materials (except human waste) including garbage, rubbish, ashes and dead animals. Refuse Container shall mean a watertight container that is constructed of metal, or other durable material impervious to rodents, that is capable of being serviced without creating unsanitary conditions. Roomer shall mean an occupant of a rooming house who is not a member of the family of the rooming house operator of that rooming house, and shall also mean an occupant of a dwelling unit who is not a member of the family occupying the dwelling unit. Roominq House shall mean any dwelling, or that part of any dwelling, containing one 1 or more rooming units, in which space is let by the owner or operator to three (3) or more roomers. 1. Rooming House -Type I shall mean a rooming house in which space is let to more than two 2 but fewer than nine (9) roomers. 1 VRooming House -T a 11 shall mean a rooming house in which space is let to nine 9 or more roomers. Rooming House Operator shall mean any person who rents to another or who has custody or control of a building, or part thereof, in which he resides and in which rooming units are let. ( Rooming Unit shall mean any room or group of rooms forming a single habitable unit in a rooming house used or intended to be used for living and sleeping, but t not for cooking or eating of meals. Rubbish shall mean inorganic waste material consisting of combustible and/or non-combustible materials. Supplied shall mean paid for, furnished, provided by, or under the control of the owner or operator. Temporary Housing shall mean any tent, trailer, motor home or other structure used for human shelter which is designed to be transportable and which is not attached to the ground, to another structure, or to any utilities system on the same premises for more than thirty (30) consecutive days. Toilet shall mean a water closet, with a bowl and trap made in one (1) piece, which is of such shape and form and which holds a sufficient quantity of water so that no fecal matter will collect on the surface of the bowl and which is 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOlecs equipped with flushing rims which permit the bowl to be properly flushed and scoured when water is discharged through the flushing rim. Meaning of Certain Words. Whenever the words "dwelling", "dwelling unit", "rooming house", "rooming unit", or "premises" are used in this Chapter, they shall be construed as though they were followed by the words "or any part thereof". CHAPTER 9.30.3 INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Enforcement Notice: Authority. The Housing Inspector is hereby authorized to administer and enforce the provisions of the Housing Code, and to make inspections to determine the condition of all dwellings, dwelling units, rooming units, structures, and premises located within the City of Iowa City, in order that he/she may perform his/her duty of safeguarding the safety and welfare of the occupants of dwellings and of the general public. B. Access by Owner or Operator. Every occupant of a dwelling, dwelling unit, or rooming unit shall give the owner or operator thereof, or his agent or employee, access to any part of such dwelling, dwelling unit, rooming unit, or its premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of effecting such maintenance, making such repairs or making such alterations as are neces- sary to effect compliance with the provisions of the Housing Code or with any lawful rule or regulation adopted or any lawful notice or order issued pursuant to the provisions of the Housing Code. C. Riaht of Entry. Wherever necessary to make an inspection to enforce any of Uprovisions of the Housing Code, or whenever the Housing Inspector or his/her authorized representative has reasonable cause to believe that there exists in any dwelling, dwelling units, rooming units, structures, or premises any condition which makes such unit or premises in violation of any provision of the Housing Code, or in response to a complaint that an alleged violation of the provision of the Housing Code or of applicable rules or regulations pursuant thereto may exist, the Housing Inspector or his/her authorized representative may enter such unit or premises at all reasonable times to inspect the same or to perform any duty imposed upon the Housing Inspector by the (lousing Code; provided that if such unit or premises be occupied, he/she shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other person having charge or control of the building or premises and request entry. The Housing Inspector or authorized repre- sentative shall at such time: 1. Identify himself/herself and his/her position. 2. Explain why entry is sought. 3. Explain that the owner or other person having charge or control of the premises may refuse, without penalty, entry without an Order to Allow Inspection. 4. Explain that if entry is refused, the Housing Inspector may apply to a Magistrate for an Order to Allow Inspection. D. Order to Allow Inspection. The Housing Inspector is hereby authorized to conduct consensual inspections of any dwelling within Iowa City, Iowa, on a reasonable and regular inspectional basis or upon request or complaint, in order to perform the duty of safeguarding the health and safety of the 25 IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rIo1NEs occupants or the public. If consent to inspect the building is withheld by any person or persons having the lawful right to exclude, the Housing Inspector shall apply to a Magistrate of the Iowa District Court in and for Johnson County for an order to allow inspection of the building. Pena. No owner or occupant or any other person having charge, care or control of any dwelling, dwelling unit, rooming unit, structure, or premises shall fail or neglect, after presentation of an Order to Allow Inspection or a Search Warrant, to properly permit entry therein by the Housing Inspector or his/her authorized representative for the purpose of inspection and examination pursuant to the Housing Code. Any person vio- lating this subdivision shall be fined not more than S10D or imprisoned in County Jail for not more than thirty (30) days. Evidence. Evidence obtained by use of an Order to Allow Inspection may be used to effectuate the purposes and provisions of the Housing Code in any ensuing action brought by the City for a violation of the Housing Code. Service of Notice. Whenever the Housing Inspector determines that there has been a violation, or that there are reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a violation of any provision of the Housing Code or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto, he shall give notice of such violation or alleged violation to the person or persons responsible there- for. Such notice shall: 1. Be put in writing; 2. Include a description of the real estate sufficient for identifi- cation; 3. Include a statement of the reason or reasons why it is being issued; 4. Allow a reasonable time for the performance of any act it re- quires; 5. Be served upon the owner, or the operator, or the occupant, as the case may require; provided that such notice shall be deemed to be properly served upon such owner, or upon such operator, or upon such occupant, if a copy thereof is delivered to him per- sonally or, if not found, by leaving a copy thereof at his usual place of abode, in the presence of someone of the family of suitable age and discretion who shall be informed of the contents thereof, by registered mail or by certified mail, with return receipt requested, to his last known address, or if the reg- istered or certified letter with the copy is returned with a receipt showing it has not been delivered to him, by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous place in or about the dwelling affected by the notice. Such notice may contain an outline of remedial action which, if taken, will effect compliance with the provisions of the housing Code and with rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. i. Be effective notice to anyone having interest in the property whether recorded or not at the time of giving such notice; and shall be effective against any subsequent owner of the premises as long as the violation exists and there remains an official copy of the notice in a public file maintained by the Department of Housing and Inspection Services. Housing �A peals Board. In order to provide for final interpretation of the provisions of the Housing Code and to hear appeals provided for hereunder, 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES nolMts there is hereby established a Housing Appeals Board consisting of five (5) members and two (2) alternates who are members of the Housing Commission, none of whom are employees of the City. The City Manager shall designate a Secretary to the Board. The Board shall be appointed by the Council and shall hold office at its pleasure. The Board shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a copy to the Housing Inspec- tor. Appeals to the Board shall be processed in accordance with the pro- visions contained in the Iowa City Administrative Procedures Ordinance. Copies of all rules and regulations adopted by the Board shall be delivered to the Housing Inspector who shall make them freely accessible to the public. Appeals. Any person affected by any written order of a Housing Code viola- tion, order suspending a housing permit, notice of intent to placard, or notice of elibigility for a rent escrow program may appeal to the Housing Appeals Board in accordance with the procedures of the Iowa City Administra- tive Procedures Ordinance. If the Board sustains or modifies such notice, it shall be deemed to be an order and the owner, operator, or occupant, as the case may require, shall comply with all provisions of such order within a reasonable period of time. J. Other Remedies. No provision or section of this ordinance shall in any way limit any other remedies available under the provisions of the Housing Occupancy and Maintenance Code or any other applicable law. K. Emerciency Orders. Whenever the Housing Inspector, in the enforcement of the Housing Code, finds that an emergency exists which requires immediate action to protect the public health or safety, he may, without notice or hearing, issue an order reciting the existence of such an emergency and requiring that such action be taken as he deems necessary to meet such emergency. If necessary, the Housing Inspector may order that the premises be vacated forthwith and that they shall not be reoccupied until the order to make repairs has been complied with. Notwithstanding other provisions of the Housing Code, such order shall be effective immediately, or in the time and manner prescribed by the order itself. Hearing. Any person to whom such order is directed shall comply therewith, but upon petition to the Board shall be afforded a hearing as prescribed in the Housing Code. After such hearing, depending upon the findings of the Board as to whether the provisions of the Housing Code and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto have been complied with, such Board shall continue such order or modify it or revoke it. Nothwith- standing other provisions of the Housing Code, every notice served by the Housing Inspector shall be regarded as an order. CHAPTER 9.30.4 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR BASIC EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES No person shall occupy or let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit for the purpose of living, sleeping, cooking or eating therein which does not comply with the following requirements: 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES A. relied Facility. Every supplied facility, piece of equipment or utility required shall be constructed or installed so that it will function safely and shall be maintained in satisfactory working condition. B. Kitchens. Every dwelling unit shall have a kitchen room or kitchenette equipped with the following: 1. It shall include an approved kitchen sink. 2. It shall contain a refrigerator (in proper working order) with an adequate food storage capacity. 3. It shall contain a stove or range in proper working order. C. Toilet Required. Every dwelling unit shall contain a toilet. 0. Bath Required. Every dwelling unit shall contain a bath. E. Lavatory Basin Required. Every dwelling unit shall contain a lavatory basin within the room containing the toilet. F. Privacy In a Room Containing Toilet and Bath. Every toilet and every bath shall be contained within a room or within separate rooms which afford privacy for a person within said rooms. G. Water Heating Facilities Required. Every kitchen sink, bath, and lavatory basin required in accordance with the provision of the Housing Code, shall be properly connected with supplied water heating facilities. Every sup- plied water heating facility shall be properly connected and shall be capable of heating water to such a temperature as to permit an adequate amount of water to be drawn at every kitchen sink and lavatory basin re- quired under the provisions of the Housing Code at a temperature of not less than one hundred twenty (120) degrees Fahrenheit (48 degrees C). Such supplied water heating facilities shall be capable of meeting the require- ments of this subsection where the required dwelling or dwelling unit heating facilities are not in operation. H. Connection of Sanitary Facilities to Water and Sewer System. Every kitchen sink, toilet, lavatory basin and bath shall be in good working condition and properly connected to an approved water and sewer system. 1. Exits. 1. Two means of egress required: (a) Every dwelling unit and rooming unit shall have access to two (2) independent, unobstructed means of egress remote from each other. At least one (1) shall be a doorway which discharges directly or via corridors or stairways or both to the exterior of the building at ground level. 2. Every exit from every dwelling shall comply with the following require- ments: (a) It shall be kept in a reasonably good state of repair. (b) All existing stairways of four (4) or more risers shall have at least one (1) handrail and those stairways which are five (5) feet or more in width, or which are open on both sides, shall have a handrail on each side. Stairways which are less than five (5) feet in width shall have a handrail on the left hand side as one mounts the stairs and on the open side, if any. 28 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES noltlEs (c) All hanarails shall be substantial and s11311 be located between thirty (30) and thirty-four (34) inches above the nose of the stair treads. (d) All platforms accessible to occupants and situated more than two (2) feet above adjacent areas shall be protected by substantial guardrails at least thirty-six (36) inches high. (e) All stairs and steps shall have a riser height of not more than eight (8) inches and a tread width of not less than nine (9) inches. (f) All exterior doors and windows below the second floor of a dwelling shall be equipped with a safe functioning locking device. (g) During the portion of each year when the Housing Inspector deems it necessary for protection against the elements and cold, every door, opening directly from a dwelling unit or rooming unit to outdoor space, shall have supplied storm doors with a self- closing device; and every window or other device with openings to the outdoor space shall likewise be supplied with storm windows, except where such other device for protection against the elements and cold is provided such as insulating glass, and insulated metal exterior doors. (h) No existing fire escape shall be deemed a sufficient means of egress unless it is in compliance with the Building and Fires Codes of Iowa City. In basement units where one means of egress is a window, such window shall open directly to the street or yard, shall be at least twelve (12) square feet in area clear of sash frame, and shall open readily. Basement or Cellar Under Entrance Floor - Every dwelling shall have a basement, cellar or excavated floor space under the entire entrance floor, at least three (3) feet in depth or shall be elevated above the ground so that there will be a clear air space of at least eighteen (18) inches between the top of the ground and the floor joist so as to ensure vent- ilation and protection from dampness; provided, however, that cement floor may be laid on the ground level if desired. CHAPTER 9.30.5 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR LIGHTING VENTILATION AND HEATING No person shall occupy as owner -occupant, or let to another for occupancy, any dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for the purpose of living therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: Minimum Rear Yard Requirements. Every single and two (2) family dwelling shall have a rear yard which is a minimum of ten (10) feet deep for struc- tures one (1) story in height, plus two (2) feet for each additional story. An irregularly shaped lot may be occupied by a dwelling without complying with the provisions of this section if the total yard space equals that required by this section. Minimum Side Yard Re uirements. If a dwelling is erected up to the side Tot line, light and ventilation as required by the Housing Code shall be provided by means other than windows opening to the side yard. In case of all dwellings having side yards, the width shall be not less than four (4) feet for the first story plus one (1) foot for each additional story. 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raol NES C. More Than One Structure on a Lot. Where more than one (1) structure is erected upon the same lot, the distance between them shall not be less than eight (B) feet. This distance shall be increased two (2) feet for each additional story above the second. 0. Courts. 1. The minimum width of an outer court of a one (1) story dwelling shall be five (5) feet, for a two (2) story dwelling six (6) feet, for a three (3) story dwelling seven (7) feet, and shall increase one (1) foot for each additional story, 2. An inner court shall be twice the minimum width required for an outer court. 3. The width of all courts adjoining the lot line shall be measured to the lot line. 4. In mixed-use dwellings where there are no dwelling units on the lower story, courts may start on the top of such lower story. 5. Every inner court extending through more than one (1) story shall be provided with a horizontal air intake at the bottom. 6. Irregularly shaped court yards must meet the minimum area require- ments. Any structure hereafter placed on the same lot with the dwelling shall be so placed as to maintain the minimum yard require- ments. 7. In every dwelling where there is a court or shaft of any kind, there shall be at the bottom of every such shaft and court a door giving sufficient access to such shaft or court to enable it to be properly cleaned out; provided that where there is already a window giving proper access it shall be deemed sufficient. E. Natural Light. Every habitable room except kitchens shall have at least one 1 window facing directly to the outdoors. The minimum total window area, measured between stops, for every habitable room shall be at least ten (10) percent of the floor area of such room. Whenever the only window in a room is a skylight type window in the top of such room the total window area of such skylight shall equal at lbast fifteen (15) percent of the total floor area of such room. F. Lighting of Public Halls Stairways Basements and Cellars. I. Public passageways and stairways in buildings accommodating two (2) to four (4) families shall be provided with convenient wall -mounted light switches controlling an adequate lighting system which may be turned on when needed. An emergency circuit is not required for this lighting. 2. Public assageways and stairways in buildings accommodating more than four (4� units shall be lighted at all times with an adequate arti- ficial lighting system; except, that such artificial lighting may be omitted from sunrise to sunset where an adequate natural lighting system is provided. Whenever the occupancy of the building exceeds one hundred (100) persons, the artificial lighting system as regulated herein shall be on an emergency circuit. 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1I01nES 3. All basements and cellars shall be provided with an adequate lighting system which may be turned on when needed. 4. Intensity of Light. An adequate lighting system, as required herein, shall mean an intensity of two (2) foot candles at a plane thirty (30) inches above the floor line. 5. The required intensity shall apply to both natural and artificial lighting. G. Ventilation. Natural Ventilation. (a) The total of openable window area in every habitable room shall be equal to at least forty-five (45) percent of the minimum window area size as required above. (b) During that portion of the year when the Housing Inspector deems it necessary for protection against mosquitoes, flies, and other insects, every door used for ventilation, opening directly from a dwelling unit or rooming unit to outdoor space, shall have supplied screens of not less than sixteen (16) mesh per inch and a self-closing device; and every window or other device with openings to the outdoor space, used for ventilation, shall like- wise be supplied with such screens. (c) In a bathroom or toilet room, the minimum window size shall be not less than four (4) square feet between stop beads. (d) Whenever a window faces an exterior wall or structure which extends higher than the ceiling of the room and is located less than three (3) feet from the window, such window shall not be included as contributing to the required minimum window area for the purpose of ventilation. 2. Mechanical Ventilation. (a) In lieu of openable windows, adequate ventilation may be a system of nachanical ventilation which provides not less than fifteen (15) air changes per hour in all habitable rooms and/or bathrooms or toilet compartments. (b) No mechanical exhaust system, exhausting vapors, gases or odors shall be discharged into an attic, crawl space or cellar but shall be directed to the outside air; except that this shall not prevent the mechanical exhausting of normal room air to attics when used solely for cooling purposes. 3. Basements and Cellars. (a) Cellars and nonhabitable areas of basements shall be provided window area of not less than one (1) percent of the floor area. (b) Every cellar window used or intended to be used for ventilation, and every other opening to a cellar or crawl space which might provide an entry for rodents, shall be supplied with a heavy wire screen of not larger than one-fourth (I;) inch mesh or such device as will effectively prevent their entrance. 4. Crawl Spaces and Attic Spaces shall be provided with ventilating area not less than 1/300ths of the floor area. 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40IIIES Heating. Every dwelling shall have heating facilities which are properly installed, are maintained in safe and good working condition, and are capable of safely and adequately heating all habitable rooms, bath- rooms, and toilet rooms located therein to a temperature of at least sixty-eight (68) degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees C) and shall maintain in all said locations a minimum temperature of sixty-five (65) degrees Fahrenheit, (18 degrees C) at a distance of three (3) feet above the floor level at all times. Such heating facilities shall be so operated and equipped that heat as herein specified is available to all dwelling units and rooming units. 2. Every central heating unit, space heater, water heater, and cooking appliance shall be located and installed in such a manner, so as to afford reasonable protection against involvement of egress facilities or egress routes in the event of uncontrolled fire in the structure. 3. Every fuel burning heating unit or water heater shall be effectively vented in a safe manner to a chimney or duct leading to the exterior of the building. The chimney, duct, and vents shall be of such design as to assure proper draft, shall be adequately supported, and shall be kept reasonably clean and in good condition. 4. No fuel burning furnace shall be located within any sleeping room or bathroom unless provided with adequate ducting for air supply from the exterior, and the combustion chamber for such heating unit shall be sealed from the room in an airtight manner. Water heaters are pro- hibited in bathrooms or sleeping rooms. 5. Every steam or hot water boiler and every water heater shall be protected against overheating by appropriate temperature and pressure limit controls. 6. Every gaseous or liquid fuel burning heating unit and water heater shall be equipped with electronic ignition or with a pilot light and an automatic control to interrupt the flow of fuel to the unit in the event of failure of the ignition device. All such heating units with plenum shall have a limit control to prevent overheating. CHAPTER 9.30.6 MINIMUM SPACE, USE, AND LOCATION REQUIREMENTS No person shall occupy as owner -occupant, or let to another for occupancy any dwelling or dwelling unit, for the purpose of living, sleeping, cooking, or eating therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: Habitable Room Size. All habitable rooms used for living, sleeping, and eating shat contain at least eighty (80) square feet of floor area and no such room shall be less than seven (7) feet wide. The minimum size for habitable rooms used for food preparation shall be forty (40) square feet in area and a kitchenette may be less than seven (7) feet wide. In all dwellings and in each apartment or group or suite of rooms, there shall be at least one( 1) room containing not less than one hundred twenty (120) square feet of floor area. 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES very unit in t least g, Floor Area Per occupant. uareEfeet offloorspacesforlthenfirstaoccupant one hundred fifty additional square feet of floor thereof and at least one hundred (100) q space for every additional occupant thereof. Air Space In Sleeping Rooms. In every dwelling unit of two (2) or more rooms, om occupied for sleeping purposes shall contain at least cubic of yearshofdage o40older and fattlp leasttwohundred (200)ce for each ocubic nfeet eofe2) air space for each occupant under twelve (12) years of age. any Ceilin_g Height. No thilisheddwelling toshall finibhednceiling;tthe feet less than seven (7) 9h from fin average height of any such room shall not be less than seven feet six inches (1'6"). Any habitable room located directly below a roof in a private ora two f(h) its yarea11and areasres a of lessven thanlfive (5)foot feet height in one-half (,) ceiling height shall not be considered as a part of the required room area. Direct euire fir5S• Access to each dwelling unit or rooming unit shall not reqst entering any other dwelling unit or rooming unit (except that access to rooming units may be through a living room of a unit occupied by the owner -operator of the structure). Basement Space h1a Be Habitable. No basement space shall be used as a habitable area unless: 1. The floor and walls are of waterproof and damp proof construction. 2. The total window area in each room is equal to at least the minimum window area sizes as required in Sections 9.30.5.E. and 9.30.5.G.l.a. 3. Said rooms shall have a minimum ceiling height of seven (7) feet in all parts from finished floor to finished ceiling. q. There shall be appurtenant to such room the use of a toilet room. CHAPTER 9.30.7 RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNERS RELATING TO THE MAINTENANCE OF DWELLINGS AND DWELLING UNITS No person shall occupy as owner -occupant, or let to another for occupancy, any dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for the purpose of living therein, which does not comply with the following requirements: of floor, wall, A. Maintenance osidewalkl,rand every we. Every indow, door, oand other aperatureYcovering stair, step, good condition. shall be maintained in 9 1. Every door, door hinge, door latch, and door lock shall be in good condition and every door, when closed, shall fit reasonably well within its frame. There shall be no exposed cracks or openings in or around door frame. All windows and exterior doors, and their frames, shall be constructed and maintained in weather-proof condition. r 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Every doorway providing ingress or egress from any dwelling unit, rooming unit, or habitable room shall be at least six (6) feet four (4) inches high and twenty-four (24) inches wide. All entrance doorways to dwelling units and rooming units shall be equipped with doors which effectively close the doorway. Every interior partition, wall, floor, and ceiling shall be capable of affordin; privacy and maintained so as to permit them to be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. 4. Every foundation, exterior wall, exterior door, and roof shall be reasonably weather -tight, water -tight, rodent -proof, and insect -proof. B. Rainwater Drainage. All eaves, troughs, downspouts, and other roof drain- age equipment of the dwelling and its accessory structures shall be main- tained in a good state of repair and so installed as to direct rainwater away from the structure. C. Chimneys and Smokepipes. Every chimney and every supplied smokepipe shall be adequately supported, reasonably clean, and maintained in a reasonably good state of repair. Grading, Drainage and Landscaping of Premises. Every premises shall be graded and drained so no stagnant water will accumulate or stand on the premises, and every premises shall be continuously maintained in a sanitary, erosion -free, and dust -free condition by suitable landscaping with grass, trees, shrubs, or other planted ground cover, or by paving with asphalt, concrete, or by such other suitable means as shall be approved by the Housing Inspector. Where a premises is occupied or shared by less than three (3) dwelling units, the continued maintenance of the premises in the above condition shall also be the responsibility of the occupants. E. Protection of Exterior Wood Surfaces. All exterior wood surfaces of the dwelling and its accessory structures, fences, porches, and similar appur- tanences shall be reasonably protected from the elements and against decay by paint or other approved protective coating applied in a workmanlike fashion. , F. Electrical System. The electrical system of every dwelling shall not by reason of overloading, dilapidation, lack of insulation, or improper fusing, or for any other cause, expose the occupants to hazards of elec- trical shock or to the hazards of fire. Every habitable room shall be equipped with a safe electrical switch located near and convenient to the room entrance which activates an illuminary within the room. Every habitable room shall contain at least two (2) separate floor or wall type electric double convenience outlets which shall be situated a distance apart equivalent to at least twenty-five (25) percent of the perimeter of the room; and every toilet room, bathroom, laundry room, furnace room, and public hall shall contain at least one (1) supplied ceiling or wall type electric light fixture. Every such outlet and fixture shall be properly installed and shall be maintained in good and safe working condition. 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINLS G. Maintenance of Cas Appliances and Facilities. I. Every gas appliance shall be connected to a gas line with solid metal piping except that listed metal appliance connectors or semi-rigid tubing may be used if approved by the Housing Inspector. 2. Every gas pipe shall be sound and tightly put together and shall be freetof leaks, corrosion, or obstruction so as to reduce gas pressure or volume. 3. Gas pressure shall be adequate to permit a proper flow of gas from all open gas valves at all times. H. Maintenance of Supplied Plumbing Fix t_ ores Every supplied plumbing fixture and water and waste pipe shall be properly installed and maintained in good, sanitary working condition. 1. All plumbing shall be so designed and installed as to prevent con- ly tamination connecctionthe andwater anyuothertmethod ofccontaminationh bak flow, back s�phonage, f 2. Water pressure shall be adequate to permit a proper flow of water from all open outlets at all times. E I. Surfaces Impervious to Water. Every toilet room floor surface, bathroom floor surface and kitchen floor surface shall be constructed and maintained so as to be reasonably impervious to water and so as to permit such floor to be easily kept in a clean and sanitary condition. I I J. Supplied Facilities. llo owner or operator shall cause any service, facility, equipment, or utility which is required to be supplied under the provisions of the Housing Code to be removed from or shut off from or discontinued for any occupied dwelling or dwelling unit let or occupied by him, except for such temporary interruption as may be necessary while actual repairs, replacements, or alterations are being made. I K. Covered Cisterns. All cisterns or similar water storage facilities shall be fenced, safe y covered, or filled in such a way as not to create a hazard to life or limb. L. Sealedis Passa es. All pipe passages, chutes, and similar openings through wa or floors shall be adequately enclosed or sealed to prevent the spread of fire or passage of vermin. M. Pest Extermination. Every owner of a dwelling containing two (2) or more we Ing units shall be responsible for the extermination of insects, rodents, or other pests on the premises. Whenever infestation exists in two (2) or more of the dwelling units in any dwelling, or in the shared or public parts of any dwelling containing two (2) or more dwelling units, extermination thereof shall be the responsibility of the owner. N. Prohibited Animals. No horse, cow, calf, swine, sheep, goat, chickens, geese, or ducks shall be kept in any dwelling or part thereof. Nor shall any such animal be kept on the same lot or .premises with a dwelling except under such conditions as may be prescribed by the Housing Inspector. 35 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES II0114LS 0. Owner to Let Clean Units. No owner shall permit occupancy of any vacant dwelling unit or rooming unit unless it is clean, sanitary and fit for human occupancy. P. Maintains Public Areas. Every owner of a dwelling containing two (2) or more dwelling units shall be responsible for maintaining in a safe and sanitary condition the shared or public areas of the dwelling and premises thereof. Q. Maintenance of Fences. Every fence shall be kept in a reasonably good state of maintenance and repair or shall be removed. R. Maintenance of Accessory Structures. Every foundation, exterior wall, roof, window, exterior door, basement hatchway, and every other entranceway of every accessory structure shall be so maintained as to prevent the structure from becoming a harborage of rats and shall be kept in a rea- sonably good state of repair. S. Alterations. All structural alterations of dwellings and accessory structures shal be done in accordance with all applicable Ordinances of the City of Iowa City and with all rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. CHAPTER 9.30.8 RESPONSIBILITY OF OCCUPANTS RELATING TO THE MAINTENANCE OF DWELLINGS AND ROOMING UNITS A. Occupant Responsible for Controlled Area. Every occupant of a dwelling or dwelling unit shall keep in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition that part of the dwelling, dwelling unit, and premises thereof he/she occupies and controls. 1. The floor and floor covering shall be kept reasonably clean and sanitary. 2. Every wall and ceiling shall be reasonably clean and free of dirt or greasy film. 3. No dwelling or the premises thereof shall be used for the storage or handling of refuse. B. Plumbing Fixtures. The occupants of a dwelling unit shall keep all sup- plied plumbing fixtures therein in a clean and sanitary condition and shall be responsible for the exercise of reasonable care in the use and operation thereof. C. Extermination of Pests. Every occupant of a dwelling containing a single dwelling unit shal be responsible for the extermination of any insects, rodents, or other pests therein or on the premises; and every occupant of a dwelling containing more than one (1) dwelling unit shall be responsible for such extermination within the unit occupied by him/her whenever said dwelling unit is the only one infested. Not withstanding, the foregoing provisions of this subsection, whenever infestation is caused by failure of the owner to maintain a dwelling in a reasonably rodent proof or reasonably insect proof condition, extermination shall be the responsibility of the owner. D. Storage and Disposal of Garbage. Storage and disposal of garbage and rubbish shall comply with the requirements of the ordinances of the Code of Iowa City concerning same and the Housing Inspector shall enforce the requirements contained therein.• 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIo RIES Every occupant of a dwelling containing one I., or two (2) dwelling units shall dispose of rubbish, garbage, and any other organic waste in a clean and sanitary manner, by placing it in approved disposal facilities or storage containers required by the Ordinances of Iowa City. In dwellings containing one (1) or two (2) dwelling units it shall be the responsibility of the occupant to furnish adequate garbage and rubbish disposal facilities or storage containers of approved type and location. E. Use0 and eration of Supplied Heating Facilities. Every occupant of a we ling unit shatI be responsible for the exercise of reasonable care, proper use, and proper operation of supplied heating facilities. Electrical Wiring. No temporary wiring or extension cords shall be used except extension cords which run directly from portable electric fixtures to convenience outlets and which do not lie beneath floor coverings or extend through doorways, transoms or similar apertures in structural elements or attached thereto. installation of Screens, Storm Doors,and Storm Windows. Every occupant of a dwelling or dwe ing unit shall be responsible for hanging all screens and double or storm doors and windows whenever the same are required under the provisions of the Housing Code, except where the owner has agreed to perform the service. CHAPTER 9.30.9 ROOMING HOUSES No person shall operate a rooming house, or shall occupy or let to another for occupancy any rooming unit in any rooming house, except in compliance with the following requirements: Permit Required. No person shall operate a rooming house unless he or she is an occupant of said rooming house and holds a valid rooming house permit issued by the Department of Housing and Inspection Services in the name of the rooming house operator and for the specific dwelling or dwelling unit within which the rooming house is contained. Application for Permit. The rooming house operator shall file, in dup- licate, an application for a rooming house permit with the Department of Housing and Inspection Services on application forms provided by the Housing Inspector. The operator shall file with the permit application an occupancy permit, issued by the Inspector of Buildings, for the operation of a rooming house in the dwelling or dwelling unit designated in the rooming house permit application. Issuance of Permit and Occupancy Record_ Card, Fees. When all applicable provisions of the Housing Code and of any rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, and other applicable codes of the City of Iowa City, have been complied with by the rooming house operator, the Department of Housing and Inspection Services shall issue a rooming house permit and an occupancy record card upon the payment of a fee, the,amount of which shall be set by Resolution of the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa. The permit shall state the maximum number of persons that may reside in the total of all rooming units or portions thereof for which the rooming house permit is issued. 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIUEs D. Occupancy Record Card. Every occupancy record shall list the maximum number of persons that may reside in the total of all rooming units located in the dwelling or portions thereof for which the rooming house permit is issued. The occupancy record cards shall also list the maximum number of persons which may occupy each individual rooming unit located in the dwelling or portions thereof for which the rooming house permit is issued. All of the rooming units listed on the occupancy record card shall be located in such portions of the dwelling as are permitted to be occupied under the provisions ofthe occupancy permit filed in accordance with the provisions of Sections 9.30.9.8. and 9.30.9.E. of the Housing Code. Every rooming house permit issued by the Department of Housing and Inspec- tion Services shall be conspicuously posted by the rooming house operator in a public corridor or hallway or other public portion of the rooming house for which it is issued and shall remain so posted at all times. Every occupancy record card shall be posted in the rooming house by the rooming house operator in a place where such cards are readily accessible for examination by the Housing Inspector. E. Operator to Control Occupancy. No allow a greater number of persons t located within a rooming house than h rooming house operator shall at any time 0 occupy the total of all rooming units the mat e rooming house permit and the occupancyximum recordumber cards. of Norsons roomingsted housen operator shall at any time allow a greater number of persons to occupy any individual rooming unit than the maximum number of persons listed on the occupancy record cards for each such unit. F. Nontransferabilitv of Permit. No rooming house permit issued under the Provisions of the Housing Code shall be transferable and every rooming house operator shall notify the Department of Housing and Inspection Services in writing within twenty-four (24) hours after having relinquished proprietorship or having sold, transferred, given away, or otherwise disposed of such interest or control of any rooming house, and shall file in writing with the Department of Housing and Inspection Services the name and address of the operator to whom proprietorship has been relinquished by sale, gift, or other method of transferal or disposition. G. Relationship of Permit to Building Code. The issuance of a rooming house permit to any rooming house shall not in any way signify or imply that the rooming house conforms with the Fire Code or the Building and Zoning Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The issuance of a rooming house permit shall not relieve the owner or rooming house operator of the responsibility for compliance with said Fire, Building, and Zoning Codes. i. Ap licabilit of Other Sections of the Housing Code. No person shall operate a rooming house un ess a of the requirements previously set forth in the Housing Code. are complied with. Every dwelling unit located within a rooming house shall comply with all of the requirements for dwelling units as established in accordance with the provisions of the Housing Code. Hearing When Rooming House Permit is Denied. Any person whose application for a permit to operate a rooming house has been denied may request and shall be granted a hearing on the matter before the Housing Appeals Board under the procedure provided by the Administrative Procedures Ordinance of Iowa City. EL -11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MolnEs Suspension of Permit. Whenever upon inspection of any rooming house the Housing Inspector finds that conditions or practices exist which are in violation of any provision of the Housing Code or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto, the Housing Inspector shall give notice in writing to the rooming house operator of such rooming house that unless such conditions or practices are corrected within a reasonable period, to be determined by the Housing Inspector, the rooming house operator's rooming house permit will be suspended. At the end of such period the Housing Inspector shall re -inspect such rooming house, and if he finds that such conditions or practices have not been corrected, he shall suspend the permit and give notice in writing to the operator that the permit has been suspended. K. Hearinq When Rooming House Permit is Suspended; Revocation of Permit. Any person whose permit to operate a rooming house has been suspended or who has received notice from the Housing Inspector that his permit is to be suspended unless existing conditions or practices at his rooming house are corrected may request and shall be granted a hearing on the matter before the Housing Appeals Board under the procedure provided by the Iowa City Administrative Procedures Ordinance, provided that if no petition for such hearing is filed within ten (10) days following the day on which such permit was suspended, such permit shall be deemed to have been automatically revoked. Upon receipt of notice of permit revocation, the rooming house operator shall cease operation of such rooming house, and after the elapse of a reasonable period of time, to be determined by the Housing Inspector, no person shall occupy for sleeping or I.iving purposes any dwelling unit or rooming unit therein. Toilets and Lavatory Basins. At least one (1) toilet, and one (1) lavatory basin in good working condition, shall be supplied for each eight (8) persons or fraction thereof residing within a rooming house, including members of the rooming house operator's family wherever they share the said facilities; provided, that in a rooming house where rooms are let only to males, flush urinals may be substituted for not more than one-half (j of the required number of toilets. M. Baths. At least one (1) bath, in good working condition, shall be supplied for each eight (8) persons or fraction thereof residing within a rooming house, including members of the rooming house operator's family whenever they share the use of said facilities. Location of Sanitary Facilities. Every toilet, lavatory basin, and bath shall be 76ANd within a room or rooms which afford privacy to a person within said room or rooms. All such facilities shall be so located within the rooming house as to be accessible to the occupants of each rooming unit sharing such facilities without going outside of the dwelling and without going through a dwelling unit or through a rooming unit of another occupant. Minimum Floor Area for Sleeping Purposes. Every room occupied for sleeping purposes by one (IT -person shall contain at least eighty (80) square feet of floor space, and every room occupied for sleeping purposes by more than one (1) person shall contain at least fifty (50) square feet of floor space for each occupant thereof. Every rooming unit shall contain at least four hundred (400) cubic feet of air space for each occupant thereof. 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS- DES MOInEs P. Phar_ ation or Eat�in o�f Meals in Rooming Units Prohibited. No occupant of a rooming house shall prepare or eat meals or store cooking utensils in a rooming house unless such meals are prepared or eaten in a dwelling unit contained therein, except that occupants may prepare and eat meals and store cooking utensils in a communal kitchen and may eat meals in a com- munal dining room in accordance with the provisions of Subsections 9.30.9.Q and 9.30.9.R. Q. Communal Kitchens. A communal kitchen shall comply with the following requirements: 1. The minimum floor area of a communal kitchen shall be sixty (60) square feet; 2. The minimum floor area of a communal kitchen in which roomers are permitted to prepare and eat meals shall be one hundred (100) square feet; 3. It shall contain at least one (1) supplied kitchen sink of an approved type; 4. It shall contain at least one (1) supplied kitchen gas or electric range. Every supplied range shall have at least two (2) top burners and an oven; 5. It shall contain one (1) supplied refrigerator. i 6. It shall contain at least one (1) supplied table or other facility having a total surface area for food preparation of not less than six (6) square feet. The surface of such table or other facility shall be suitable for the preparation of food, smooth, free of cracks, and easily cleanable; 7. It shall contain at least one (1) suitable supplied cabinet of adequate size and suitable storage of food and eating and cooking utensils; 8. Every communal kitchen shall be located within a room accessible to the occupant of each rooming unit sharing the use of such kitche, without going outside of the dwelling and without going through a dwelling unit or rooming unit of another occupant. R. Communal Dining Rooms. Every rooming house, within which the occupant of any rooming unit is permitted to prepare meals or cook within a communal kitchen containing less than one hundred (100) square feet of floor area, as provided in Section Q, shall contain a communal dining room which com- plies with all of the following requirements: 1. Every communal dining room shall be located on the same floor of the rooming house as the communal kitchen and such dining room shall be as nearly adjacent to the communal kitchen as is practicable; 2. Every communal dining room shall be located within a room accessible to the occupant of each rooming unit sharing such dining room, without going outside of the dwelling and without going through a dwelling unit or rooming unit of another occupant; 40 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tIOIREs 3. Every communal dining room shall contain not less than eighty (80) square feet of floor area; 4. The surface of each dining table shall be smooth, free of cracks, and easily cleanable. S. No Cooking In Rooming Units. The operator shall prohibit the cooking and preparation of food in every rooming unit. T. Shades, Drapes, Etc.. Every window of every room used for sleeping shall be supplied with shades, draw drapes, or other devices of materials which, when properly used, will afford privacy to the occupant of the room. U. S�ani�tary Maintenance. The rooming house operator of every rooming house shall be responsible for the sanitary maintenance of all walls, floors, and ceilings and for maintenance of a sanitary condition in every other part of the rooming house; and he shall be further responsible for the sanitary maintenance of the entire premises where the entire structure or building within which the rooming house is contained, is leased or occupied by the owner. The occupant of every rooming unit shall keep his personal be- longings contained within the unit in a clean, neat, and orderly condition so as to facilitate the ability of the operator to discharge his respon- sibilities for sanitary maintenance within every rooming unit as set forth in this subsection. V. Garbage Disposal or Storage. Adequate garbage and rubbish disposal facil- ities 6e storage containers whose type and location are approved shall be supplied by the rooming house operator. The rooming house operator shall be responsible for the disposal of all garbage in a clean and sanitary manner through the use of approved mechanical equipment or by placing it in the required containers. W, Han in Screens, Storm Doors, Storm Windows. The owner of a rooming house sha be responsible for providing and hanging all screens and storm doors and windows whenever the same are required under the provisions of the Housing Code. Screens shall be provided not later than the first day of June each year. X. Infestation. The owner of a rooming house shall be responsible for the extermination of any insects, rodents, or pests therein. Y. Fire Extinguishers. Fire extinguishers suitable for the occupancy and which are approved by the Housing Inspector shall be provided in every rooming house. Extinguishers shall be properly hung and shall be main- tained in operable condition at all times. Z. Heatin Units Fire Protected. In every rooming house in which space is let to more than four 4 persons and served by a common central heating system or water heating system, the heating unit or units shall be suitably enclosed with one (1) hour fire resistive construction including all walls, ceilings, and doors, or such heating units shall be enclosed in a room provided with a sprinkler system approved by the Fire Marshal. AA. Earl Warnin Fire Detection System Every dwelling and rooming unit in rooming houses shat be provided with a smoke detector as approved by the Fire Marshal. The detector shall be mounted on the ceiling or wall at a point centrally located in the corridor or area giving access to rooms used 41 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIo INES for sleeping purposes. Where sleeping rooms are on an upper level, the detector shall be placed at the center of the ceiling directly above the stairway. All detectors shall be located within twelve (12) inches of the ceiling. Care shall be exercised to insure that the installation will not interfere with the operating characteristics of the detector. When actuated, the detector shall provide an alarm in the dwelling unit or rooming unit. BB. Safe Storaqe Required. Rooming houses shall provide for every rooming unit a facility for the safe storage of drugs and household poisons. CC. Hazardous'Storage. There shall be no transom, window, or door opening into a public hall from any part of a rooming house where paint, oil, gasoline, or drugs are stored or kept for the purpose of sale or otherwise. DD. Ways of Egress. Every rooming house shall have at least two (2) indepen- dent ways of egress from each floor level as approved by the Fire Marshal. 1. No existing fire escape shall be deemed a sufficient means of egress unless it is in compliance with Building and Fire Codes of Iowa City. 2. All means of egress shall be maintained in a good state of repair and shall be free of obstruction at all times. 3. Whenever fire escapes on a rooming house are rusty, the owner shall have them properly painted. CHAPTER 9.30.10 MULTIPLE DWELLINGS No person shall operate a multiple dwelling, or shall occupy or let to another for occupancy any dwelling unit in any multiple dwelling, except in compliance with the following requirements: A.Permit Re wired. No person shall operate a multiple dwelling unless he ho ds a valid rental permit issued by the Department of Housing and In- spection Services in the name of the operator and for the specific dwelling or dwelling units. B. Relationship of Permit to Building Code. The issuance of a rental permit to any multiple dwelling shall not in any way signify or imply that the multiple dwelling conforms with the Fire Code or the Building and Zoning Codes of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The issuance of a rental permit shall not relieve the owner or operator of the responsibility for com- pliance with said Fire, Building, and Zoning Codes. C. Applicability of Other Sections of the Housinq Code. No person shall operate a multiple dwelling unless all of the requirements for dwelling units as previously set forth in the Housing Code are complied with. D. Hearing When Rental Permit is Denied. Any person whose application for a permit to operate a multiple dwelling has been denied may request and shall be granted a hearing on the matter before the (lousing Appeals Board under the procedure provided by the Administrative Procedures Ordinance of Iowa City. 42 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111[s E. Sus ension of Permit. Whenever upon inspection of any multiple dwelling t e Housing Inspector finds that conditions or practices exist which are in violation of any provision of the Housing Code or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto, the Housing Inspector shall give notice in writing to the owner of such multiple dwelling that unless such conditions or practices are corrected within a reasonable period, to be determined by the Housing Inspector, the rental permit will be suspended. At the end of such period, the Housing Inspector shall re -inspect such multiple dwelling and, if he finds that such conditions or practices have not been corrected, he shall suspend the permit and give notice in writing to the operator that the latter's permit has been suspended. F. Hearing_ When n Multiple O<velling Permit is Suspended; Revocation or rel -MIL. Any person whose permit to operate a multiple dwe ling has been suspended or who has received notice from the Housing Inspector that his permit is to be suspended unless existing conditions or practices at his multiple dwelling are corrected may request and shall be granted a hearing on the matter before the Housing Appeals Board under the procedure provided by the Administrative Procedures Ordinance of Iowa City, provided that, if no petition for such hearing is filed within ten (10) days following the day on which such permit was suspended, such permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked. Upon receipt of notice of permit revocation, the operator shall cease operation of such multiple dwelling, and after the elapse of a reasonable period of time, to be determined by the Housing Inspector, no person shall occupy for sleeping or living purposes any dwelling unit or rooming unit therein. G. Fire Extinquishers. Fire extinguishers suitable for the occupancy and which are approved by the Housing Inspector shall be provided in every multiple dwelling. Extinguishers shall be properly hung and shall be maintained in operable condition at all times. N. Heating Units IF Protected. In every multiple dwelling served by a common central heating system or water heating system, the heating unit or units shall be suitably enclosed with one (1) hour fire resistive con- struction including all walls, ceilings, and doors, or such heating units shall be enclosed in a room provided with a sprinkler system approved by the Fire Marshal. I. Operator to Maintain Orderly Premises. The operator of every multiple dwelling shall at all times maintain the premises in an ord�olerty. and free of materials which are hazardous to life, health, or prop J. Hazardous Stora e. There shall be no transom, window, or door opening into a public hall from any part of a multiple dwelling where paint, oil, gas- oline, or drugs are stored or kept for the purpose of sale or otherwise. K, Closets. In multiple dwellings no closet of any kind shall be constructed but staircaserom the ce clearto eandper freestories, from encumbrance. L. Cellar Entrance. In every multiple dwelling there shall be an entrance to the cellar or other lowest story from the outside of the building. 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES Scuttles and Bulkheads. In all multiple dwellings where there are scuttles or bulkheads, they anU all stairs or ladders leading thereto shall be easily accessible and shall be kept free from obstruction and ready for use at all times. No scuttle and no bulkhead door shall at any time be locked with a key, but may be fastened on the inside by movable bolts or hooks. Slight Access to Roof. Unless there is a bulkhead in the roof, there shall be over every inside stairway used by more than one (1) family, a skylight or scuttle not less than two feet by three feet (2'X3') in size. Every flat roof multiple dwelling exceeding one (1) story in height shall have at least one (1) convenient and permanent means of access to the roof located in a public part of the building and not in a room or closet. Safe Storage Required. Multiple dwellings shall provide a facility not easily accessible to children for the safe storage of drugs and household poisons in every dwelling unit. Earl Warnin Fire Protection S stems. Every dwelling unit within a multiple dwelling sha be provided with smoke detectors as approved by the Fire Marshal. Detectors shall be mounted on the ceiling or wall at a point centrally located in the corridor or area giving access to rooms used for sleeping purposes. In an efficiency dwelling unit, the detector shall be centrally located on the ceiling of the main room. Where sleeping rooms are on an upper level, the detector shall be placed at the center of the ceiling directly above the stairway. All detectors shall be located within twelve (12) inches of the ceiling. Care shall be exercised to insure that the installation will not interfere with the operating characteristics of the detector. When actuated, the detector shall provide an alarm in the dwelling unit. Sanitar Maintenance. The owner of every multiple dwelling shall be responsib a for the maintenance and sanitary condition of all public areas therein. Garbage Disposal or Storage. Adequate garbage and rubbish disposal fa- cilities or storage containers whose type and location are approved shall be'supplied by the multiple dwelling owner. The owner shall be responsible for disposal of all garbage in a clean and sanitary manner through the use of approved mechanical equipment or by placing it in the required containers. S. Hanging Screens, Storm Doors, Storm Windows. The owner of a multiple dwelling shall a responsible for providing and hanging all screens and storm doors and windows whenever the same are required under the provisions of the Housing Code. Screens shall be provided not later than the first day of June each year. T. �s of Egress. Every multiple dwelling shall have at least two (2) independent ways of egress from each floor level as approved the the Fire Marshal. 1. No existing fire escape shall be deemed a sufficient means of egress unless it is in compliance with the Building and Fire Codes of Iowa City. 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111Es p, All means of egress shall be maintained in a good state of repair and shall be free of obstruction at all dwelling are rusty, the owner shall 3. Whenever fire escapes on a multiple have them properly painted. CHAPTER 9.30.11 REMEDIES dwelling units, or rooming unit which Unfit for -Habitation. Any dwelling, defects shall be condemned as is A. of the following and placarded by the sIa be found to have any unfit for human habitation and shall be so designated Housing Inspector: unsafe, or 1, One which is so damaged, decayed, dilapidated, unsanitary, vermin infested that it creofe safety of the occupants publ�cs hazard to the health or adequate 2, One which lacks light, ventilation, or occsanupantsnoraoflthe epubli to protect the health or safety of the occupants because of its general conditions or location Of�then 3. One which, otherwise dangerous to the health or safety sanitary dange occupants or of the public. ]nspelctor shall leave a reasonable B• but not more than six (6) months, between the time he Condemnation Procedures. The Housing Ins condemnation proceedings if perio of time, and the time he beg placards the property he situation for which the remedial action is not taken to correct t dwelling was placarded. Any dwelling or any portion thereof condemned C. Vacate Condemned Dwellin the Housing as S�nitlnspectofor humanshabitation and l be atedsoiBmediatelydornaspordereddbyy the Housing Inspector. or portion thereof which has No dwelling P again be D To Re -Otto Condemned Dwellinand such been c e and p acar ed as unfit for human ha shall the Housing Inspector. The Housing used for human habitation until written approval placard is removed by, remove such placard Whenever Weredbased haveebeenseliminated. on wb ch the con em - nation and placarding unit, or rooming unit which has been E. Removal of Placard ProhibitdwellNngperson shall deface or remove the placard from any dwel ing, condemned as unfit for human habitation and placarded as such, excep a bsection 9.30.11.D, provided in su CHAPTER 9.30.12 RETALIATORY CONDUCT PROHIBITED Conduct Definices, a terminatio ed. Retaliatory conduct is an increase in rent or tory A. of erRetal-aees, a ecrease in servn or threat of termination 45 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIREs of a rental agreement, the bringing or the threat Of bringing an action for Possession which is the result of the tenant doing any one of the following: 1. The tenant has complained to a governmental agency charged with responsibility for enforcement of a safety or health code of a violation applicable to the premises materially affecting health and safety; or 2. The tenant has complained to the owner or operator of such a vio- lation; or 3. The tenant has organized or become a member of a tenant's union or similar organization; or 4. The tenant has pursued legal remedies. B. Presumption of Retailiatory Conduct. In any action by or against the tenant, evidence of a complaint or other protected activity within six (6) months before the action creates a presumption that the conduct on the part of the owner or operator was retaliatory in nature. This presumption does not arise if the tenant engaged in such protected activity after notice of i a proposed rental or fee increase, diminution of services or termination of existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is rental agreement. "Presumption" means that the trier of fact must find the i which would support a finding of its nonexistence. introduced C. Owner's Rights. Notwithstanding other provisions of this ordinance, an owner or operator may increase rent or other fees, decrease services, i terminate a rental agreement, bring an action for possession or act other- wise upon a showing of, but not limited to, the following: ( 1. The condition or conditions found in violation of the health and safety codes were directly caused by the tenant or the members of the tenant's family beyond ordinary wear and tear. 2. The tenant has refused entry at reasonable times to the owner or operator or agent of either to the premises for the purpose of cor- recting such condition or conditions. 3. Compliance with applicable safety or health codes require a reduction in services or an alteration, remodeling, or demolition which would effectively deprive the tenant of use of the leased premises. 4. The tenant is in default in rent. D. Tenant Defense. If the owner or operator acts or engages in retaliatory conduct as defined, the tenant has a defense in any action against him for eviction. In addition, the tenant may recover possession or terminate the rental agreement. If the rental agreement is terminated, the owner or whichoperatthesownerhall oroperatorrn any notlegallyentitll lmounts elredy d. by the tenant to E. Normal Lease Term. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply in such Tway as to affect negotiation of a lease renewal at the end of the normal term of an original lease. CHAPTER 9.30.13 RENT ESCROW A. Noncompliance. 1. Deposit in Escrow. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or any agreement, oral or written, if a lessor of residential premises, 46 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo IrIEs fails to �vmply with an order of the Housing Inspector to correct a violation of the Housing Code, the Housing Inspector shall, upon the expiration of the original notice of such violation, serve Notice in writing that the dwelling or dwelling unit is eligible for rent escrow. Said notice shall be sent to the owner by certified mail, return receipt requested with copies forwarded to each tenant affected by such notice. Certification for Rent Escrow shall be given by a housing inspector upon a showing to the inspector of eligibility for rent escrow and the production of a signed rent escrow agreement with a bank, trust company or other lending institution approved by the City bearing a certificate of the Johnson County Recorder that the same has been recorded. Application for Certification must be made within 30 days of Notice of Eligibility or final determination by the Housing Appeals Board. A dwelling or dwelling unit is eligible for Certification of Rent Escrow if Notice of Eligibility for Rent Escrow is not appealed as provided for in this ordinance or upon a decision by the Housing Appeals Board upholding in whole or in part the Notice of Eligibility. 4. Upon such Certification the duty of any tenant to pay, and the right of the lessor to collect rent, shall be suspended without affecting any other terms and conditions of the landlord -tenant relationship until the dwelling or dwelling unit is certified as in compliance or until the tenancy is terminated for any reason other than the nonpayment of rent. During any period when the duty to pay rent is suspended, and the tenant continues to occupy, the rent withheld shall be deposited by the tenant into an escrow account in a bank, trust company or any other lending institution approved by the City of Iowa City. Said rent shall be paid to the lessor when the premises is certified as in compliance with the Housing Code, at any time within six (6) months from the date on which it was certified for Rent Escrow. Any funds deposited in escrow may be used by the lessor for the purpose of making such dwelling or dwelling unit comply with the Housing Code pursuant to adopted escrow procedures. No tenant shall be evicted for any reason relating to non-payment of rent while the rent is deposited in escrow. However, a tenant may be evicted for holding over after the end of the lease term in any written lease. After six (6) months from the date of Certification, the lessor may evict the tenant for purposes of vacating or demolition of said premises if the lessor deems it to be economically unfeasible to repair or renovate the premises. In that event, no certificate of occupancy shall be issued and no person shall occupy said premises for a period of one (1) year following the tenant's eviction. If, at the end of six (6) months after the Certification of the dwelling or dwelling unit, such dwelling or dwelling unit has not been certified in compliance, any monies unencumbered or remaining in escrow shall be payable to the depositor. 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tl0ltl Es B. Administration The City Manager shall develop and establish written procedures for the deposit and disbursement of all monies derived as a result of the rent escrow program. Such procedures shall be adopted by resolution by the City Council. C. Hearin Before Housin A eats Board. Upon appeal of any Notice of E igibility for Rent Escrow the lessor may assert and present evidence as to why a particular premises does not qualify for the rent escrow programAmong the matters presented, i the owner may assert and show, but s not limited to, the following: I• The deficiencies found by the Housing Inspector have been directly caused by the tenant or members of the tenant's beyond 2. The tenant ahas yrefused entry ato thery wearownerandtorrhis/her agent for the purpose of correcting such condition or conditions. 3. The owneror his/her agent had no knowledge or had no reason to believe that said deficiencies had existed in the dwelling or dwelling unit. W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines i i 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron B. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen SeB•Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee [' 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each {a Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 c r V MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ,IORM MICROLAR The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401tlEs CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Perrel Robert Vevera, Mayor Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster* Max Selzer* Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain"" Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor • Past Council Members Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the Inside back cover. I is P' HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Lorna Owen May 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa Department of Community Development City of Iowa City MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neigh- borhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City and the work carried out by the University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. References included in this bibliography are, for the most part, gleaned from other reports in the North Side neighborhood preservation study series. Entries are classified according to the report number with which they are most closely associated. Several (numbers 3, 9, and 10) have no entries, and others have only a few. Annotations have been contributed by various members of the project staff, but the vast majority were written by Lorna herself. We have found, in the course of this project, that there are no comprehensive sources on neighborhood planning or neigh- borhood preservation, and very few that deal with any of the subtopics in a manner which is ideally suited to use in neighbor- hood planning. Those that have been of some use to us, or might i conceivably be of use in a different neighborhood setting, are i included, but many of the sources are very brief or contain large amounts of material that is inapplicable. A more diligent search I on our part might have resulted in deeper and more comprehensive jcoverage, but our experience suggests that the most useful sources are often fugitive documents that are hard to track, or works • designed for an entirely different purpose but happen to be easily adapted to the neighborhood context. Thus it is my hope that this bibliography can be updated, expanded, and refined over the next few years to the point where it can reliably guide persons interested in neighborhood planning -- professionals, researchers, citizens --to the sources that will be most useful. Toward this end, I would welcome any suggestions for additions, annotations, and deletions. M9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ::OIRES CONTENTS FOREWORD i IMPACT EVALUATION: PURPOSE, PROCEDURES & GUIDELINES (Report Number 1) 1 LAND USE REGULATION AND ADMINISTRATION (Report Number 2) 9 HISTORIC STRUCTURES INVENTORY (Report Number 4) 13 STREETS AND TRAFFIC (Report Number 5) 17 PARKING (Report Number 6) 22 COMMUNITY FACILITIES (Report Number 7) 23 NEIGHBORHOOD SITE IMPROVEMENTS (Report Number 8) 24 CITIZEN SELF-HELP HANDBOOK (Report Number 11) 25 NUISANCE LAW APPLIED TO LAND USE CONTROL (Report Number 12) 26 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION (Report Number 13) 27 GRANT PROGRAM COORDINATION (Report Number 14) 29 FINAL REPORT (Report Number 16) 30 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIRES IMPACT EVALUATION: Report PURPOSE, PROOC1DURES & GUIDELINES Aldaire, Jerrold R., "Neighborhood Boundaries." Plannin Advisory Service Report No. 141. Chicago: American ociety of Planning officials, December 1960. Reviews methods for delineating neighborhoods and examines how the neighborhood concept is used by planner. American Public Health Association Committee on the Hygiene of Housing. Planning the Neighborhood. Chicago: Public Administration Service, 1960. Neighborhood standards based on health considerations are offered, with health including accidents, contagion, daylight, ventilation, noise, pollution, privacy, moral hazards, and aesthetic satisfaction. Although rather rigidly oriented toward specific standards of a variety of types, the book is most useful in its justifications for design standards. Andrews, Richard B., ed., Urban Land Use Policy: The Central City. New York: The Free Press, 1972. Readings covering different formal devices used in order to control problems involved in land use, with emphasis on the socioeconomic aspects of zoning. Also included is an introduction and application on a legal basis of building and housing codes. The last portion deals with taxation. Barlett, Ronald E. Surface Water Sewerage. New York: John Wiley, 1976. Storm runoff calculations and sewer design. Bergmann, Paul A. "Assessing in the Consequences of Development: Clearwater, Florida's Community impact Statement Requirement." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp. 10-13. Clearwater, Florida is a seaside resort community that has experienced very rapid growth in recent years. In 1974, it amended its zoning ordinance to require a detailed community impact statement (CIS) for all projects with a value in excess of $500,000. Physical, social, and technological issues are addressed in the CIS. The time required to prepare the statement seems to takean average of 30 days plus 30 days for processing the app The CIS process is considered to be complimentary to zoning and not a replacement. It has been used to gain concessions from developers. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40114ES Castle, Gilbert H., III, "Evaluating the Impact of a New Community: Saint Charles Communities Maryland." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp. 13-16. Saint Charles' Study (sponsored by HUD) found that a new community (rather than scattered subdivision) was beneficial to a county on the fringe of urban develop- ment. Christensen, Kathleen. Social Impacts of Land Development. Washington, D.C.: The Urban institute, September 1976. Evaluates the social impacts on a neighborhood's physical environmental due to land development. Includes a sample citizen survey. City of Berkeley, "Noise Element;" Plaster Plan. Berkeley California: Undated. Detailed study describing the relationship between urban noise and transportation/land use activities. Effects of noise upon people, and methodology used to study the noise environment in Berkeley are presented. City of Berkeley, "Seismic Safety Element Now Available." Berkeley Master Plan Program, Newsletter #7 (June 1975). Description of the draft Seismic Safety Element. Cunniff, Patrick F. Environmental Noise Pollution. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977. Highly quantitative discussion on noise pollution. Discussing every aspect of noise - from how sound waves are propagated to what the effects are on people, to laws and ordinances enacted to control noise. Also included is a brief review of basic concepts dealing with physics, mathematics, and a simplified analysis of harmonic oscillation. De Chiara, Joseph and Lee E. Koppelman. Site Planning Standards. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1978. Provides a graphical and pictoral presentation of "current standards, design details, analytical methods, and design procedures. Textual material is included only where clarity or exposition of the graphics is served", as it is intended to supplement the theoretical and critical writings. 2 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES Dodge, Marcia C., "Modeling of Photochemical Smog," Science (March 1973), pp, 1259-1260. Outline of an EPA -sponsored conference held in October 1972. Proceedings are available upon request from the EPA. Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (September 1976). Examines some of the key emerging trends in environmental management at the state level. Graf, William L., "The Impact of Suburbanization on Stream Networks." Final Report No. 19. Iowa City: Institute of Urban and Regional Research (June 1976). I Using Ralston Creek as an example, the impacts that i result from suburbanization are examined. Hendler, Bruce, "Caring for the Land." Planning Advisory Service Report No 328. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials June 1977), "The book focuses on the design principles which should be considered before site design decisions are made." Informative to the citizen in that it provides a glimpse of these processes; however, it "it is not meant to be construed as a text in professional planning and design." Iowa Department of Soil Conservation, Soil and Water Conser- vation in UrbanizingAreas. Iowa Department of Soil Conser- vation. Jago, William H. and Richard R. Lieberman, "Using Model to Assess Urban Design a Planning Impact: Waikiki." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp, Describes a model designed to help answer the question of determining what, when, where, and how much to build, by assessing the impact of various design alternatives. Kendig, Lane, "Performance Zoning: Planning, 32, 10 (November 1977), An Update on Euclid," PP• 18-21 Description of efforts made in Bucks County, Pa., to simplify and eliminate zoning district categories by greater use of performance standards and buffers. W 3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401DES Keyes, Dale L. On, D. � C•� The UrInstban Inst Detailed discussion of development impacts, with the use of analytical techniques, on the natural environ - natural the ment. Also discussed are the effects of man en his natural environment and vice versa. The areas life uand de ave ir qualetat ity, water quality and covered grcesion, noise, natural quantity, wild - scarce resources. disasters and Krieger, Martin H., "Social Indicators Socioeconomic Planning Sciences and the Life C 317. Research 6 Cycle". (1972), PP. 305 - Discussion of the quality of friendship as an indicator the quality of life, Policy in areas suggestions for relationship to it housing, education, health manpower, and physical environment. Land Use Digest, 9, 10 (October 1976). Includes a discussi Renaissance Center on on whether the impact of the spark a broadly bin Detroit ,will be sufficient to with ba in revival of the entire downtown benefits accruing to other properties in the vicinity as well." Langriay, Lynn, "Architecture: The Glass Menagerie," Newsweek (April 26, 1976), p. 89. Feature article on some problems with the Hancock Company Building in Copley Square, Boston; effects on neighbors. Marsh, William M. Environmental and Site Plannin New York: Anal sis for Land Use McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1978. "This book was written to keep you fully informed on key aspects of environmental analysis for planning and design." Also identifies several general trends in the use of environmental information in planning. McLean, Mary, "Zon. PlanningAdvisor g Buffers: Solution or Panacea." American Societ Service Re ort No. 133. Chicago: y of Planning Officials (April 1960). A method of softening the effects which are incompatible. of proximal uses Two types are discussed: (1) use buffers (an offshoot of zoning) (2) landscape buffers (a design device). Example zoning ordinance containing requirements for land - P g and screening. (Rye, New York, 1959). FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Muller, Thomas, "Assessing the Impact of Development." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp• 2-5. — A guide to reports (prepared by ULI) on the availability of impact analysis tools to local government decision -makers. Muller, Thomas. Economic Impacts --•� -•••� &� =guy values. Washington, D.C.: t-ute, September 1976_ In-depth study examining the nonfiscal economic effects on employment, housing, and property values of land development. Muller, Thomas. Fiscal Impacts of Land Development. Washington, D.C.: —The Urban Institute, 1976. Fiscal impact studies, including methodologies used to determine the net value of new develop- ment to a community. Myers, Phyllis and Gordon Binder. An Issue Report -- Nei h orhood Conservation Lessons from Three Cities. Washington, D.C.. the Conservation F� pond t on, March 1978. Case Studies of neighborhoods in Cincinnati, Ohio, Seattle, Washington, and Annapolis, Maryland in which urban conservation efforts (from both the private and public sectors) are examined. This report is beneficial in that it contains impor- tant lessons for local policy "as well as for state and federal policy, beyond the specifics of each case study." Mylroie, Gerald, "Community Design Review Procedures," Practicing Planner (April 1976), pp. 25-28. Concepts, procedures, and cases of the use of design review for improving the quality of new construction and rehabilitation in urban settings. Oakland City Planning Department, Design Resources in the Oakland Central District. Oakland, California, 1963. Gives an overall visual form and organization of the district and a detailed survey of existing design resources (mostly buildings). 5 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Perloff, Harvey, "Life Styles and Environment," ASPO Planning, 19 (June 1973). Discussion of life style conflicts. Pimental, David, et al., "Land Degradation: Effects on Food and Energy Resources," Science (October 8, 1976), pp. 199-155. Contains a section discussing agriculture land loss to highways and urbanization. Promise, John, "Sound Cooperation: First Phase of an Area - wide Environmental Noise Study," Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, D.C. (June 1975). In this report, the study is described but none of the data are given. For example, the reader is told that a "NOISE computer program" was developed using results of an EPA survey; however, neither the program nor the survey are described in enough detail to allow for application of the same process in other locations. Public Affair Counseling, "Dynamics of Neighborhood Change," Real Estate Research Corporation, San Francisco, California, 1976; also NTIS. Provides an overview of total neighborhood change process. Also gives a description of process compo- nents and relationships and an understanding of what can be done. Included is a graphic illustration of the process and an extensive bibliography. Roberts, Polly, "Making Dollars and Sense out of Fiscal Impacts Analysis." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (October 1976), pp, 5-g Critique of the use of "cash flow" impact as a basis for fiscal impact analysis. Schaenman, Philip S. Usin�an impact Measurement System to Evaluate Land Development Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, September 1976. i Reviews the impact measurement system with help from three communities: Phoenix, Arizona, Indianapolis, Indiana, and Montgomery County, Maryland. Emphasizes the improvement of existing procedures for evaluating changes in the use of land. i i 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Schaenman, Philip S. and Thomas Muller. Measuring Impacts of Land Development. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1976. An assessment of measures and procedures that analyze the effects of land development in the areas of social, economic, aesthetic, environmental, public, and private services. Siegan, Bernard. Land Use Without Zoning. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath, 1972. An evaluation of zoning as a means of land use control and an investigation of what patterns develop without zoning, with and without restrictive convenants. Con- clusion is that land use patterns would be not all that different, and at least no worse, if zoning were elimi- nated, Not much attention is paid to negative externali- ties, and no regulatory mechanism is suggested for controlling them. So, Frank S., David Mosena, and Frank Bangs, "Planned Unit Development Ordinances," Plannin2 Advisory Service Report Number 291. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, May 1973. ' Concepts, mechanics, language, experience with PUD development in the U.S. Considerable detail in all aspects, including design standards and site plan review guidelines. Thurow, Charles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley, "Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A Practical Guide for Local Administrators, Parts 1 and 2," Planning Advisory Service Reports Numbers 307 and 311. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, June 1975. Regulatory instruments for protecting environmental resources and creeks, aquifers, wetlands, woodlands, hillsides) through various kinds of performance stand- ards. Concepts, experience, excerpts from ordinances. i Urban Land, Urban Land Institute (June 1977). I Explores some of the forces already at work in residen- tial rehabilitation. Examines an innovative technique HUD is using to dispose of vacant housing acquired through its mortgage insurance programs and also includes a case study of Atlanta's experience with in -town rein- vestment. / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIMES Webb, Dorothy, "Designing the City," Nations Cities (1977), reprinted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development. Description of HUD's 1976 awards to cities and states for urban design excellence. Neighborhood conservation and design review procedures are among the examples cited as well as pedestrian plazas, housing rehabilitation, and civic architecture. 6 r - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES LAND USE REGULATION AND ADMINISTRATION Report Number 2 Babcock, Richard and John Banta, "New Zoning Techniques for Inner City Areas," Planning Advisory Service Report No. 297. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials (December 1973). Reviews techniques such as citizens participation in rezoning and variance procedures; new tools to control bulk, density, and building siting; overlay districts; zoning incentives; historic preservation. Bair, Frederick, M., Jr., "Special Public Interest Districts: A Multipurpose Zoning Device." Planning Advisory Service Re ort No. 287. Chicago: American Society of Planning 0 facials January 1973). Describes evaluation of the concept of special public interest districts and lays out draft legislation with commentary. Beal, Frank, "The Elimination of Nonconforming Signs." Planni.n Advisor Service Re ort No. 209. Chicago: American Society of Planning Of icials April 1966). Examines the development of the amortization concept as it relates to signs. Survey of jurisdictions to find out nature and effect of elimination programs. Bosselman, Fred and Charles Siemon, "Improving Due Process in Local Zoning Decisions." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (August 1976), pp. 14-16. A look at the growing impatience with procedural (not substantive) due process in zoning. Ellickson, Robert C., "Alternatives to Zoning: Convenants, Nui;sgnce Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls, "The Univer- sity of Chicago Law Review, 60, 4 (Summer 1973), pp. 681-781. Discusses goals for a land use control system. Zoning, covenants, and nuisance law are then evaluated in terms of these goals. Finally, "the article explores how these methods, and others, might be interrelated to produce a more efficient and equitable system for guiding urban growth." Geiler, Richard M., "Development Regulations Must be Reasonable." Urban Land (October 1976), pp. 3-4. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Geiler feels that there is a necessity for environmental regulations; however, the controls placed on the land developer must be within reason. This "means that real estate development will take longer, will be more costly, and will carry more risks." Gil, Efraim, "Neighborhood Zoning; Practices and Prospects." Planning Advisory Service Report No 311. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials. Describes the practice of neighborhood zoning and emphasizes "problems that have arisen, factors of success or failure, and recommendations for practical application." Harr, Charles M., "The Social Control of Urban Space," The Manipulated City. Ed. Stephen Gale and Eric G. Moore. Chicago: Maarifa Press, 1975. Chapter VI. Problems of decision-making about urban space are given real legal and institutional flesh. Space is viewed as simply something to be used and regulated for human purposes. Heeter, David, "Toward a More Effective Land -Use Guidance System: A Summary and Analysis of Five Major Reports." Plannin Advisor Service Report No. 250. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials 1969 . Reviews five important reports on the use of land. Recommendations for restructuring regulatory systems are critically analyzed. Herr, Philip B., and Kevin Lynch, "Performance Zoning: The Small Town of Gay,.Massachusetts, Tries It." .'Planners Notebook. American Institute of Planners, 3 5 (October 1777T. Looks at the process which led to the adoption of a broad performance zoning and impact analysis approach to land use control in a rural town in Massachusetts. Several reasons for hesitancy to adopt zoning laws are cited: value placed on freedom from government interfer- ence and regulation; feeling that urban zoning categories are inappropriate for rural areas; low level of land precommitment; and a desire to "judge each case on its own merits," rather than committing the area to an abstract, long-range goal. Traditional zoning by named category of use was largely abandoned in favor of flexible and uniform performance controls over use and density including parking regulations, limits on traffic generation, dust, fumes, odor, glare, erosion, and pollution of air and water. 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ?10111[5 Keene, John C., "Constitutional Limits on Federal Regulation of Land." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (August 1976), pp. 7-13: Examines limits of federal government in exerting control over land use (at the local level) through spending power, taxing power, and regulation. Land Design/Research, Inc. .Cost Effect Site Planning, Washington, D.C.: National Association of Home Bui ers, 1976. "Sets forth site development guidelines for higher density single-family homes on small lots." Emphasizes use of costs, design standards, environmental consider- ations, and neighborhood designs in favoring cluster development under PUD and similar flexible regulations. Land Use Digest, 9, 12 (December 1976). Describes "a technique for preserving open space in residential developments without common ownership of land that is being put into practice" in a subdivision Of Delafield, Wisconsin. Morell, David, 11208 Planning: Local Priorities and Political Authority." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (December 1976 , pp, 5_7, Discusses 208 972. This Program edeals pwith athe rauthorityeated yCretainedongresslbyllocal, state and federal governments concerning land use and water quality decisions. "...environmental quality is too vital an issue to be left solely to the professional planners." Nelson, Robert H. Zoning and Property Riqhts. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, Focuses on "the changes that zoning has made in property rights and their social and economic consequences. It also deals with zoning history the role of planning in zoning development and the political aspects of zoning administration and zoning legal theories." Pai, Gregory, "How the City Council plans to complete the destruction of Waikiki." Hawaii Observer (January 20, 1976), pp. 6-8. 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES Discusses Bill 144 which would establish a Waikiki Special Design District. Analyzes the contributing factors for its rejection by the Honolulu City Plan- ning Commission. The article states that Bill 144 is unessential to the economic well-being of small pro- perty owners. It also "fails to project a unifying and consistent vision of the physical, social, and cultural quality of Waikiki." Reilly, William D. (ed.). The Use of Land: A Citizens' Policy Guide to Urban Growth. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1973. Report prepared by the Task Force sponsored by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Assesses influence which government can exert on land use; sets out a selective strategy for improving control; looks at impact of land use on environment -- both social and physical. Schnidman,Frank, "Legal Notes ..." Urban Land (September 1976), p. 22. The Supreme Court approves ballot box growth management in Eastlake case. Scott, Robert, "The Effect of Nonconforming Land -Use Amortization." Planning Advisory Service Report No. 210. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials May 1972). Explains amortization which emphasizes the concerns of both the nonconforming user and the judicial body reviewing the case. Sullam, Brian, "House retreats on land use." Hawaii Observer (April 1, 1975), p. 3. Traces the path of the bill, H.B. 85, to its demise. If it had been passed, it would have required the legislature to approve every single land -use change granted by the State Land Use Commission." Weinberg, Edwin, "The Courts and Land Use." Environmental Comment, Urban Land Institute (August 1976), pp. 2-7. Contains a summary of land use case law over the past two years. 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIIi[s HISTORIC STRUCTURES INVENTORY Report Number 4 Back to the City - A Guide to Urban Preservation. Proceedings of the Back to the City Conference, NYC Brownstone Revival Committee of New York, 1974. Collection of essays concerning the promotion, financing, and preservation of old communities within our cities. Blair, Lachlan F. and John A. Quinn., eds., Historic Preservation - Setting, Legislation and Techniques. Urbana inoi.s: n erer- sity of Illinois, Bureau of Urban and Regional Planning Research, January 1977. Proceedings of the Second Annual Winter Conference on Planning. It "emphasized practical techniques which practitioners and volunteers need to be familiar with in order to fit preservation efforts effectively into the ongoing processes of development and change." Brenneman, Russell L. Private Approaches to the Preservation of Open Land. New London, onnec icu a Conservation an Ed Research Foundation, 1967. Evaluates legal instruments -- transfers, trusts, easements, leaseholds, conditions, limitations, restrictive convenant, tat aspects -- from the standpoint of their usefulness in preserving our natural heritage. Board of Trustees, Maryland Environmental Trust. Conservation Easements. Baltimore, Maryland: Maryland Environmental Trust, July 1974. Questions and answers dealing with a specified case (Maryland) "concerning the use of conservation easement as a method to preserve both land and buildings." Tax consequences of donated easements are also reviewed. Includes a sample easement. Dunsavage, Lyn and Virginia Talkington. The Making of a Historic District - Swiss Avenue, Dallas, Texas. Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press, 1975. Analyzes the creation of the Swiss Avenue Historic District, an "inner-city neighborhood that was historically signifi- cant but had deteriorated over the years into a classic example of urban blight." 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONJES urammage, Grady, Jr., Philip N. Jones and Stephen S. Jones. Historic Preservation in California - A Le al Handbook. Standford Environmental Law School, Stanford, California, 1975. Provides guidance and assistance to preservationists, attorneys, and public officials in legal approaches to historic preservation. Duke University School of Law, "Historic Preservation." Law and Contemporary Problems, 36, 3 (Summer 1971). An assortment of articles dealing with legal aspects of historic preservation. Includes a case study of historic preservation in NYC and contains a bibliography of periodic literature relating to the law of historic preservation. Keyes, Margaret N. Nineteenth CenturV Home Architecture of Iowa City. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1966. Includes a brief history of Iowa City and illustrated listing of architecturally significant 19th century houses by style. Lafore, Lawrence, and Robert Dykstra, "Report on the Proposal Rezoning Area of Iowa City's Near North Side." Iowa City, Iowa: mimeo, 1975. Shows the results of the Architectural Heritage Committee, Iowa City Project Green survey. It gives a listing of North Side areasand individual structures of architectural merit. Land Use Digest, 9, 11 (November 1976). Major retailers are beginning to show renewed interest in downtown by refurbishing, expanding, and replacing with modern facilities older central -city department stores. Maddex, Diane, Historic Buildings of -Washington, D C Washington, D.C..ober Park Asso Yates, Inc., 1973. Includes an illustrated selection from records of Historic American Building Survey, National Park Services, U.S. Department of Interior and a detailed historic and architectural description of Washington's historic buildings. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOItIES Miner, Ralph W., "Conservation of Historic and Cultural Resources." Planning Advisory Service Report No 244 Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials 1969. "...Outlines an approach to historic and cultural conservation within the perspective of key issues and problems, and describes the basic components of a comprehensive local conservation program." Includes an Historic Building Evaluation Checklist and an Historic Area Evaluation Checklist, Guidelines for Architectural Review, and an extensive bibliography. Morrison, Jacob H. Historic Preservation Law. Washington, D.C.: The National rus or is oric r�vation, 1965. Examines Federal State legal developments in the historic preservation field as a separate body of law. Also includes sample city historic preservation ordi- nances. This is a revised and expanded edition, the first being published in 1967. National Trust for Historic Preservation, Hi76) storic Preserva- tion. Preservation Press (January - March 19. i Collection of essays by college students on historic I preservation. Old House, Inc., Old House Journal, Brooklyn, New York: 12 issues/year, 1974+. Articles on how to renovate, maintain, and rehabilitate old houses, especially Victorian and earlier. Sources for special services and materials. Old West Side Association, Inc., Old West Side, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 1971. A comprehensive survey of the "Old West Side" neighbor- hood of Ann Arbor. --"aim is to establish the physical character of the neighborhood, to identify its assets and its problems, and to suggest guidelines that will perceive its structures and landscape as well as its historical character." Old West Side Association, Inc., Old West Side News. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1970 - (10 issues per year . Includes local history, suggestions for renovations, notices and discussions of proposed policies affecting the neighborhood, and personal notices and services. National Trust for Historic Perservation. "Papers from the Preservation and Building Codes Conference, 1974." 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES A collection of short essays on Current Issues, Current Solutions, National Code Organizations, and Future Action. Examples of national and state code provisions relating to historic buildings are given. Maryland Historical Trust. Preservation Easements. Baltimore, Maryland: Mayland Historical Trust, 1974. Based on Conservation Easements, a citizen's guide to use of Historic -Facade, or Scenic Easements. National Trust for Historic Preservation. Preservation Your Town - 1973 Annual Mea+;nn anA 1974. Collection of short essays on financial aspects promoting historic preservation and case studies. French and Pickering Creeks Conservation Trust, Inc. "Proceed- ings from Conference on Voluntary Preservation of Open Space, 1974." Emphasizes easements for preservation of historic sites and protection of Critical Environmental Areas. Reed, Thomas J., "Land Use Controls in Historic Areas." Notre Dame Lawyer, 44, 3 (February 1969), pp. 379-430. Gives historical, case study approach to subject, focusing on administration and practice. Includes model Historic District Ordinances and easements for preservation. Reynolds, Anthony and William D. Waldron, "Historical Significance... How much is it Worth?" The Appraisal Journal, 37, 3 (July 1969), pp. 401-410. Applies traditional appraisal techniques to historically significant real estate to determine its value. Urban Land Institute, "Private -Market Housing Renovation in Older Urban Areas." ULI Research Report Number 26. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1977. Focuses on private investment and renovation in older inner-city neighborhoods. It first explores general trends, and influencing factors and then looks at specific cases in Boston, Atlanta, Dallas, St. Paul, and San Francisco. 16 FIICROFILHFD BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES STREETS AND TRAFFIC Report Number 5 Appleyard, Donald and Mark Lintell, "Environmental Quality of Streets: The Residents' Viewpoint." Highway Research Record, No. 356 (1971), pp. 69-84. Shows in depth, that "traffic creates not only a barrier effect but also reduces the livability of the neighborhood and leads to negative attitudes toward the neighborhood on the part of the residents as well as having a generally depressing effect." Bolt, Beranek and Newman. Highway Noise Generation and Control. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report Nu mer Washington, D.C.: Transportation Board, 1976. Covers the many aspects of the highway noise problem. Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. A Handbook for Pedestrian Action. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977. "Provides guidelines that can be modified to suit pedestrianization experiments of differing scale." Deals with the reasons for pedestrian zoning and the ways in which it can be implemented. "Emphasis has been placed on methods and goals that are financially and politically feasible, as well as socially and en- vironmentally desirable. Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. Bannin the Car Downtown. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 19 . "Presents an in-depth analysis of sixteen North American pedestrianization experiments, providing information on the process each city underwent in the creating of its mall." Both successful and unsuccessful projects are examined within the context of the complexity of pedes- trian planning. Brambilla, Roberto and Gianni Longo. The Rediscover of the Pedestrian. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing 0 ice, 1977. Evaluates "pedestrian experiments in twelve selected European cities." Excellent resource for those involved in "promoting the creating of traffic -free areas in their cities. 17 411CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES Brambilla, Roberto, Gianni Longo, and Virginia Dzurinko. American Urban Malls. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977. Provides an easily understandable and comparative overview of a majority of North American pedestrian- ization experiments through the presentation of vital statistics and visual representatives of 68 urban malls." Brinton, John H., Jr., and Joel N. Bloom. Effect of Highway Landscape Development on Nearby Property. Na— t nal Cooperative Highway Research Program Report Number 75. Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Board, 1969. "It not only provides current information on the subject of the values of landscaping, but also presents infor- mation on noise and other factors related to highway use. Curry, David A. and Dudley G. Anderson. a;ahwav User Costs, Air Pol] 1972. for oval Cooperative hignway rceaeai , _ � 7- ••• 133, Washington, D.C.: Highway Research Board, Contains information on procedures that can be used to select level of traffic services on the basis of user costs and related consequences of air and noise pollution. DeLeuw, Cather and Company and City of Berkeley. Six Months ...... n.,valpv Traffic Management Plan. Berkeley: Describes the impacts of the use of diverters, closures, and other traffic management devices extensively used in Berkely, California. Emphasis is on objective measures of change resulting from what is probably the oldest and most fully developed neighborhood protection plan in the U.S. Department of Community Development, Ames, Iowa. Ames Neighbor- borhood Planning Guide. Community Planning Department, Iowa State University, 1976. Describes the steps involved in preparing a neighborhood plan. Gambel, Hays, et al., Community Effects of highways Reflected by Property Values. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Admin- istration, August 1973. 18 MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Goodwin, P.B. and T.P. Hutchinson, "The Risk of Walking, Transportation, 6, 3 (September 1977), pp. 217-230. Accident rate per distance traveled is estimated to be roughly 5 times higher for pedestrians as auto drivers. Likelihood of accident goes up with the product of ve- hicle and pedestrian flows. Hal]., Fred L., Susan Birnie and S. Martin Taylor, "The Effective- ness of Shielding in Reducing the Adverse Impacts of Highway Noise", paper presented to the meetings of the Transportation Research Board. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, 1978. In using "home interview data from 5 pairs of residential sites" it was found that "there is no psychological effect for road traffic noise specifically, but that there is an effect for attitudes toward overall community noise. This psychological effect appears to be negative for solid noise barriers, low for single rows of trees, and highest for a row or rows of intervening house." Institute of Public Administration, "Pedestrian Needs and Accomodations: A Study of Behavior and Perception," prepared for the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (Washington: December 1974). Combination direct observation and questionnaire survey of pedestrian attitudes, opinions and behavior. It was found pedestrians do not offer strong opinions about the amenities and disamenities of the walking environment, yet they clearly respond to these factors in their be- havior. Keeler, Theodore and Kenneth Small. Transportation. Part III: Automot 1 Development, July 1975). Kugler, B. Andrew, Daniel E. Commins, and William J. Galloway. Highway Noise - A Design Guide for Prediction and Control. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report Number 1974, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1976. Presents two methods of predicting traffic noise levels at locations adjacent to highways. Also includes "pro- cedures for applying noise control measures through high- way designs or modifications to existing facilities." Lee, Douglass and Stephen Kautz, "Highway Financing in the State of Iowa," Proceedings of the Transportation Research Forum, 18, 1, Oxford, Indiana: Richard B. Cross (1977), pp. 223-231. 19 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES o-iDuus Lyon, Richard H., "Environmental Noise and Acoustical Modeling." Technology Review, 78, 5 (March/April 1976), pp. 60-67. Describes "how scale modeling techniques are helping acoustical engineers control the rising levels of urban noise." O'Hara, Edward, "Hard Decisions and Lower Fares." Trans- portation USA_, United States Department of Transportation, 2, 3 (Spring 1976), pp. 8-11. Describes what various cities across the nation have been doing in the area of transportation system manage- ment in order to "reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, to save gasoline, and to reduce the need for large capital spending to handle growing auto traffic." Public Technology, Inc. Portation: Local Govex and Shows how seven U.S. Cities are "using innovations in transportation and pedestrian movement as major tools in downtown revitalization. All are designed to provide better access to and mobility within the center city areas." Pushkarev, Boris S., with Jeffrey M. Zupan. Urban Space for Pedestrians. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1976. "This timely book with its unique analysis and concomi- tant recommendations on the needs and the welfare of the pedestrian should contribute to a long -needed establish- ment of pedestrian norms to balance over -assertiveness of the motor vehicle." Schmitt, Rolf, "Predicting the Impacts of Transportation on the Spread of Urban Blight," Transportation Research Record Number 634. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1977, pp. 27-32. Slavet, Joseph, Katherine Bradley, and Philip Moss. Financing State -Local Services. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath Co., 1975. Smith, Wilbur and Associates and Curtis Associates. Draft Final Report - Berkeley Coordinated Transit Development Project. San Francisco: Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc., April 1976. "...Recommends an action program for improving public transportation in Berkeley." 20 FIICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES Transportation Research Board, "Motor Vehicle Noise Control." Special Report Number 152. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1975. Proceedings of a conference held in November. 1974. The articles range from detailed modeling of noise levels to description of abatement programs. Most of the articles on control deal with source (i.e. vehicle engine, trans- mission, tire) regulation. Urban Land Institute, American Society of Civil Engineers, and the National Association of Home Builders, Residential Streets: objectives, Principles, and Design Considerations. Washington: ULI, ASCE, NAHB, 1974. U.S. Department of Transportation. Fundamentals and Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise: Noise Barrier Design and Example Abatement Measures. Washington, D.C.: O fice of Environmental Policy, Federal Highway Administration, April 1974. U.S. Department of Transportation, "More on Social and Economic Effects of Highways." Highway and Urban Mass Transportation (June 1977), p. 31. "...a study of social effects of auto traffic on urban streets found that heavy traffic caused residents either to move away from the street or to retreat from the front of the house." U.S. Department of Transportation, "Noise Bariers." Highway and Urban Mass Transportation (June 1977), pp. 12-13. Discusses ways in which the effects of noise can be minimized; by breaking the "line of sight between the source and the receivers "through the use of earth beams and noise barrier walls. I U.S. Department of Transportation. The Social and Economic Effects of Highways. Washington, D.C.: Socioeconomic Studies Division, 1976. Vance, John, "Liability of the State for Highway Traffic Noise," Research Results Digest, 99 (February 1978), Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board. Witheford, David K., "State of the Art -Transportation Noise Barriers," Trans ortation Research News, Transportation Research Board (July - August 1976 . Provides information on the latest research on noise barriers, including theory, design procedures, and costs. 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES PARKING Report Number 6 Land Use Digest, 9, 9 (September 1976). Looks at the established parking standard for shopping centers. Land Use Digest, 11, 2 (February 1978). Discusses incentives implemented by the American Hospital Supply Corporation of Evanston, Illinois to encourage its employees to use public transportation in order to save energy and cut air pollution. Also, Downtown Auto Parks of Minneapolis is offering incentives to carpools to reduce downtown parking. Ornstein, Gail, "Parking in Residential Area." Planning Advisory Service Re ort No. 214. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials September 1966). Surveys current practices and standards especially in residential areas. Summarizes provisions for offstreet parking ordinances. Simkowitz, Howard J., Lajos Heder and Edward -Barber, "The Restraint of the Automobile in American Residential Neighborhoods." Cambridge, Massachusetts: U.S. Department of Transportation and Moore-Heder Architects (April 1978). Discusses parking policies in residential neighborhoods. Describes the causes and effects of the parking problem and the potential solutions, i.e. the residential parking permit concept. Also analyzes the use of traffic restraint devices in residential neighborhoods and their effectiveness. 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14017IES I COMMUNITY FACILITIES Report Number 7 Drewry, Virginia, "Recycling Old Schools," Self -Reliance, 10 (November -December 1977), pp. 1-2- A few ideas on what to do with school buildings no longer needed for primary and secondary education. Holohean, Mary Ann, "Neighborhood Service Facilities." Planning Advisory Service Report No. 2.39_. Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials (May 1968). "...states the problems posed by decentralized social and administrative centers in the context of what has been and proposed in the area of neighborhood facilities planning. Also cites four basic reasons for the de- centralization itself. MCEldowney, Ken. "Hospitals -- the Latest Neighborhood Nuisance," San Francisco Bay Guardian (April 13, 1979). Describes some of the impacts of hospitals -- particularly hospital expansion -- on residential neighborhoods: traffic, pollution, etc. Article calls for neighborhood clinics rather than expansion of a centralized facility. `Patton, Carl V., "Schools and Neighborhood Conservation," i Planning -- Where We Live. Eds. John A. Quinn and Clyde W. Forrest. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, Bureau of Urban and Regional Planning Research, June 1977. Deals with the question of school closings due to changing demographics and gives a list of criteria that closures are based upon. It also analyzes the impact of school s, the problems associated with, closings upon neighborhood and alternatives to school closings. "Regrowth for Existing Shopping Centers," Urban Land (February 1977) . Gives a step by step list on how to save a mall that has become outdated. Cites six good examples of out- dated open malls that are being saved and made very productive by remodeling (enclosing them) to modern standards. 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES raolMEs NEIGHBORHOOD SITE IMPROVEMENTS Report Number 8 Clay, Grady, "Long Live the Alley!" Planning, Am�e1ican 8. Society of Planning Officials (June 1978 pp. An in-depth look at the city's hidden byways. This article is an excerpt from his book Alleys: A Hidden Resource, which incorporates a study by Jonathan Barnett and the Louisville Community Design Center. Geshwiler, Rick, et al., "Tree Planting Plan" (April 1976). Prepared for the Department of Community Development. Discusses "how trees can be planted around residences to make them more pleasant and energy efficient, and provides a guide for the planting of trees along City Streets." 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORIES CITIZEN SELF-HELP HANDBOOK Report Number 11 O.M. Collective. The Organizer's Manual, New York: Bantam Books, 1971. Assesses the criteria needed for organizing anything from a simple meeting, to a drug counseling center, to a mass rally. Recommended for everyone as it is written•on a very practical basis. Wallick, Philip B. and Leon Benkovitz, "New York City Pioneers Neighborhood Handbooks." Practicing Planner. December 1976. Describes a handbook put out by the NYC planning department to aid their neighborhood advisory groups. Also advises planners and officials in other cities working with such citizen groups. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES NUISANCE LAW APPLIED TO LAND USE CONTROL Report Number 12 i Department of Health and Environmental Protection. "Summary of Noise -Related Statues in Metropolitan Washington." Technical - er hington Governmentst Wa hMetropolitan ington,D.0 (DecembersCouncil of 1, 1974) Contains the noise -related statutes of the fourteen local governments and three states which comprise the Metropoli- tan Washington area, as well as criteria used in the design of the METRO rapid rail system. The latter do not consti- tute laws nor regulations but have been used as performance standards by METRO and provide information on impacts of er various conditions. The other noise at various levels und statutes reprinted here vary from the uneffectual (outlaw- ing "unnecessary" noise from aircraft) to the trivial (bells on ice cream wagons) to lengthy and complex (state of Maryland, Senate Bill #870, establishing maximum allowable levels of noise exposure). i I I 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIriLs COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Report Number 13 Black, Thomas, "Germantown, Maryland: A New Approach to Community Development." Urban Land (September 1976), pp. 13-21. "Montgomery County, Maryland, is trying to develop a planned new community (Germantown located northwest of Washington, D.C.) through a combination of public and private initiatives, using fairly conventional regulatory spending authorities." Citizen's Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality. Citizens Make the Difference. Washington, D.C., January 1973. A collection of seven case studies depicting successful actions that were undertaken by citizens across the nation in order to improve some aspects of their surrounding environment. Goldstein, Benjamin and Ross Davis. Neighborhoods in the Urban Economy. Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath, 1976. Report of a conference on neighborhood commercial revitalization. Topics include market analysis, federal programs, physical design improvement, organizational structures for business revitalization, technical assist- ance to small business credit problems, and public-pri- vate cooperation. Substance is fairly thin, but a comprehensive survey for those concerned with retail activities in blighted urban areas. Haight Action, Haight - Ashbury Neighborhood Council. A neighborhood paper attempting to organize, inform and unite. Hallman, Howard. Neighborhood Government in a Metropolitan Setting. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications, 1974. Problems and advantages of administrative and geographi- cal decentralization of local government. Reviews, theories of community participation, small-scale admini- stration, and shared power, and evaluates experience in U.S. communities with regard to applicability to neighborhood government. Concludes that portions of many urban service functions could be successfully and beneficially administered at the neighborhood level. Hallman considers neighborhoods of 10,000 and 25,000 persons as representative sizes. PRA MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES Jones, Malcolm, "People, Place Persistence: A Victory for [ Neighborhoods." Southern Exposure, 5, 1 (Spring 1977), i pp. 77-79. Describes how the generally lower income Crystal Towers neighborhood in Winston-Salem, N.C., managed to become organized and acquire the kinds of y community support necessary for protecting and re- habilitating older neighborhoods. A number of different efforts, planning techniques, and types of programs were tapped to supply the needed ingredients. Small Town. Small Towns Institute, Ellensburg, Washington. Monthly newsjournal containing varying viewpoints covering a wide variety of issues that affect a small town and its inhabitants. The majority of the articles focus directly on the works of specific small communities across the nation and Canada. The TAG Staff, Tenant Survival, ed. Terry R. McCure, Haight - Ashbury, 1970. +� Informational booklet for tenants covering tenant's rights, evictions, repairs, deposits, and breaking leases. Taylor, James, "Making Cities Safe for Democracy." Self -Reliance, 6 (March -April 1977), pp. 6-7. A brief description of how neighborhood residents can and are becoming more involved in planning for their neighborhoods. NE MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NCS GRANT PROGRAM COORDINATION Report Number 14 Department of Community Development (Iowa City), "CDGB Environmental Review Process" (July 1, 1976). I I Details the environmental review procedure that must be accomplished by DCD staff before requests for funding (from HUD under the Community Develop- ment Block Grant) can be submitted for specific projects. Drewry, Virginia, "Congress Discovers Neighborhoods." Self -Reliance, 8 (July -August 1977). Summarizes five bills (one of which has already been signed into law) "that would promote neighbor- hood economic development," by the establishment of a National Rebuilding and Development Bank or by encouraging energy conservation through the prudent management of financial assistance. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Improving the Quality of Urban Life. Washington, D.C.: HUD, December 1967. A program guide to model neighborhoods in demonstra- tion cities. "Explains the nature, intent, policies, and requirements of the Model Cities program and presents an overview of its various stages." Naparstek, Arthur, et al. A Citizen's Compendium to Programs and Strategies. National Center for Urban Ethnic airs, 1977. Analyzes programs and legislative acts for the reinvest- ment of various neighborhoods across the country. 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES FINAL REPORT Report Number 16 McNulty, Robert H. and Stephen A. Kliment, eds., Neighbor- hood Conservation: A Handbook of Methods and Techniques. New York: Whitney Library o Design, 1976. "This book is designed as a guide to the key adminis- trative, legal, financial, social, and physical design issues governing the present and future of neighborhood conservation." Included are 45 case studies of American cities that have been involved in neighborhood conser- vation, "along with a detailed compendium of printed resources arranged by issue and subject matter." Zinsmeyer, Jeff, "Neighborhood Preservation: Preservation for Whom?", Self -Reliance, 5 (January 1977), pp. 1-3. Commentary on HUD neighborhood preservation programs. 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110PIES I North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r The research and studies forming the basis for this report were conducted pursuant to a grant with the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD). The statements and conclusions contained herein are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Government in general or HUD in particular. Neither the United States nor HUD makes any warranty, ex- pressed or implied, or assumes re- sponsibility for the accuracy or com- pleteness of the information herein. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROI RES CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Mary C. Neuhauser t Carol deProsse John Balmer David Ferret (( Robert Vevera, Mayor x; Clemens Erdahl Glenn E. Roberts Pat Foster' Max Selzer i`„ Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Ogesen Ernest W. Lehman Patt Cain** Jane Jakobsen Richard Blum, Chairperson John Kammermeyer Juanita Vetter City Staff Neal Berlin, City Manager Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development Julie Vann, CDBG Program Coordinator Bill Keating, Assistant Planner t Past Mayor Past Council Members " Past Chairperson THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Institute of Urban and Regional Research: Kenneth J. Dueker, Director Douglass B. Lee, Jr., Project Leader A complete list of the reports in this series appears on the inside back cover. HUD Innovative Projects Grant No. B -76 -SI -19-0001 (FY 1976) FINAL REPORT Douglass Lee July 1978 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Douglass Lee, Project Leader Department of Community Development City of Iowa City Institute of Urban and Regional Research University of Iowa MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOINES FOREWORD Funding for the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study was provided under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Innovative Projects program in response to a proposal titled "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neigh- borhood Preservation and Enhancement." The award was made to the City of Iowa City and the work carried out by the i; University of Iowa's Institute of Urban and Regional Research under a subcontract. Most of the content of the Final Report was taken directly from the other fifteen reports that comprise the final report series. The summaries, conclusions, and recommendations portions of each report were supplemented by illustrative figures and other material, and are incorporated into the i Summary and Recommendations section of this report. Only the section on internal management of the project (organiza- tion, tasks, budget, etc.) is entirely unique to the Final Report. Some of our recommendations have received an initial 3 hearing (as "proposals"), but they have not, as yet, been aj given the time and attention that will be required to act on them. We hope that City staff, policy makers, and neighbor- hood residents will take a hard look at what we are offering, on the possibility that the information and ideas contained '• in these reports may be useful in helping to preserve and improve the quality of Iowa City's neighborhoods. jDBL a I IA 1 i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOINES CONTENTS FOREWORD i INTRODUCTION 1 Study Area 2 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 I. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines 8 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration 15 3. Land Use Intensity 17 4. Historic Structures Inventory 31 5. Streets and Traffic 43 6. Parking 51 7. Community Facilities 59 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements 62 9. Impact Survey Manual 63 10. Impact Survey 1978 68 11. Citizen Self -Help Manual 77 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control 78 13. Community Participation 85 14. Grant Program Coordination• 90 15. Annotated Bibliography 92 MANAGEMENT AND EVALUATION 93 Management of the Study 93 Task Organization and Supervision 94 Evaluation 97 Budget 98 Participants in the Study 100 ii MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES INTRODUCTION At the broadest level, the objective of the North Side study was to apply the techniques of comprehensive planning to the neighborhood level. Since no "plan" per se emerges from the study, and since many of the reports explicitly reject some of the existing techniques of land use planning and land use control, it might be more accurate to state that the objective of the study was to develop comprehensive planning methodology for the neighborhood level. The reports of the study try to explain and illustrate the techniques and methods we believe are most useful. At a more specific level, attention is focused on the planning of existing older neighborhoods, expecially those which contain mixed land uses and a variety of problems and resources. This focus implies that there are many attributes of existing neighborhoods that are worth protecting -- a housing stock, a demographic structure, a set of public and private facilities that provide useful services, some historic and neighborhood qualities not found in other neighborhoods, etc. Also implied is the presence of numerous problems which detract ' from and undermine the positive attributes. In developing our methodology, the intent has been to seek ways of understanding the problems and identifying the resources as efficiently and ii accurately as possible, with a reasonable expenditure of time and effort. That is why we constructed our own techniques as we went along, rather than simply applying an off-the-shelf methodology for land use planning. We feel the results justify the approach taken. { The use of a case study neighborhood creates a beneficial tension between ideas and reality. On the one hand, the study r strove to find general results and general methodologies that could be transferred to other neighborhoods with useful conse- quences; on the other hand, the study had to be specific to the i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES North Side and produce information and recommendations that would be pertinent to that particular neighborhood. Thus the analysis and conclusions contained in the study apply directly and specifically to the North Side, yet many of the problems and most of the methodology will relate to other neighborhoods in other times and places. Both the professional and the research sides of planning could greatly benefit from more of this kind of interaction. Two primary clusters of problems formed themselves in the course of the study: one set of problems emanated from the usage of motor vehicles (traffic, parking, trucks), and the other set arose from land use incompatibilities, of the type that zoning is commonly expected to prevent. In analyzing both of these problem areas we found the concept of negative i impact to be helpful: activities which constitute the use and j enjoyment of land (residential, commercial, or street land) for t one person may interfere with the use and enjoyment of another's land. Traffic noise, danger, and fumes reduce the habitability 1 of portions of homes that are close to heavily traveled streets and impair walking where it should be encouraged; parking lots create dust, litter, runoff, and unsightliness that j reduce the values of adjacent residential properties; structures L. too large for the site and/or badly designed are harmful to older structures designed at a smaller and more intimate scale. We have concluded that improvement of neighborhood quality in areas such as the North Side depends entirely upon the ability j to control the negative impacts of one land use upon another. The Study Area The North Side neighborhood is shown in Figure 11 in relationship to the downtown, the University of Iowa campus, and the urbanized area of Iowa City. Approximately seven by eight blocks, the neighborhood, as defined for the purposes of r I 2 j / - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIOS•OCs fJOIIIEs this study, is relatively small in size. While the concept Of neighborhood is flexible enough to apply to an enormous range of geographic entities, a neighborhood should be a subpart of a larger urban community, and it should be relatively homo- geneous relative to the larger community. The boundaries of the North Side are clear on the west side, fairly obvious on the south and north, and rather open on the east. The fact that a neighborhood exists mostly in the mind of the beholder or has somewhat vague and floating boundaries should not reduce the utility of the concept; from a planning standpoint, a neighbor- hood can be any contiguous area that exhibits a common set of problems, although "natural" boundaries and resident self - identification are helpful supplements. In any event, the North Side is reasonably unambiguous to describe as a neighborhood. ! Approximately seven percent of the population of Iowa City is included within the study area. In general, the demographic characteristics of this area are representative of Iowa City, although there are some important differences. Population and housing data from the 1970 Census, displayed in Table 1, I indicate that the study area has a higher percentage of elderly than the city and a higher proportion of college students. The area also contains somewhat fewer young children. While the percent non-white for the area is lower than that for the City, the percentages in both cases are small. At least one ethnic community (Bohemian) is located in the study area. Income of the population in the study area is generally lower than that of Iowa City. Over 108 of the families in the Near North Side receive incomes below the poverty level as com- pared with about 78 of families in the entire city, and a higher Proportion of families in the city have incomes in excess of $15,000. Based on a survey taken in 1976, 24% of the families in the North Side earn incomes less than half the city-wide median. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CCDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES Table 1 Characteristics of the Study Area, 1970 Study Area Demographic Characteristics Total Population 3,236 % of Iowa City 6.9% % over 60 14.5% % 0-14 11.6% % non-white 0.5% % families with children under 18 34.0% Education Characteristics % of structures multi -family owner % over 25 with some college 50.2% % over 25, non -high school graduate 18.3% % college students 39.7% Employment Characteristics (as % of all workers) % professional -related 37.6% % blue collar 33.0% % unemployed 4,6% % of population in labor force 52.3% Housing Characteristics % of units built prior to 1940 83.8% % living in same unit since before 1950 14.4% % living in same unit since 1965 70.4% % of units lacking some plumbing facilities 15.7% % of units owner occupied 33.5% % of structures one -family owner occupied 46.3% % of structures multi -family owner occupied 16.1% Income Characteristics % of families below poverty level 10.2% % of families with incomes over $15,000 15.6% Miscellaneous Characteristics Total number of automobiles 1,255 Total number of families 597 Total number of housing units 1,431 1i FICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401IIES Iowa City 46,850 0.0% 10.0% 21.5% 2.2% 54.2% 55.4% 17.9% 30.8% 40.3% 35.4% 2.7% 39.3% 7.3% 74.1% 6.5% 45.9% 7.2% 21.5% 9,666 16,904 Education and employment of the North Side are similar to those of the city, in terms of the percentages of blue collar workers and professionals, and those lacking a high school diploma. The study area does have higher unemployment, with a 4.68 rate as compared to a 2.78 city-wide rate. These data are for 1970, so present rates may be somewhat higher. Major differences between the city and the study area are in housing characteristics. The Near North Side is a relatively old neighborhood, with over 808 of the housing units built before 1940, in contrast to a figure of less than 408 for the city as a whole. In addition, over 148 of the population in the study area have been living in the same house since 1950, compared to 78 for the entire city. This would indicate that the study area is stable in relation to the city, although both populations are highly mobile. The study area also has a significantly higher proportion of housing units that lack one or more plumbing facilities, probably a consequence of the large number of rooming houses, where several units share a common bathroom. In summary, the Near North Side is fairly representative of the city as a whole. However, the area has a higher con- centration of problem characteristics usually associated with urban areas, including higher percentages of poor people, unemployed, and elderly, as well as an older housing stock. FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES I SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Most of the other fifteen reports in the final report series contain results of the component studies that make up the North Side study, as well as explanations of the metho- dology by which the results were obtained. The results apply to the North Side neighborhood in Iowa City, and are meant to reflect the balance of importance between different problems and alternatives that are most appropriate to that particular neighborhood, but many of the conclusions and recommendations will apply to many other neighborhoods in other locations. The methodology, however, is meant to be both general in its applicability and uncomplicated in its implementation. No apologies are made for this lack of complexity; we hold the opinion that analysis of neighborhood problems by persons with first-hand experience in dealing with those problems need not be complicated. Almost all of the studies done by the North Side study group could be undertaken (and improved upon) by neigh- borhood residents and/or local staff people. Two of the reports go into greater depth than the others i because they address topics where we feel a major reorientation is needed: one explains the concepts, methodology, and rationale for introducing impact evaluation into local decisionmaking (report number 1); and the other seeks to demonstrate why nuisance law concepts should be relied upon much more heavily than they are (report number 12). These reports draw upon more theory fthan the others, and reveal most clearly the research side of the project. They emphasize basic ways of thinking about neighborhood problems, rather than immediately implementable t recommendations. We hope these ideas will be given sympathetic as well as patient consideration. The order in which the reports are numbered -- hence, the order in which they are presented below -- has no special t significance. Nor does the list of titles indicate the 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101ULS "mandatory" fifteen elements of the proper neighborhood study; the topics covered by the North Side study are those which we felt were most important from the standpoint of this particular neighborhood at this particular time. Another time or another place might lead to an entirely different set of topics, depending upon the circumstances. Nonetheless, the North Side study was intended to be comprehensive, and this, along with conscious attempts to generalize the methodology, should make both the methodology and the recommendations of potential interest to other neighborhoods. For each of the reports listed, conclusions are preceded by a hyphen (-) and recommendations by a number. Some of the conclusions point clearly toward associated recommendations, while some of the recommendations are of a broad and general nature, so the distinction is not a dichotomy but a gradation. Within the list of recommendations are some which are immediately implementable (traffic signals have, in fact, already been installed, on the basis of decisions made prior to the conclusion of the study) and others which will require considerable time and thought if they are to be implemented. I. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines The Impact Evaluation report seeks to explain what impact evaluation is and why it is needed, using the context of an older urban residential mixed-use neighborhood. More than anything else, impact evaluation is an organizing concept; most of the pieces which are assembled in the report are familiar in other contexts (such as comprehensive planning and environmental analysis), but the synthesis constitutes a significant departure from current practice in planning. Considerable effort has gone into developing and testing the component parts of impact evaluation, over a period of years and in a variety of situations, but it will remain empty 1 0 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110IBES i V potential unless it is nurtured in practice at the hands of sympathetic professionals. There is no magic in impact evalua- tion, simply a challenge. The purpose of an impact evaluation is to state, in as clear and as meaningful terms as feasible, what difference a particular action (e.g., construction of an apartment in the North Side) will make if it is taken (a permit issued). This purpose has two components: - (Impact) Articulate the consequences of one choice versus another, in whatever units or terms are suitable (land paved over, traffic generated, noise and dust created, etc.) and quantified to a degree that seems appropriate. - (Evaluation) Suggest values to be placed on each of the consequences, to the extent that these can be derived from valid standards, economic markets, public preferences, etc. Accomplishing the first component requires an understanding of how cause and effect are related (impact linkages), and some methodologies for making this knowledge operational. The second component must ultimately be resolved in a political arena, but there are many sources for exhibiting such values as have been revealed by previous choices. Impact evaluation is comprehensive in scope, but selective in detail and the depth to which analysis should be carried. Checklists and sophisticated methodologies are useful references, but choice of which impacts to evaluate and how precise the estimates need to be should depend upon the decision under consideration. Usually, most impacts can be judged as insigni- ficant from cursory review, and additional refinement of important impacts -- beyond some rough estimates -- will not alter the basis for choosing among alternatives. The amount of effort directed at impact evaluation should be commensurate with the potential consequences of the choice being made; decisions about major land use changes should be informed by a thorough study of impacts, while minor changes can be 9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES accepted or rejected on the basis of very brief analysis. Neighborhood impact evaluation concentrates primarily on the issue of whether or not a proposed change would be compatible with the neighborhood, or contribute to neighborhood quality, i.e., whether property values of affected parcels would increase or decrease as a result of the proposed change. The types of negative neighborhood impacts, listed in Table 2, emphasize impacts on the natural environment (air pollution), on the built environment (flooding, structural undermining), and direct impacts on persons (noise, smoke, unsightliness, light). All impacts are evaluated, of course, with respect to their ultimate impact on human beings. In general, it is easier to measure or estimate impacts than it is to place values on those impacts, and it is easier to answer narrow questions (How much runoff will accumulate from a 10 -year storm?) than to answer the questions of interest (How much damage will be done by flooding? Is the proposed development compatible with the neighborhood?). With the aid of some methodology and guidelines, however, useful answers can be constructed to the important questions in most situations. The intent is not only to separate proposed changes which will enhance the quality of the neighborhood from proposals which will damage neighborhood quality, but to establish conditions under which any particular proposed change would be acceptable. Zoning is one technique for setting conditions of acceptability, but current practice of zoning is rarely effective in protecting older mixed neighborhoods such as the North Side. Evaluation also depends upon the viewpoint of the evaluator. While neighborhood protection is the dominant orientation of impact evaluation as presented here, the interests of the community as a whole and various subgroups within it should nonetheless be balanced: Property owners want the free enjoyment of their own property protected while also retaining the maximum number of options for future use, i.e., they may 10 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101MEs Table 2. Categories of Negative Impact AIRBORNE 1. suspended particulate matter 2. trash and litter 3. smoke 4. odors and fumes 5. toxic pollutants and pathogens 6. noise 1. runoff 2. standing water 3. silt and debris 4. toxic pollutants and pathogens ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS 1. slippage -prone soils 2. earthquake stability OTHER PHYSICAL 1. vibration 2. structural undermining 3. physical dangers 4. interference with other activities 5. heat 6. animals 7. fire hazard NON PHYSICAL 1. light, air, and breathing space infringement 2. glare 3. unsightliness 4. privacy and life style conflicts 5. fright, mental depression, and anguish 6. offense to morals 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mo1RES want to be secure homeowners and unfettered developers at the same time. Residents, renters, homeowners, absentee owners and merchants all have something at stake and deserve Proper consideration. It must be acknowledged that the benefits to the community as a whole of some proposed neighborhood change (e.g., higher outweigh the desires Ofntheyneidevelopment) may but this does not obviate the need otooaccompashts, the change expeditiously and to pay full compensa- tion to individuals who may be injured by the change. It is thus the intent that impact evaluation serve the criteria Of both efficiency (the total benefits of each action exceed the costs resulting from it) and equity (no individuals gain at the expense of others). Either public or private sector decisions can be reviewed utilizing the framework of im evaluation, but the concepts of nei Pact hborhood im act covered in the report focus p evaluation initiated within the Private sector. The impact evaluation approach to neighborhood and enhancement is derived from two major and Preservation Control of No Negative Externalities. A properly functioning market has the socially optimal allocationpoferesources Producing the Primary source of market failure in , but the context is the presence of negative externalitiiesood there is no mechanism for restraining If property owners are encouraged to g negative impacts, j amenities as free. A raw g treat neighborhood value of the home on the Parking lot may reduce the 1 parking lot owner does notdloining property, but the If externalities could betake this into account. Property owneruse fully internalized by each "correct" withoutaadditional sions constraints. lbe ocially amount ofinimum Public Intervention. The least public inter that wilvention into private markets l result in ade uatel y low le nalities is the most desirable amountvofsiOfex er- Minimum interference allows maximum flexibility in the resolution of land use conflicts, which in turn 12 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110I0ES 9 i i i leads to the most efficient solution to each individual conflict. By controlling the externalities directly, and only the externalities, individual property owners are given the greatest latitude to take actions which are both socially and individually desirable. Impact evaluation is a means for identifying the real or potential negative externalities that an action may create, and selecting the least restrictive control strategy that will control the externalities. One of the results of this strategy will be to permit neighborhoods to evolve their own unique and recognizable characteristics, while balancing individual tastes and preferences, neighborhood welfare, and overall community benefit. For example, consider a hypothetical apartment building proposed for a residential area. Some of the possible impacts, as indicated in Table 3, include obstruction of sunlight, unsightliness from the design of the building, the lack of space around the building, parked cars, trash, dust, storm runoff, heat, glare, litter and noise. The path of trans- mission of the impacts from the source (the apartment building) passes through such intermediate or associated activities as the parking lot, storage and movement of vehicles, and tempos nary storage of trash. For each source, link or impact, a control mechanism is suggested (in brackets), ranging from prohibition of apartment buildings (zoning) to mandatory storm water detention facilities. Unsightliness from a lack of open space can be corrected by minimum usable open space requirements; dust can be reduced by paving the surface of the parking lot; several negative impacts of cars and parking lots can be ameliorated by landscaping and other screening; and trash storage problems can be corrected by suitable control measures and design standards. of greatest significance is the observation that there are many ways to control the negative impacts of apartment buildings without prohibiting them entirely. A similar kind 13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 170 RIES Table 3 impact producing activity (land use) BUILDING [prohibit apartment building] Selected Negative Impacts of an Apartment Building intermediate activities or impact linkages parking lot ) Prohibit off-' street parking impact effect on recipient light lack of sunlight [height, affects plants, human bulk, health, energy con - placement] sumption in winter unsight- liness reduced pride in [open space, neighborhood; un - pleasant visual design, experience coverage] dust discomfort to eyes, [paving] nose, throat; extra cleaning, wear; \runoff impeded vision flooding,.damage to [detention] property, inconven- ience, fear heat additional discomfort [landscaping] in summer glare [screen] discomfort to eyes; impeded vision litter reduced pride in [screen] property; cleanup effort noise distraction, stress, [design] loss of hearing, im- peded conversation, sleep litter reduced pride in pro - [storage] perty; cleanup effort unsight- reduced pride in liness neighborhood, un - [storage] pleasant visual experience 14 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES td0111Es I i of analysis could be done for grocery stores, rooming houses, bars and restaurants, and so on. When only the impacts are controlled -- not the land use -- socially beneficial activities are allowed to occur where they would otherwise be prohibited. The decision as to whether they are socially worthwhile or not is left to the private decision maker, who is constrained only by the need to eliminate all significant negative exter- nalities. 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration One of the major problems in the North Side seemed to be an inablility to prevent demolition and new development that were detrimental to the existing neighborhood. At its extreme, this process amounted to destruction of a single family residence of historic and architectural interest and its replacement by a three- or four-story apartment building that covered most of the lot with building and the remainder with open parking. Some of the results of this process are docu- mented in report number 3, Land Use Intensity, and historic structures are inventoried in report number 4. The incompat- ible developments appear to be scattered throughout the neighborhood, and the impact on adjacent properties has been clearly negative. In an attempt to locate the crux of the problem, a review of existing land use regulations and administrative procedures was undertaken, to find out how land use controls actually worked as well as how they were supposed to work. Our conclusions were that many of the negative impacts were not regulated under the typical zoning types of controls, that existing regulatory instruments were not applied to some of the problems to which they could be applied, and that some of the regulations, for a variety of reasons, were not rigorously enforced. This report seeks to pinpoint places in 15 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES the review process where changes detrimental to the neighbor- hood are allowed to pass, and to explore ways of improving the regulations and their administration. Land use controls applied to older neighborhoods are weak in some areas and leave gaps in other. Generally, these deficiencies consist of the following: - Regulations do not provide for review of certain types of redevelopment in existing neighborhoods. i- Negative impacts produced by certain land uses i are not addressed by the regulations. - Procedures limit citizen access to land use decision-making. - The land use regulatory system provides no incentives for developers to consider broad neighborhood concerns. - The volume and organization of the regulations applicable to land use control make administration difficult. Recommendations for improving the effectiveness of land use controls involve both modifications and additions to the present regulatory system. The proposed changes include: 1) The consolidation of land use regulations and administrative functions to improve enforcement and to make the regulations easier to understand. Z) The use of current controls such as permit issuance as a vehicle for more com- prehensive control. 3) The improvement of notice and hearing procedures for all land use decision processes. 4) The addition of an evaluation of impacts, residential performance standards, and site plan review to the present land use regulatory system. 5) The use of regulations and procedures which provide development incentives and reflect neigh- borhood concerns. 16 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIOS-OCS 1101IIEs As outlined in the state enabling statute Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa, land use decisions in Iowa City are made by either a legislative or a quasi-judicial process. Applica- tions for amendments to the zoning ordinance, for approval of development requiring subdivision, or for approval of planned area or large scale (equal to or greater than 2 acres) developments require legislative action. The interpretation of the zoning ordinance, the granting of variances and special use permits, and the settling of grievances against administra- tive officials and their decisions call for quasi-judicial rulings. Figures 2 through 4 summarize the administrative review procedures followed for several types of applications. Within these procedures are the elements of a review process which would, if sensibly administered, be able to i protect an older neighborhood from incompatible development. i These procedures have not been applied (with the occasional exception of rezoning reviews) to the North Side, because the development that has taken place has been in compliance with the use restrictions in the zoning ordinance; "compatibility" has not been a criterion for approval. Zoning controls are oriented toward new development in new, homogeneous areas, and little attempt has been made to tailor such regulations ! to older, mixed-use neighborhoods. 3 Land Use Intensity The purpose of the Land Use Intensity report is to document the character of the North Side neighborhood in accordance with the four kinds of attributes outlined in 1 report number 1, Impact Evaluation, and report number 12, Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control. Existing patterns, trends, and other factors are used to assess the inherent nature of the neighborhood and to understand the structure 7 of the problems which affect it. As is corroborated by analysis 17 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Days 5 � sketch plat (optional) 10 15 * Department of Community Development and Planning & Zoning Commission 20 preliminary plat filed with city clerk 25 agency review 30 * I applicant information meeting; agency comments 35 * I submission of revised plat; basis of staff report I 40informal Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; * changes recommended 45 formal recommendation by Planning & Zoning Commission sent to City Council 50 55 60 * resolution by City Council on preliminary plat 65 sinal plat filed with city clerk 70 gency review: City Engineer & City Attorney 75 applicant information meeting; agency comments 80 * -submission of revised plat; basis of staff report 85informal Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; * changes recommended 90 formal recommendation by Planning & Zoning Commission sent to City Council 95 100 105 resolution by City Council on final plat 110 * points where revisions to plat are suggested or required Figure 2 SCHEDULE FOR APPROVAL PROCESS M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140DIES Figure 3. ELEMENTS OF SITE PLAN REVIEW I• Existing Site Plan (Location Map) includes: name, north point, scale, date, streets, utilities, outline Of tract. 12• Development Site Plan (Preliminary Plat, Final Plat) A. Legal description, acreage, name B. Name and address of owner C. Date of preparation D. Name of preparers owner's attorney E. North point and graphic scale i F. Contours G. Locationn of existing lot lines, streets, mains I H. Layout of blocks with dimensions and order I• Location, dimensions, names of proposed streets J• Grades of proposed streets (, K. Cross section of proposed streets: curb/gutter L. Layout of Proposed water mains and sanitary sewer M• Drainage of land: storm sewers, culvert, etc. i N. Location of buildings on tract; uses and number I` of units 0• Location of dedicated areas P. Height of present and proposed structures Q. Distances between buildings on/adjacent to tract R. Land within tract to be developed later; time frame j S. Transportation and parking facilities T. Methods of buffering U. Overall density V. Location of proposed open space 19 MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Elements Required e 0 ✓ I✓I✓7✓ J ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ J ✓ ✓ ti J ✓✓✓ J ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ '/ ✓ ✓ ✓✓ J ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Y ✓ �, ✓ .` ✓ ✓ ✓ J ✓ / J I. Standard application form filed with City Clerk. II. Referred to Department of Community Development (DCD) Current Planning Division for staff review. III. Application and staff report sent to Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z). a) Considered by P&Z at informal meeting. b) Recommendation formulated at formal P&Z meeting. c) Depending on the type of amendment, P&Z holds: 1) public hearing after 15 -day prior public notice; 2) public discussion after 7 -day prior public notice and signs on property. IV. Application, staff report, P&Z minutes containing recommen- dation are referred to City Council. a) Public hearing after 15 -day prior public notice in newspaper and signs on property. b) Final action on application after consideration at two prior meetings unless this requirement is waived by 3/4 vote. c) Final action requires simple majority vote. If the proposed action by the City Council is contrary to the P&Z's recommendation or protested by owners of 20% of the land included in, to the rear or side of, or opposite the land proposed for rezoning, a 3/4 majority vote is required. Figure 4. PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE 20 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101fI[S from other perspectives, the main sources of problems in the North Side are land use incompatibilities and an excess of automobiles. The neighborhood is made up of a heterogeneous j mixture of attributes -- land use, housing tenure, density, structure type, and ownership. Imposing some kind of homo- geneous pattern -- even at the block level -- is clearly i• infeasible, and hence solution of the neighborhood's problems will require land use controls not typically in use at the present time. Drawing mainly upon empirical information from primary and secondary sources, a variety of data have been assembled that describe the existing and inherent character of the North Side neighborhood. Some of the qualities observed are common to many urban residential neighborhoods, and some are unique to this particular neighborhood. The purpose of this study is to identify those attributes of the North Side, whether unique or typical, that illuminate its problems and its resources. Portions of the data and analysis are presented in Figures 5 through 10. The following conclusions emerge: - Not only does the North Side contain many kinds of land use, they are spatially mixed together in a very heterogeneous way. Single-family, and multi -family uses are found on almost every block, and commercial, public, and semi-public are also interspersed. While most of the neighborhood is predominantly residential, there are no naturally existing land use zones larger than a block or two. - Newer apartment buildings are scattered through- out the neighborhood in a way that suggests inten- tional dispersal. These buildings are incompatible with the previous development in many respects, frequently being constructed at ten times the previous density. The property value appreciation gained by these apartment land uses has often been at the expense of adjacent single-family residences. - Owner confidence in the North Side is generally high and remains high. Consistently high owner occupancy 21 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rtl7INEs KEY N 50 1 0-.dweHinea d Per parcel 10-1per acral 1.50-1.80 dwellings per Parcel !10.810.8 9-13.Q7 per acral 1.80-2.25 dwelllnes Per parcel 113.07-16.34 per Wel i 2.25 and abaft dwellings per parcel 118.34 and above OData Ineulficlent to yl.w re9abla results per serol U) ~ � H W U)Ld rn U) Cr O (n O W a)W Qz Z O J m Z zZ fn W G7 > 1.3 O j p BROWN ST RONALDS ST C� CHURCH T # SCHOOL FAIRCHIL PARK DAVENPORT ST O O LOOMINGTON ST 2'':�`�'HOSPITAL MARKET ST ® SCH00 JEFFERSONST ....... Figure S. DWELLING UNIT DENSITY PER BLOCK 22 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOINES f H F- __jBLOOMINGTON ■...fid Ld Ir•!4;' � f },�,{�iJali s ST.....: �. 0 Z � Z O J BRO'JVN T r. y �Win : 11, F- __jBLOOMINGTON ■...fid f .:,I Ir•!4;' � f },�,{�iJali s ST.....: �. %--] HOSPITAL M(II( r Y� V) MARKET ST Z • • IIi: Mid U) U) 1 H U O m it m 6. (n W U)Q Z LLJJ U > J j U' o J r. y �Win : 11, �..�.� __jBLOOMINGTON ■...fid f .:,I Ir•!4;' � f },�,{�iJali s ST.....: �. %--] HOSPITAL M(II( r Y� MARKET ST • • IIi: Mid 1 JEFFERSON s 6. SINGLEFiguro t USE �..�.� __jBLOOMINGTON ■...fid f .:,I Ir•!4;' � f },�,{�iJali s ST.....: �. %--] HOSPITAL M(II( r Y� MARKET ST • • IIi: Mid JEFFERSON 6. SINGLEFiguro t USE 23 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RANDS -OLS MOINES Izi U) E:�■moi■�■ ': w !•� • a U) ■ z RIM■ z O J H w m KEY • Nrrwr AtWIN000" 0 Other ApwtwAnts 1— H cn � w U) z W> O J DC7 •• E:�■moi■�■ ': !•� • .. ■ ■ RIM■ !� • •, ••• • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ T ®F-010 3LOOMINGTON ST IVWJ = MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST Figure 7, MULTI -FAMILY STRUCTURES WITH FOUR OR MORE UNITS 24 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES ': ■ ■ RIM■ !� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES ® © ❑ ❑ M ® ® ❑ ®®Fu ❑❑ . JEFFERSON ST' Figure 8. OFF-STREET PARKING /. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101RLs N KEY 4-9 spaces over 10 spaces I Cf) W M z~ � N M O I a 0 Z J w m 0 Q W to W BROWN ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � J ❑ ! RONALDS STI lel ❑ ❑ ©❑ ❑ ❑ ❑fes—l❑❑❑®❑ i CHURCH ST i ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i ❑ F7wl ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ FAIRCHILD ST � � � a i ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ { DAVENPORT ST L� {' ER] ❑ ❑ ❑ BLOOMINGTON ST ® © ❑ ❑ M ® ® ❑ ®®Fu ❑❑ . JEFFERSON ST' Figure 8. OFF-STREET PARKING /. 25 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101RLs P H h U) Ld ■ am NIL O� U) m Z �. Z O J BROWN ST BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL MARKET ST 31:1 = 0 ® ® ®® JEFFERSON ST ® 1p Figur. 9. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB LCDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1701RES h ■ am NIL 1■ iiiiiii ISO W mJ Z W m Z lj Cn Z I- W S S i- Cn U 3 Z x 0 BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL MARKET ST 31:1 = 0 ® ® ®® JEFFERSON ST ® 1p Figur. 9. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB LCDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1701RES ■ am NIL 1■ iiiiiii ISO BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL MARKET ST 31:1 = 0 ® ® ®® JEFFERSON ST ® 1p Figur. 9. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB LCDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1701RES MEN tJ Bill - .r �.... BLOOMINGTON ST HOSPITAL MARKET ST 31:1 = 0 ® ® ®® JEFFERSON ST ® 1p Figur. 9. ABSENTEE OWNERSHIP OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY 26 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB LCDAR RAPIDS -OLS 1701RES KEY =Highest (6 and above) N =Second Highest (4-5) Middle 2-3) ®Lowest (land below) OData Insufficient to yield reliable results H lj N Z U) LLI f— H p N z Z � Q O S O BROWN ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ RONALDS ST - ❑❑ ❑ CHURCH ST ❑ ❑ ❑ SCHOOL'��.,':��.,?`.,i�.,�'.'.,':`•':`•,':�•,:.�'•,:.,:•,'.�'.•,',..,'•,'..''•, ❑❑❑ PARK :::::::::: FAIRCHILD ST :•:. ::;.; ❑ ❑ DAVENPORT ST MOM BLOOMINGTON ST❑ ...'. � .,....,.. ?`:<:::::::<L` ' HOSPITAL MARKET ST I J ?? ® SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST Figure 10. PRIVATE INVESTMENT BY BLOCK, 1976 27 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DLti MOINES rates are probably important in sustaining this type of investment confidence. - Upwards of half the land in the North Side is given over to highway transportation, including streets and parking lots. A large share of the usage of the streets and parking is by non-residents of the neigh- borhood; since these transportation facilities have significant negative effects on neighborhood quality, transportation land use ranks high on the list of f land uses that need to be restricted and from which the neighborhood needs to be protected. A basic conflict exists between the historic and other resources contained in the neighborhood and its prime location with respect to the University, Mercy Hospital, and downtown. It is not feasible to give the neighborhood over entirely to one pur- pose or the other, and any resolution of the conflict that allows higher densities in some locations while i protecting the neighborhood's resources must be able to operate at a parcel -specific level. - Abnormally high turnover rates of property ownership 3 have not been observed, and speculation is not readily apparent from secondary data sources. - Past local government policies affecting the neigh- borhood have been ambiguous and not conducive to maintaining the quality of the neighborhood, but recent actions have moved toward consistency and i greater protection of the residential areas. Programs are still needed which will mitigate past errors, eliminate the negative side effects of development at the microscopic level, and achieve development objectives where major land use changes are planned. Data for this report come from a variety of sources, which were cross-checked where feasible and frequently re- checked. Despite efforts to make the results as sound and as reliable as possible, a number of problems in the data must be acknowledged: data sources were sometimes difficult to access and awkward to use, leading to transcription errors; errors in the source data have been found, but undoubtedly many remain; secondary data sources may be out-of-date by varying amounts of time (sometimes 1-2 years) within the same source; data processing within the project was done W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES rJo Itl[s entirely by hand, and was only one of many kinds of tasks performed by each staff member, which resulted in less control over errors; and both observation and analysis often required the exercise of judgment (e.g., in classifying observations) by persons only moderately skilled in such tasks. The picture of the neighborhood presented by this information may thus be inaccurate in detail and represent a time period somewhat earlier than indicated, but the patterns presented are nonetheless a valid description of the general character of the neighborhood. Primary recommendations based on analysis of these data are two: 1) If redevelopment at a higher density is viewed as being in the best interests of the community, then a program for achieving this objective should be formulated and imple- mented. A full block is the smallest unit at which this should occur, and all property owners } on the block should share equitably in the benefits of redevelopment; any'high density development which occurs should be restricted to this program and concentrated geographically in the most appropriate location. Most especially, redevelopment should not be "encouraged" by simply permitting high density under the zoning ordinance, as has been the case in the North Side in the past; the result will always be spotty development, at the expense of many for the benefit of a few. 2) Any higher density development should be required to submit to a review and evalua- tion of neighborhood impacts. All negative impacts on nearby property owners should be eliminated prior to development, or compensation provided to affected property owners. YUnless these policies are followed, major land use changes should not be permitted within the neighborhood. As urban neighborhoods go, the North Side is not especially complex nor outstandingly different. In comparison to the average suburban neighborhood, however, it is very complex and very different. Since the homogeneous single-family suburban e 29 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES neighborhood is the standard by which residential neighborhoods are normally judged, there are many persons who regard the North Side as undesirable and unsatisfactory as a living environment, in part because of the variety and complexity. They believe that whatever problems the neighborhood suffers are inevitable and unavoidable, and this should be obvious to anyone who chooses to live there. In contrast to this viewpoint, there are those for whom a large variety of facilities and amenities within easy walking distance is a valuable quality. Older homes of different architectural styles, a mix of ages, family structures, and I lifestyles, and nearby small restaurants and stores are often considered to be attractive features of a residential neigh- borhood. There are many reasons why it might be worthwhile saving older neighborhoods, but the issue is not so much one of having a choice between mixed neighborhoods and homogeneous neighborhoods, but of being able to create and maintain good mixed neighborhoods. As things now stand, mixed neighborhoods ! generally have to work hard at protecting themselves in the i I face of pressures for change. While the North Side exhibits characteristics and problems common to many urban neighborhoods,'it also has a quality when all the aspects are put together -- that is uniquely its own. Identifying precisely what this quality is may be impossible, but some descriptive effort must be attempted if the quality is to be preserved. The Land Use Intensity report, along with report number 4, Historic Structures Inventory, report number 7, Community Facilities, and report number 10, Impact Survey 1978, constitutes a beginning effort to document the character of the neighborhood as well as the problems it faces. I 30 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110MES 4. Historic Structures Inventory This inventory identifies and records those structures within the North Side neighborhood which possess historic or architectural significance, up to approximately World War I. As one component of a comprehensive planning study of the neighborhood, the historic survey is intended to serve two major purposes: first, it attempts to document some of the many social and physical resources that make the community an important and worthwhile segment of Iowa City, and second, it attempts to integrate a concern for historic preservation with a general interest in neighborhood protection. It is the recommendation of this study that some kind of additional incentive to retain the structures identified in this inventory be created, possibly in the form of an historic district or districts. Iowa has recently enacted enabling legislation which describes the process by which these districts may be established, and many other instruments can be used for protecting historic resources. A map of the neighborhood, with structures included in the inventory marked upon it, is shown in Figure 11. Figures 12 through 18 portray examples of some. of the typical styles found in the North Side, although any attempt at stylistic categorization provides only a clumsy description at best. A block map and two inventory forms (Figures 19 through 21) give examples of the content of the main body of the inventory. 31 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMCs KEY 89 Biock Number Historic Structure Location r`.". • ■ son ■ •ROWN ':xJ:v;M 5��1�v7;,fi�';*,A [S'�iY':j ti; fiW■ i :. .■ 9 .. KS • ■ ■ � ■ •. • • • R. NIALD4wages ft c. ••• u.■■■ ■•■ 2 •2• �. WCHURCH h • • d■ ■ ■■■ ■• ■ OD • 2 ,p Z a 2• •W■ 2 0= W..■■■ tl1•■■•0 • 0 i ■ ■ 0 Z�� • tl■ < Z x*i U ■ •. • •u/■■ J •u ■■ J • ■ U it 0 ... >... 30 .8 ■ ... �i W ... FAIRCHILD ■ • ■ • ■ > i ■ ■ �s� ��Y, • ./• ■ 0 I d` ■ ■ ■ / / :• ••■ ■ DAV[NFORT ■ mean, •.■ an2 so .e„.r. ■..: ■ assess ■ .. . •/. sass. GLOOM IN G_r0N ■ r`� x !■e■n• • • Et •TAL ■ ••• �•• • • ■ • 1 ! 38 • • ■ ■ Y^^! ■ ■ � MARKETam •■• r` ■ ■ ■ ■ I11'..�.... ,��:��� JEFFER90N Figure 11, HISTORIC STRUCTURE INDEX MAP 32 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIru S The earliest settlers In the North Side Neighborhood built structures based on the styles of ancient Greece. This Greek Re- vival style was very popular in the eastern part of the United States, and as the pioneers moved west they built their hcmes in this mode. cornice _ • vitk detttil v" ' • molding _ _ anchor iron u tt�an*om _ The more ornate examples of Greek Revival with their classic columned porticos do not appear In the North Side. Instead, the typi- cal Greek Revival building seen here 1s very simple in form, and many structures will have only a few details of the style on a simple rectangular structure. 219 N. Gilbert materials wood frame brick stone - local yellow sandstone style one story two story door rectangular glass transom over door J lose pitclvd roof six ovev *ilr tiriniow tann, *tome Rout windows six over six panes stone lintels over windows on brick and stone versions roof low pitch to roof broad cornice broken pediment dentil molding Figure 12. GREEK REVIVAL STYLE, 1830 -1850 33 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NEs The coronation of Queen Victoria on June 28, 1838 marked the beginning of the Victorian era, which lasted for more than 60 years. The term "Victor- ian" is applied to a number of architec- tural styles that were popular during the years of Victoria's reign. The first of these styles to become popular In Iowa City was the Italianate It was imported from the East, where eaves with heavy braclwts IK&M" on rrch. or veranda . materials wood frame brick style one story - not common two story wealthy persons were building homes in the 1830's and 1840's. The new styles became popular In the West via pattern books, which allowed local carpenters and builders to copy the fancy buildings from "back East". The Italianate house with a tower or cupola is not common on the North Side; instead, Italianate fea- tures appear on the basic rectangular house of the Greek Revival period. 31 a E. Je f frrsora windows tall slender - often floor length segmental arches over windows - early ornate arches over windows - late bay windows common later pitched roof aeotneatea arch floor leagth tvit+d.oev roof low pitch to roof extended eaves ornate brackets, often paired, under eaves, around porches and bay windows door double doors common oval glass Inserts in door porch almost always a porch (often called veranda) square pillars with brackets Figure 13. ITALIANATE STYLE c. 1845-1885 34 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB cconR RAPIDS•DLs rIo LMLs D At about the same time that Italianate style buildings were replacing Greek Revival in popu- larity, the Gothic style was also being introduced. "The Architec- ture of Country Houses" by Andrew Jackson Downing, printed in 1850, helped popularize both the Italian - ate and the Gothic. The Gothic style is easy to Identify but hard to date. That is because it remained in use for such gingerbread bargeboard on gab les ---� pairrd windon• with pointed arch triUL— gingerbread triuL on materials wood frame a long time, from the Gothic Revival in the 1840's, 1850's and 1860's to the Carpenter Gothic of the late nineties. The Gothic style has sharp- ly pointed rooflines, multiple gables and fancy scroll woodwork. With the invention of the mechanical jigsaw, gingerbread decoration was made pos- sible on a grand scale. Patterns were mass produced, and trim was applied to otherwise plain houses. It is often the case that this trim has been removed in later years. 120 E. FalrC1•tild style roof one story sharply pitched two story steep pointed gables gingerbread bargeboards windows Pointed -early Gothic porch paired windows in some instances gingerbread trim Figure 14. GOTHIC STYLE c.1845-1910 9111 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES The name Queen Anne is a mis- leading one for this style. It is not an adaptation of the architecture of Queen Anne's time, but is instead an American version of a style popular in England in the latter part of the nine- teenth century. The Queen Anne style is charac- filet, sc&Le sb-ingLe5 steep pitched' V-00 f Witt,, many 9a1>les7 materials wood frame - mixture of surfaces board siding and fish scab shingles most common brick - mixed with fish scale shingles on gables style one story - uncommon two story porch delicate spindlework classical details Figure 15. terized by complexity and irregularity of form. There is always a varietyOf o surface texture, roofs and wall projec- tions. 1 tions. The tgwer or turret is the most prominent feature on some North Side Queen Anne houses. Pattern books and blueprints by mail were the source of inspiration for most of the North Side Queen Anne houses. targe porc4 .With sriTl-a' or jLrLger - ,,,ea,, tri.tri 314 E. CUU,rct►. windows bay windows frequent variety o panesow shapes window P often outlined with stained glass squares leaded glass and stained glass roof steeply pitched many gables dormers and towers QUEEN ANNE STYLE C. 1875-1900 36 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DEs MOIRES North Side Victorian is a tens coined to cover the large number of late nineteenth century houses on the North Side which owe a great deal to both Queen Anne and Georgian Revival styles, but are really too simple in form to fit either style. Most often there is a prominent front gable on these houses, and the gable often has fish scale shin- gles on the gable peak. There are porches, sometimes Queen Anne, some- times Georgian Revival in detail. It is Large front %W indoux upper seetLon usually stained or leade& g146s materials wood frame - fish scale shingle wood trim common brick style one story two story windows large front window - upper portion stained or leaded glass possible that some houses, in their original form, would be classified as one of the above styles. Over the years a great many structures have had all trim removed, porches torn off, siding applied, and new windows added, so that all that is left to hint at the style are the steep roof and the gables. There may be a large margin of error in this inventory in judging correctly the original architectural styles of these houses. strep pitched roof with front gable porch with gingerbread trite. so E. cu"Wcl' roof steeply pitched front gable most prominent feature porch gingerbread trim Georgian Revival details Figure 16. NORTH SIDE VICTORIAN STYLE c. 1885-1905 37 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES >10INES There are many simple rectangular or L-shaped houses on the North Side which do not fit into any of the catego- ries of Victorian architectural styles. These houses are usually one story, al- though there are some two story houses classified as cottages in this inventory. These cottages bear a resemblance to the earlier Greek Revival style, but the pitch of the roof is steeper, the cor- distinetave tsvatsaetat or door - material wood frame style one story two story windows no distinctive treatment nice is not as wide, and the windows are taller and narrower. In their origi- nal state they may have had trim clas- sified as Carpenter Gothic. As in the case of the North Side Victorian, the trim and the porches have often been re- moved leaving a very simple, plain house. These houses are difficult to date accu- rately, and the inventory may be in error on many Turn -of -the -Century Cottages. 8i4 E. Churc:k roof moderate to steep pitch porch plain or simple trim •aodrratr ritcude Teo f Figure 17. NORTH SIDE TURN - OF -THE- CENTURY COTTAGE STYLE c. 1890-1910 M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES PDIrrCs The Georgian Revival represents a turning away from the foreign influences of the Italianate, the Gothic, and the Queen Anne styles. Americans were look- ing to their own architectural past and were building houses based on Colonial styles. The turn -of -the -century Georgian Revival still showed Victorian influence, but grad- ually the new style resembled the 1700's more and the 1800's less. headed - window columns - waithl. heavy stone seaPpesrts 41 -- materials wood frame brick style two story windows Palladian -style leaded windows Paired windows bevelled glass On the North Side, the Georgian Revival house is usually not ornate in form. There is often a Palladian -style window in a front dormer, and doors sometimes have fan lights. The domi- nant feature is the front porch with co- lumns topped by capitals in the Doric, Ionic or Corinthian orders. low ritched roof wide saves Lays porch. 214 E. Church roof hipped, pitched or gambrel dentil molding under eaves door fan light over door porch columns of Classic orders clustered columns short columns with heavy stone supports Figure 18. GEORGIAN REVIVAL STYLE c. 1890-1920 39 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES MARKET Figure 19. BLOCK 59 t - m W m Jtrrcrwvn 40 ® Historical Structure 1 KEY I ❑ Existing Structure MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES UIREs ■ e North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory address: 119 N. Gilbert present use: single family residence present owner: Klein block: 59 lot no. 1922 owner occupied: yes date of construction: c. 1870-1880 building type and material: 2 story shingle architectural style: North Side Turn -of -the -Century Cottage condition: excellent importance to neighborhood: important as part of cluster notable features of building and site: Further research is needed on this house; It is possible it was built In the Gothic or Italianate style, and has been altered over the years. original owner: original use: historic significance: sources: Sanborn 1883 Figure 20. HISTORIC STRUCTURE INVENTORY, 119 N. GILBERT 41 IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRE- :9 North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Historic Structure Inventory block: 59 z 0 lot Uaddress: 318 E. Jefferson no. 1935 .. present use: multiple family residence owner H present owner: Paul Shaw/Cont: occupied: no z 318 Jefferson Corp., at al ua A date of constru,tion: 1883 building type and material: 2 story brick -stucco applied later architectural style: Italianate condition: good importance to neighborhood: important independent of surrounding structures p notable features of building and site: F Italianate brackets and dentil molding appear a under eaves and a. a U on porch cornice. The first floor windows extend to the floor and the A second floor windows have decorative stone segmental arches. The bay window on the second floor is repeated in a bay shaped entrance on the first floor. original owner: Robert Hutchinson original use: w historic significance: z This house was the only house on the west end of this block for many years. It was located near the back of the lot at 310 Jefferson 2 and was moved to the present location c. 1905 C9 H sources: Keyes, Lafore Sanborn, 1888, 1892, 1899, 1906 Figure 21. HISTORIC STRUCTURE INVENTORY, 318 E. JEFFERSON 42 / MICROFILMED BY .;ORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•Df.S MOIRES I I, ik 1 1 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOn1Es 5. Streets and Traffic From our surveys (Impact Survey, report number 10, and Land Use Intensity, report number 3) and neighborhood dis- cussions (Community Participation, report number 13), it became clear that there were two major sources of negative impacts on the North Side: those emanating from transportation -- streets, traffic, parking -- and those resulting from incompa- tible development. This report, along with the Parking report (number 6), deals with the former grouD of problems. Trafficways are an important component of Iowa City's transportation system. The movement of people and goods is a necessary function which trafficways help to provide. Trafficways are also the source of what should be called "external" effects, because these effects impact persons i other than users of roads and streets. As examples of these external effects, traffic noise may interrupt a telephone j conversation or interfere with sleep; heavy traffic flows ;4 endanger pedestrians; and road salt kills grass, shrubs, and I" trees. Fj The goal of the transportation element of the North Side neighborhood preservation study is to protect residences and other land uses from the external effects of traffic while maintaining the circulation function provided by roads and streets. Figures 22 through 26 illustrate some of the data h and proposals generated by the streets and traffic study. The major conclusions can be summarized as follows: - Traffic on streets and in alleys has a significant negative impact on neighborhood quality in the North Side. Noise, fumes, physical danger, and unsightliness make the neighborhood less desirable and reduce property values. - A balance among modes -- auto, bicycle, and pedestrian -- does not exist in the North Side because of the overwhelming predominance of the auto. Drivers and non -drivers alike seem to believe that auto traffic 'I. I <r should not be inhibited in any way. The result is a 43 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOn1Es Park Rd 10,300 O O n 3700 l x4800 5900 SgOp 5000 6200 p 500 5200 14�❑ 8 O —560 � 0�0 o57U�0 5200 47nQ 4400 47oo O p ON W) O p r` r0 e o v t • e � • B v' U O �g S Figure 22. 1975 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC IADTI 44 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Church O O N L'�'4900 8Market 4200 Jetlereon O O IC O U) !— F— Z Yn U w =~ m (7 w ZJ Z Z 8 Z z Q J j O QO BROWN ST �:�CCCC�yCIC RONALDS ST �— :..0 C I noise caused by trucks LLL--- down -shifting to climb hill ' CHURCH ST . ::.::•: •xxx :::.............''''i- I..0 SCHOOL 1 CCC.: FAIRCHILD ST. school children must PARK cross busy street i DAVENPORT ST ✓ dltnvujt } pedestrian l crossings BLOOMINGTON ST' 11 HOSPITAL :. MARKET ST �::::•:;,;•.:�::::::•::�!_h::::::::::>::,::•,.::::::.;:.:�ss::�:.::::•::.:•:: ,: JEFFERSON ST '\,dengerous Intersections Figure 23. MAJOR THROUGH STREETS AND EXAMPLES OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS 45 h1CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rIOIMES 1— co fr O Z w W O (D N 1— N LU � N N Z 0 LLI W Z (D > z ED z g o J �, > BROWN ST ::("'"i`'j�`.'�:. RONALDS ST �'.Wj:'''`�;;::"'".�"j"`"""`.�• CHURCH ST � SCHOOL FAIRCHILD ST � PARK ❑ DAVENPORT ST 'I LOOMINGTON ST :::.;;::•:.:::::.; :: HOSPITAL MARKET ST � SCHOOL JEFFERSON ST Figure 24. RESIDENTIAL STREEHAS BEEN NOTEDEXCESSIVE CSSIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC 46 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I BROWN ST RONALDS ST CHURCH ST j u i 0 FAIRCHILD ST DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST 1 MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST re, DIVERTER BARRIER i 1 Z w W 0 N W O Z Z LD J Z Q DIVERTER BARRIER i 1 HOSPITAL Cj O Z W to Ir LLI SCHOOL J D Figure 25. POSSIBLE LOCATIONS FOR TRAFFIC DIVERTERS AND SARRICADES 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES HOSPITAL IL_—JI SCHOOL Figure 25. POSSIBLE LOCATIONS FOR TRAFFIC DIVERTERS AND SARRICADES 47 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES al � 2 J ® •I __ pa�klnp • 'e ®L®1 1 ® ® MARKET ST. _ .. ._ _ . _. _. _._..__..._ I __ •. .. bike lane 00 bl I ® i J 110 NUENN INEEMEMEN F_ p•rklnp y J L 1 1 IFIN ® fps —® a MARKET ST. Ell bike Ian• I • �i I® Figure 26. EXAMPLE OF IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK AT MARKET AND LINN STREETS 48 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES pedestrian environment whichis uneighborhooddare dangerous, yet most trip s in made on foot. l - Neighborhood residents are paying -- through i property taxes -- for street maintenance and improve- ments that actually detract from the value ers pay esoft their pr whileestreett users Rentrs and mare exempted from indirectly, taxes on streets. paying property re complex Transportation and land use interactions ais necessary j and often subtle, and a comprehensive strategy lace to ss in order to avoid pushing the problems from one p l remise another. The following recommenaatelativelybhigh levelOfI that the North Side must acceptevil, but that the negative through traffic as a necessary impacts of this traffic should be ameliorated and mitigate } to the maximum extent feasible: Pedestrian crosswalks need to be marked at all intersections that intersections arterial . street, and at many in a ermanent Markings should be maintaitodremindpmotorists S high state of visibility, cross these streets that pedestrians frequently and have as much reason to be there as motor vehicles. In several locations, diverters or barriers 4 2) h traffic should be erected to eliminate alleys channeling on residential streets and alleys by i it onto arterials. Experience in other coly mprove ties indicates sthat such entuni- lbut also ces tarouse the the neighborhoodof motorists, virulent antagonism of a minority so a program for installing diverters shocommun- undertaken incrementally and with strong ity support. 3) Residential uses on arterainsttthetnegative be buffered and/or screenedagaidust, and impacts of traffic noise, fumes,unsightliness. 49 IICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 4) Signs that inform motorists of diverters, pedestrian crossings, a residential environ- ment, bicycles, recommended routes to the hospital, etc., should be erected in appropri- ate locations. 5) Three intersections should be signalized: Church and Dubuque, Jefferson and Gilbert, and Market and Gilbert. Signals would improve safety at these busy intersections, help control the speed of arterial traffic, and provide protection for pedestrian crossings. 6) Bicycle routes and streets need to be improved by physical separators between auto and bicycle traffic, improved markings, and signs. 7) Residential streets feeding arterials can be "necked" by extending the curbs into the crosswalk; this indicates to motorists the entrance of a residential neighborhood and provides more protection for pedestrians. 8) Brick paving on residential steets should be retained, even replaced, since traffic tends to move more slowly on the uneven surface. 9) Sightlines at intersections should be kept as they are or reduced. Shorter sight distances require motorists to be more careful and drive more slowly on residential streets, and landscaping on corner properties (which may obstruct sightlines) adds to general neighbor- hood quality. 10) All improvements which are for the benefit of motorists or serve to protect pedestrians, bicyclists, residences, and residents from motorists, should be paid for out of highway user fees. 11) The City should begin to bring its street budget into balance, by funding only those projects that can be fully financed by highway user fees. Recent legislation to increase the state gasoline tax and increase the share apportioned to cities should greatly facilitate this budget balancing. 50 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES 1 12) The City should begin to impose user charges (parking fees, annual registration fees, gasoline taxes) on motorists to help support the street system in the City. To the extent necessary, specific authorization should be sought at the state level. 5. Parking Because the North Side is located near the downtown and the University, there is a large demand for parking space in the neighborhood. Multi -family structures often contain several car owners per dwelling unit, creating a high level of resident demand for parking; stores and employers located in the neighborhood provide some off-street parking and also add to on -street demand; employees and students at the University may park in the North Side while at work or at school; and nearby dormitory residents may store their cars on the neighborhood streets rather than use a University lot. Whether on the street or off, cars create a burden for the neighborhood that is destructive of its amenities and attractiveness. The provision of adequate parking facilities is of increasing importance to most communities. The problem stems from factors tending to increase demand for parking space while supply lags behind. Merely increasing the supply of parking space is not the best answer since there are negative impacts associated with parking, and the necessary space must be procured at the expense of valuable amenities such as green spaces, lawns, trees and vegetation. The most desirable solutions are those that discourage relatively unnecessary parking and assign costs in an acceptable manner. Compre- hensive consideration of the parking problem is necessary so that the negative impacts are not overly concentrated or merely shifted to another area. 51 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Several factors have been identified as being primarily responsible for the excess parking demand in the North Side Neighborhood: are: - commuter parking due to the convenient location of this neighborhood in relation to downtown, Mercy Hospital, the University and the bus lines; - storage of cars belonging to University students living in the nearby dormitories; - inadequate off-street parking space provided by North Side apartment units, rooming houses, fraternities and single family residences. The recommended solutions to these parking problems 1) A Parking Permit System (with various modifica- tions) whereby the user pays for the privilege of parking on the street. Because of its prime location, space in the North Side is valuable - whether on or off the street. Attaching a price to curbside parking or allowing preferential parking for residents and charging a small fee, would serve a dual purpose of channeling some parkers back into municipal and University - provided facilities, and forcing those who continue to park on the streets to assume the costs of parking's undesirable effects. Permit zones are shown in Figure 27. 2) A Usable open Space Requirement aimed at causing new development to assume the cost of parking and limit the external effects on the neighborhood. Too often, excessive parking demands an undesirable proportion of multi -family residential lots. specified amounts of usable open space, incorporated into site requirements, would work together with parking and building area specifications to in- directly control the number of dwelling units that could feasibly share a lot. 3) The Reduction of Parking Demand at Mercy Hospital by decreasing the incent�.ve for employees to drive to work. Because parking is a free benefit to employees of Mercy Hospital, there is an excessive demand for parking space. Removal of this incentive would encourage employees to carpool or seek alter- native forms of transportation. 52 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Id01NEs 4 H W =O m BROWN ST RONALDS ST FAI DAVENPORT ST BLOOMINGTON ST MARKET ST JEFFERSON ST h 1-- (n (n 6 =Z O Figure 27. PARKING PERMIT ZONES 53 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RANDS -OLS MOINES When the supply of and demand for parking is analyzed for North Side residents alone, there is an overall balance of spaces and cars in the neighborhood. This balance is rather tenuous, j however, and is easily upset when daily commuters take up on - street parking spaces. Many of the commuters who park in the North Side are destined for the University. Since all of the existing commuter lots are located on the west side of the Iowa River, commuters traveling from the east and south must } cross the campus in order to park. In addition to adding unneeded traffic to city streets, this arrangement encourages parking in areas along commuter routes and closer to the east side classes -- notably the North Side Neighborhood. Although relocation of some of these commuter lots seems warranted, there is a problem of land availability, and therefore an incentive is needed to constrain commuter cars to designated places. A significant contributor to the North Side parking problem stems from a relatively small number of cars (pri- marily belonging to students living in the east side dormi- tories) that are stored in the neighborhood. Early in the academic year there is a long waiting list for spaces in the University -provided storage lots. As time passes, however, this demand decreases -- perhaps because students discover j there is little need for a car in Iowa City or because they have found somewhere else to park. The major storage lots ! are south of campus, not as easily accessible to dormitory residents who own cars as are the North Side streets. The current policies dealing with the problem of automobile storage are: a) calendar parking (alternating control allowing parking on only one side of the street), and b) the city-wide ordinance limiting on -street parking to 48 hours in the same place. Both of these controls impose inconveniences on residents while not always alleviating the impacts of automobile storage. 54 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES The parking needs of multi -family dwelling units in the neighborhood impose two major problems -- inadequate provision of space and improperly designed and controlled lots. The current Iowa City Zoning Code requires an allocation of 1'Il parking spaces per dwelling unit in multi -family developments. This criterion is frequently inadequate, however, when 3 or 4 car -owning students share an apartment. Figure 28 depicts problems resulting from a typical North Side lot development. the allowable density of North Side zoning, Taking into account setbacks and parking requirements, and the original size of a y (80' by 150'), fully 508 of the area is neighborhood propert omobiles. If one concedes that parking lots paved over for aut e, the available green area do not qualify as usable open spac is limited to the 20 -foot setback strip -- clearly inadequate for either the recreation of the tenants of a twelve-plex or the protection of a livable neihborhood environment. Figure 29 g f imposing an open space requirement. shows the result o The by Mercy Hospital he parking requirements g greatly impact the surrounding neighborhood streets. The facility presently employs approximately 675 persons (including part-time staff) in addition to 92 doctors, and contains patient beds. There are 273 hospital -provided parking ` 234 p employees and spaces (Table 5) to meet the demands of both spital, the I to the engineer at Mercy Hospital, visitors. According capacity b ' is filled to cap Y Y employees Large General Lot is usually s for others. Overflows are cars, with occasional opening ipal Parking Lot on Market Street formally directed to the Munic a nd informally to the surrounding (15 blocks from the hospital) a neighborhood streets. S i 55 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40I7JCS I a Parking Spaces 9'x 20' T 20' 2800 sq. ft. VV, ,J VV n IJV i. LOT SIZE: 12,000 sq. ft. ALLOWABLE DENSITY: 12 units 12 2SR apartments* (770 Oosq. ft./ unit, or PARKING SPACE REOUIREMENT: 18 spaces •FHA min. for 2BR•050sq. ft. Figure 28. R3A TYPICAL LOT DEVELOPMENT 56 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Lv 1 M ov x wv — LANDSCAPING 6 SCREENING LOT SIZE: 12,000 sq. It. ALLOWABLE DENSITY: 8 units, 8_1BRR PARKING SPACE 22 REQUIREMENT: 12 spaces Figure 29. TYPICAL LOT DEVELOPMENT (with recomended changes In density controls) 57 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a i' Lot i' 'r Doctor's Parking Lot Emergency Parking Lot Admissions Parking Lot ut 00 Large General: Lot Small G Table 5. Mercy Hospital Parking Facilities Number of Location Spaces Users Adjacent to 98 Professional and east of staff/clergy, the hospital open to other hospital employ- ees from 3 p.m. - 6 a.m. West of emer- 8 Emergency patients gency room, only next to hospital Adjacent to and 15 New admittance west of hospital only on Market Street Market Street half 129 General employees of the first block east of hospital Visitors Across from Large I I I eneral Lot Lot on alley 23 273 General employees and visitors MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 4I0INES Cost Free, must have sticker Free Token gate from 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Free with sticker $1 (no time limit) attended from 6 a.m. - 5 p.m., free all other hours Free i 7. Community Facilities A comprehensive range of community services is evaluated in this report, without regard to whether they are publicly provided, offered by private enterprises, or provided by some combination of public and private resources. Facilities reviewed include schools,.parks, libraries, hospitals and clinics, groceries, restaurants, and other public and private facilities (Figure 30). overall, the North Side is moderately well served, although there are a few deficiencies and some other related problems: - Horace Mann elementary school is experiencing declining enrollment; - No library facilities for the general public are located in the neighborhood; - Happy Hollow Park and Mercy Hospital, as well as some retail establishments, provide valuable services to the residents of the neighborhood but also create some negative impacts because of their orientation to a service area that is larger than the neighbor- hood; - Most negative impacts are the consequence of traffic and parking, although litter, petty vandalism, noise, and unsightliness are also created. Recommendations for improvements and policies in the area of community facilities are the following: 1) Horace Mann school should be retained if this is at all feasible, as it is important to maintaining the mix of families and household types that currently are found in the North Side. Joint uses of the existing facility should continue to be developed, one of which might be a small library oriented toward serving elderly residents. Another use could be child care services immediately before and after school. 2) Happy Hollow park should either be expanded or the recreation programs and facilities located there altered to better serve nearby residents and lessen the number of automobiles attempting to park on or near the park. 59 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOINCs © hospital/cllnlc/pharmacy school N A church supermarket Q corner grocery store . tavern/restaurant O gas station 4 office O other commercial: Including hair dressers H N Bio -Resources W I _Z small shops I F— C � � j W m V W Z m J BROWN ST ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ RONALDS ST E❑ CHURCH ST D ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ 0❑ ! FAIRCHILD ST ❑ ❑ ooc]❑ ❑❑❑ DAVENPORT ST c�❑a❑o❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ .y •°O❑ ❑❑❑ ❑❑ ;3LOOMINGTON ST ❑®• © DDD MARKET ST ❑ ❑ JEFFERSON ST D ❑ ❑ Figure 30. LOCATION OF NORTH SIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 11011JES U 3) It should be a general policy to favor public and private services in the neighborhood that make efforts to appeal to neighborhood residents and pedestrian access. This policy is not simple to administer, but implementation can be based on requirements such as maximum off-street parking, open space, landscaping and screening, trash control, and enforcement of on -street parking controls. 4) No distinction should be made between public and private services in requiring that acceptable standards of "neighborliness" be met; for example, the parking lot at Horace Mann should be paved and landscaped. Variety of land use is one of the neighborhood's positive attributes. Residential is the most prevalent use, but inter- spersed among the older homes and newer apartment buildings are activities which provide services to both the neighborhood and the larger community. The adequacy of these services, and the positive and negative impacts generated by their presence, j form an important component of the neighborhood's ability i to attract residents and to remain attractive as the demands for services change and evolve over time. Evaluation of each community facility or type of facility is organized under four main headings: Services Provided. A description of the facilities currently available and the services provided, currently and historically, is included for each type of facility and major facility. This information reveals the balance between supply and demand, and r patterns and trends in consumption. i Services Needed. A rough, generally judgmental, assessment is made for each type of facility as to whether it is needed and j whether or not additional facilities are needed. In the case i of the North Side, maintaining a varied mix in the population requires a wide range of services and facilities. Service Area. An important distinction from the perspective of the neighborhood is the degree to which facilities located within the neighborhood actually serve neighborhood residents 61 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES II0INC5 as opposed to non-residents. Facilities which are oriented towards serving local residents tend to be more compatible in scale, make more effort to adapt to neighborhood needs, and create fewer negative impacts. Neighborhood Impacts. Positive impacts generally derive from the service provided by the facility, and the objective becomes one of seeking to maintain access to the service while minimizing the negative impacts. Users or consumers of the services are most frequently the direct source of impacts, in the form of traffic, parking, inconsiderate people, and litter. Pressure to store cars, even temporarily on the street, tends to undermine neighborhood quality, especially as demand rises above on -street parking capacity. Litter comes from many sources, but a major one is take-out food packaging; while none of the facilities can be properly regarded as a fast food outlet, many stores and restaurants sell food for consumption off the premises. In both these examples, the problem is exacerbated if the clientele is primarily from outside the neighborhood. A distinction that is commonly made between public and private facilities seems to be unimportant in the neighborhood context. The order of types of facilities evaluated in the I, report progresses generally from public to private, but the same procedures for evaluation are applied to either kind. 8. Neighborhood Site Improvements The idea behind the Neighborhood Site Improvements report was that of producing a miniature capital improvements program at the neighborhood level, solely for purposes of discussion. No priorities have been assigned to projects, and no attempts made to evaluate them from a technical standpoint. Cost estimates are included in the report, so residents and policy makers can 62 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES A judge for themselves which projects create benefits that are high relative to costs. Projects have been culled from the other North Side study reports, but there is no assurance that the list is exhaustive. The list of possible neighborhood improvements for the North Side of Iowa City has been developed as a result of residents' comments at block meetings, expressions of concern from members of the North Side Neighbors organization, and observations by the study staff. Although distinctions are sometimes vague, an attempt has been made to limit this list to physical public improvements for the area (e.g., sidewalk maintenance and repair) as compared to neighborhood problems that require a "policy" approach (parking control). Improve- ments have been arranged in sections that correspond to other reports of the North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study, and these provide a more detailed justification for the proposed improvements. The intent is to show improvements for which a need has been expressed. Included in the information contained in Table 6 is the location, the source of the recommendation for the improvement, a description of the improvement itself, and a rule -of -thumb estimate of some of the cost parameters. j 9. Impact Survey Manual Throughout the conduct of the North Side Study, methodology and techniques of measurement had to be developed for most of the components. Some of this methodology is fairly complex, as in Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines (report number 1), and the results can only be regarded as a first effort. Other methodologies are adapted from conventional procedures (report number 9, Historic Structures Inventory, report number 7, Community Facilities, and report number 3, Land Use Intensity) and explanations of the methodology are contained in the appropriate reports. For several elements of 63 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140114ES k M Improvement 1) Alley Surfaces 2) Alley Traffic Control 3) Restore Bricks to Cement Patches Table 6. Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table Reference Proposal Location Streets & Traffic (see Figure 1) Report 5 Streets & Traffic Alleys between Report 5 Davenport and Fairchild from Dubuque to Dodge; between Jefferson and Market from Dubuque to Van Buren Streets & Traffic Brown Report 5 Linn Fairchild Davenport Church 4) Pedestrian Right- Streets & Traffic Church & Dubuque of -Ways Report 5 Fairchild & Dubuque Davenport & Dubuque Bloomington & Dubuque Market & Dubuque Jefferson & Dubuque Market & Linn Market & Gilbert Jefferson & Linn Jefferson & Gilbert 5) Traffic Diverter Streets & Traffic Linn & Davenport Report 5 Linn & Fairchild Linn & Ronalds Linn & Bloomington MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110IIIES Description 15 IE alleys, oiled once a year 6 11 alleys mid block barrier in alley 19 patches 38 patches 29 patches 11 patches 5 patches with an average area of 48 sq. ft. 6" lines, reflective paint, 6' apart, applied twice/yr. or installation of permanent material (brick, plastic) of contrasting color, 6' wide Landscaped island 10' wide constructed dia- gonally across inter- sections or 3 or 4 cement tubs w/plantings Estimated Costs $110/alley $1,705 total $500 each $85,950 Total $25/intersection $250 total $21,000 each m Ln Table 6. Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table (Continued) Reference Improvement Proposal Location 6) Necking Streets & Traffic Ronalds & Governor Report 5 7) Traffic Lights Streets & Traffic Church & Dubuque Extending curbs out 3' $5,000 per Report 5 Gilbert & Jefferson at intersection Standard stop light Gilbert & Market 8) Bike Lanes Streets & Traffic Davenport 36 blocks of lanes $9/block Report 5 Gilbert color 4' wide, once a year Johnson "Bike streets" $60/sign sign to inform Lucas motorists every 2 or 3 blocks Ronalds Plantings around $3,000 perimeter Church 150 trees $75-$100 each pine, spruce Fairchild other large trees $7,545 - 1 tree every 32.8 feet Linn Brown 9) Screening Market Parking Market Street Lot Report 6 between Linn & Gilbert 10) Tree Planting Iowa City Church - 1'k blocks Tree Planting Dodge - 3 blocks Plan Gilbert - 5� blocks Governor - 2 blocks Jefferson - 2 blocks Market - 1'k blocks & business section Bloomington - 1 block MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Estimated Description Costs Extending curbs out 3' $5,000 per along 15' of block face intersection at intersection Standard stop light $12,000 each pretimed signals 2 phased control 36 blocks of lanes $9/block painted a contrasting total $324 color 4' wide, once a year "Bike streets" $60/sign sign to inform $300 total motorists every 2 or 3 blocks Plantings around $3,000 perimeter 150 trees $75-$100 each pine, spruce other large trees $7,545 - 1 tree every 32.8 feet $11,318 total Improvement 11) Happy Hollow 12) Sidewalk Replacement 13) Sidewalk Installation 14) Street Lights 15) Benches Table 6. Neighborhood Improvements Summary Table (Continued) Reference Proposal Location Description Estimated Costs Brown Street between Addition of 1.2 $90,000 Governor & Lucas acres adjacent & to the west of park See Figure 9 Replacement of 1,572 25,152 sq. ft. individual 4' x 4' @ $2.25/sq. ft. squares of sidewalk $56,592 total Dubuque between 4' wide, � block long, Sidewalk, $1,350 Ronalds and alley plus 4' retaining wall Wall, $15,000 North 9 square blocks 25 lights lantern or $500 each from Market to Church, globe on a 10-12' pole, $12,500 total Gilbert to Dodge Mercury Vapor Located midblock or down 1/3 of block on one side, 2/3 down facing block Corner of Jefferson & Wooden bench with $75 - $600 each Linn, Market and Van pedestal leg $300 - $2,400 Buren, Jefferson and total Governor, Dodge and Church r - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111E5 streets and Traffic; report number 6, ( the study (report number 5, Handbook, and i parking; report number 11, Citizen Self-Help report number 13, Community Participation), the methodology ques for the largely original but utilizes simple techni is t ain, the specifics are presented in individual most part; aq rt reports. For the Impac_ t_ Sum the purpose o£ the methodology was Ito identify problems and resources in the neighborhood as revealed by readily observable physical evidence. while much rcise of judgment (what of the information requires the exe f constitutes a significant negative impact, what is a valuable resource, estimating whether an owner is upgrading a property produced with reasonable or not), the observations can be re give an indication of what is worthwhile or unde- accuracy and g important, it offers a sirable about the neighborhood. More imp policy makers point for discussion with residents and p Y starting p act survey t about preservation and enhancement. The first imp as it u served this purpose quite well, and the methodology evolved seems to be easily transferred. 9 vey outlined below is designed The Neighborhood Impacts Sur athering and organization of specific and to facilitate the g z detailed information concerning the positive, negative, and j a multi-use regulatory aspects of land uses in nei5ledrfrom ! is a combination of data comp The completed survey plus a block-by-block walking survey existing municipal sources p athered falls into of the study area. The information that is g three categories: block data, resources, and negative impacts. In addition, a map of each block is drawn from existing city he recording of information during the maps and used for t field survey component. The survey manual gives instructions for performing the pare a map o£ each block in survey. The first step is to pre the study area, depicting parcel boundaries and numbers. In { addition, block data forms should be prepared and filled out to I 67 / MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES the extent possible by using available data. Secondly, the maps and block data forms are taken into the field, where two surveyors walk around each block, including the alley, twice. On the initial walk around the block, one surveyor verifies as best he/she can the information on the block data forms, and records the rating (arrived at by both surveyors) of owner investment in major structures. This surveyor also fills out the "Resources" sheet. The second individual completes the block map by drawing in structures, parking areas, trees, and other significant features on the block. This individual also records on the map the location of block resources. On the second walk around the block, negative impacts are identified by the surveyors. one surveyor is responsible for completing the "Negative Impacts" form. 10. Impact Survey 1978 The first impact survey undertaken during the summer of 1976 was a twelve -week project funded by the Bicentennial I Internship Program of the Center for Public Affairs Service - Learning of Indiana University, the City of Iowa City and the University of Iowa. The survey was both a component of the ongoing Land Use Report Task of the Iowa City Comprehensive Planning Program and a scaled-down version of the Neighborhood Survey component of the proposal submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the FY -76 Innovative Projects Program entitled, "An Impact Evaluation Approach to Neighborhood Preservation and Enhancement." In April and May of 1978 the second survey was done, to update the information gathered on the summer of 1976 survey, and to provide data on changes which had occurred in the neighborhood over the preceding nine to ten months. An analysis of these data is presented in report number 3, Land Use Intensity. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 001RES i i i I I Block Data. Some traditional components of a land -use survey are included in the neighborhood impacts survey. Util- izing records available through the City Assessor's Office, the following information was compiled and field -verified: 1. Parcel identification number and location. 2. Parcel address. 3. Existing land use. (Figure 31) 4. Parcel owner, and 5. Whether a residence is owner -occupied. For each block these data are listed on the block form entitled "Block Data" (Figure 32). Additional components were added to the survey to provide information concerning the positive, negative, and regulatory effects of land use activities in a multi -use, historically significant neighborhood. Data concern- ing these three components are contained on the block forms entitled "Resources" and "Negative Impacts," and are marked on block maps (Figures 33 and 34). Resources. The "Resources" section (Figure 35) contains a listing of those features of a block which contribute positively to its overall quality. The block resources include such items as mature trees, open space, "corner" grocery stores, and buildings of historical and/or architectural merit. Several books and reports on Iowa City architecture were used to iden- tify the significant buildings in addition to field determination by the surveyors. For each of these buildings a short descrip- tion of its style and outstanding characteristics is also included. A far more complete historic survey is contained in the Historic Structures Inventory, report number 4. Negative Impacts. The negative impacts of one land use activity upon another are listed on the block form entitled "Negative Impacts" (Figure 36), on a block by block, parcel specific basis. In contrast to resources, negative impacts ;3] MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I101ME5 STUDY 73 93 52 33 32 F 12 II AREA RONALD5 '72] L 5� Z(�'�� 311 ; 13 10 �I--1d1L�J.., 7. dl ZC U H� z • ; BLOCK 0 7 0 71 55U 50; 350 la;� NUMBERS f"• • SUIOOL • • •.a... •(�� z IRCNILD H—' ,,, 30 . *ZONING 70 ; 5 49 F ; 15In 36 u2 69 57 48 37 2 0 • Is 7 w • aua.a • u• o _ a a 0 o f H • • • LOOMIN TON 58 ; 47 ; 38 27 17 6 L •. "ii i M E •'•'•' a I• 67 59 : 4s : 5CIx�L 26 IB •j N :Jjj:..a . ,.,, .. •��:.......� =1 F z IN•..•........o...... i JEFFERSON MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114Es i ..... _ ADDRESS T i I J C •ti\I'll M1.97. 37-2075 119 Covmmor R3A SF • W North Governor RSA N L'arion. William 4 Vary m 2027 831 Warket r SF Fuhmeister. )larle % 2028 Q R3A NF -3 Conlon, Mill lam 4 3Vq S 0 2079 821 Market RM >6-2 Brennan. Walter d L s 2030 519 Kirket R3A SF Weidner. Carrie 0. N 4- 2031 c R3A SF I,ehrer, John A. S -1- 2032 807 7larket R3A a lwghes, ILarKar.•t K I 803 Market R3A BLOCK DATA BLACK 5 -,c PARCF.I. ..... _ ADDRESS .. __.-__.. TONING USE/ACTIVITY MIR OhMI:R OCCUR •ti\I'll M1.97. 37-2075 119 Covmmor R3A SF Carlson, Ruth 2026 North Governor RSA Vacant Lot L'arion. William 4 Vary po 2027 831 Warket R3A SF Fuhmeister. )larle % 2028 827 Market R3A NF -3 Conlon, Mill lam 4 3Vq S 0 2079 821 Market RM >6-2 Brennan. Walter d L ORotella 2030 519 Kirket R3A SF Weidner. Carrie 0. K 4- 2031 811 Narket R3A SF I,ehrer, John A. S -1- 2032 807 7larket R3A SF lwghes, ILarKar.•t K 2033 803 Market R3A NF -2 Yreho[Ie4y, feo18e 4 !Wjcl 0 2034 800 Jefferson R3A SF Quinn. James R. K O 3033 810 Jeffers.. 0.NibPatrlek, SrSF Glen Cont; Quinn. Jeers % 0 2036 elm Jefferson RM SF Roe, Ra)mnd 0 ELI". % 0 2037 BIB Jefferson 113A SF 7n1,heie, Sara A. % + 2038 B24 Jefferson R3A SF Knocdel, EJuln % + 2039 105 Governor 0.3A NF -6• Liar James 4•rci[a 0 2040 117 Governer RSA SF Oreckman, Aabrase K 0 4 I 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DCS 1401BE5 Commentd Quite a hew ho12se6 on .th.id Voek axe being (ox Aeeentty have been) xehab.iUtated by .i.ndivtduat owneu. Housed aAe otdeh and smaUeA but vehy lueU-kept. Cnowded apaxtment bu tding on SE eoxneh. seems to be a .threat to .thi.6 tAend... Je66ehhon St. couRd be gn.ea.tey enhanced by thee-ptan.ting. H W Y cc Q - HONUAOJ N sv3m Figure 33. MAP OF BLOCK 5 72 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIo1MEs 0 W LL LL W n LEGEND INHABITED STRUCTURE ACCESSORY BUILDING TREES/PLANTS FENCE BLOCK RESOURCE no.2 i NEGATIVE IMPACT nal P=z . PAVED PARKING AREA — 2 CAR G -z UNPAVED PARKING AREA ^m -1 1 ^ LINE LINES NUMBERS *NOTE: ALL MAPS DRAWN TO APPROXIMATE SCALE ONLY MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES RESOURCES BLOCK 5 NO. ! TYPE OF RESOURCE 1. Trees along Lucas - row of young, nicely spaced trees all along the block. 2. (36-38) houses - 814, 818, 824 Jefferson - small; older houses; very well maintained; all newly painted; yards very well maintained. .- 3. (40) Open lot with garden - provides visual relief from crowded corner lot. 4. 7 N (25) (louse - 119 Governor - small older house; well maintained; attractive. S. Trees along Market - row of young, nicely spaced trees; shade f screening from ly busy street. 6. (29) House - 821 Market - very well maintained house; large attractive yard. 7. (30) (louse - 819 Market - large, attractive well maintained house. 8. (32) House - 807 Market - architectural and historical significance; badly in need of paint. r to C 's MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES i ! fll a m N C) n 7 N 4 O ly MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES i NEGATIVE IMPACTS BLOCK 5 NO. SOURCE TYPE OF IMPACT IMPACTED PROPERTY 1. Governor St. traffic Noise 25, 26, 27, 40, 39 2. (39) Parking Lot Visual (yard completely - paved with parking) 38, 40 (also houses across Governor) 1 � 7. Alley (gravel) Dust Properties along alley. M 9 U) N T 0 9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3. (39) Parking Lot Mudholes, standing water (because of required setback from corners for curb cuts, People who live in apartment, those using tenants cannot gain access to front sidewalks. some (2) parking spaces without driving across grass F, causing ' ut mudholes.) T q, Jefferson St. 34-39 (visual impact could be ameliorated by n traffic Noise, visual planting trees along Jefferson.) • W S. Market St. traffic Noise, visual 27-33. G. (29) [larking Lot Visual, dust 25, 27 z 1 � 7. Alley (gravel) Dust Properties along alley. M 9 U) N T 0 9 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES reduce the overall qualities of the block. For example, a large, unpaved parking lot in a residential area creates dust, noise, traffic hazards, and unsightliness, all of which reduce the values of nearby residential properties. For each block, 1 both the source of these negative impacts and the properties )I affected, i.e., the impacted properties, are identified. It should be pointed out that often a particular feature of a block can be both a resource and a negative impact. For example, a local store provides convenient service, yet its parking lot 4 may be unsightly, garbage ridden, and noisy. Other Survey Information. In order to obtain a crude measure of the amount of private investment activity occurring on each parcel, the "Owner Investment" column was added to the Block Data Form. Upon visually inspecting the exterior of the major structure of each parcel, the surveyors rated owner zero, or minus in the appropriate investment by placing a plus, space. A plus sign indicates that the owner is carrying on 1 maintenance and renovation activity with the obvious purpose of upgrading the overall character and quality of his or her property. A zero is assigned to those parcels where the owner rehabilitation activity but is is not carrying on any majorresent maintaining the property with the intent of holding its p value. For example, those homes that showed .little recent f 1 outward sign of upgrading, yet were structurally sound, were given a zero. Finally, a minus sign was assigned to those properties where the owner appears to be disinvesting and where, as a result, the structure is being undermaintained. The Iowa City Zoning Code is the primary instrument through which land use is regulated in the study area. Generally, the examples of non-compliance noted fell under the categories of Use Regulations specific to each of the study area's four zones. These zones -- R2, R3A, R3B, and C2 -- are delineated on the Study Area Map (Figure 31) and the relevant zone for each parcel 76 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IIIES i is indicated in the "Zoning" column of the Block Data Form (Figure 32). No attempt was made to determine instances of enforceable violations, and listing of non-compliance has been dropped from the current version of the survey. Report number 1, Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures and Guidelines includes an evaluation of the efficacy of typical zoning controls in older mixed land use neighborhoods. Finally, brief block -specific comments made by surveyors during or immediately following the completion of each block are included with the three forms already mentioned. It must be emphasized that while these are the subjective impressions of the surveyors, they do attempt to note qualitative aspects of the block which are not amenable to the other, more formal- ized, methods of notation included in the survey. 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook We have frequently found, in our neighborhood meetings and in other contexts, that people may have gripes which are of such a nature that the complainer could probably achieve an adequate level of satisfaction solely on his or her own initiative, if they took the right actions. For some individuals, expecting "the City" to do something about a particular problem is simply a rationalization for not doing anything themselves. For others, a lack of knowledge about how to pursue their complaints results in a compounding of ignorance about the sources and remedies for the problem as well as a festering dissatisfaction with "govern- ment," as if local officials should be able to understand and remedy the complaints of individuals who do not express their concerns. This handbook is an effort to provide a base of information to neighborhood residents about what sorts of expectations they can reasonably have regarding things that bother them, and how they can accomplish those remedies. 77 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIMCs Each topic in the handbook is divided into four sections: BACKGROUND sections provide summaries of city ordinances that will help to give a foundation to a particular complaint. The section numbers of these ordinances are in parentheses. SELF HELP sections recommend courses of action which can be taken to get results. INTEREST GROUPS sections provide the names of organizations which will help with a specific problem. GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES sections list the applicable depart- ments and commissions of the City. Appendices located in the back of the handbook contain the addresses and telephone numbers of interest groups and govern- mental agencies. i 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Control of neighborhood externalities is the major rationale for the existence of zoning, yet zoning is least effective in the older mixed neighborhoods where land use spillovers are greatest. Nuisance law concepts are ideally suited to dealing with externalities, yet this branch of torts has developed in ways that appear to minimize its utility for control of land use spillovers. This paper attempts to reconstitute the law of nuisances in a way which will allow it to play a much greater role in land use decision making and to perform the functions that zoning fails to perform. Several writers have proposed that nuisance law be allowed to play a larger role in land use control; the purpose of this r rules and guidelines for. accomplishing this. paper is to offe Despite the current indifference of most planners and land use greater reliance upon lawyers to nuisance law, it is both feasible and desirable. The obstacles (other than inertia) are modest, and the benefits potentially great. A number of reasons can be cited for turning to nuisance law for land use control: W MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NEs I i 1) Many land use problems which cannot be dealt with under zoning because they would require retroactive applica- tion are natural problems for nuisance law; 2) Nuisance law encourages the resolution of land use conflicts through private actions, rather than government intervention; to the extent that problems can be addressed via the nuisance mechanism, the results are likely to be more responsive to the particular context and trample less heavily on private rights; 3) Zoning has its origins in the common law of nuisances, and zoning, as an instrument of public policy, would be greatly strengthened by being reconnected with those origins; j 9) Zoning can continue to develop more flexible instru- ments, leaving nuisance actions to control the side effects of similar but potentially incompatible uses, thereby avoiding S much of the arbitrary and discriminatory nature of highly refined land use classifications. j 5) Nuisance proceedings allow for more options in the resolution of land use conflicts, opening the door to improved social efficiency, i.e., zoning rules out many possible land use configurations that would be socially desirable if nuisances were controlled; 6) Problems in areas of mixed and changing land uses, which are not well handled by zoning, are directly addressed by nuisance law. While the objectives and guidelines described below are i intended to pertain to nuisance law in general, the context in which it is being evaluated is the typical older, mixed land use neighborhood found in cities of all sizes. Theory of Negative Externalities. A nuisance, in legal terms, is an interference with the use or enjoyment of property, especially land. This is a form of negative externality, of a type which requires some measure of physical proximity for the i 79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IdDIRES impacts to be transmitted. A negative externality, in turn, is one of several kinds of market failure. Where market failure 1 can be demonstrated and intervention is warranted, public policy should seek to either create a situation that is as close as possible to what an ideal market would produce or else establish a public purpose which overrides the market solution. An abstracted example of a negative externality is dia- grammed in Figure 37. The horizontal axis could represent a number of measures of output, but one which is especially relevant to the neighborhood context is dwelling unit density. For a given parcel of property, the number of dwelling units constructed upon it (or created by conversion) is associated j with a cost per unit, which will, in general, increase with the number of units constructed. This is shown by the private cost (PC) curve, which indicates marginal private development j costs per unit. The marginal benefit of each unit constructed is given by the MB curve, which indicates the willingness of I an informed buyer or renter to pay for the dwelling unit; j the curve is drawn almost flat (i.e., elastic demand) on the I assumption that the number of units to be built on the property i in question is small in comparison to the local market. The private developer will construct units until the marginal ' cost equals the marginal benefit, located at B on the diagram. In the absence of market failure, the solution described is optimal and the correct density for the property is determined by private market action. Where negative externalities exist -- specifically, nuisances -- the solution is not socially optimal and a misallocation of resources occurs. Suppose, in the example, that the private solution is achieved by Placing an apartment building in a block which is primarily older single family homes, and the combined effect of the bulk of the apartment building, the loss of grass paved over for parking, the noise and fumes of increased auto traffic, the glare and ' 1 80 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIOS•DES II0111E5 cost or value social cost %PC' )ptimal social and private cost >rlvate cost I narginal lenefits d d3 d1l density (dwelling units per acre) Figure 37. NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES RELATED TO DENSITY 81 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110INES unsightliness of an unlandscaped parking lot, the increased trash and litter, and the amoral lifestyles of the tenants, results in a decrease in the values of the adjoining properties. The hypothetical private developer, then, has created costs which are borne by others, and are therefore external to the developer. For each level of density, the external costs are represented by the difference between the PC and the SC (or social cost) curves. At density dl, the negative extern- alities have a value of DB. If the developer had to pay the external costs in the form of damages to injured property owners, clearly a lower level of density would result. In the example, this level would be dZ and the amount of damages would be AC. Allowing a level of development of dl leads to a social loss (entirely borne, in this case, by adjoining property owners) equal to the area ABD, since each unit of density above d creates more social costs than it is worth. One result, then of failing to control negative externalities is a suboptimally high level of density, and another is the expropriation of I values from one group of owners for the benefit of the developer. Once the requirement to compensate injured � P 3 property owners has been imposed, however, the developer will seek ways to reduce these costs since they have become internal to his or her decision making. Assume that by improved design, land- scaping, construction of enclosed parking, and control of trash, the developer can completely neutralize the externalities (to the extent they still exist they are offset by positive contributions to neighborhood quality) at less cost per dwelling unit than the previous PC costs plus damages. Representing this curve by SC'/PC', the new ideal level of density is d3, and no damage payments are necessitated. Nuisance law has the potential for causing the source to internalize these land use externalities, greatly reducing VF I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DLS MOINES both the inefficiencies and the inequities of current land use patterns. Zoning, in its pure form, lacks this potential; density controls set above dl have no effect at all and lower densities reduce total costs but do little to remove extern- alities. For example, level d2 is the best that can be achieved with density controls, and external costs are still AC per dwelling unit. Besides the elimination of external costs and unpaid damages, the nuisance -law solution (E) results in net social benefits, equal to the area AEF, over the best zoning solution. It will be claimed that zoning can internalize nuisance effects through design and performance standards, as well as more flexible instruments such as planned unit develop- ments. To a certain extent, this is true, and should be done, but zoning is fundamentally handicapped by its prospective t (before the fact) orientation; under ideal conditions, zoning can result in a high quality environment starting from scratch, but cannot maintain it in the face of change and it can do ! nothing in neighborhoods where the externalities already exist. Such neighborhoods are our primary concern. The example has been presented in the framework of new development or redevelopment, in an existing neighborhood, t but the same concepts apply to any sort of land use activity in an existing neighborhood. Change in use in existing struc- tures, additions and conversions, greater intensity in the same activity (e.g., a store which shifts from a neighborhood, i primarily walk-in service, to a community service with a majority of auto arrivals), or simply laziness (leading to i accumulated junk) are all activities hich may lead to negative externalities. Nuisance tlaw tissanwinstru- ment ideally suited to the task of controlling these undesir- able effects. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 objectives of Nuisance Law. In merging the theory of externalities with the legal adversary process, a number of objectives can be proposed against which nuisance law principles and procedures may be evaluated. Nuisance law will be considered successful in helping to control land use if it can accomplish i the following: 1) Cause private property owners to consider the negative external effects of alternative actions in making their decisions about land use activities; 2) Encourage the resolution of nuisance problems through private market -like negotiation among all affected parties; 3) Serve as a market surrogate where such negotiations fail, i.e., offer last resort arbitration for land use con- flicts; 4) Impose the least restrictive solution on the parties that find litigation necessary; and 5) Interfere to the least possible extent (commensurate with the above) in private market choices affecting land use. An enormous range of potentially efficient resolutions i of nuisance conditions exists, and a good regulatory or legal process precludes as few of those options as possible. Con- sider some of the ways a nuisance problem can be corrected: payment of damages to injured parties, termination of the nuisance -producing activity, redesign of the activity to eliminate the production of the nuisance, amelioration by j buffering the effects of the nuisance on the property of the nuisance source, buffering on the property of the owner suffering the injury, acquisition of easements from affected or potentially affected owners, and relocation of the activity to another site. Any combination of these or others is a contender for the ideal point E in Figure 37. L, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 13. Community Participation Citizen participation (broadly construed to include presentations to and discussion with the Planning and zoning commission and the City Council, as well as neighborhood groups) was given a high priority in the study for two reasons: (1) citizens, whether private individuals, appointed commis- sioners, or elected officials, Possess information and view- points about the problems that are essential sources of input and critical review; and (2) novel ideas need testing and time for digestion before they can have much impact. We thus tried to expose as many of our ideas as possible to public scrutiny, in a variety of forums, and reconstruct them on the basis of the responses obtained. This report describes that process. A wide range of participation and interaction techniques " were used in the study, including block level discussions with residents in their homes, public Presentations to City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission, general neigh- borhood civic groups, and extensive meetings and discussions with City and University administrative staff. Some general conclusions drawn from this experience are listed below: The greater the diversity in a neighborhood, the greater the difficulty of developing a cohesive neighborhood organization. Each subgroup within the neighborhood (homeowners, renters, students, businesses, hospitals, etc.) pursues its own self interest, and these may conflict.come into order to ate planning, conflicts shouldbe resolvedwithincthetneighborhood before going to the City for action, since conflicting responses from different neighborhood groups will { generally result in no action. One alternative is to work through whatever groups exist, and attempt to achieve consistent positions; the other alternative is to form a single umbrella group that will develop a unified position for the neighborhood. We worked almost exclusively with the North Side Neighbors organization, which maintained a single-family homeowners protectionist stance while preservation of a neighborhood with mixed I 85 w - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I4010Es structure types, age groups, and life styles remained a high priority of the study group. Student residents are especially difficult to involve because they have little at stake in the neighborhood, and are occupied by personal interests that focus on school and related activities. Innovative efforts need time and nurture before signi- ficant public action can be expected. Seeds of ideas need to grow and develop, and perceptions about what is feasible and desirable need time to change. For example, support for alternative parking policies will be different depending upon whether personal ease of parking and access are regarded as most important, or cutting down on traffic and parked cars is the dominant concern. We hope that the final reports issued by the study will stimulate the neighborhood to articulate its own posi- tion at some point in the future and support City policies that will accomplish some of the residents' objectives. A full range of community participation activities is essential to the success of any planning project, most importantly because the various citizens, staff and officials have information and insights that are needed in attempting to solve the problems. Many other side benefits accrue from community participation: people are given a chance to digest concepts and relationships before being confronted with a choice, support for proposals for change can be developed as the study progresses, citizens have greater confidence in govern- ment decisions if they feel that the process is open and above board, citizens develop a better understanding of the political process by working with it, politicians and staff obtain some idea of what reactions to various proposals are likely to be before they have to commit themselves to a position, etc. Planning should involve a two-way exchange of knowledge and learning between any two participants in the process. Administrative staff in public and semi-public agencies are frequently -- almost always -- helpful and cooper- ative in providing information, and are often willing to devote large amounts of time and effort to explaining regulations, procedures, etc., and reviewing preliminary drafts of reports. It helps to have questions and requests clearly in mind before calling upon local officials, and repeated visits are generally necessary to develop an understanding of the work carried on by various persons and agencies and to reach a level of fluent communication. Patience and goodwill are helpful in creating this flow of information. VU MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES :IOIRES - The Planning and Zoning Commission can serve as a pre- processor of issues for the City Council, allowing possibly controversial topics to get some exposure before the council has to face them. With the North Side study, this did not occur for several reasons: specific proposals were offered in some instances, but the preliminary reports did not recommend items for action, so there was little pressure for quick resolu- tion; media coverage of Commission meetings was scant or absent, and few citizens or spectators were present; and the interests of the Planning Commissioners were not necessarily the same as those of Council. Frequent contact was made with newspaper and radio reporters, but no serious media campaign was ever mounted by the study group. - When conclusions and recommendations are presented in reports, the largest share of attention is likely to come from organizations that appear to be (or perceive themselves as appearing in the report to be) partially responsible for the problems. These organizations sometimes react initially with some hostility, but are usually willing to go over the offending material in detail and present their side of the case. Un- fortunately, their interest in the substance of the problem and associated recommendations is usually limited to defending their lack of responsibility for the problem. Individuals able to take positions or t act on the recommendations are likely to be higher up in the organization, but there are occasional exceptions. Most people do not like to be told that they have a problem to deal with, and they like it less if it appears that they are contributing to the problem in some way. Natural reactions tend to be (a) there is no problem, (b) the problem is the responsiblity of somebody else (not the City, not the University, not a particular agency), and (c) everything possible is already being done to solve the problem. There is also some tendency to associate blame for the existence of the problem with the person who brings news of the problem. Any group or organization operating independently and on its own initiative runs the risk of being regarded with suspicion by other groups. Neighborhood residents viewed the North Side study team as hand -in -glove with the City staff, the City staff tended to see the study team as too close to the neighborhood residents, and the University was apprehensive that the study might stir up town -gown conflicts. While many of these fears AN MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES are rationally based, most persons with whom we inter- acted found they could develop working relationships with the study group; yet the study was never completely accepted by any group. Many residents were warmly grateful for our efforts, but others were not and some complained individually to City staff and politicians, with the results that the neighborhood has not, so far, taken any position with respect to our recommendations. - University researchers and city bureaucracies operate in entirely different environments, and the two styles can be a source of friction. Academics believe in a marketplace of ideas, often naively expecting that bad ideas and bad analysis will disappear simply because they are intellectually defective; in addition, academics can be insensitive to the impacts of what they say on persons in more vulnerable circumstances. Bureaucratic organizations tend to place highest emphasis on loyalty, management control, and protection of the organization from criticism. Universities are also, of course, bureaucratic organizations, and many city officials can be found who are intellectually open, so the dis- tinction between academia and the bureaucracy is not a simple dichotomy. - Any significant achievement in solving neighborhood problems requires strong leadership from somewhere. It is possible for neighborhood organizations, ad- ministrative staff, or politicians to provide this leadership, but doing so is very time consuming and demands an ability to transcend stereotypical roles; there are few who are both willing and able. Working with a number of disparate groups calls for unusual talents nowadays, and the reward (mostly ego satis- faction) may sometimes call forth the wrong people or fail to draw out the needed talent. The overall conclusion is that most of the people whom we came in contact with behaved in normal ways according to normal instincts; most persons in the same positions would respond in approximately the same ways. Roles have a great deal of influence on the ways people think and act. Social progress depends upon the existence of some people that are capable of satisfying their normal roles while, at the same time, thinking and acting outside them; i.e., society requires both the orderly norms as well as the individuals who are exceptions to the norms. MP FIICROFILMEO BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MofOEs Because the North Side study group tried to maintain a balanced relationship with all components of the local political system, the community participation report covers a scope much broader than what is usually meant by "citizen participation" (which, itself, is often narrowly interpreted to mean question- naire surveys). Included under the community participation heading are presentations to and discussions with neighborhood groups, presentations to the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission, review by the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission and its Land Use Committee, direct communications with the press, relationships with units within the University, and interactions with staff and administrative personnel at . the City. In other words, any communication -- whether technical, political, or a mixture -- with individuals or groups belonging to the larger community of Iowa City is subject matter for the community participation report. Community participation is an essential study element for a variety of reasons: ideas can be exposed and tested against different standards and perceptions, information used in the study can be checked by letting others review and critique the results, insights into the problems can be gained from persons with more experience dealing with them in different ways, novel or innovative ideas can be introduced in settings which allow the ideas to develop and mature rather than being rejected summarily, general community support can be built for an approach to solving a problem so that the alternatives have already been digested when formal political discussion takes place, etc. A high level of community participation also carries with it many handicaps: efforts expended in public discussion may draw away from greater substantive understanding of the problems, perhaps leading to superficial debate; a "representative" participation process is an elusive myth, since participation is a result of interest, in part self-interest; the apathetic majority usually pays no attention to debate over M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101DEs issues yet may still be in a position to obstruct the imple- mentation of a carefully constructed consensus; members of organizations tend to respond in terms of how a particular proposal will affect their organization and their status within it; some individuals may seek to downgrade or embarrass the project by seizing upon flaws in preliminary or published work. Nonetheless, community participation is a desirable and necessary ingredient in any planning effort, and the objective is to maximize the benefits while minimizing the unproductive aspects. The North Side study team attempted to operate in a fishbowl throughout the year -and -a -half study, and, while this certainly created its difficulties for the project, there is no real reason in retrospect to operate any differently. Preventing the invevitable mistakes and misunderstandings is a fruitless task, although pains should be taken to be sure that all material is reviewed as thoroughly as possible internally, before asking others to react to it. Controversy, far from being an indication II of poor staff work, is inherent in the nature of policy making; the absence of controversy is commonly a symptom of apathy or the avoidance of problems. The study staff took their share of abuse, and no permanent damage seems to have resulted from it. i We believe that good planning requires the introduction of some I unpopular notions, and useful change can only be attained in many areas after waiting out a period of initial negative reaction. 14. Grant Program Coordination Neighborhoods, regardless of their age, represent a substantial investment by both the private and public sectors. Like any physical asset, neighborhoods will, if permitted to, deteriorate over time. Conversely, if sufficient care and main- tenance are provided, older, well established neighborhoods can 0 M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS 110INES 0 create substantial returns to investors (homeowners, city government) indefinitely. These returns often take the form of rising property values, tax base and tax revenue. In neighborhoods like the North Side, where physical deterioration is the consequence of years of homeowner dis- investment, the attraction of new capital in the form of individuals and families willing to rehabilitate existing homes is difficult, at least on a large scale. If physical conditions can be substantially improved and financial incen- tives provided, a substantial portion of the risk involved in investing in older neighborhoods is eliminated. Grants and low-interest loans are available to qualifying persons through local governments, for various types of property improvements; other programs can be used for construction of public facilities, code enforcement, provision of services, or other activities. Housing rehabilitation, small parks, and minor capital improvements such as sidewalks and shelters can be funded from these programs. The Grant Program report reviews some of the programs that are available to property owners and residents of the North Side, and describes the experience in the City and the neighborhood with respect to housing rehabilitation grants and loans, and neighborhood site improvements. While dramatic changes in the physical condition of the North Side cannot be expected to occur overnight, as a result of implementing the programs described in this report, it can reasonably be expected that over a two to three year period substantive improvements will be evident. Experience in other cities undergoing neighborhood revitalization indicates that such efforts begin very slowly, but as improvements are made, and homeowner investment follows, the rate and level of additional private investment accelerates. Property values typically begin to increase as the area and its existing housing stock become more attractive. A noticeable increase in the 91 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES care and maintenance of all property (including renter and jowner -occupied) becomes evident as property owners realize + that such efforts enhance the value of their property and can often mean a substantial return on it. 15 Annotated Bibliography References included in this bibliography are, for the most part, gleaned from other reports in the North Side neighborhood preservation study series. Entries are classified according to the report number with which they are most closely associated. Several (numbers 3, 9, and 10) have no entries, and others have only a few. We have found, in the course of this project, that there are no comprehensive sources on neighborhood planning or neighborhood preservation, and very few that deal with any of I the subtopics in a manner which is ideally suited to use in orhood planning. Those that have been of some use to us, neighb ighborhood or might conceivably be of use in a different ne setting, are included, but many of the sources are very brief or contain large amounts of material that are inapplicable. A more diligent search on our part might have resulted in deeper and more comprehensive coverage, but our experience st useful sources are often fugitive suggests that the mo documents that are hard to track, or works designed for an entirely different purpose but happen to be easily adapted to the neighborhood context. it is our hope that this bibliography can be updated, j expanded, and refined over the next few years to the point where it can reliably guide persons interested in neighborhood planning -- professionals, researchers, citizens -- to the sources that will be most useful. Toward this end, we welcome any suggestions for additions, annotations, and deletions. 92 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -OLS MOIRES MANAGEMENT AND EVALUATION Relationships between the project and other organizations or groups -- residents, citizens, the City, the University -- are described in the report on community participation. This section will be concerned with internal management of the project staff, organization of the tasks, and experience with the project budget. Management of the Study HUD guidelines applicable to the project seemed to place a good deal of emphasis on the responsibility and autonomy of the project leader, and this turned out to be the case in practice. while nominally the Director of Community Development of the City of Iowa City as well as the Director of the Institute of Urban and Regional Research at the University both had some authority over the project, they did not make any efforts to exercise day-to-day control over the conduct of the study. Because of the potentially awkward interrelationsips among the University, the City, and the citizens of the North Side, a high level of cooperation and information exchange was required, but these demands proved to be a benefit rather than a burden to the study.. Graduate students in the Program in Urban and Regional Planning at the University made up the project staff, supple- mented toward the end of the project by undergraduate students in related fields. Overall, these students worked diligently and conscientiously over the course of the study, and many had received some classroom instruction from the project leader. The use of students (mostly part-time) for this work has some potential drawbacks: except during the summer, work on the project was not the students' highest priority, and sometimes flagged; quality of the student work varied, and the 93 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIfICS time required to accurately judge a student's capabilities was'often almost as long as the time the students were available; and turnover was high enough that it was impossible to build a stable staff that would carry through the duration of the project. Nonetheless, the students on the project produced outstanding results in several instances and contri- buted immensely in terms of ideas, scholarship, community involvement, critical review, and stimulating interaction. A special advisory committee mentioned in the proposal as a means for guiding the conduct of the study was never formed, in the belief that the Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee already contained the appropriate people and an additional review body was not necessary. In retrospect, the CPCC did not serve as an advisory committee to the study, and a citizen's committee composed of neighborhood residents, civic leaders, and City staff could have had a very desirable effect on the project. Establishing and maintaining such a committee would have required that time and effort be taken from other activities, but the results probably would have made the effort worthwhile. Task organization and Supervision The original proposal listed seven major elements around which the work program was organized: 1. performance standards 2. environmental linkages 3. land use regulation 4. historic preservation 5. planned unit development 5. community participation 7. grant coordination Elements 1, 2, and 5 are taken up in several of the final reports but primarily in number 1, Impact Evaluation. Element 3, which ontrol orientation, included the investigation of a nuisance-c led to reports number 2 (Land Use Regulation and Administration) 94 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111[S i N I and number 12 (Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control). The remaining three elements each have their own final report. An annotated list of references was promised in the proposal, and the Final Report satisfies most of the grant reporting require- ments within a single summary document. of the remaining eight reports in the final series, three are aimed at the objective identification of problems in the North Side neighborhood (Land Use Intensity, report number 3; Impact Survey Manual, report number 9, and Impact Survey 1978, report number 10), four are directed at problem areas that emerged as significant in the course of the study (Streets and Traffic, report number 5; Parking, report number 6; Community Facilities, report number 7, and Citizen Self -Help Handbook, report number 11), and one report (number 8, Neighborhood Site Improvements) was meant to serve as a bridge between the problem area recommendations and existing City grant programs. This group of reports fits clearly within the scope of the study as initially outlined, but not all of them were explicitly con- templated in the design of the study. Thus the products which were felt by the project team to be necessary for an adequate neighborhood preservation study turned out to be somewhat more than anticipated. A few efforts initiated during the study were dropped (an extension of the surveys North of Brown Street to Kimball Road, and an impact analysis of making Gilbert and Dubuque into a one-way couplet), but most of the work under- taken as part of the study is documented in the final reports. Supervision and management were made difficult by several factors inherent to this particular project: 1) The scope of the project was very broad, which meant that a delicate balance had to be maintained between all aspects of the work; gaps had to be covered, and greater depth in some aspects was of no value without equal depth in all aspects. Very little time and effort could be expended on any single aspect without shortchanging some other aspect, a common 95 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES problem in comprehensive planning. l 2) A wide range of professional skills was demanded -- writing, conduct of meetings, public presentations, data collection and analysis, interpretation, graphic skills, initiative -- from each staff member. Tasks were assigned as problems rather than skills; for example, each staff member was expected to provide the full range of skills from citizen interaction to report editing. This was good experience for the staff, but also revealed occasional deficiencies that had to be corrected after the fact or by other persons. overall, the quality of performance by the staff was very high. 3) The conflict between maximum productive output and maximum flexibility in responding to information as it is acquired was resolved according to the judgment of the project leader. There were times when the neighbors wanted us to work primarily with their ideas, when the Council wanted our work to appear more like the comprehensive plan, and when the best strategy seemed to be to downplay the innovative aspects of the project. We feel that a judicious balance was maintained I (subject to fluctuations), but it meant leaving everyone at i least slightly dissatisfied. Because the University campus, the Iowa City Civic Center, and the project leader's residence are separated by a distance i of three blocks from each other, there was little difficulty in scheduling meetings at locations that would be convenient to City staff and project staff. The Institute is housed in facilities located several miles outside of Iowa City, so meetings and work sessions were more awkward to arrange using Institute quarters. A free campus shuttle service links the Institute with the City and main campus, so transportation was generally available. The close proximity of the City, the University, and the neighborhood was a very definite asset in conducting the study, and the location of the project leader's residence within the study area was also highly advantageous. M. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IlOfilEs M Evaluation Two evaluation measures were offered in the grant proposal, one being an indicator of investment in the neighborhood and the other being an assessment of policy actions taken in response to problems identified by the study. A capsule review of these two measures provides a mildly positive but inconclusive result: 1) In each of the two neighborhood impact surveys, a visually -derived estimate of owner investment was recorded for each property. The variable was marked "+" if the property was apparently being upgraded, "0" if it was being held in a stable state (whether high or low), and "-" if it appeared that the owner was disinvesting by letting the structures deteriorate. The result for the second survey is shown above in Figure 10, taken from report number 3, Land Use Intensity. Greater detail for both survey years is provided in the source i report, along with analysis of the changes from 1976 to 1978, but the combination of limited data reliability and short time span make it difficult to draw strong conclusions. Owner confidence in the neighborhood seems to have increased, and this is reflected in improvements to structures, but the pattern is not clear and there are offsetting indicators (e.g., removal of houses and replacement by parking). On balance, there ( appears to be a reasonably high level of neighborhood confi- dence in the North Side, and that level appears to be increasing 2) No formal actions have been taken in direct response to recommendations made by the study. Comprehensive planning and other public policies seem to show a greater awareness of the nature of the neighborhood and what affects it negatively, but the contribution of the North Side study to that increased awareness cannot be assessed. Report number 13, Community Participation, summarizes the interactions between the study and politiTians, professionals, and neighborhood residents; the major conclusions of that study are contained in the second section of this report. Again, there seems to have been a small positive impact resulting from the project, but the long run benefits cannot be judged until more time has been allowed for considering the information and recommendations generated by the study. Thus the major accomplishment of the project to date is the production of the sixteen reports that document the study and its findings. We hope these reports will be useful to the North Side, to Iowa City, and to other communities that contain similar neighborhoods. 97 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES .ri Budget Proposed and actual budget estimates are shown in Table 7. The major discrepancy appears in publication costs, which will run at least 508 more than anticipated. Three factors contri- buted to this difference: unit costs were underestimated initially; a larger number of reports is being published than what was expected at the outset; and the publication of pre- liminary versions of some reports was not recognized for the cost burden it would entail. The overrun on publication costs was made up from travel, staff salary, and indirect costs. Travel was included in the proposed budget on the rationale that several examples of neighborhoods employing protection techniques similar to those proposed for the North Side could j be evaluated first-hand (only Berkeley to our knowledge has provided any documentation of their experience), but time did not permit this. The only other significant discrepancy between proposed and budgeted expenditures does not show up in the figures, and that is the time actually spent by the project leader. It is difficult to estimate how much this amounted to over the entire project, but it is likely that a full cost accounting of the project leader's time would result in a doubling or tripling of the expenditure indicated. Financial administration was handled by the University's Business Office, and record keeping and reporting has been entirely satisfactory from the standpoint of managing the project. City staff processed the payments to the University, and no difficulties have arisen, to our knowledge, regarding these payments. M. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Table 7. Proposed and Actual Budget Estimated Proposed Actual Project Leader 10,518 8,077 Staff (RAs) 38,908 41,500 Secretarial 8,424 7,000 Indirect Costsa 29,942 29,500 Travel 1,800 357 Publications 5,500 8,242 Phone and Supplies 2,540 2,540 Total subcontract 97,632 97,216 Planner° 11,750 TOTAL 109,382 a 558 of wages and salaries b includes equipment rental = $226 actual c half-time planner hired directly by Iowa City 99 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Participants in the Stud A number of people who helped out the study in some way (in addition to those listed inside the front cover) are listed in Table 8. We are grateful for whatever contribution they may have made, but any errors and misconceptions that remain in the reports are the responsibility of the authors. Many other persons attended meetings and gave us informal comments, and this interaction was very valuable to the study staff even though it is impossible to pinpoint the source of each idea or stimulus. 100 FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Table 8. Persons Involved in the North Side Study in Addition to Those Listed Inside the Front Cover North Side Neighbors Ginny Alexander 1 Wayne Begley Ken Hubel Tom Neuzil Block Meeting Hosts Dave and Jean Cater Pat and Bill Eckhardt Jim and Claudine Harris Joan and Mike Hart Richard Keith Marsha and John Linder George and Pat McCormick Marie McIlree City Staff Project Staff Peter Barboutis Margaret Barron Elaine Baxter Charles Burd Andrew Chesley Timothy Pluck Cynthia Frederickson Sally Garst Gretchen Hayne Mary Howard Bill Keating David Koehser Anthony Koyzis Kevin Laverty Gary Lozano Lorna Owen Paul Panik Susan Schmidt Rebecca S. Schroeder Rebecca S. A. Schroeder Jim Brachtel, Public Works Gerald Thompson Dawn Chapman, Community Development victoria Williams. Frank Farmer, Public Works Denny Gannon, Public Works Rick Geshwiler, Community Development Mike Kucharzak, Housing and Inspection Services Craig Minter, Public Works Candy Morgan, Human Relations Hugh Mose, Transit Manager Angie Ryan, Assistant City Attorney Sue Sheets, Community Development 4 Others Bill Binney, University of Iowa Office of Facilities Planning Robert Dykstra, University of Iowa Dick Gibson, University of Iowa Office of Facilities Planning i Jerry and Carol Goddard, Burlington, Iowa Lauren Horton, State Historical Department, Iowa Laurence LaFore, University of Iowa Todd Mozingo, State Historical Department, Iowa Denis Parsons, Mercy Hospital Mel Schweer, Iowa -Illinois Gas and Electric 101 d / II1CROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 14011JES North Side Neighborhood Preservation Study Report Series Report Author 1. Impact Evaluation: Purpose, Procedures, Douglass Lee and Guidelines 2. Land Use Regulation and Administration Gerald Thompson 3. Land Use Intensity Douglass Lee 4. Historic Structures Inventory Elaine Baxter 5. Streets and Traffic Kevin Laverty 6. Parking Victoria Williams 7. Community Facilities Margaret Barron B. Neighborhood Site Improvements Victoria Williams 9. Impact Survey Manual Margaret Barron 10. Impact Survey 1978 Andrew Chesley 11. Citizen Self -Help Handbook Tim Fluck 12. Nuisance Law Applied to Land Use Control Douglass Lee 13. Community Participation Douglass Lee 14. Grant Program Coordination William Keating 15. Annotated Bibliography Lorna Owen 16. Final Report Douglass Lee Price: $1.50 each Requests for copies of the reports or for Inclusion on the institute's mailing list should be addressed to: Institute of Urban and Regional Research The University of Iowa N246 Oakdale Campus Iowa City, Iowa 52242 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES