HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-03-01 Info Packet•
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 18, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Informal Agenda and Meeting Schedule
February 21 1983 Monday
HOLIDAY - City Offices Closed
NO INFOf44AL COUNCIL MEETING
February 22 1983 Tuesday
7:00 - 9:00 P.M. Conference Room
Special Informal Council Meeting
7:00 P.M. - Review of new Zoning Ordinance
a. Commercial Zones
b. Industrial Zones 1
c. Additional Requirements Section
February 28, 1983 Monday
4:30 - 6:30 P.M. Conference Room
4:30 P.M. - Review zoning matters
4:45 P.M. - Council agenda, Council time, Council committee reports
5:15 P.M. - Evaluation of City Manager j
PENDING LIST
Priority A: Iowa-Illinois Utilities Franchise i
Revenue from Public Housing Sites
Priority B: Discuss Council Majority Voting Requirements
Discuss Affirmative Action Task Force Report
Tour Shamrock/Friendship/Arbor Drainage Area
City Council Salaries
Housing Inspection Funding Policy
Housing Market Analysis Recommendations
Priority C: Discuss Job Evaluation Studies
Meet with Design Review Committee regarding recommendations
Traffic Signals•- Flashing Mode
Parking in Central Business District
Extension of Revitalization Area to Stur is Corner
Mandatory Parkland Dedication (Fall 19Q
Appointments to Mayor's Youth Employment Board, Planning
and Zoning Commission, and Housing Commission - March 15, 1983.
Appointment to Board of Review - March 14, 1983.
Appointments to Historic Preservation Commission - March 29, 1983.
31G
II`I`I 141CROFIL14ED BY
1,-JORM MICR6L-AB l
LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
rl �
- r
February 8, 1983
Mr. Gene Schwab, President
Iowa Railroad Company
Fourth and Vine
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
Dear Mr. Schwab:
Recently our City Manager, Neal Berlin, had contact with Mr. Tom
Loggel, Vice President for Operations, Iowa Railroad Company,
concerning clearing 'of railroad right-of-way in Iowa City. In
addition, you have been contacted by several residents of the area.
While the City certainly understands the need for clearing brush and
weeds' from the railroad right-of-way and, in fact, compliments you
for this effort, we are very concerned about the removal of screening
trees. I would certainly hope that you will be sensitive to the
residents of our community who wish to maintain these trees. Your
cooperation in this matter would be greatly appreciated. If there is
anything I can do to assist, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Mary C. Neuhauser
Mayor
bj/sp
3-17
MICROFILMED BY
DORM.._ MI C A S M01.
L A JB
CEDAR RAPIDS DE 0 1. ES
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 18, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: David Perret
RE: Clear -Cutting along Rock Island R.O.W.
Attached is a letter I received from Jean Lloyd -Jones concerning a
"change" in the tree -cutting policy of the Iowa Railroad Company. It
is a first step in the right direction, but it will have little impact
in areas where the right of way is 100 feet. Hopefully, there exists a
climate for more flexibility.
s
JEAN LLOYD -JONES
STATE REPRESENTATIVE
Serenty-Third District
HOME ADDRESS
160 Oakridge Avenue
IOWA CITY. IOWA 52210
David Ferret
932C Oakcrest
Iowa City, Iowa
Dear David:
Nlo n,.n ua.w .eN�4
I. 4
AMWX�
i
..
WNW
Amse of Pepresentatb3es
STATE OF IOWA
Sixty -Ninth Genera! Assembly
STATE HOUSE
files Naines, ,31alun 58319
52240
COMMITTEES
Natural Resources
SUte Government
Transportation, Ranking Member
Corrections/Mental Health Appropriations
Subcommittee
House Administration
February 15, 1983
Thankyou for calling last weekend to bring to my
attention the excessive tree -cutting being carried out by
the Iowa Railroad Company. I tried to reach Gene Schwab
on Sunday without success. .
As soon as I reached the Capitol on Monday morning, I
telephoned the company's office and was told that Mr. Schwab
was not in. I then asked to speak to the second person in
command. Soon a Mr. Dan Crum came on the phone and began to
explain the company's•tree-cutting policy. I expressed the
strong objections that I had heard this weekend from you and
from others: the destruction of healthy trees; the need for a
buffer between the rail corridor and residential uses; the
potential for erosion and the need for good will between the
company and the city. He said he would talk to Schwab and call
me back. Within a half-hour he called to say that he had
talked with the directoin and they had formulated a new tree -
cutting policy: no large trees would be cut further than 20
feet from the track.
I asked him to get in touch with Neal Berlin and advi&e
him of the new policy. I trust that this will take care of
the problem. Thank you again for alerting me about this
problem.
JLJ:ts
Sincerely,
Jea Lloyd -Jones
State Representative
SEVENTY-THIRD nISTRICT
Iowa Cit, prorinct, 1.11: Cnnlellle: Uflk.nItr Heiahw Wnt Luru Township
3 78'
r
1 MICROFILMED BY
L „ ' DORM MIC ROLA
4
CEDAR RAI'I DS • DES 114019ES j !
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 18, 1983
To: City Council and City Manager
From: David Perret \'-A tk
Re: Report on National League of Cities (NLC) Convention
"Rethinking the Federal System," the theme of the 1982 NLC Convention,
consisted of evaluating the pros and cons of President Reagan's "New
Federalism," taking stock of current and anticipated urban problems and
opportunities, and adopting alternative goals. Workshops and symposia
were organized around five broad areas: tax and finance, courts and
regulation, individual rights, local development, and public/private
partnerships.
A crisis atmosphere pervaded many of the workshops. There was a general
feeling among delegates that the federal government is redefining too
narrowly its responsibility to local governments and that "New
Federalism" will only divert problems to the cities. Rep. Morris Udall
(D -Ariz.) adequately summed up the mood of the convention when he said
that cities have been victimized by a "triple whammy." First, the Reagan
Administration has forced cities to cut services and.raise taxes because
of federal aid cutbacks. Second, federal policies have perpetuated the
recession, thus eroding tax bases and forcing additional cuts. Third, the
1981 tax cut has fueled the largest federal deficits in American history,
increasing the cost of local borrowing.
Against such a bleak economic background and the adverse impacts it is
having on local finances, the workshops I attended concentrated on ways to
squeeze more out of existing resources and to be innovative in tax base
expansion and economic development. Below are my comments on some of the
workshops I attended.
Tax and Finance
The symposium on tax and finance was led by Kenneth Howard, Executive
Director of the Advisory Commisssion on Intergovernmental Relations,
Washington, D.C., and Senator Gary Hart (D -Colorado), a member of the
Senate Budget Committee. Both individuals focused on the absence of any.
meaningful long-range financial planning at the federal level, the
downward trend in per capita spending at all levels of government, and the
huge disparities in tax capacities from state to state. The federal
government has no idea what will be the financial and economic impacts of
turning over to state and local .goverments programs which have been
federal responsibilities. The individual taxing capacities and needs of
cities and states must be taken into account in devising an effective and
equitable federal/state/local relationship.
One step toward national economic recovery that would help to revitalize
cities would be the creation of a long-term federal capital improvements
374
j
j MICROFILIAED By
_DORM MICR6LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES /
i
program and national inventory of capital investment. Capital
commitments could then be prioritized and funded to rebuild
transportation, sewerage, and other urban infrastructures. This, in
turn, will help to promote commercial and industrial renewal. Other steps
discussed were programs to re-educate and re-train the labor force to the
skills needed by high technology and specialized fields. With more
financial de -regulation, funding for venture capital will increase.
Investment of pension funds should be channeled into rebuilding
businesses, industries, and housing in the states and cities where the
funds originate, not in outside states or in other countries.
Even ignoring the recession and the Reagan Administration's cutbacks in
urban aid, the trend in per capita -spending for cities by all levels of
government is downward. Mr. Howard said that local per capita spending is
in its eighth down year, having peaked in 1974. State per capita spending
for cities peaked in 1976, and federal spending peaked in 1978. Because
demand for new and improved city services is not decreasing, cities will
have to form new public/private partnerships and to look to the states for
new taxing authority. (In a lighter vein, it was suggested that taxes be
imposed on the {{4 B's" - Beer, Bets, Butts, and Booze! It looks as if the
Iowa Legislature has already chosen to start with pari-mutuel betting!)
Broadening the Local Tax Base
A second workshop dealing with "Broadening the Local Tax Base" focused on
economic development strategy and fostering a healthy investment
psychology. Featured panelists were Gary Stout, a financial consultant
from Arden Hills, Minnesota, Carl Geupel, a senior associate and financial
analyst with Halycon Ltd., Hartford, Connecticut, and Gerald Trimble, an
executive with Centre City Development Corp., San Diego, California.
All three panelists described the uses and packaging of tax increment
financing, tax abatement policies, and industrial revenue bonds (IRBs).
As we have done in Iowa City, it was recommended that the cities should
develop an IRB policy that specifically rationalizes the public policies
to be promoted and that establishes areas with geographically defensible
boundaries. Applications should be carefully screened against the policy
objectives.
Another tool to promote a positive investment climate is tax abatement.
It can be used by itself-, or, for example, in conjunction with IRBs as a
second or third mortgage. It should have a phase-out schedule and be used
sparingly. Tax increment financing (TIF) is another means for encouraging
public/private partnerships and development. Increments in tax revenues
generated by a development project may be set aside to finance public
improvements adjacent to the project or plowed back into the project if
the city has equity in the project. As a project property appreciates in
value, taxes paid back by the developer appreciate yearly to retire the
increment bonds. Or, the city may write off the costs of the land for the
developer by leasing the land. Land -lease payments, thus generated, would
appreciate with the property.
374
i
141CROFILIIED BY
"DORM MIC REfL AB
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 140I4ES /
Finally, Urban Development Action Grants (UDAG) were endorsed by the
panelists as a potentially excellent method to enhance local taxes. Upon
request by a qualifying city, the UDAG may be used as a second mortgage
held by the city, to leverage an investment on a scale of at least 10:1.
The UDAG may be packaged as a loan with escalating interest rates and with
the grant paybacks used to finance local development agency and staff
costs and to reinvest in new development projects. The principal may be
paid back on a deferred basis, or be excused with the city retaining
equity in the project.
" Mr. Geupel advised that the city should do a
sensitivity" analysis in the event it should retain equity, and that, in
any case, the developer's pro forma should be compared with the one
deposited with the banks for any
pay it off. discrepancies. He added that the use of
the UDAG funds does not have to be linked with the sources of the funds to
�
Neaotiating a Development Deal
i
Another workshop dealt with negotiating a development deal and looked at
several of the financing mechanisms discussed in the previous workshop.
Panelists were Kenneth Dobson, Vice President of the Detroit Economic
Growth Corporation, Christopher Stewart, Vice President of the Central
Rouse ACorporationssociation ,of Los and whonhasepers nally negotiated retailc ndlin he
housing
developments all over the world.
i
Like speakers in previous workshops, Mr. Dobson stressed the importance of
creating a favorable investment climate. Development should be promoted
as a matter of public policy - particularly, in depressed areas. (He
added that in some areas development was explosive, causing dislocations
in the quality of life, and straining city services.) Development serves
the public purpose by creating jobs and expanding the tax base, which, in
turn, will fund programs to improve public health, safety, and welfare.
In addition, city officials
capital formation techniquesmust understand the "developers' language" -
much. , risk-taking, how profits are made, and how
Financing tools are packaged in different combinations to meet
effectively the individual needs of a developer/project. While tax
abatement, TIF, and UDAG are public funding possibilities, private
financing through pension fund investment and syndication financing
should also be encouraged. Insurance companies, which do nearly half of
all development projects today, should be encouraged to invest in cities
where they have clients. Syndication financing involves the selling of
tax losses and depreciation to high income -bracket taxpayers who want to
shelter their incomes. Income thus derived is invested in redevelopment.
Both Mr. Dobson and Mr. Stewart stressed the importance of having an
economic development strategy plan, developed with broad community input,
which is supported by the entire community. A third -party development
corporation, made up of representatives of the city's political
leadership, labor, planners, bankers, developers, and citizen groups, and
37Q
1 MICROFILMED BY
I' 1 "DORM MICR6LA6 1
L CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
I
which is adequately staffed, would serve as the catalyst between city and
developer. An agreement would have to be drawn up, clearly defining the
relationships between the corporation, the city, and the developers. The
city would retain design review standards as well as other planning
requirements. Because of limited availability of public funding, many
development corporations are now offering public incentives, like land,
low-cost financing, or technical assistance in return for a share in total
project equity. The return on such investments is often used to finance,
in part, new projects.
Mr. Molinard, speaking as a developer, said that "the action" is starting
to shift to the smaller middle-sized cities, not just in the "Detroits"
and the "Los Angeleses." His corporation is focusing on downtowns. What
does he look at? First, city government: the city council, mayor, city
manager, the department heads and development staff. Does the city spell
out clearly and with conviction a public purpose in economic development?
Second, he looks at the business community. Are they unified? Effective?
Intelligent? Where have they invested their money? And why? Third, he
looks at the utility company projections. He looks at the community's
media - what are they saying? Fourth, he looks at the educational
community. What are they turning out? What do they think?
Regulatind Land -Use
Ever since Herbert Hoover advocated that the entire country should adopt
zoning, the pendulum has swung back and forth, favoring and opposing land -
use controls. • Recently, many voices have been raised about "de-
regulating" land -use or streamlining the review process. One of the
speakers at the land -use workshop, Ralph Widner, Vice President for
Research and Publications, Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C.,
suggested a review of land development codes and zoning, themselves.
The original purpose of zoning was to separate noxious uses from non -
noxious uses - [the separation -of -use concept]. Today the theory of
zoning has gone beyond the original purpose. Many cities, he asserts,
have become dull and homogeneous. He advocates greater land -use
experimentation, using Phoenix as a model. Phoenix uses an "urban village
approach" - a potpourri of compatible mixed-use developments in which
diversity of uses is encouraged. Controls are placed on allowable
densities, not on uses. This approach, he believes, restores vitality and
interest to a city. In return, Phoenix has upgraded performance standards
in its subdivision and building codes to provide for increased residential
and public amenities and new construction materials.
Frank Gray, formerly the Planning Director in Petaluma, California, and
Urban Renewal Director in Boulder, Colorado, and now a land -use consultant
in Boulder, has had professional experiences in two cities rocked by
explosive growth. While not disagreeing with Mr. Widner, he advocated
growth management mechanisms to guide urban development. Just as business
corporations set priorities in managing their growth, municipal
corporations must do the same. A comprehensive plan should manage the
growth of fiscal, social, and physical goals of the community.
1
lalcaonuaED BY
1. .-JORM-MICR#LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
I �
379
U1
5
Business Retention and Expansion
Finally, the workshop concerning business retention and expansion
stressed the importance of the city's quality of life. David Laughery,
Manager, Economic Development Division in Tulsa, Oklahoma, was the
featured speaker. While land prices and markets are important factors for
businesses in deciding to expand or locate, local governments do not have
much control over such factors. It is the level of urban amenities, the
condition of the infrastructure, low crime rates, quality of residential
neighborhoods, zoning, and educational,, recreational, and cultural
opportunities that help to determine whether businesses will want to
locate and expand in the community. Other factors included area councils
which do support work for businesses, such as growth projections, surveys,
growth -incentives research, and gather economic data. Businesses, Mr.
Laughery added, will also tend to feel more secure when cities invest in
professional economic development staff who have the cities' political
support.
The convention was obviously worthwhile. The multitude of workshops,
alternative approaches to problem -solving, and fresh ideas gave me some
new insights to similar problem -solving in Iowa City. Old cobwebs should
not be allowed to gather too much dust.
bj5/1-6
i 141 CROFILMED BY
'DORM-MICRCICA13 - - A _1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
379
I
J�
r:
City of Iowa City
FF=
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 10, 1983
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Dubuque Street Improvements
Attached is a draft letter which the staff plans to send to the property
owners along Dubuque Street concerning new water services for sprinkler
systems in conjunction with reconstruction of Dubuque Street. If this is
acceptable to the Council, the letter will be sent at an early date.
bdw/sp
Attachment
E
February 9, 1983
Beginning in May, 1983, the City will begin work on the Dubuque
Street Improvements Project from Washington Street to Iowa Avenue.
The project will include complete removal and reconstruction of the
sidewalk and street slabs, work on sidewalk vaults plus installation
of new streetlights, trees and other amenities.
The City would like the property owners on Dubuque Street to consider
i
upsizing their water services to provide capacity for a sprinkler
system in their buildings. It is strongly recommended that you take
the opportunity to make these changes while the Dubuque Street
Improvements Project is underway.
The City, in conjunction with the Dubuque Street project, will be
replacing old lead or galvanized metal water service lines. Existing
copper service lines will be left in place. The City will replace
the lead or galvanized service lines with a copper line from the
watermain to the corporation valve at no expense to the property
owner. If the property owner wishes to put in a service large enough
to handle a sprinkler system (normally a four (4) inch ductile iron
pipe), the City will contribute $520 toward the larger service, this
cost being the estimated cost for replacing the lead or galvanized
service as described above. In either case, the property owner shall
J
i 14ICROFILMED BY
I1 `DORM-- MICREILAB ... _1 ..�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M014ES
J
380
J�
J
DRAFT 02/08/83 2
be responsible for replacing the service line from the corporation
valve into the building.
The advantages of making improvements to your water service line at
i
this time are economicl Ordinarily, such work would require removal
and replacement of the street and sidewalk slabs at a cost at least
i
equal to the cost of installing the service line itself. The 1
i
estimated cost for installing a four (4) inch ductile iron water
j service would be $2500 while the project is under construction. This I
is estimated to be less than half the cost of providing water for a
I 1
sprinkler system after the Dubuque Street Improvements Project is
completed.
If you would be interested in making improvements to your water
services, or if you have any questions about the project, please feel
free to contact me at 356-5143 or Lee J. Tippe at 356-5144.
Sincerely,
Frank Farmer, P.E.
City Engineer
bdw/sp
3 8D
MICROFILMED BY
i-�
` I JOR M -MIC ROIL AB
I/ I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
L
L
L
special feature
supplement #1 to
newsletter
ICMA
February 7,1983
Vol. 64, No. 3
This Special Feature reports the preliminary returns from the most current
survey by ICMA's Municipal Data Service on the salaries of managers of ICMA-
recognized cities, chief administrative officers of counties, and directors
of councils of governments in the United States. At the time of publication,
1,591 cities (64% of those surveyed), 357 counties (68%), and 363 councils of
governments (56%) had reported salaries for their manager, administrator, or
executive director. The responses are displayed in the following tables by
population group and geographic region.
Trends
The average annual salary increases for city managers, county administrators,
and COG directors are less than they were last year. The mean salary for all
city managers reporting (Table 1) rose 7.8% in 1982 compared with an increase
of 9.0% in 1981 and 10.2% in 1980. County administrators' salaries increased
4.9% in 1982 compared with an increase of 8.8% in 1981 and 9.6% in 1980 (Table
2). The annual earnings of COG directors increased on average 4.5% in 1982
compared with a 6.9% increase in 1981 and a 7.6% increase in 1980 (Table 3).
The trend toward smaller increases in salaries for city managers was found in
each region (Table 4). Managers in the Northeast, with a mean salary of
$31,601, are earning 7.3% more this year compared with last year when their
salaries rose 8.9%, In the North Central region salaries increased 5.7%
compared with 7.0% last year, bringing the mean salary to $38,360. For the
second year in a row managers in the.South fared the best of the four geogra-
phic regions with a 9.0% average salary increase this year compared with a
10.1% increase last year, bringing their mean salary to $37,096. The mean
salary for managers in the Nest, $47,328, remains the highest of all regions
and represents a 6.5% increase compared with the 8.1% increase last year.
Although the salary increases for positions examined in this Special Report
are less in 1982 than in 1981, perspective is added by noting that the Con-
sumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI -U) (which measures the price
change of a constant market basket of goods and services over time) also
increased less in 1982 (3.9%) than in 1981 (8.97.). The change in the CPI -U
and the lower salary increases this year reflect the continuing slowdown in
the national economy and the budget cutbacks that have been taking place at
all levels in response to economic pressures.
TABLE 1
CITY MANAGERS' SALARIES AS OF JANUARY 1, 1983*
* The salaries shown in this table are only for municipalities recognized by ICMA as
providing for the council-manager form of government.
** The ICMA master file includes only those municipalities under 2,500 population that are
recognized by ICMA. 00
TABLE 2
COUNTY CAO/MANAGERS' SALARIES AS OF JANUARY 1, 1983* -
Population
Group
No. of
Mean
1st
Quartile
Median
3rd
Quartile
Population
Cities
357
1st
$27,171
3rd
$45,000
Group
Reporting
Mean
Quartile
Median
Quartile
TOTAL, all
cities
1,591
$39,201
$29,663
$38,000
$47,548
500,000
to 1,000,000
4
85,857
80,520
83,834
84,012
250,000
to 499,999
9
71,202
60,248
70,980
75,368
100,000
to 249,999
47
62,588
54,851
62,400
68;294
50„Q,QO
to 99.999
177
55.492
4A, 41A
-55, A9?
69, nnn
25.000
to 49.999
241
48.974
43.229
49.249
54.000
10,000
to 24,999
454
40,352
35,405
39,966
44,798
5,000
to 9,999
351
33,252
28,106
32,400
37,875
2,500
to 4,999
252
28,202
23,980
27,061
31,506
Under 2,500**
111
24,972
17,448
22,500
28,011
* The salaries shown in this table are only for municipalities recognized by ICMA as
providing for the council-manager form of government.
** The ICMA master file includes only those municipalities under 2,500 population that are
recognized by ICMA. 00
TABLE 2
COUNTY CAO/MANAGERS' SALARIES AS OF JANUARY 1, 1983* -
* Salaries shown here are for all survey respondents indicating a position of county chief
administrative officer.
� I
f
141CROFILMED BY
1... _"JORMI MICR#LAB -
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401NES
j
L
391
Population
Group
No. of
Counties
Reporting
Mean
1st
Quartile
Median
3rd
Quartile
TOTAL,
all counties
357
$37,843
$27,171
$34,908
$45,000
Over 1,000,000
9
70,161
52,750
76,854
79,630
500,000
to 1,000,000
19
61,899
54,465
63,230
70,209
250,000
to 499,999
29
52,979
42,235
50,053
63,175
100,000
to 249,999
57
45,113
37,499
43,000
51,839
50,000
to 99,999
81
36,412
31,080
36,000
41,937
25,000
to 49,999
71
30,489
26,650
28,900
33,772
10,000
to 24,999
75
27,647
22,440
26,112
30,169
5,000
to 9,999
15
25,623
20,274
26,040
29,599
2,500
to 4,999
1
22,500
...
...
...
* Salaries shown here are for all survey respondents indicating a position of county chief
administrative officer.
� I
f
141CROFILMED BY
1... _"JORMI MICR#LAB -
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401NES
j
L
391
r
J
COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
DIRECTORS'
TABLE
SALARIES AS OF
3
JANUARY 1, 1983
f CITY MANAGERS' SALARIES
No. of
1, 1983* BY GEOGRAPHIC
REGION**
i
i �
Population
COGS
1st
j
3rd
Group
Reporting
Mean
Quartile
Median
Quartile
I
TOTAL, all COGS
363
$32,437
$26,044
$31,035
$37,864
Over 1,000,000
19
54,678
45,224
56,378
62,360
500,000 to 1,000,000
31
39,804
36,103
39,837
42,076
250,000 to 499,999
68
36,085
30,350
36,798
40,943
100,000 to 249,999
146
30,651
26,053
30,948
34,070
50,000 to 99,999
62
26,717
22,788
26,400
29,490
25,000 to 49,999
24
25,130
20,580
26,914
28,800
10,000 to 24,999
6
21,628
16,500
21,980
23,358
5,000 to 9,999
4
24,469
17,500
24,688
25,375 i
Under 2,500
3
28,583
...
30,250
21,000
i 141CROFILMED BY
�.
DORM "MIC R
ICAB-
++
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES I !
TABLE 4
f CITY MANAGERS' SALARIES
AS OF JANUARY
1, 1983* BY GEOGRAPHIC
REGION**
i
i �
j
-. Region
No. of.
1
i
Population
Cities
let
3rd
Group
Reporting
Mean
Quartile
Median
Quartile
Northeast
TOTAL, all cities
251
$31,601
$23,206
$30,022
$39,055
100,000 to 249,999
4
57,874
52,181
57,157
60,000
50,000 to 99,999
6
42,227
27,671
45,781
48,050
25,000 to 49,999
24
44,372
38,673
41,562
46,000
10,000 to 24,999
82
37,602
32,584
36,000
41,485
5,000 to 9,999
68
29,832
25,014
28,057
33,610
2,500 to 4,999
37
21,804
18,104
21,000
24,343
Under 2,500***
30
15,44441
11,250
15,361
18,370
�jJ c L.(4D LCS
1- dLJ A
North Central -'
TOTAL, all cities
365
$38,360
$30,388
$37,841
$44,753
250,000 to 499,999
1
70,980
100,000 to 249,999
50.000
6
55,046
50,893
54,550
57,170
to 99.999
25,000 to 49,999_
26
52
51,860
49.386
46,208
43 00
51,929
56,066
_
'y 10,000 to 24,999
99
40,862
36,808
48 7sn
40,000
%1 11
44,025
5,000 to 9,999
88
34,061
30,000
33,000
37,800
2,500 to 4,999
71
29,919
26,000
29,795
33,333
Under 2,500***
22
23,496
21,250
23,375
25,428
381
i 141CROFILMED BY
�.
DORM "MIC R
ICAB-
++
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES I !
_r
i
TABLE 4 (continued)
1st 3rd
Quartile Median Quartile
$27,561 $35,503 $44,100
59,187
Region
No. of
54,554
63,490
Population
Cities
55,000
60,277
Group
Reporting
Mean
34,000
South
42,504
26,800
TOTAL,
all cities
558
$37,096
500,000
to 1,000,000
2
89,448
250,000
to 499,999
6
72,394
100,000
to 249,999
17
62,112
50,000
to 99,999
33
54,580
251000
to 49,999
73
45,977
10,000
to 24,999
172
38,307
5,000
to 9,999
122
31,658
2,500
to 4,999
102
26,746
Under'2,500***
31
22,381
West
TOTAL, all cities
417
$47,328
500,000
to 1,000,000
2
82,266
250,000
to 499,999
2
67,734
100,000
to 249,999
20
66,198
50,000
to 99,999
57
59,072
25,000
to 49,999
92
52,320
10,000
to 24,999
101
45,566
5,000
to 9,999
73
38,128
2,500
to 4,999
42
34,472
Under 2,500***
28
39,213
1st 3rd
Quartile Median Quartile
$27,561 $35,503 $44,100
59,187
71,239
79,316
54,554
63,490
68,489
45,357
55,000
60,277
39,121
46,000
50,220
34,000
38,331
42,504
26,800
30,500
35,383
22,025
25,634
28,938
17,616
22,500
24,943
$38,544
$47,594
$54,996
61,236
66,768
72,389
54,030
60,060
63,452
48,000
52,032
55,000
39,951
45,150
50,000
33,217
38,620
42,204
29,167
31,698
35,020
28,188
38,682
50,975
* The salaries shown in this table are only for municipalities recognized by ICMA as
providing for the council-manager form of government.
** These are U.S. Census Bureau regions. Northeast includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachu-
setts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
North Central includes Illinois, Indiana, LgXL, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. South includes Alabama,
Arkansas, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia, and West Virginia. West includes Alaska,'Arizona, California, Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
*** The ICMA master file includes only those cities under 2.,500 population that are
recognized by ICMA as providing for a position of professional management.
A future ICMA publication, Compensation 83, An Annual Report on Local Government Executive
Salaries and Fri nee Benefits, will contain more detailed information on salaries, including
an individual salary listing of managers and selected department heads. It will also con-
tain an extensive section on common and not -so -common fringe benefits of local government
managers. Compensation 83 will be available in late April. A special price for members
will be offered.
Until then, any ICMA member can obtain a complimentary copy of "Salaries $35,000 and Over
for Local Government Managers" by sending a mailing label to the Urban Data Service at ICMA.
3V
1
i MICROFILMED BY
(1 _-JORM -MICR6LA13'_
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
f
JI
1933
Iowa Department of Transportation
430 16th Avenue S.W., Cedar Rapids, Iowa •52419)364-0235
I
February 14, 1983 REF: FR -1-5(27)
Johnson County
Neal G. Berlin
City Manager
Civic Center _.......
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Berlin:
We are sorry but the Iowa Department of Transportation cannot
build new sidewalk on our primary road projects. We can replace -
existing sidewalk if the project dictates the sidewalk has to be
raised, lowered or relocated. j
As a part of the Iowa 1 widening and resurfacing project, in Iowa
City, we will provide a rack shoulder approximately 8 feet wide. I
Very truly yours,
Robert C. Henely I
District Engineer
I -
t
RCH:mf
cc: Warren Dunham
I.D.O.T. Director
R. H. Given
Highway Division Director
38a
J �MIC.....
wED .. _
-ORM MIC R/S CA
f1 ' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI4E5
J
lid
t -- - -
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 17, 1983
To: City Council
From: Don Schmeiseii
Re: Review of the Oroposed New Zoning Ordinance
Attached are additional sections of the new Zoning Ordinance for your
review. Included are the commercial and industrial zones and the public
zone. These constitute all of the conventional zones proposed for the new
ordinance. The overlay zones will be submitted for your review at a later
date.
Also enclosed is the additional regulations section of the Zoning
Ordinance referred to under provisional uses and special exceptions of
each zone. This section is very similar to the additional regulations
section of the existing Zoning Ordinance (Section 8.10.19).
A marked -up copy of the above sections, which includes suggested changes
to the original draft ,of the ordinance by staff and the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and a copy of the sections with the suggested changes
having been incorporated in the draft, are attached.
Staff will be present to discuss the ordinance provisions and recommended
changes with the City Council at your meeting on February 22. Also,
please feel free to contact me at any time prior to the meeting should you
have any questions in regard to the provisions.
bj4/3
3 F3
H
i
1
nICRor IL14ED 9Y
-"JORM_MIC RICA B" __ r1
I1 L % CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401RES /
� � J
i
31
C. Of - reet parkin requirements. See Sec. 1- pa e
d. Sign re ulati ns. See Sec. 1 �, p ge/
L e. Fence r gula ions. Se Sec. 1-4, age
t (2 Dim nsional requirements. ee D vision p ge/Zf.
a (3 Non onformi ies. See Divi ion pag•
i ,•• , I (4 Tre regul tions. See D' inion p ge%
1 (5 Per rman a stan rds. See Divi on pag
i (g) SP cial ovis ons.
\ L. (1 Mobi a omes s al comply wit the sp tial provisio s
"•A appl cabl to m bi a homes n hapter 22 of t e Code f
Ordi anc and th p ovisions o th Code of I wa. i
(2) As n al rnativ t complia e w th the re uireme is of is i
zon , dev lopme s m y confor to a requi ements or an PD-
H/ zone u on m etin the ocedura requi ements o PD -H
Z ne withou lying change in on' g.
' Sec. 1-�.° Commercial Office Zone (CO -1). j
(a) Intent. The Commercial Office Zone (CO -1) is intended to provide +
specifi-ic areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments
and certain public and semi-public uses may be developed. The CO -1 Zone
can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or
industrial areas.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Office buildings in which no activity is carried on catering to
retail trade with the general public and no stock of goods is
maintained for sale to customers, except as otherwise provided.
CGrlh®ffice use ermjtted challripplud'nf a the following:
a. ° (les T- small animal clinics.
b. ,
ive-in facilities.
C. Central ep -J_t__G_a_-a_..�off �___
-I Rueineee anri m�na9 mn_n..4 .•n..c••�a:-•• °^pV1Ee5.
e-_ mepGaW l2 red -i ______:__ __
adjustmeft and 5.
141CIO11LRED DY
I• �- _ 1 _ DORM "MICR6LAB' l
CEDAR RAP DES 1401YES I
1
-1
32
f—Employmran* Sar�iras,
(2) limited to theAsale of drugs and pharmaceutical
products.
(3) Corr ctive optical and prostheticssupplystoreX, �OWa'"^`^"`
(1) Mer}ii-famr}y pwel ings located above or below the ground floor
of a commercialX-buildiag provided that the density does not
exceed
r8O0 .�insitut�4nsandaM;�Ioa'l
Qj � p uMP 'dd �ur�
(2) Religioed facilities subjectto the
requirements of Sec. 1- /Lt11aW ,
Hospitals. �
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Drive-in facilities associated with financial institutions.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of ;
Sec. 1- i
4
(4) Group care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-
(5) Nursing homes.subjeet to the wequirememtrcf��-
(r5) ( Restaurants.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front: 20 ft.
Side: None
3?3
i MICRO... ED RY
—DORM-MICR46LA
l CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I
33
Rear: None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height: 25 ft.
Lot coverage: None
Floor area ratio: 1
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article, the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division 2, page �.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec.
page ?2.
b. Access use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-'$0 ,
page
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 15?y' , page
d. 0 street loading requirements. See Sec. 1--, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1��, page/a.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-�, pagejf.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division ,�, page/,&
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division page/
(4) Tree regulations. See Division pag%g.�'
(5) Performance standards. See Division G , page/�,r
(g) Special provisions.
41AN)t mor tan two roamer y resi n ea we g u
p ovi ed tan ad 'tio 1 on -hal ( f-st t p r ng
k) TYssp per r shall urnish
Sec. 1- /.Z . Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN -1).
(a) Intent. The Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN -1) is intended to
permit the development of retail sales and personal- profeszioAal,- and
b�s#ne�s services required to meet the needs of a fully developed
residential neighborhood. Stores in this zone should be useful to the
majority of the neighborhood residents, should be economically
supportable by nearby population, and should not draw community -wide
patronage. In general, the CN -1 Zone is intended for the grouping of
small retail businesses which are relatively nuisance -free to surrounding
residences.
1
i 141CROFILI4ED BY
DORM -"MIC R6L AO' i
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401NES
3 83
J
34
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Grocery stores including specialty food such as bakery and
delicatessen goods.
(2) Drugstores and variety stores.
Jarber shops and beauty parlors,
laundromats,q I undry and dry cleaning pick-up and delivery
services.
.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) MRfibi-fem+} ,6wellings located above or below the ground floor
of a �emmereial building provided that the density does not
exceed',�loll tntr
gronipeer.•aexa. /Coa
(d) S ep CiiiT)a S.
lli�e �G���
(1) U
' (2) Religious institutions and related facilities.
(3) Restaurants.
(4) Filling stations f
provided that no part of the use shall be located within 100
feet of an R zone boundary.
(5)
Daycare centers and
preschools subject to the requirements of
Sec. 1-Y&.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1)
Minimum lot area:
None
(2)
Minimum lot width:
None
(3)
Minimum lot frontage:
None
(4)
Minimum yards:
Front -
20 ft.
Side -
None
Rear -
None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
111 CROFILI4ED BY i
JORM- "MICRQLA13' �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
I
383
i
J
35
Height - 25 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 1
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
wi h n this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division Z , pagey2.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-41/,
page•
b. Accesc�or use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-�,
page l'f•
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- page
I �l
d. Off street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-., page f
A&
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-�, page�� ?
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1--&L page%�
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division,? , pagg/4
(3) Nonconformities. See Division page/
(4) Tree regulations. See Division,!f, page/,
(5) Performance standards. See Division L, page/-
,
(g) Special provisions.
(1) In no instance shall an area zoned CN -1 be less than four (4)
acres, more than seven (7) acres, or located within three-
quarters (3/4) of a mile of any other C zone, except a CO -1
Zone.
tw t mor an two ej roomers rest to ea ower n u t
P
ovi d t an ad ition one ha ( f -s t p ing
s per ro shall rnishe .
Sec. 1-13. Community Commercial Zone (CC -2).
(a) The Community Commercial Zone (CC -2) is intended to provide for major
outlying business districts to serve a major segment of the total
community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and
services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic
generators that require access from major thoroughfares. While these
centers are usually characterized by indoor operations, certain permitted
uses may have limited outdoor activities as specified.
.383
RILRoEILMED BY
J__JORM "MICR6LAB **
CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES
- - - J
36
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Retail stores and shops.
(2) Business and personal service establishments except drive-in
facilities.
(3) The permitted office uses of the CO -1 Zone.
(c) Provisional uses.
None.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Clubs.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
i
(3) Religious institutions and related facilities.
(4) Auto oriented uses.
(5) Multi femil fellings located above or below the ground floor
i of a 4emmere4e4 building provided UaL-the density does not
exceed 24 -1+ -cps•
�eoo agu!re a a�eaJ;""cv , � �ornrn
(e) Dimensional r u�reme ts.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
i
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) .Minimum yards:
Front - 20 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 35 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 2.0
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
Within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division Z, page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-0/
Page �0-
,
WO
_ MICROFIL14ED BY
--
,^ I JORM�-MIC R1lLAB-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES
37
b. Accesso,,rY use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-�,
page O
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- page
lJL.•
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1 --!PV, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1- page/e)%
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-'�, page/,Z%
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division,-? , page/ ,&
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division �, page,Z
(4) Tree regulations. See Division S page,/
(5) Performance standards. See Division ig , page/
(g) Special provisions.
( t more two (2) ers may r 'de in h dw ing it
p Ovide tha an a itio 1 on alf of eet ki
er roo 11 be f ed.
Sec. 1-f Central Business Service Zone (CB -2).
(a) Intent. The Central Business. Service Zone (CB -2) is jntended to
allow for the orderly expansion of the central business district of Iowa
City, to serve as a transition between the intense land uses located in
the central business district and adjoining areas, and to enhance the
pedestrian orientation of the central business district by providing
suitable, peripheral locations for auto -oriented commercial and service
uses. This zone is intended to accommodate mixed land uses and requires
that the intensity of use be less than that permitted in the CB -5 zone.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The permitted uses of the CB -5 Zone.
(2) Auto oriented uses.
(3) Hotels, motels and convention facilities.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) MWW -fami y Dellings provided they are developed in accord-
ance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -80 Zone.
mld,uNrX� 64 2e WAd) m� Z4& a�r�CJ
660 Q '64, .
j I-0ICROFIEIdED BY
�
JO RI1i1""MIC ROLAB'+
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES I
393
i
J
38
(2) Elderly housing subject to the requirements of Sec.
(d) Special Exceptions.
(1) Clubs.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - None
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 100 ft.
Lot coverage None
Floor area ratio - 2.0
P
General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
M the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division Z, page FZ.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 -
page FZ.
b. Accessor use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-4,
page -V
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-��, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-�, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1 - page /029
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1—.01,91, page /�
i 141CROFIL14ED BY !
JORMI "MIC REILAel- 1 i
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MO .4ES
i
i
383
i
,J
J
I
39
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division ,, pag%Ti %
(3) Nonconformities. See Division �, pagVd,?
(4) Tree regulations. See Division �, page/
(5) Performance standards. See Division % , page/ya
(9) Special provisions.
Sec. 1-1— ,
(a)
Central Business Zone (CBA
Intent. The Central Business Zone is intended to be the high
dens Ly, compact, pedestrian oriented shopping, office, service, and
entertainment area in Iowa City. Development and redevelopment
—within this zone should occur in compact groupings, in order to
intensify the density of usable commercial spaces, while increasing
the availability of open spaces, plazas, or pedestrian ways. The
zone is intended to accommodate a wide range of retail, service,
office and residential uses. Auto oriented uses, as defined in this
Chapter, -are not. permitted except as otherwise provided. Consoli-
dated off-street loading and service facilities should be provided
wherever practical with access to be provided from public service
alleys or courts. It is intended that off-street parking facilities
be publicly provided and off-street accessory parking be allowed
only as a provisional use. Because of the proximity to the
-University of Iowa, residential development above the ground floor
iM this district is encouraged as a provisional use.
uses.
(1) Retail stores and shops.
(2) Business and personal service establishments except drive-in
facilities.
(3) The permitted office uses of the CO -1 Zone.
(c) Provisional ses
, uses
(1)/ v
' im' Y" provided they are located above the
F?rst floor,"
1 n-
(2) Elderly housing subject to he provisions of Sec. -A2, /
(3) Hotels or motels provi ed that parking spaces shall be in
accordance with Sec.
i MICROFILMED BY
1. -"DORM "MICREILAB- ,
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES
383
Ji
L -
40
(4) Off-street parking subject to the provisions of Sec. 1-_�U9i
(5) Wholesale establishments in conjunction with retail stores and
shops.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Clubs.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
(3) Religious institutions and related facilities.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - None
Side - None
Rear- None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 449 -ft. Aloes
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - D
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
with n this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division .2, pagefd.
a. Permi ted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-�,
page .
b. Accessor use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-,
pagew
C. Sign regulations. See Sec. page/OS'
d. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1--,Oy , page/
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division,,,, page/f.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division -:%, page/
rte_._ +
J' f
f r
it 141CROFILMED BY
l
-JOR M" MIC R�CA _A
13 -f�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M01MES f
3�3
0
J�
r�
41
(4) Tree regulations. See Division ,S, page/`i�
(5) Performance standards. See Division 6 page,��O
(g) Special provisions.
( `)) The floor area ratio may exceed €rve-f5j,J up to and including
�vw / e+@4t-48_0•), for any lot for which a use conforms to the off-
street loading requirements of Sec. 1- qor
HJ
(2k The floor area ratio may exceed ), up to and including
vight—t"), for any lot for which a use provides for a
pedestrian plaza abutting a public street or pedestrian mall
i and has an area equal to or greater than 20 percent of the lot
area.
three r me
an dditio al
sWe per robmar-Gall be furnished.
Sec. 1-A6. Highway Commercial Zone (CH -1).
i nx'a-cWwel
(a) The Highway Commercial Zone (CH -1) is intended to permit development
of service uses relating to expressways or other controlled access
locations along major arterial thoroughfares. At certain access points,
food, lodging, motor vehicle service and fuel can be made conveniently
available to the thoroughfare user, without creating the traffic conges-
tion and hazards associated with intersections.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Hotels, motels and convention facilities.
(2) Restaurants.
(3) Auto oriented uses.
(4 Comme�rnc4
Piiall recreational facilities.
(c) ry visional al des.
(1) None.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) None.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
i 141CROFILMED BY
1.. -DORM "-MICR#LA9 '
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M0INES I
3?3
L.1
r
42
(2) Minimum lot width: 100 ft.
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 80 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height None
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 1
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division Z. page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-4,
page &.
b. AAcacgees$or use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-40 ,
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_:Zl, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-W, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. page/a
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-11.9 , page/
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division a, page/Z2
(3) Nonconformities. See Division page/.�
(4) Tree regulations. See Division .S page,%
(5) Performance standards. See Division page,/�p
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-17. Intensive Commercial Zone (CI -1).
(a) Intent. The Intensive Commercial Zone (CI -1) is intended to -provide
areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose
operations are typically characterized by outdoor display, storage and/or
sales of merchandise, by repair of motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial
I
1
i 141CROFILMED BY
1_ JCRM-MICR6LAB' _1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 11014ES
I1
393
0
Ji
43
amusement and recreational activities, or by activities or operations
conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. -lass
d
ete-iwd•-deve}opment
pattern. Special attention must be directed toward buffering the negative
aspects of these uses upon any residential uses.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Auto oriented uses.
(2) Building contractor facilities, yards and pre -assembly yards.
(3) Commercial recreational facilities.
(4) Equipment rental agencies.
(5) Farm implement dealers.
(6) Food lockers.
(7) Furniture and carpeting stores. y
I
(8) Hardware and building supply stores. ;
Lumber
yards, and buil ing sppply establishments and yards.
Merchandis anti ccturs�,uppl ce ters but not including the
retail sale of merchandise on premises.
i
L3� (0) Plant nurseries.
(f4) Mai Printing and duplicating operations. j
Repair shops.
Restaurants.
i
07)(,185 Wholesale trade and warehouse establishments for the goods
listed in the I-1 zone.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Kennels and veterinary establishments provided they are not
located within 200 feet of an R zone.
(2)A.&tail establishments when associated with the permitted uses
of this zone provided that not more than 50% of the total ground
floor area shall be devoted to the retail display of
merchandise.
393
1
i MICROFILMED BY
`( +1. _"JORM"-MICF1#LAB� �
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI ES j i
I�
44
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) DwellingSAri+s located above the ground floor prey -Wed
(e) Dime
C�� nsion
al requirements. fOc�O,�9.uaw�
y�ei,CiM, wa! 4 Tait L)
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2)
Minimum lot width:
None
(3)
Minimum lot frontage:
None
(4)
Minimum yards:
Front -
20 ft.
Side -
None
Rear -
None
(5)
Maximum building bulk:
Height -
35 ft.
Lot coverage -
None
Floor area ratio -
1
f) General povi
rsions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
wi h n this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessary uses. See Division ,, page &c.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1--.//,
page Fz.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-10110e,
page -P -1,00
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1--W , page
ALP,
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1- �S pagq/0'
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-10f , page/ZZ.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division ,, page/2,9
(3) Nonconformities. See Division �, pagef
(4) Tree regulations. See Division �S, page%
i
i
i 141CROFILMED BY
1. .-'JORM--MICR46LAM_. �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401NES
383
J�
45
(5) Performance standards. See Division 6L, page��
(g) Special provisions.
Sec. 1- Office and Research Park Zone (ORP).
(a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide areas for the
development of large office, research and similar uses. The requirements
of this zone provide protection for uses within the zone to adjacent land
uses and for adjacent more restrictive uses.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Data processing and computer operations.
(2) Natioial a d e0&nel(9ffice blwaes including business,
educational, governmental, industrial or professional offices.
I
(3) Merchandise and product display centers, but not including the
retail sale of merchandise on premises.
(4) Research, testing, and experimental laboratories.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) None.
(d) S ecial exceptions.
(1) Hotels, motels, and convention centers, including restaurants.
(2) Communication stations, cent rs, studios and towers subject to
the requirements of Sec.
(e) Dimensional requirements
(1)
Minimum zone area:
21
acres
(2)
Minimum lot area:
7
acres
(3)
Minimum lot width:
400-€t /47Lt)
(4)
Minimum lot frontage:
400-f
t, AlQ2W
(5)
Required yards:
Front -
150
ft.
Side -
100
ft.
v 141CROFIL14ED BY
1. -DORM MIC R41L A0--
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
3 T3
i
Ji
D
46
Rear - 100 ft.
(6) Maximum building bulk:
Height - None
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 49B -ft. Afcn�
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article, the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division %� , page �,
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-4/1,
page,Z.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-4?1
page.
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- �3 , page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec.. 1- page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1—Pl-, page/[y
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-, page/
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division ,�, page/,o'.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division �, page/
(4) Tree regulations. See Division �, page/
(5) Performance standards. See Division 4� , page/4!
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-/�. General Industrial Zone (I-1).
(a) Intent. The General Industrial Zone (I-1) is intended to
I
de for the development of most types of industrial firms. Regula -
are designed to protect adjacent non-residential zones and other
trial uses within the zone.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The manufacture, compounding, assembling or treatment of
articles or merchandise from the following previously prepared
materials such as but not limited to bone, canvas, celeophane,
cement, cloth, cork, feathers, felt, fibre, fur, glass, hair,
i
141CROFILME
-JORM - MI7A B. -
?101.
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES:ES
f
- .J
3 83
Ji
47
horn, leather, metal, paper, plastics, precious or semi-
precious metals or stones, rubber, shell, textiles, tobacco,
wax, wire, wood (except logging camps, sawmills, and planing
mills) and yarns.
(2) The manufacture and packaging of food and kindred products
(except grain milling and processing, stockyards and slaughter
houses).
(3) The manufacture of chemicals and allied products except
fertilizer manufacturing.
(4) Communication stations, centers, studios and towers.
i
(5) Railroad switching, storage and freight yards and maintenance
facilities.
(6) Wholesale trade and warehouse establishments for goods such as
but not limited to automotive equipment, drugs, chemicals and
allied products, dry goods and apparel, groceries and related
products, electrical goods, hardware, plumbing, heating
equipment and supplies, machinery, equipment and supplies,
tobacco and alcoholic beverages, paper and paper products,
furniture and home furnishings.
(7) Research, testing and experimental laboratories.
i
(8) Vocational schools.
(9) Building contractor facilities, yards and pre -assembly yards.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Residence of the proprietor, caretaker, or watchman when
located on the premises of the commercial or industrial use.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Uses listed as a permitted or provisional use in the I-2 Zone
s ��ectrejio th requi r )ments * d * ited in the I-2 Zo9e(e) Dnsiuirem�'�Ct.�.c��l�
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - Wft.
�D
31'3
1
I` i 141CADF ILIdED BY
___.�..•„ �. _JORM .. MICR46L B_
` CEDAR RAFI DS •DES s10I4C5 I
i
J
i
48
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 45 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - None
(f) General provisions. Allpal and
accessory permitted
within 'thiszone are subject to the General Provisions of Article zr_
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division •; , page -
G 9 C.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-�,
page.
b. Accessor use and building regulations. See Sec. 1- `
page 2E
C. Off. -street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- 93 , page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1- page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-4Y, page/e�
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-W*,5? , page/
j
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division , page/,LOF
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division !:eZ�, page
(4) Tree regulations. See Division �, page/,&.—
(5) Performance standards. See Division (v , page/7
(g) S ecial provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-0. Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2).
(a) Intent. The Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2) is intended to provide for
heavy or intense industries. The zone is designed primarily for
manufacturing and fabrication activities including large scale or
specialized operations having external effects which could have an impact
on adjacent less intense commercial or industrial uses.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Any industrial, commercial or related use •'
uses sha1}1 be prohibited: except the following
3g.3
1 j
i MICROFIL14ED BY -1
---., „ ' JORM -"MIC RbCA B"
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES i
49
a. Manufacture of explosives.
b. Stockyards and slaughter houses.
C. Disposal, reduction or dumping of dead animals or offal.
d. Production of stone, clay, glass materials including
Portland cement plants and quarries.
e. Fertilizer manufacturin .
f. Radioactive wastgf r d sposal site.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) The uses listed as provisional uses in the I-1 zone subject to
the requirements indicated.
(2) Extraction of sand, gravel and other raw materials subject to s
the requirements of Sec. 1-
(3) Junk yards subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-�, i
I I
(d) 5 cial exceptions. i
OW -1
Bulk storage of an materials j
9 Y products, and equipment, j
I (e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 100 ft.
Side - 0 ft.
Rear - 0 ft.
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 45 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - None
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article,
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division Z, page z.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-�
page &-
3 r3
r 141CROFILMED BY
1 1
'DORM MIC RfJL.4 B'�
L! I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1401NES
r - '
50
b. Acces,sior use and building regulations. See Sec. 1- �,
page �
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-_�, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_� a., page/f.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-f, page/Z?
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division S. page/�
(3) Nonconformities. See Division Q, page/H_
(4) Tree regulations. See DivisionJ page%�
(5) Performance standards. See Division pagew
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1 -, Public Zone (P).
(a) Intent. It is intended that the Public Zone (P) provide reference on
the ion ni g map to public uses of land. Thus land owned or otherwise
controlled by the Federal Government, the State of Iowa, Johnson County,
City of Iowa City, and' the Iowa City Community School District will be
designated a Public Zone (P). This designation is intended to serve a
notice function to those owning or buying land in proximity to publically
owned land, which is not ordinarily subject to the regulations of this
Chapter.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The use of land, buildings or structures of the aforementioned
federal and state governments or political subdivisions
thereof.
(2) Farms.
(c) Provisional uses.
None.
(d) Special exceptions.
None.
1
r MiCROFILMED BY
—JORM"MIC R(s1L"AB-
CEDAR RA
RIDS • DES 1401YE5
3 9.,3
n
J
R
51
(e) Dimensional requirements.
None.
(f) General provisions.
None.
(g) Special provisions.
(1) Should any such land be sold, conveyed or transferred to anyone
other than the government of the United States of America or the
State of Iowa or a political subdivision thereof, the buyer or
transferee must submit an application to the City for a rezoning
to a zone other than the Public Zone (P) in accordance with Sec.
1-
(2) Land which is acquired by the government of the United States of`
America or the State of Iowa or a political subdivision thereof
after the effective date of this Chapter shall retain its'
existing zoning designation until such time as pursuant to Sec.
1- , the zoning map is amended to designate such land a
P^, ublic Zone (P).
f��Yu/ •AA
(3)1(�11y such land to—be conveyed by leasehold interest toanyone
other than the federal and state governments or political
s divisions thereof for � ase jhan permitte in is
zone, si►aii-9e �wrt to `f'o're i 1 A"the use is p°`�ed
The use shat a licable to all requirements of the zone in
which it is ` c *Further, the zone shall be established
as an overlay zone 'with the underlying zone retaining 'its
original of P.
DIVISION �. OVERLAY ZONES
Sec. 1- Z2 . Flood hazard overlay zones,
Sec. 1 -Z -L. General.
(a) Pur ose. The purpose of the flood hazard overlay zones is to
establish regulations to minimize the extent of floods and the losses
incurred in flood hazard areas and to promote the public health, safety
and welfare.
(b) Intent. The flood hazard overlay zones are intended to permit only
that development within the floodplain which is appropriate in light of
the probability of flood damage. The regulations. as set forth herein
shall apply to all property located in thq floodplains, as shown on the
Flood Hazard Boundary Map filed with the City Clerk.
(c)
adX. The City has
Flood Boundary and the Fede Map and the Flood1000 insurance Rate In Insurance Study dated aMayt2,
1977, provided by the Federal Insurance Administration as the official
KM
i MICROFILMED BY
�- --DORM-MICROLAB` �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I /�
i
a
Sec.
83
3. Depth of a court shall
one-half times width.
n
not be greater than one and
4. Where walls are not parallel to property or building.
site lines, the nearest portions to such lines shall
be at least the required minimum distance therefrom.
Inner courts.
I. Dimensions. Inner courts formed on four sides by
building walls or potential building walls shall have
a minimum dimension equal to the sum of the required
yards but not less than 10 feet. Their areas shall
not be less than 100 square feet for one story or 150
square feet for two stories or more.
2. An unobstructed passageway shall be provided at the
lowest level of each inner court (except in cases of
inner courts, striums, or enclosed patios for single
family dwelling units) with a cross-section not less
than four (4) feet wide by seven (7) feet high. Such
passageway shall be continuous from the inner court
to unobstructed open space adjacent to the building,
and shall be so aligned as to facilitate passage of
nonvehicular fire fighting equipment, including
ladders.
3. Inner court design shall be such as to permit use of
fire ladders and equipment.
DIVISION /'.
ADDITIONAL REMEfITS
K�4Ci4PTt��t/s
use and requirements.
The following uses shall meet the requirements indicated for each use
in addition to the regulations of the zone in which the use is permitted.
Said requirements shall apply whether the use is allowed as a permitted
principal use, a provisional use, or as a special exception within the
zone.
In case of any conflict between the regulations of the zone in which
the use is permitted and the additional requirements of this section, the
most restrictive r uirefien s shago
VO
(�a'f d A i r o
(1) The area shall be sufficient to meet the Federal Aviation
40 Agency's requirements for the class of airport proposed.
(2) There shall be no existing flight obstructions such as towers,
chimneys or other tall structures, or natural obstructions
outside the proposed airport which would fall within the
approach zone to any of the proposed runways or landing strips
of the airport.
383
14IDROF ILI4ED 6'!
1. "-JORM-"MICR#LAB t
6EDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES
If
i
I
84 I
(3) Certification shall be obtained from the Federal Aeronautics
Administration that airport traffic will not interfere with the
flight pattern of the Iowa City Airport or any other nearby
airport.
/(p) Cemeteries and mausoleums.
(1) Area. Any new cemetery shall be located on a site containing
not less than 20 acres.
j (2) Setback. All structures including but not limited to a
mausoleum, permanent monuments or maintenance building shall be
set back not less than 30 feet from any property line or street
right-of-way line and all graves or burial lots shall be set
back not less than 10 feet from any property line or street
0' right-of-way.
(,ej Clubs.
(1) Clubs shall be located_ with access to arterial streets as
identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street pavements
wider than 28 fee't,in�.
(2) Dimensional re irements
i
a. Minimum lot area: 40,000 square feet.
b. Minimum yards:
1. Front yard - 30 feet
2. Side yard - 30 feet
^� 3. Rear yard - 50 feet
4. Parking - not closer than 20 feet to a side or rear
lot line.
C. Building bulk:
1. The maximum permitted floor area ratio shall be 0.3.
2. The maximum permitted building coverage shall be
0.15.
p � (.d -
i (d) Da care centers and reschools.
i i771c'"�rL�"'
The llowing requirements shall appl when�(six ( c ildren
,yG are to be cared for.
4,Th lot area shall be not less than 15r988 square feet.
enced play area of not less than 2,000 square feet shall be
•'I pr vided for the first 10 or less children with 100 square feet
V1P a ditional area for each additional child. No portion of the
nced play area shall be in the front yard. Such area shall be
Q�L; I ' 1 nclosed or protected, well drained, free from hazards, and
I. P �l $, shall be readily accessible to the center.
\ �h'� 383
j IIICROFILMED BY
1
1
�, I --JORM--MIC Rfi1LAB"
L CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I4014E5
1
� •r I i
i
85
64)(1 The center shall be provided with:
a. Adequate light and ventilation with at least one toilet
and one basin per 15 children.
b. At least 50 square feet of accessible, usable interior
floor space per child.___-...
�! m e o ndoor nd oo eq i I i s '� le
�h' dr us or 10
G„a. Exits clear from obstructions and with no flammable or
poisonous products permitted on the premises that are
accessible to the children.
(5) In addition to the requirements above, the facility's operation
and maintenance shall meet all applicable state requirements.
Drive-in theaters.
(1) The ike shal. ve cect access to a primary or secondary
ar erial�treef)d on the Comprehensive Plan Map.
(2) eAtheateri screen°shall not be visible from within 1000 feet of
an xisting or pro public street. i
(3) Cars parked in the viewing area shall be screened on all sides
by a solid wall or fence not less than six (6) feet in height.
(4) All entrances. and exits shall be separated and internal
circulation shall be laid out to provide one-way traffic.
(5) Sale of refreshments shall be limited to patrons of the theater.
/ (6) No central loudspeakers shall be permitted.
�I��v„µ =� (7) Am cement areas shall be limited to patrons of the theater.
Dwellin s ;
W exp a sly er tt e a gleqne
l tac dweTl�'ng/ y
j aons ruc ed wit ne w 11 o tl s as 'n t e tam/O�a
town e, ted n a de 1 ch t th ext s`i£s e
uch dwellings shall meet the following requirements.
tie o adjacent to theme o cid rd mu be and�aje
wn rsh'pa the time 9f in tial cons ru ion kr a0o t c strctio eas ment be o t toed to o
nstru he dwe on th t line.
(iZ) j s tba on ace mu tth r_ie o r i
t.
M&w
.r�.�rar •G�iv,���'�,ti �lJv c�
MICROFILMED BY
I � _JORM MICR46LAB-� 1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I
87
r`1
0) (131) Dimensional requirements:
a. Minimum lot area per unit: 300 square feet.
b. Minimum yards: none.
C. Minimum separation. A separate building on the same lot
containing one or more of the uses listed above shall be
separated by a minimum horizontal distance equal to one of
the following:
1. The height of the highest building;
2. Eight (8) feet plus two (2) feet for each additional
story above the second story, provided that no window
of a dwelling unit is located on the side next to the
adjacent building below the height of the building;
or
3. Two (2) times the height of the adjacent building
above the window sill of any window of a dwelling unit
located on the side next to the adjacent building.
(See figure below). The distance shall in no case be
less than eight (8) feet plus two (2) feet for each
story above the second story. The above conditions
1, 2 or 3 shall apply to a building for elderly
housing and a building on an abutting lot.
FIGURE
a ftly
/V11C4 ,voanctNr
$ult�/N6
8v/LD/N6 2_
1�N41N) _
'\ ( Extraction.
Cj (1) Approval for the withdrawal of water, if required, shall be
obtained from the Iowa Natural Resource Council.
(2) Approval for operation in a floodplain shall be obtained from
the Iowa Natural Resource Council.
1
i 141CROFIL14ED BY
11" - JORM--MICR46LA6` _1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
3 93
J�
(3) A license to operate from the Iowa Department of Soil
Conservation - Division of Mines and Minerals shall be
obtained. Failure to maintain said license shall constitute
abagdon
�� l
I
(4) The -44 -shall not •be located -within 1000 feet of an R zone.
/4n) /
(5) cavatson shall no occur within 100 feet of vd_j."P4-n
p ropertyX ey (5_)ztuet
(6) Compliance with all other applicable state regulations shall be
met.
ul Family care facilities. (�
/ Such facilities shall be licensed in accordance with the laws of the
ire-- State of Iowa.
>et0acK Aqu rements.
a. l�soIi a5p�udland 11:
1. aet cl ser h n 15 fe t to
rigway when co�fstr�ucte p rail
2. Be loc ted not closer tan 0 f et t any str t 1
/ 1 �
i I
j \
/ 1 �
I
B9
3 Be separated�by a driveway,of at leas 2 feet in
wi th whe two islands re located par llel to` each
oth r. \i\!
Be sepilty
ated f m he print pal wilding b a
dri ewaof at 1 as 20 feet w ere he islands are
cons red paralle to the b ildilg (excludi g a
sery c� attendant bu.'lding const uct d as apart f a
pump i land).
Be se arated fr m the princi al building y a
dri ew y of 40 fe t here the is and are constr cted
per en icular to he building.
Be et back 15 fe rom all pro erty lines oth r th'n
str a right-of-w y ines.
b. anopie stall not be co strutted closer ban 15 f et fr m
ny str et ight-of-w y line.
(2) Drive ays.
a. he m ximu width a driveway penin at the prope y
ine hall a 40 fee j
I
b. he inimu dista a be ween th inter ection of str et 1
right of-wa lines on a cornier
1 t and he dri eway t a
servi a st tion s all b not 1 ss tha 25 f et at he !
righ -of-wa line.
I
c. he pinimu dista ce fro an a joining nteri r lot 1 ne '
and A drive ay op ning s all be not less than 12i feet at
he treet ight- f-way 1 ne. i
d. Mini um dis ante betwee two riveways ery ng the me
pro erty an which prov de ac ess to t e s me stree -
mea ured at rop rty lin
1. Where tree is not stat highway - 25 feet.
2. Where tre is a s ate ighway - 25 fe t or the ame
width s th widest rive ay, whichev r is greate .
(3 Cur s.
a. A aised c rb t least ix () inches i h fight shat be
co structe o or beh nd, all street pr perty li es,
ex ept at rive ay openi gs.
b. Ra ius of curb eturn. he cu b return r di shall b not
les tha five (5) f et or ore than twen y (20) eet;
pro ide howe er, t at no su'h radi s sha 1 exce the
dist�dn between the driveway o nin at the p er line
and a adjoinsi4 property lin or one-half (ls) the
k`I distance to an adjacent driveway.
3Ir3
4 I4ICROFILME0 BY
! .-DORM MICROLAB' 1
1•-••..
L �
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI4E5 � /
�I
i
90
(m Gr u care acilities.
S ch faci ities s all be Ii sed in acc r. ante w'2 he la s o the
S at of owa
( J os 'tat .
(1) Ho pit is hall a ocat d wit acces t arte ial street s
id nti ied n th C mpreh nsive Plan M p r on s re t pavem n s
wi er han 8 fe t i widt .
(2) imens n req ire ents.
a. Minimum y rds. Two feet of ho izo tal d sta ce sha 1 e
provided or ch f of of build ng eight meas red b wean
the neare t p int f an lot ine and e n arest point
from whit the heig It is measur d.
b. Maximum b ildi g b ilk: I
1. The axi m pe mitt d flo Ir ar a ra io s all be 0.4.
2. The, xi/num pe it ed buil in cover ge shall b 0.
Junk yards. �/
1.1 l
(1) No operation shall be perm tted c oser` han/368 feet from any `
established R.zonel - � l i
(2) All outdoor storageI sh 1 be c nduc ed entirely within an
enclose fence, �w 1, except `dr1v ay areas.t Such J -
wait sha 1 be constr ted on or in de the front side and rear
lot lines nd shal constr ed in such a ma ner that no
outdoor stora salva erations shall be vise from an.
adjacent property, street, or highway. Storage, eiftlier
temporary or permanent, between such fence 'or wall and any
property line is expressly prohibited. Junk or salvage
materials shall not be piled higher than the height of the
fence, nor against the fence.
(3) For fire protection, an unobstructed firebreak shall be
maintained, 15 feet width and completely surrounding the junk
yard.
(4) The storage of rags, paper, and similar combustible waste shall
not be closer than 100 feet to any property line, unless
enclosed in a masonry building of not less than four-hour fire
resistive construction.
\ Kennels and veterinary establishments.
No kennel area or animal yard shall be located within 400 feet of any
--dwelling not located on the premises.
f
I
I• i I1ICROFILMED BY ,•
I l - JORM-'MICR6LAB-
1•.•...
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1101NES /
r
�� •-1--ivesbDck-feed-}ots-
U)'111 feedots shall
91
al),of the Waste treatmanr.o 11; .� _.1
where applj able.
feed lot shall be located closer than
n.i n.... .• _ _ . . ..
=ball a...I C W
ot-be-notated-closer-4han
zone boundary.
and dhia'fn
NO mile to any R
'NO-�a.p4es shall be located with access to a secondary or
Primary arterial street as identified on the Comprehensive Plan
Map.
(2) The site shall have a minimum frontage of 120 feet and a minimum
lot area of aalija88 square feet.
AGI Goo
�BS Nursing homes. .
(1) Nursing homes shall be located with access to arterial streets
as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street
pavements wider than 28 feeWi4�
IJ! (2) Dimensional requirements: foo
a. Minimum lot area:
bed. .299g square feet of lot area per each
I
b. Minimum yards:
1. Front yard - 40 feet
2. Side yard - 30 feet
I Rear yard - 25 feet
C. The maximum permitted building coverage shall be 0.4.
CO` (p� �,t'f Religious institutions.
(1) Religious institutions shall be located with access to arterial
streets as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street
pavements wider than 28 feet.ia-width.
(2) Dimensional requirements.An nnn
`
ua L__`�
V Two feet of horizontal distance shall be
rovide or each foot of building height measured between
rroonearest point of any lot line and the nearest point
m which the height is measured.
J' t
i MICROFILMED BY �
1- JORM--MICR46LAE3- -�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ff�
383
JI
92
Y") Stables.
r--- IOGO
Such structures shall be located at least 49B'feet from any R zone
boundary.
�PNliw,luid.�EY�
L�\ / ,(4) towers.
/t Y
The tower shall be located at least as far away from property lines
ILS -as its maximum height above jeaund4eve1z. OTO -4V
DIVISION ,Z . ACCESSORY USES.
Sec. 1-_�/' . Permitted accessory uses and buildings.
Accessory uses, buildings or other structures customarily incidental
to and commonly associated with a permitted principal use, provisional use
or special exception shall be permitted provided they are operated and
maintained under the same ownership, located on the same lot (except as
otherwise provided), do not include structures or structural features
inconsistent with the uses to which they are accessory, and conform to the
specific requirements contained herein. The accessory uses, buildings or
other structures permitted in each zone may include the following:
(a) In the AG Zone.
(1) Fences as regulated by Sec. 1--o
(2) Private garages.
(3) Private greenhouses or conservatories.
(4) Structures for the shelter of household pets except kennels.
(5) Home occupations.
(6) Non-commercial radio transmission towers.
(7) Gazebos, enclosed patios and similar buildings for passive
recreational use.
(8) Roadside stands for the sale of produce grown an the premises
provided that such a stand shall not contain more than 600
square feet of floor area, the stand is located not less than 20
feet from a street, and access to the stand is from the entrance
to the farm or residence.
3 r3
1 �
i 141CROFILMED BY
�•.. I �. -JORM--MICR6LAB..
% CEDAR RAPIDS DES t4018ES /
-- -
34
Draft 2/15/83
(2) ns 1 requirements. See Divis'
onformi ie . Se Divisio p e
( Tree egulati s. See Divi ion pa
(5) Perfo ance t dards. S e Divi ion p ge
( )
Special rov sio s.
(1) Mobile o es s all o ply with 'th s ec.ial pr vi ions
applicab to mo ile o s in Chapte of the o e of
Ordinance and the rovi ion of he Code Iowa.
As an al er ative to ompliance e r uirement o this
I zone velop is y conform o the requirem or an D-
H zone upon meeting th roc dural requirements of the OPD-H
Zone without applying for a c ange in zoning.
Sec. 1- Commercial Office Zone (CO-1).
j
(a) Intent. The Commercial Office Zone (CO-1) is intended to provide
speci i�C areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments
and certain public and semi-public uses may be developed. The CO-1 Zone I
can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or
industrial areas. j
(b) Permitted uses.
j (1) Office buildings in which no activity is carried on catering to .
retail trade with the general public and no stock of goods is
maintained for sale to customers, except as otherwise provided.
Any office use shall be permitted excepting the following:
a. Small animal clinics.
b. Drive-in facilities.
(2) Pharmacies limited to the retail sale of drugs and
pharmaceutical products.
(3) Corrective optical and prosthetics supply stores, limited to
retail sales.
(4) Hospitals.
(5) Nursing homes.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Dwellings located above or below the ground floor of a
commercial use permitted in this zone provided that the density
does not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per 1800 square feet of
lot area. A maximum of two roomers may reside in each unit.
3�3
{r' I
Ili MICROFILMED BY
I•-'"JORM -MICR6LAB_
j j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOI ES i /�
35
(2) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the
requirements of Sec. 1-
(d) special exceptions.
(1) Drive-in facilities associated with financial institutions.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of
Sec. 1-
(3) Funeral homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40.
(4) Group care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-
(5) Restaurants.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front: 20 ft.
Side: None
Rear: None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height: 25 ft.
Lot coverage: None
Floor area ratio: 1
(f) General rovisions, All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec.
page
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_
page
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1 -
page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. page
i
ii 141CROFIL14ED BY
1' -DORM-"MIC ROLA B' ,
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES
II
393
J
j
i
I
36
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page _.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _, page _.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division _, page _.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page _.
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1- Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN -1).
(a) Intent. The Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN -1) is intended to
permit tledevelopment of retail sales and personal services required to
meet the needs of a fully developed residential neighborhood. Stores in
this zone should be useful to the majority of the neighborhood residents,
should be economically supportable by nearby population, and should not
draw communitywide patronage. In general, the CN -1 Zone is intended for
the grouping of small retail businesses which are relatively nuisance- '
free to surrounding residences.
(b) Permitted uses.
i
(1) Grocery stores including specialty food such as bakery and
delicatessen goods.
(2) Drugstores and variety stores.
(3) Barber shops and beauty parlors, laundromats, and laundry and
dry cleaning pick-up and delivery services.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Dwellings located above or below the ground floor of a building
provided that the density does not exceed one (1) dwelling unit
per 1800 square feet of lot area. A maximum of two roomers may
reside in each dwelling unit.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Financial institutions including drive-in facilities.
(2) Religious institutions and related facilities.
(3) Restaurants.
(4) Filling stations provided that no part of the use shall be
located within 100 feet of an R zone boundary.
3003
MICROFILMED BY
JORM-MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVES
lid
--
37
(5) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of
Sec. 1-
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None --
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 20 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
i-
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height 25 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 1
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within t� zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article _, the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page _.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 -
page _.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_,
page _.
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-
_, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1 - page _.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division page _.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division _, page
(4) Tree regulations. See Division,_, page
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page _.
3,P3
i
MICROFILMED BY �
�l
-JORM-MIC RdLA B'�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES
i f
I
rj
38
i
(g) Special provisions.
I
(1) In no instance shall an area zoned CN -1 be less than four (4)
acres, more than seven (7) acres, or located within three-
quarters (3/4) of a mile of any other C zone, except a CO -1
Zone.
Sec. 1-_ Community Commercial Zone (CC -2).
(a) The Community Commercial Zone (CC -2) is intended to provide for major
outlying business districts to serve a major segment of the total
community population. In addition to a variety of retail goods and
services, these centers may typically feature a number of large traffic
generators that require access from major thoroughfares. While these
centers are usually characterized by indoor operations, certain permitted
uses may have limited outdoor activities as specified.
(b) Permitted uses.
1 l I
i(1) Retail stores and shops.
(2) Business and personal service establishments except drive-in
facilities.
I
(3) The permitted office uses of the CO -1 Zone. I
1
(c) Provisional uses.
None. f J{
(d) Special exceptions. 1
(1) Clubs. 111'
i
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
(3) Religious institutions and related facilities. 1
(4) Auto oriented uses.
(5) Dwellings located above or below the ground floor of a building
provided the density does not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per
1800 square feet of lot area. A maximum of two roomers may
reside in each dwelling unit.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
383
1r �
M1CRof1L11ED BY
I- 1.
DORM 'MIC R46LA9
J CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES
r
/ \ E
39
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards: p0 ft.
Front - None
Side -
Rear - None
1
(5) Maximum building bulk: 35 ft.
Height-
Lot coverage - None I
Floor area ratio - 2.0
{ (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article —,the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division —, page _•
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_,
page
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_,
page
4 -
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1- page i
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page —•
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _, page —.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division —, page _.
i l
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page
(5) Performance standards. See Division —, page _.
(g). Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-_ Central Business Service Zone (CB -2).
(a) Intent. The Central Business Service Zone (CB -2) is intended to
allow or the orderly expansion of the central business district of Iowa
City, to serve as a transition between the intense land uses located in
the central business district and adjoining areas, and to enhance the
pedestrian orientation of the central business district by providing
suitable, peripheral locations for auto -oriented commercial and service
I
I
• 3�3
r MICROFILMED BY
I• �- JORM-"MICR6ILAB-"
I i
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 /
40
I
uses. This zone is intended to accommodate mixed land uses and requires
that the intensity of use be less than that permitted in the CB -5 zone.
I
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The permitted uses of the CB -5 Zone.
(2) Auto oriented uses.
(3) Hotels, motels and convention facilities.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Dwellings provided they are developed in accordance with the
dimensional requirements of the RM -80 Zone. A maximum of two
(2) roomers may reside in each dwelling unit.
(2) Elderly -housing subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-
(d) Special Exceptions.
(1) Clubs.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - None
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height -
Lot c overage - No0neft.
Floor area ratio - 2.0
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within th s zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article _,
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: the
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page _
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1 -
page.
r� !
I!
141CROFILMED BY 1
JORM"MICRO LAB I
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M01' S
I
383
41
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1 - page.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1 - page _.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division page _.
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division _, page _.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page _.
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-_ Central Business Zone (CB -8).
(a) Intent. The Central Business Zone is intended to be the high
density, compact, pedestrian oriented shopping, office, service, and
entertainment area in Iowa City. Development and redevelopment within
this zone should occur in compact groupings, in order to intensify the
density of usable commercial spaces, while increasing the availability of
open spaces, plazas, or pedestrian ways. The zone is intended to
accommodate a wide range of retail, service, office and residential uses.
Auto oriented uses, as defined in this Chapter, are not permitted except
as otherwise provided. Consolidated off-street loading and service
facilities should be provided wherever practical with access to be
provided from public service alleys or courts. It is intended that off-
street parking facilities be publicly provided and off-street accessory
parking be allowed only as a provisional use. Because of the proximity to
the University of Iowa, residential development above the ground floor in
this district is encouraged as a provisional use.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Retail stores and shops.
(2) Business and personal service establishments except drive-in
facilities.
(3) The permitted office uses of the CO -1 Zone.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Dwellings provided they are located above the ground floor. Two
(2) roomers may reside in each dwelling unit.
_ - --
i MICROFILMFD BY
1_ _JORM---MICR6LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
38'3
E
J
i I '
42
(2) Elderly housing subject to the provisions of Sec. 1-_
(3) Hotels or motels provided that parking. spaces shall be in
accordance with Sec. 1-
(4) Off-street parking subject to the provisions of Sec. 1-_
(5) Wholesale establishments in conjunction with retail stores and
shops.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Clubs.
(2) Daycare centers and preschools.
I
(3) Religious institutions and related facilities.
i
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
i (2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None it
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - None
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - None
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 8.0
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within tT one are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page _. !
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page _•
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_,
page.
C. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page.
d. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page _.
373
MICROFIL14ED BY i
JORM""MICR�LA I-
J
(i i LEDAR RA IDS DES MDINES i Y
43
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _, page
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division page
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page
(g) Special provisions.
(1) The floor area ratio may exceed eight (8), up to and including
twelve (12), for any lot for which a use conforms to the off-
street loading requirements of Sec. 1-_; or
(2) The floor area ratio may exceed eight (8), up to and including
twelve (12), for any lot for which a use provides for a
pedestrian plaza abutting a public street or pedestrian mall
and has an area equal to or greater than 20 percent of the lot
area.
Sec. 1 Highway Commercial Zone (CH -1).
(a) The Highway Commercial Zone (CH -1) is intended to permit development
of service uses relating to expressways or other controlled access
locations along major arterial. thoroughfares. At certain access points,
food, lodging, motor vehicle service and fuel can be made conveniently
available to the thoroughfare user, without creating the traffic conges-
tion and hazards associated with intersections.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Hotels, motels and convention facilities.
(2) Restaurants.
(3) Auto oriented uses.
(4) Commercial recreational facilities.
(5) Creamery.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) None.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) None.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
MICROFILMED BY
--DORM-MICR6LAHB_
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
i
% a
j A
r
44
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: 100 ft.
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 80 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height None
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 1
(f) Generalprovisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
withinhis tzone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page _.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_, i
page.
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page _.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _, page
i
(3) Nonconformities. See Division _, page _.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1- Intensive Commercial Zone (CI -1).
(a) Intent. The Intensive Commercial Zone (CI -1) is intended to provide
areas for those sales and service functions and businesses whose
M3
IIICROFILIIED BY
-JORM...-MICRbLAB._ ...... _� _�
i! I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i !
�_ _ -
45
operations are typically characterized by outdoor display, storage and/or
sales of merchandise, by repair of motor vehicles, by outdoor commercial
amusement and recreational activities, or by activities or operations
conducted in buildings or structures not completely enclosed. Special
attention must be directed toward buffering the negative aspects of these
uses upon any residential uses.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Auto oriented uses.
(2) Building contractor facilities, yards and pre -assembly yards.
(3) Commercial recreational facilities.
(4) Equipment rental agencies.
(5) Farm implement dealers.
(6) Food lockers.
(7) Furniture and carpeting stores.
(8) Hardware and building supply stores.
(9) Lumber yards, and building supply establishments and yards.
(10) Marine equipment and supply.
'(11) Merchandise and product supply centers but not including the
retail sale of merchandise on premises.
(12) Office uses permitted in the CO -1 zone.
(13) Plant nurseries.
(14) Printing and duplicating operations.
(15) Repair shops.
(16) Restaurants.
(17) Wholesale trade and warehouse establishments for the goods
listed in the I-1 zone.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Kennels and veterinary establishments provided they are not
located within 200 feet of an R zone.
(2) Other retail establishments when associated with the permitted
uses of this zone provided that not more than 50% of the total
ground floor area shall be devoted to the retail display of
merchandise.
i
i I-0ICROF ILHED BY
( 1. _-JORKA-MICR4�L
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES
3F3
0
Ji
W
46
(3) Funeral homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Dwellings located above the ground floor of a building provided
that the density does not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per 1800
square feet of lot area. A maximum of two (2) roomers may
reside in each dwelling unit.
(2) Cementitious concrete batch/mix plants.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 20 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 35 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - 1
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within tis zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
i
(1) Accessory uses. See Division 2, page 92.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-41,
page 92.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-42,
page. 94.
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-43, page 96.
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-44, page 108.
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page. 109.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129.
MICROFILMED By
1' - 'JORMMICR61LA B-- i
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MDINES
383
47
(3) Nonconformi ties. See Division 4, page 133.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135.
(5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140.
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1 Office and Research Park Zone (ORP).
(a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide areas for the
development of large office, research and similar uses. The requirements
Of this zone provide protection for uses within the zone to adjacent land
uses and for adjacent more restrictive uses.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Data processing and computer operations.
(2) Offices including business, educational, governmental,
industrial or professional offices.
(3) Merchandise and product display centers, but not including the
retail sale of merchandise on premises.
(4) Research, testing, and experimental laboratories.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) None.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Hotels, motels, and convention centers, including restaurants.
(2) Communication stations, centers, studios and towers subject to
the requirements of Sec. 1-
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum zone area: 21 acres
(2) Minimum lot area: 7 acres
(3) Minimum lot width: None
(4) Minimum lot frontage: None
(5) Required yards:
i
I
I4ICRUILMED BY
1" -JORM_ MIC Rb:R0
8".
CEDAR RAPIDS DES HE5
3F3
I
Ji
48
Front - 150 ft.
Side - 100 ft.
Rear - 100 ft.
(6) Maximum building bulk:
Height - None
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - None
(f) General provisions. All principal and. accessory uses permitted
within�s zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article _, the
divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page _.
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page _.
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-_,
page _.
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-_, page
Gf
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page _.
f.. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-_, page
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _, page _.
(3) Nonconformities. See Division _, page _.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division _, page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page _.
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1- General Industrial Zone (I-1).
(a) Intent. The General Industrial Zone (I-1) is intended to provide for
the deve opment of most types of industrial firms. Regulations are
designed to protect adjacent non-residential zones and other industrial
uses within the zone.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The manufacture, compounding, assembling or treatment of
articles or merchandise from the following previously prepared
f
J 111CROFILMED BY
1-- -JORM "MICR6LAB'- - -�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
3F3
i
J�
49
materials such as but not limited to bone, canvas, celeophane,
cement, cloth, cork, feathers, felt, fibre, fur, glass, hair,
horn, leather, metal, paper, plastics, precious or semi-
precious metals or stones, rubber, shell, textiles, tobacco,
wax, wire, wood (except logging camps, sawmills, and planing
imills) and yarns.
(2) The manufacture and packaging of food and kindred. products
(except grain milling and processing, stockyards and slaughter
houses).
(3) The manufacture of chemicals and allied products except
fertilizer manufacturing.
(4) Communication stations, centers, studios and towers.
(5) Railroad switching, storage and freight yards and maintenance
facilities.
(6) Wholesale trade and warehouse establishments for goods such as
but not limited to automotive equipment, drugs, chemicals and
allied products, dry goods and apparel, groceries and related
products, electrical goods, hardware, plumbing, heating
equipment and supplies, machinery, equipment and supplies,
tobacco and alcoholic beverages, paper and paper products,
furniture and home furnishings.
(7) Research, testing and experimental laboratories.
(8) Vocational schools.
(9) Building contractor facilities, yards and pre -assembly yards.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) Residence of the proprietor, caretaker, or watchman when
located on the premises of the commercial or industrial use.
(d) Special exceptions.
(1) Uses listed as a permitted or provisional use in the I-2 Zone
subject to the requirements indicated in the I-2 Zone.
(2) Airports, heliports, and helistops subject to the requirements
of Sec. 1-40, page _.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
I
MICROFILMED BY
-DORM MIC R#LAB-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I
383
I
J1
50
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
i
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 20 ft.
Side - None
Rear - None
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 45 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - None
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
(1) Accessory uses. See Division _, page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 -
page _•
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-
page _• —'
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-
. page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. I-
, page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1 - page _.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1 - page
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division page
(3) Nonconformities. See Division page
(4) Tree regulations. See Division page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page _.
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1-_ Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2).
(a) Intent. The Heavy Industrial Zone (I-2) is intended to provide for
heavy or intense industries. The zone is designed primarily for
manufacturing and fabrication activities including large scale or
specialized operations having external effects which could have an impact
on adjacent less intense commercial or industrial uses.
i MICROFILMED BY
1.
1--JORM`-MICR6LA B'
1 CEDAR RARIDS DES MOINES !
3K3
�J I
51
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) Any industrial, commercial or related use, except the following
uses which shall be prohibited:
a. Manufacture of explosives.
b. Stockyards and slaughter houses.
C. Disposal, reduction or dumping of dead animals or offal. -
d. Production of stone, clay, glass materials including
Portland cement plants and quarries.
e. Fertilizer manufacturing.
f. Radioactive waste storage or disposal site.
(2) Bulk storage of any materials, products, and equipment.
(c) Provisional uses.
(1) The uses listed as provisional uses in the I-1 zone subject to
the requirements indicated.
(2) Extraction of sand, gravel and other raw materials subject to
the requirements of Sec. 1-
(3) Junk yards subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-_
(d) Special exceptions.
None.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
(1) Minimum lot area: None
(2) Minimum lot width: None
(3) Minimum lot frontage: None
(4) Minimum yards:
Front - 100 ft.
Side - 0 ft.
Rear - 0 ft.
(5) Maximum building bulk:
Height - 45 ft.
Lot coverage - None
Floor area ratio - None
(f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted
withiF�s zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article
the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows:
) i
i I4ICROF 1LIdED BY '
11- JORM MICR46LA13
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
3 F'3
V
J�
f
52
i
(1) Accessory uses. See Division page
a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-_,
page —
b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-
page _. _,
C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1 - page
d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1 - page
e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1 - page _.
f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1 - page _.
(2) Dimensional requirements. See Division page _
(3) Nonconformities. See Division page _.
(4) Tree regulations. See Division page _.
(5) Performance standards. See Division _, page
(g) Special provisions.
None.
Sec. 1 Public Zone (P).
(a) Intent. It is intended that the Public Zone (P) provide reference on
the zoo map to public uses of land. Thus land owned or otherwise
controlled by the Federal Government, the State of Iowa, Johnson County,
City of Iowa City, and the Iowa City Community School District will be
designated a Public Zone (P). This designation is intended to serve a
notice function to those owning or buying land in proximity to publically
owned land, which is not ordinarily subject to the regulations of this
Chapter.
(b) Permitted uses.
(1) The use of land, buildings or structures of the aforementioned
federal and state governments or political subdivisions
thereof.
(2) Farms.
(c) Provisional uses.
i I
JI,
141CROMMED BY 1
I JORM --MIC RIfIC'A B` 1111
CEDAR RAPIDS DES Id01RE5 '
i —
383
J
53
None.
(d) Special exceptions.
None.
(e) Dimensional requirements.
None.
(f) General provisions.
None.
(g) Special provisions.
(1) Should any such land be sold, conveyed or transferred to anyone
other than the government of.the United States of America or the j
State of Iowa or a political subdivision thereof, the buyer or
transferee must submit an application to the City for a rezoning
to a zone other than the Public Zone (P) in accordance with Sec. j
I-
(2) Land which is acquired by the government of the United States of
America or the State of Iowa or a political subdivision thereof
after the effective date of this Chapter shall retain its
existing zoning designation until such'time as pursuant to Sec. i
1- the zoning map is amended to designate such land a
Pub=lcZone (P). j
(3) Before any such land is conveyed by leasehold interest to anyone
other than the federal and state governments or political
subdivisions thereof for a use other than permitted in this
zone, rezoning to an appropriate zone in which the use is
allowed shall be obtained. The use shall be applicable to all
requirements of the zone in which it is allowed. Further, the
zone shall be established as an overlay zone with the underlying
zone retaining its original designations of P.
I.
Draft: 2-16-83
-DIVISION—. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS
Sec. 1-_. Use and requirements.
i The following uses shall meet the requirements indicated for each use
in addition to the regulations of the zone in which the use is permitted.
Said requirements shall apply whether the use is allowed as a permitted
principal use, a provisional use, or as a special exception within the
zone.
In case of any conflict between the regulations of the zone in which
the use is permitted and the additional requirements of this section, the
most restrictive requirements shall govern.
(a) Airports, heliports and helistops.
(1) The area shall be sufficient to meet the Federal Aviation
Agency's requirements for the class of airport proposed.
(2) There shall be no existing flight obstructions such as towers,
chimneys or other tall structures, or natural obstructions
outside the proposed airport which would fall within the
approach zone to any of the proposed runways or landing strips
of the airport.
(3) Certification shall be obtained from the Federal Aeronautics
Administration that airport traffic will not interfere with the
flight pattern of the Iowa City Airport or any other nearby
airport.
(b) Cemeteries and mausoleums.
(1) Area. Any new cemetery shall be located on a site containing
not less than 20 acres.
(2) Setback. All structures including but not limited to a
mausoleum, permanent monuments or maintenance building shall be
set back not less than 30 feet from any property line or street
right-of-way line and all graves or burial lots shall be set
back not less than 10 feet from any property line or street
right-of-way.
(c) Clubs.
(1) Clubs shall be located with access to arterial streets as
identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street pavements
wider than 28 feet.
(2) Dimensional requirements.
a. Minimum lot area: 40,000 square feet.
RICAOFILIIED BY I'
11- -1
-DORM �-MIC R(�LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES
I
30.3
J
f
r-,
2
b. Minimum yards:
1.
Front yard
- 30
feet
2.
Side yard
- 30
feet
3.
Rear yard
- 50
feet
4.
Parking -
not
closer than 20 feet to a side or rear
lot
line.
C. Building bulk:
1. The maximum permitted floor area ratio shall be 0.3.
2. The maximum permitted building coverage shall be
0.15.
(d) Communication towers. The tower shall be located at least as far
away from property lines as its maximum height above grade.
(e) Daycare centers and preschools.
The following requirements shall apply when more than six (6) children are
to be cared for.
(1) Daycare centers and preschools shall be located with access to
arterial streets as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or
on street pavements wider than 28 feet.
(2) The lot area shall be not less than 10,000 square feet.
(3) A fenced play area of not less than 2,000 square feet shall be
provided for the first 10 or less children with 100 square feet
additional area for each additional child. No portion of the
fenced play area shall be in the front yard. Such area shall be
enclosed or protected, well drained, free from hazards, and
shall be readily accessible to the center.
(4) The center shall be provided with:
a. Adequate light and ventilation with at least one toilet
and one basin per 15 children.
b. At least 50 square feet of accessible, usable interior
floor space per child.
C. Exits clear from obstructions and with no flammable or
poisonous products permitted on the premises that are
accessible to the children.
(5) In addition to the requirements above, the facility's operation
and maintenance shall meet all applicable state requirements.
30
a
0
111CROEILMED BY
I l"—JORM---MICR6LA9 1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES td01YES
i
3
(f) Drive-in theaters.
(1) The site shall have direct access to a primary or secondary
arterial street as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map.
(2) The viewing side of the theater screen shall not be visible from
within 1000 feet of any existing or proposed public street.
(3) Cars parked in the viewing area shall be screened on all sides
by a solid wall or fence not less than six (6) feet in height.
(4) All entrances and exits shall be separated and internal
circulation shall be laid out to provide one-way traffic.
(5) Sale of refreshments shall be limited to patrons of the theater.
(6) No central loudspeakers shall be permitted.
(7) Amusement areas shall be limited to patrons of the theater.
(g) Dwellings, zero lot line.
(1) Where the abutting lot has been developed with a side yard of
less than 10 feet, the dwelling shall be located such that there
iis a minimum of 10 feet between dwellings.•
j (2) No portion of the wall on the zero side yard shall project over
the lot line. Openings in the wall shall be prohibited.
(3) Legal provision shall be made for permanent access for the
maintenance of the exterior portion of the proposed building
wall located upon the lot line. A permanent ten foot
maintenance easement to provide such access shall be secured
prior to issuance of a building permit.
(h) Elderly housing.
(1) Elderly housing shall be located within 600 feet of a public
transit system, unless comparable service is made available to
the elderly housing by other means.
(2) Dimensional requirements:
a. Minimum lot area per unit: 300 square feet.
b. Minimum yards: none.
C. Minimum separation. A separate building on the same lot
containing one or more of the uses listed above.shall be
separated by a minimum horizontal distance equal to one of
the following:
1
1
i MICROFILMEDDY '
JORM -MIC RbL d:9 ..�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M014ES I
3a3
J1
4
I. The height of the highest building;
2. Eight (8) feet plus two (2) feet for each additional
story above the second story, provided that no window
of a dwelling unit is located on the side next to the
adjacent building below the height of the building;
or
3. Two (2) times the height of the adjacent building
above the window sill of any window of a dwelling unit
located on the side next to the adjacent building.
(See figure below). The distance shall in no case be
less than eight (8) feet plus two (2) feet for each
story above the second story. The above conditions
1, 2 or 3 shall apply to a building for elderly
housing and a building on an abutting lot.
FIGURE
Nui1N6 1 i bulcu/Nf
BuitD/N6 i� 2 1
(i) Extraction.
(1) Approval for the withdrawal of water, if required, shall be
obtained from the Iowa Natural Resource Council.
(2) Approval for operation in a floodplain shall be obtained from
the Iowa Natural Resource Council.
(3) A license to operate from the Iowa Department of Soil
Conservation - Division of Mines and Minerals shall be
obtained. Failure to maintain said license shall constitute
abandonment.
(4) Extraction shall occur within 1000 feet of an R zone.
(5) Extraction shall not occur within 100 feet of abutting property
or a street.
� 1
i 141CROFIL14ED BY
1 -JORM-MICR6LA9-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 14014ES
383
J�
r--
5
J I
i MILAOFILidED BY
1' 'DORM MICR6LAO-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I
i
383
J
(6) Compliance with all other applicable state regulations shall be
met.
(j)
Fmi ly care facilities. Such facilities shall be licensed in
accordae
ncth
withe laws of the State of Iowa.
(k)
Funeral homes.
(1) Funeral homes shall be located with access to a secondary or
primary arterial street as identified on the Comprehensive Plan
Map.
(2) The site shall have a minimum frontage of 120 feet and a minimum
lot area of 40,000 square feet.
(1)
Junk yards.
(1) No operation shall be permitted closer than 1000 feet from any
established R zone.
(2) All outdoor storage shall be conducted entirely within an
enclosed fence, wall, or other solid screen except for driveway
areas. Such solid screen shall be constructed on or inside the
front, side and rear lot lines and shall be constructed in such
a manner that no outdoor storage or salvage operations shall be
visible from an adjacent property, street, or highway.
Storage, either temporary or permanent, between such fence or
wall and any property line is expressly prohibited. Junk or
salvage materials shall not be piled higher than the height of.
the fence, nor against the fence.
(3) For fire protection, an unobstructed firebreak shall be
maintained, 15 feet width and completely surrounding the junk
yard..
(4) The storage of rags, paper, and similar combustible waste shall
not be closer than 100 feet to any property line, unless
enclosed in a masonry building of not less than four-hour fire
resistive construction.
(m)
Kennels and veterinar establishments. No kennel area or animal
yard
shall be ocated within 4 feet of any dwelling not located on the
premises.
(n)
Nursing homes.
(1) Nursing homes shall be located with access to arterial streets
as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street
pavements wider than 28 feet.
(2) Dimensional requirements:
a. Minimum lot area: 600 square feet of lot area per each
bed.
J I
i MILAOFILidED BY
1' 'DORM MICR6LAO-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I
i
383
J
6
b. Minimum yards:
1. Front yard - 40 feet
2. Side yard - 30 feet
3. Rear yard - 25 feet
C. The maximum permitted building coverage shall be 0.4.
(o) Religious institutions.
(1) Religious institutions shall be located with access to arterial
streets as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Map or on street
Pavements wider than 28 feet.
i
(2) Dimensional requirements.
i a. Minimum lot area: 40,000 square feet. j
b. Minimum yards. Two feet of horizontal distance shall be
provided for each foot of building height measured between
the nearest point of any lot line and the nearest point
Ifrom which the height is measured.
(p) Stables. Such structures shall be located at least 1000 feet from 1
1 any R zone boundary.
(q) Communication towers. The tower shall be located at least as far
I away from property Ines as its maximum height above grade.
i i
I
I
I
383
i MICROFIL14ED BY 1 1
I.l_.. _ 1111
'JORM 'MICR/LAB-
% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES ! !
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 17, 1983
To: City Council
From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance 9-0
Re: Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
Attached is the revised five year CIP which will 'be considered along
with the FY84 Operating Budget at the March 1, 1983, Public Hearing.
The following changes to the Proposed CIP have been made:
1. CBD - Clinton Street: This project was moved up one year.
Design is now scheduled for FY84 with construction in FY85.
2. Napoleon Park Restrooms: Funding for this project was changed
to contributions and operating revenue with the emphasis to be
on obtaining contributions for a majority of the cost.
3. Storm Sewer - Rundell/Dearborn: This project will be funded
with $124,200 of Community Development Block Grant monies and
$140,800 of General Obligation Bonds. The Council has decided
that the bonds will not be abated with sewer revenues.
4. East Side Water Storage Tank: This project was taken out of the
five year CIP and included on the pending list.
5. Dubuque Street (Iowa Avenue to Park Road): This project was
left in FY84 but construction will be scheduled for the spring
of 1984 so as to not coincide with the reconstruction scheduled
for Highway 1 during the summer of 1983.
6. CBD - Linn Street: This project was moved up one year to FY84.
The project will exclude the sidewalk area adjacent to the old
Penney's parking lot. This sidewalk will need to be completed
when construction on the east part of the old parking lot
occurs.
7. Highway 1 Bikeway: This is a new project added since the
Proposed CIP was completed. It will provide for an eight foot
asphalt bikeway/sidewalk running along one side of Highway 1
from Hy -Vee north to A.C.T. The bikeway will then proceed north
on both sides of Highway 1 to the Westinghouse driveway and to
the Highlander driveway. This project assumes that the bikeway
will run adjacent to the highway. The project is scheduled in
FY84 and is proposed to be funded by General obligation Bonds at
a cost Of $115,000. The State has notified the City that it
would not fund the bikeway as part of its Highway 1 Renovation
project.
j IdI CROFILHED BY �
—'JORM MIC Ft AB
CEDAR RAPIDS DES V1 JES
� I
WA
2
All other projects remain in the CIP as they appeared in the Proposed
CIP with no revisions as to timing or funding sources. It will be
possible to amend the CIP during FY84 should changes become
necessary.
The pending list has been expanded and will now include the following
projects:
Wastewater Treatment Facility
River Corridor Buffer and Trail System
City Administration and Public Safety Building Expansion
Pool Facility Replacement
East Side Water Storage Tank
Parking Facility
Iowa Avenue Restoration
bj/sp
1 '
IIICROFIL14ED BY
1
JORM "--MICR6L-A6'-
CEOAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
3?�
i
J�
CAPIffl,Iv,RO-[Has
BTPBOQRAN
PROJECT
PRIOR IRS
PI84
Pisa
PY86
fY87
Piss PUtURL
TRS
TOTAL
BENTON/RIVERSIDE INTERSECTION
0
600.000
0
0
SCOTT BOULEVARD PAYING
0
0
0
0
0
600,000
IST AVE CULVERT
0
13,000
595,000
777.000
0
910,000
0
6,000
719,000
0
0
0
0
224,000
RAILROAD CROSSINGS IMP
1,000
61,000
0
0
NELROSE AVE PAYING
0
0
0
0
0
67,000
BONNET ROAD PAYING
0
65,000
615,000
0
0
680,000
NELROSE COURT INP
0
1,500
0
81,500
0
0
75,000
775,000
0
300,000
.ALLEY PAYING (LVON•S ADD)
0
67,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
83x000
DUBUQUE ROAD INP
0
0
0
0
0
67,000
KIRKWOOD CIRCLE IMP
0
0
0
1890000
0
0
0
t$9,000.
DUBUQUE BY IOWA TO PARK
15.000
0
590,000
61000
78,000
0
0
0
14,000
91TRA WIDTH KEOKUR/BANDUSKV
0
35,000
0
O
0
0
0
0
605,000
►OSTER.RD RIGHTS -OP -NAT EAST
0
30,000
0
0
0
0
0
)5.000
FORM 10 RIGHTS -OP -NAT WEST
0
'101000
0
0
0
0
0
70,000
IOWA AVENUE BRIDGE
70,000
0
0
0
0
0
10,000 - {
BURLINGTON BY BRIDGE
69,000
0
1,719,000
0
0
0
1.789.000
DODGE ST BRIDGE/OLCK REPAIR
0
0
0
0
1.110,000
0
01,170,000
BENTON BY BRIDGE
5,000
0
49.000
0
0
10,000
110,000
p
170,000
ROCKY SNORE SIKENAT
17.500
97,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
54,000
HIGHWAY 1 BIKEWAY
0
115.000
0
0
0
0
0
115,000 y
N DODGE ST SIDEWALK
0
76,350
0
176,15
LAST SIDE 8109NALKS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
VILLA MBM SIDEWALK
0
6,700
1Sr )f0
0
0
0
0
76,150 1
MERCER PARK SIDEWALK
0
11,000
060700
0
o
p
p
WILLOW CREEK PARK SIDEWALK
0
14,000
0
0
0
0
0
000
CBD - CLINTON ST
0
,A_nnn
0
0
0
0
0
31,000 i
34,
CAPITA Lf1MQIl0IOWA
ENflTPNOONAN
►r � - rru'
PROJECT PRIOR YRS FY01
rr/s rY86 fY/7 riff FUTURE TR{
CRD . LIMN /T TOTAL •
0 331.000 0 0 0
SLACNNAVN MINI.PANK REHAB 0 75.000 0 0 0 711,000
0
RAMOM CARIB CHANNEL INP 0 0 0 75.000
0 0 149.310 376,290 289.170 0
NAPOLEON PAIN RESTROOMS 0 2U1000 p 0 111,400
MILLER PARK 0 0 0 0 20,000
0
-� 0 90.000 p 0
� ASEp PARK 0 p 0 0 90.000
CAROLINE PApN 0 0 0 0 70.000 p 0 50,000 0 0 0 $0,000
i &Coll PARK
CAROLINE
0 70.000 i
0 0 0
FOSTER pp PARK 0 00 0 55,000 55r000 j
BUS FLEET EIPANSION/REPLACENT 0 0 0 80,000 0 90,000
SALT STORAGE BLOC 0 900,000 360,000 372.500 320,000 320.000 195,000 2.767,500
5,000 50,000 0 0
OLD TRANSIT GARAGE ACQUISITION 0 0 0 55,000
0
0 100.000 0
T-NANOAR{ 0 0 0 100,000
0 120,000 0 0 0
NORTH CORRIDOR SEVER 00 0 0 5,500 99,000 p 0 0 120,000
SLYER LK}.TA/T SPEEDWAY p 0 101,500 •
STOp" SEVER-RUNDELL/DCANBORM 0 0 13,000 159,000 0 172.000
20,000 215,000 0
.................... 0 0 _ 0 0 7{1,000
fOfA4 203,000 3,671,010 Ir03S, 700 -2,362,790 3,052,6701,415,000 550.000 12,29,310
easoaou neuuua gnuoaa oanges", .aaauaaaa oaanaeeaa oaaanauu oouaua 1
I
I
)I
I
fI
w
zq
MI CROFILliED BY
-,--JORM"--MIC RI L4B- -- -
LCEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
City of Iowa City
= MEMORANDUM
Date: February 17, 1983
To: Neal Berlin, City Manager
From: Joe Fowler, Parking Supervisor
Re: Vandalism - Capitol Street and Dubuque Street Parking Ramps
The following is a summary of the vandalism that occurred in the Capitol
Street parking ramp the weekend of February 12-13, 1983.
The elevator lobby area of the F level was heavily damaged. The suspended
ceiling was torn down, it had last been replaced Thursday, February 10.
Graffiti was painted on the lobby walls, they had last been painted Friday
the 11th and were repainted Monday the 14th.
The interior walls of both elevator cars were spray painted. The spray
paint was removed Monday the 14th.
i
In the walkway between elevator lobby A and Capitol Street the electrical
conduit was ripped from the ceiling. Previously we had remove the
susconduiteande lightsafter it had we a ttachedetortheed out ceilin twiceapproximately 12in one week dfthe
eet
above the walking area. The conduit has been rehung, t not repaired.
Two lights were knocked off the wall on the walkway between elevator lobby
D and Clinton Street. 'Both lights were damaged to the extent that they,
could not be rehung. The wires were taped off and left hanging. .
A concrete bollard located along Clinton Street was knocked over. This
took two employees and a tractor to reset.
The only noticeable vandalism in the Dubuque Street ramp was the theft of
ceiling panels from the west elevator.
This was not an unusual weekend. These acts of vandalism are commonplace
in the rampsand are occurring at a rate that makes it -impossible to keep
up with them both in manpower and money. As a result of vandalism the
following conditions currently exist in the Capitol Street parking ramp.
1. 40 fire extinguishers are missing. In addition to the extinguishers
many of the cases need replacement as the doors have been damaged or
destroyed.
2. The emergency lights have been stolen from the elevator lobbies on
levels A and F.
3. The trash cans in elevator lobbies D, E and F have been stolen.
Those located in lobbies A, B and C have been damaged.
39S
1 -
i 141CROFIL14ED BY
1 _DORM-MICR6LA9 1
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES C /�
i
2
r,
i
4. Graffiti is spray painted on the concrete on levels 0, E and F.
5. Nine signs have been stolen.
6. Seven exit lights have been broken in the parking area and two in the
Capitol Street corridor.
7. One-half of the ceiling is missing in the F level elevator lobby.
8. The elevator indicator light in the south elevator is broken.
9. The elevator walls have traces of graffiti that could not be removed.
10. The electrical conduit in the Capitol Street corridor needs
replacement.
11. Two lights in the Clinton Street walkway need replacement.
12. Ten out of seventeen trashcans located by the stair towers have been
stolen.
13. Graffiti on the walls in the elevator lobbies on levels E and F.
Since December 1 we have done the following to correct vandalism in the
Capitol Street parking ramp..
1. Replaced two broken windows - $900.
2. Replaced three telephones stolen from the elevators.
3. Replaced light cover in the north elevator.
4. Repainted the level F lobby three times.
5. Replaced the level F lobby ceiling twice.
6. Rehung conduit.
7. Reset bollard.
Although the Dubuque Street ramp has not suffered the degree of vandalism .
that the Capitol Street has, the following conditions currently exist.
1. 24 fire extinguishers are gone. Many of these cases need
replacement.
2. Six out of eight trash cans are gone.
138,15
a
1
MICROFILMED BY
r 1" JORM -MICR6LAB �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES /�
3
3. Three ash trays are broken.
4. Graffiti on the northwest stair tower.
5. Graffiti on the north outside wall of the ramp.
6. Ceiling panels missing from the elevators.
In an attempt to upgrade the appearance of the ramp the following items
are being considered.
1. Application of vandal -resistant surface to all elevator lobbies and
elevator cars.
2. Removal of suspended ceilings and relocation,of lights.
3. Removal of all objects attached to the interior walls.
4. Replacement of lobby trash cans with heavy duty, vandal -resistant
containers.
5. Placement of protective covers over exterior lights.
6. Placement of monitoring cameras throughout the ramp.
bj/sp
cc: Rosemary Vitosh
j MICROFILMED BY
1" -DORM-"'MIC RICA B - -_�-�
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
3 grS
,J
/ I I
'
/ I
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 16, 1983
To: Neal Berlin, City Manager,,,,,,,,///
From: Larry McGonagle, Transit Manage`
Re: Federal Public Transportation Acct of 1982/Administration's
Federal Budget
I recently received some disturbing information from APTA and IDOT
planning. As you are aware, Congress recently enacted legislation
authorizing funds for transit. This legislation was to become the first
authorization dedicated to transit.
Recently the Department of Transportation unveiled the President's FY84
budget proposal for all DOT agencies. In this proposal the President
would slash transit's total funding 23.2%. The most important areas of
reduction are: 1) limitations on the amount of gas tax funds to be made
available in both FY83 and FY84; 2) a substantial overall reduction in
funding for Section 9 block grant; and 3) an additional major limitation
on the amount of Section 9 funds that can be used for operating
assistance, thus reinstituting the administration's proposed phase-out of
ter for more detailed
operating systems. (See attached APTA let
information.)
Point three above is the one which will have the largest impact on Iowa
City Transit. As I previously reported the new transit legislation
authorized anywhere from $226,000 to $282,000 to be used for operating
assistance in the -Iowa City urbanized area. Iowa City Transit would
receive approximately 65% of these funds. Under the President's proposal
the entireIowa City urban area would receive $58,000 for operating
assistance in FY84. This means that Iowa City transit would receive
$37,700 in operating assistance for FY84. At present we have budgeted
$250,800 in federal operating assistance. In addition, the
administration proposes that operating assistance not be funded in FY85.
In the event that this budget or one similar is enacted, I am preparing a
list of options that we can institute to reduce our budget.
I strongly urge thatfour on page three the attached APTA take the action requested in points number
three and
cc: Rosemary Vitosh
John Lundell
bj3/4
I
386
i 141CROF1 L14E0 BY
-JOR MMIC ICA B'-
L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
Wgis
VW report
r
'�.ri/S'j �.1"�lv` `:Q iii+'L�yi':•
APTA MEMBERS
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 1983
SUBJECT: FEDERAL FY 1984 BUDGET PICTURE
= .• -1. Gilsirap
�m:,m:,• :, 1"^sident
was
hieved
With the passagerofethepFederal tPubliccTransportationbthe 1Act sofy
1982 (P.L. 97-424). Despite our successful efforts on this
landmark legislation, the battle of the budget is now beginning
and the gains achieved in the new authorizing bill could be
wiped out if the Administration has its way in formulating the
actual 1984 budget.
Department
Overall Picture. On Monday, January 31, 1983 the
Of Transportation unveiled the President's FY 1984
budget proposal for all
budget summary, produced DOT agencies. The attached chart and effects of the President'by DOT-, illustrates the bottom line
s proposal for mass transit.
As the table shows, the Administration is proposing to
make substantially less money available than is authorized in the
new bill. The most significant reductions are: 1) limitations
on the amount of gas tax funds to be made available in both FY
83 and FY 84; 2) a substantial overall reduction in funding for
the Section 9 block grant; and, 3) an additional major limitation
on the amount of Section 9 funds that can be used for operating
assistance, reinstituting the Administration's proposed phase-out
Of operating assistance. Each of these features is described
more fully below,
Gas Tax Funds After firm commitments from the Ad-
ministration that the gas tax revenues would be net new funds for
the transit program, Table 1 illustrates that new -gas funds
no more than offset proposed reductions in the level of existing
general fund dollars authorized in the new Act passed by Congress
and signed by the President. These reductions come in the form
of proposed "obligation limitations" which will preclude UMTA from
obligating all gas tax funds coming into the Mass Transit Account.
For the rest of FY 83, the Administration proposes an obligation
ceiling of $550 million compared to the authorized $779 million.
C J@f Uc ` ', (OVER)
•�.,Washington,D.C.20036 P':`)ne(202)923.2900
i 141CROFILMED BY i
-JORM "MICRbLAB
CEDAR RAVIDS DES Id01YE5
386
1
-2-
In addition, the Administration further proposed that unobligated
FY 83 Section 9A funds will not be carried over to FY 84. In FY
84 they propose a ceiling of $1,100 million compared to the
authorized $1,275 million. The result is an overall reduction of
$379 million in the amount of available gas tax revenues to be
committ d
ein FY 83 and 84.
Congressman'James Howard, an author of -the gas tax
legislation, said, "People have a right to ask where the extra
money from the gas tax is being spent. It was designed to provide
an additional $1.1 billion a year for mass transit and that should
be reflected in the budget."
Block Grant Funds. $2,750 million in block grant funds
from general revenues were authorized for FY 84 by the new legis-
lation to fund the new Section 9 block grant program. These funds
must be provided through an upcoming appropriations bill by Congress.
The Administration budget proposes, however, that only $1,974 million
be appropriated, a reduction of $776 million from the general funds
authorized in the new bill.
Further Ooeratina Assistance Limitations. Within the
Section 9 block grant program for FY 84, the new bill provided for
approximately $846 million to be available for operating assistance,
subject to various caps in urbanized areas according to their popu-
lation and their FY 82 operating levels. This constituted a IQ
from FY 82 operating levels. Along with the overall r
ductions proposed for the Section 9 program noted above, the 1 r
ministration proposes further drastic limitations on the amounts
Ad -
of the block grant that can be used for operating assistance.
The budget proposal sets an FY 84 limit of $275 million
rather than $873 million, an additional 678 decrease in operating
assistance. This represents a return to the Administration's
original proposal to phase out all operating assistance by October
1, 1984. For FY 85, the Administration intends to propose no fund-
ing for operating assistance. We are all aware of the hard battle
that was fought successfully in the Congress less than two months
ago to preserve the federal funding for operating assistance. The
Administration has chosen to ignore the intent of this legislation.
The attached charts show the estimated effect of the
budget's proposed operating assistance limitations on each urbanized
area.
Jobs. The Congress, in enacting the new transit legis-
lation, was keenly mindful of the employment impacts of the new
funding; so was the President, who told the nation that 320,000
jobs -- 84,000 of them transit jobs -- would result from his gas
tax bill. Now, with this apparent substitution of gas tax funds
for general revenues, a substantial portion of these transit jobs
will not be forthcoming even though the five cent gas tax will be
levied.
IIICROFIL14ED BY
" JORM-MICR4bLA6 1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i
3 F6
1
J
i
I
1
I
71
1 1
-3-
The President's FY 84 budget reneges on the commitments
contained in the Surface Transportation Act of 1982, the gas tax
bill, which was hammered out in good faith in the lame duck session
and which was signed into law by the President on January 6, 1983.
While the President's budget is only a proposal at this time, the
Congress must act on it. The Budget Committee will set budget
levels for the various Committees by mid-March. Hearings before
the House Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee on the FY 84
budget and appropriations have been tentatively set for April.
But can we wait until then? No! We must act now, even as the
budget process is getting underway and opinions are being formulated.
Action Required. We urge you to:
1. Interpret and assess the positive impacts that
the fully funded authorizing bill will have on your own community;
2. Project the negative impact the President's pro-
posed FY 1984 budget reductions will have on your community, if
enacted;
3. Immediately convey in writing to your Representatives
and Senators, as well as to the White House, your organization's
position on the proposed budget cuts. A list of the Senate and
House members serving on the respective Budget and Appropriations
i Committees is attached. These people will decide transit funding
for FY 84 and we must contact them now.
4. Contact your local elected officials, business
leaders, and citizen groups to inform them of the facts and to en-
list their help.
Future Outlook- There is positive sentiment within the
Congress to ung d transit at the levels authorized in the gas tax
bill. The most difficult chore, however, will be to raise the
proposed limitation on operating assistance to that authorized in
the gas tax bill. Our united effort must be aimed at raising
this operating assistance limitation.
In summary, from FY 1982 to FY 1984 the President has
proposed to dramatically cut transit funding and wipe out the
commitment that Congress has made to public transit. By com-
parison, the proposed highway budget will go from an estimated
$8.8 billion dollars in FY 1982 to $13.3 billion in FY 1984--a
whopping 51 percent net increase! The Administration's vehement
opposition to federal operating and maintenance support for
transit apparently does not carry over to highways where the
emphasis on labor-intensive infrastructure repair increased to
almost 308 of the federal highway budget.
(OVER)
3M
I' ; 141cRorILMED BY
) �. --DORM MICROLAB-
% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES
-4-
Transit remains an essential element of this nation's
transportation infrastructure and a vital ingredient of this
nations national economy. The reduction of transit funding hurts
the people who can afford it the least, those who depend upon
public transit - the senior citizens, school children, workers
and millions of unemployed who are using transit to try to find
jobs. Much more, the Administration's budget proposal seriously
hinders the ability of transit to contribute to the nation's
much needed economic recovery-.
It is up to us to carry this message to Congress and
we have no time to spare.
LL ,
i
q2cR.. G strap
r
Enclosures i
Si
f
I
i 141CROFILMED BY -I _
I L - -JORM--MICR4IL:AB'-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
3�G
�I
I
American Public Transit Association
Operating Assistance Limits Comparison, Page 9
February 1, 1983
uroanizea Area
Trade -In
Trade -In
Reaueet
(OOOa)
(OOOa)
_Budget
(0008)
Illinois, continued
Elgin
Joliet
785
826
172
Kankakee
1,173
1,235
178
Round Lake Beach
275
233
344
292
71
Springfield
715
753
60
136
Indiana, Total
3,575
3,878
793
Anderson
3
393
13
Bloomington
31122
390
80
Elkhart -Goshen
194
204
Evansville *
932
981
81
199
Kokomo
277
346
71
Lafayette -West Lafayette
541
569
Muncie
537
565
110
101
Terre Haute
409
430
77
Iowa, Total
2,221
2,382
457
Cedar Rapids
668
703
137
pubuqu *
384
404•
74
Sioux City
434
457
Waterloo
509
536
87
101
Kansas, Total
893
986•
185
Lawrence
230
288
59
Topeka
663
698
125
Kentucky, Total.
1,417
1,491
285
Lexington -Fayette
1,049
1,104
212
Owensboro
368
387
74
Louisiana, Total
2,145
2,301
475
Alexandria
402
423
85
Houma
218
273
56
Lafayette
528
556
121
Lake Charles
512
539
Il0
Monroe
bras
ron
Inv
i
_ MICROFILMED BY
—JORM -MIC R6LA13-
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M01.
S m
T
W
.TH
F
S
'
/
3PM-Police Captain
Ass antOrien-
tation (Conf Rm)
7:30PM-Council
(Chambers)
2 LOAM -Staff Mtg.
(Conf Room)
12noon-CCN (Public
Library)
3:30PM-Housing Com
(Public Library
4:45PM-Board of
Adjustment (Chamb
6 M -Fir Liegt.
anteFviews (Conf
Room)
3
8AM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
3PM-Senior Center
Comm (Senior Ctr)
'�
_
'
BAIFIAagistrate
Court (Chambers)
4:30PM-Informal
Council (Conf Rm)
70CIPM-Informal
P&Z (Conf Room)
7:30PM-Riverfront
Comm (Law Library
8:30AM-Housing
Appeals Board
(Conf Room)
7.30PM-Special
Council Meeting
(Chambers)
LOAM -Staff Meeting
(Conf Room)
4:30PM-Board of
Adjustment (Chamb
7PM-Parks & Rec
(Rec Center)
7:30PM-Airport Co
(Conf Room)
BAM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
4PM-Broadband Tele.
Comm Annual Forum
(Chambers)
7:30PM-Formal P&Z
3
lit
BAM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
8:30AM-Police Serg
TestsYY((Conf Room)
4Counciln(ConflBm)
7:30PM-Informal
P&Z (Conf Room)
13
4PM-Broadband
Telecommunications
Comm (Conf Room)
7:30PM-Council
(Chambers)
LOAM -Staff Meeting
(Conf Room)
2PM-0 hing Bids
for Transit Facility
(Chambers)
AM -Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
•30PM-Formal P&Z
(Chambers)
Tom
OU
8AM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
4:30PM-Informal
Council (Conf Rm)
X;L
7:30PM-Special
Council Meeting
(Chambers)
10AM-Staff Meeting
(Conf Room)
SAM -Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
4PM-Library Board
(Library Conf Rm)
,17
�P
BAM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
,t9
3o
LOAM -Staff Meeting
(Conf Room)
I
BAM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
7.30PM-Council
4CouncilnMnflRm)
(Chambers)
7:30PM-Human Right
Comm (Conf Room)
I
i I.ICROPI...ED RY
i'. _.DORM-MICRbLAO-
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
i
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 25, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Material in Friday's Packet
Memorandum from Mayor Neuhauser regarding Central Junior High Property.
Copy of letter from Mayor Neuhauser to the President of Iowa City
Community School District regarding the Central Junior High property.
Memoranda from the City Manager:
a. Tour of Shamrock/Friendship/Arbor Drainage Area
b. Study of Parking Needs
c. City Manager Evaluation
d. Bids for Pipeyard Property
Memoranda from the Department of Public Works:
a. Railroad Safety
b. Highway Nl Bikeway/Sidewalk - Dubuque Road to Highlander
c. Linn Street Improvements - Burlington to Washington Street
Memorandum regarding Iowa City FY 84 Budget for Human Service Agencies
Memorandum from the Resources Conservation Commission regarding response
to C.A.r;.G. Community Energy Study Proposal.
Copy of ICMA Newsletter which includes article regarding Iowa City's art
program.
Evaluation of North Side Street Lighting Project.
1
1 141CROFILMED By
L ` JORM MIC MDHEO`
CEDAR RANI DS DESS MOI4E5
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 23, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: Mary Neuhauser
RE: Central Junior High Property
The School Board has requested that I meet with their executive committee
on Tuesday, March 1, at 6:30 P.M. to discuss the disposition of the Central
Junior High property. The session will be open to the public. I believe
that negotiation, like making love, works better behind closed doors.
Publicity leads to posturing and embarrassment, but privacy allows mutual
satisfaction. Nonetheless, I'll see what can be accomplished.
I have sent the Board formal rejection of their proposal and sent the
alternatives approved by the City Council. Also, I am sending them the
enclosed list of questions. If you have any additional questions you
want submitted prior to the meeting, please give me a call this weekend
so that I can relay them no later than Monday morning.
�T
I
Questions concerning sale of Central property before the meeting, March 1, 1983.
1.
Has
the School Board irrevocably decided that it wants to market
the
property
as one parcel?
2.
Has
the School Board irrevocably decided that the present school
building
and
gym must be demolished?
3.
On what basis was the property appraised?
a.
One piece of ground? Or several?
b.
What zoning?
c.
What use?
d.
Value of the existing buildings?
e.
Was consideration given to existence of sewer lines?
f.
May we have a copy of the appraisal?
4.
Has
the School Board budgeted the proceeds of the sale of land?
If so,
for
what projects or programs?
5.
Has
the School Board irrevocably made a decision that it will not
move
its
offices to Central and allow the County to purchase the Sabin
building
for
County offices?
6.
Has
the School Board been approached by interested developers other than
Mercy Hospital to purchase the Central property?
If so, who?
If so, for what purpose?
If so, how much money are they offering?
I
141CROFILMED BY
11" - JORM"--MICR6 B._
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES II�
388'
CITY OF IOWA
CITY
CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST, IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000
_ V
February 24, 1983 Y'=' l
Mrs. Lynne Cannon, President
Board of Directors
Iowa City Community School District
509 S. Dubuque Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Lynne:
This letter is in response to the proposed agreement of January 28,
1983, which the Board of Directors of the Iowa City Community School
District presented to the City of Iowa City. As the City Manager and
City Attorney previously discussed with Mr. Cronin and Mr. Cruise,
the proposal is unacceptable to the City.
As a counter offer, the City proposes the following terms for an
acceptable agreement [not in the order of priority]:
1. The City and the school district will jointly prepare
specifications for the bidding documents for the south half of
the property.
2. The preferred use of the south half of the property will be
congregate housing for not less than 100 units.
3. No -build easement restrictions will be included as required for
existing sewer lines (sketch attached).
4. The City and the school district will negotiate the value of the
south half of the property. This value will take into account
the City's interest in the property and applicable State law
provisions governing the disposal of property by the School
District.
5. If the negotiated land value settlement is too high to make
congregate housing economically viable, the City reserves the
right to write down the value of the land prior to bidding.
6. The negotiated and/or written -down price will become the
minimum bid for the south half of the property only for the
purpose of congregate housing.
7. L' one or more proposals for congregate housing are received at
the minimum price established, the City will determine within
MEW
I
141CROFILMED BY
r 1 -DORM -MICR;L"A 8`
LI CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1D IVES
y �
L � I
Mrs. Lynne Cannon
February 24, 1983
Page 2
I
30 days if this bid is acceptable to the City for congregate
housing.
8. If the bid for congregate housing is accepted by the City the
school district will transfer all interest to the south half of
the property to the City upon payment of the negotiated value of
the property.
9. The City will relinquish all rights to the south half of the
property if no congregate housing proposals are received or
upon rejection of any proposals for congregate housing.
10. Bids for uses other than congregate housing for the south half
.of the property may be received simultaneously and considered III!
by the school board for acceptance after the Council makes a
determination concerning congregate housing.
I
I am looking forward to meetingwith
his
matter can be resolved expeditiously in the best inteestpoftthe
School District and the City.
Sincerely yours,
Mary C. Neuhauser
Mayor
cc: City Council
Neal Berlin
Robert Jansen
David Cronin
John Cruise j
bj/sp
RM
_I
i 141CROFIL14ED BY
DORM -MIC R4ILA ff-
L!% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
I
I
lu
.. ... - AIH i51
31 - I
I
i
I
—_. _.. M
~ I 1
In
I I
r
O t,1H 2'
H.18
CENTRAL JUNIOR UI I
HIGH X; I
O
(D:
QII
I�
.I
I
I it
•-31.
B11
F
In
Z
In
0I
Z:
T I
Z
w I
cr !I I
CO I l
II
i.
Q ;I i
'I
I I I
—80" 1 r* t -8c
ROW —�.. -------...._.-- I I RO
} I;
1
loo'o/ s .r .'J
II
I
I I
3S9
` � t
j
MICROFILM ED BY
�•-
,` f 'DORM ID DES''M B`
CEDAR RAPIDS •DES N014ES
I I
•-31.
B11
F
In
Z
In
0I
Z:
T I
Z
w I
cr !I I
CO I l
II
i.
Q ;I i
'I
I I I
—80" 1 r* t -8c
ROW —�.. -------...._.-- I I RO
} I;
1
loo'o/ s .r .'J
II
I
I I
3S9
` � t
j
MICROFILM ED BY
�•-
,` f 'DORM ID DES''M B`
CEDAR RAPIDS •DES N014ES
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 25, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Tour of Shamrock/Friendship/Arbor Drainage Area
A bus will leave the Civic Center promptly a`
February 28, to tour the above-mentioned are
present, please notify Lorraine.
i MICROFILMED BY
r JORM-MICRfDCAE
CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOIRE
t_
City of Iowa CK.'
MEMORANDUM=
Date: February 25, 1983
To: City Council
s//�� .
From: City Manager
Re: Study of Parking Needs
When a final commitment is made to proceed with the construction of
the hotel, the City should be prepared to construct two additional
floors on the Dubuque Street parking facility. Currently
approximately 200 spaces are available in the Dubuque Street parking
facility for use by the hotel. City Code requirements dictate that
300 spaces be provided.
Serious consideration also should be given to the possibility of
improved access/exit from both parking facilities. While there is
land adjacent to the Dubuque Street facility available for improved
exiting, it is unlikely that a similar solution could be developed
for the Capitol Street parking facility.
During peak demand periods, such as the Christmas holidays, the City
does not currently have sufficient parking space. However, in
planning for future parking needs the City should not predicate
parking needs only on peak demands. Currently during the remainder
of the year parking demand varies between 40 and 60 percent of the
available spaces in the parking ramp.
In addition to a short term parking problem, long.term parking will
become a problem. The City's existing parking policy provides that
all day parking shall occur on the perimeter of the central business
district. However, as the strength of the central business district
continues to increase, the perimeter will have less ability to
provide sufficient all day parking. In addition, increasingly the
needs of the University and Mercy Hospital for parking will impact
adversely upon the City's ability to provide adequate parking in the
central business district and the adjacent area.
It is recommended that the major city departments, in cooperation
with a consultant, undertake a comprehensive parking study which
will consider four major issues: 1) projecting parking needs for the
short term (during the next 5 years) and long term (the next 5 to 15
years); 2) revenue projections for the parking system during these
periods; 3) identification of sites and costs of acquisition; and 4)
construction alternatives. The first three issues will be jointly
considered by the Departments of Finance, Planning and Program
Development and Public Works. The construction alternatives will be
prepared primarily by a consultant. The consultant also will assist
the Departments in the other three areas but the City will serve as
overall coordinator on the study. In addition, the consultant may be
utilized to provide on-going advice on maintenance requirements for
1
i MIC"""", BY
I_ "-JORM MICR46LA13
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
391
J
._f
—JORM- -MICR#L:AB'-
M"
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIRES
391
a
Y
fw
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 25, 1983
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager./�
RE: City Manager Evaluation
The City Manager's evaluation is scheduled for February 28. Enclosed
are two evaluation forms which may be of assistance to you.
The previous evaluation of the City Manager was held in May 1982. The
suggestions offered at that time were:
1. Ensure that information flow is timely.
2. Establish continuity in budget process.
3. Establish process for following up Council goals, including
providing chart in conference room.
4. Perhaps there should be additional staff in the City Manager's
office.
5. Provide appropriate input from department and division heads at
informal Council meetings, but do not have a large number of staff
members in meetings when not required.
6. Provide City Council with information on major administrative
issues or actions.
7. City Manager should consult with Mayor on issues Manager is
particularly concerned about when Council direction is uncertain
and also issues that Council is interested in but which staff does
not strongly support.
As provided by Chapter 28A of the Code of Iowa, relating to the evaluation
of professional competence, I am requesting a closed session.
If you desire additional information, please give me a call.
I
1
MICROFIL14ED BY
11" --JORM--MIC 76LAEl
CEDAR RAPIDS DES IdOL'IES
I
39a.
i `I
J I
CITY MANAGER EVALUATION
Purpose: To provide professional and efficient
administration of municipal resources and depart-
ment operations within policy established by the
City Council.
ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Does the manager plan and organize work that carries out the policies of the
Council?
Most Often_ Often Sometimes %'nupp
Does the manager effectively communicate the Council's position to staff and
to the public?
Most Often— Often Sometimes_ lever
ADMINISTRATION
Does the manager develop staff, encourage their initiative, and motivate maximum
performance?
Most Often— Often _ Sometimes_ Never_
Do the manager's efforts lead to the successful and timely accomplishment of
goals?
Most Often_ Often Sometimes_ Never_
BUDGET
Does the manager utilize prudent practices in the preparation and administration
of the City's operating and capital improvement budgets consistent with guidelines
adopted by the City Council?
Most Often— Often_ Sometimes_ Never_
Does the manager suggest creative solutions to City financial needs?
Most Often-- Often Sometimes Never
PROGRAM DWELOPMEW AM) FOLLOW TI-RCUG11
Does the manager plan, organize and supervise implementation of ongoing City
programs and services?
Most OftenOften— Sometimes' Never_
Does the manager maintain knowledge of current and innovative trends in the area
of local government services and incorporate that knowledge in program suggestions
and research?
Nbst Often— Often_ Sometimes Never
I
v 141CROFILMEO RY �
IJ 1
OR M���MIC Rb L'AB_ J•
CEDAR RAPIDS DES I401'4ES '
f
0
39a
J�
I
I
LONG RANGE PLANNING
Does the manager keep the Council advised of new legislation and developments in
public policy as well as actions in other jurisdictions that may have an impact
on the City's activities?
Most Often— Often— Sometimes— Never
Does the manager organize program planning in anticipation of future needs and
problems and establish common goals to be adopted by the Council?
Most OftenOften Sometimes Never
RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE PUBLIC
Does the manager maintain an image of the City to the community that represents
service, integrity, sensitivity to public needs and professionalism through
his own conduct and that of the City employees?
Most Often— Often— Sometimes— Never
Does the manager enjoy the respect of members of the community, as well as the
other members of the Public Administration profession?
Yes No
I I
RELATIONS WITH MAYOR MM COUNCIL i
Does the manager maintain effective communications with the Council and a good
i
—system of reporting on staff plans and activities?
kbst Often Often Sometimes Never
Is the manager available to the Council, either personally or through designated
subordinates?
Most Often Often Sometimes Never
i —
INTERGOVERk.NTENT.kL/CD\tUNITI' RELATIONS
Does the manager maintain awareness of developments in other public jurisdictions
and community organizations, as well as open communications with them in areas
that may affect or relate to the City?
i Most Often— Often— Sometimes— Never—
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Does the manager show originality in approaching problems and creating effective
solutions?
Most Often Often Sometimes Never
Is the manager energetic, enthusiastic, cooperative and unbiased regarding actions
and decisions concerning the City?
Most Often Often Sometimes Never
I
I
i IAICROF IWED BY '
-'JORM"MICRbCAB��
4 !� I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
I
t-
Id1CROFILMED BY
('---- JOR M --MIC RAL'A El - '
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES
I!
:inue:
i
i
Dntinue
i
CITY OF IO14A CITY
PERSON/U, EVALUATION FOPW
Ibis form is intended as an aid to formulating a carefully considered and fair
appraisal of a supervisory employee's job performance and potential for greater
responsibilities.
The following evaluation for management performance is divided into four general
headings: a) Management, b) Technical Skills and Abilities, c) Personal Performance
•md d) Community and Intergovernmental Relations. The comments under these
headings contain one or two word descriptions of various aspects to be considered
in the evaluation. This is followed by longer discriptions of criteria to aid
in evaluating an employee.
Comments should address.the employee's current performance in his/her present
position. Additional comments may suggest how an employee may improve performance
in his/her present position.
After completing the evaluation, a personal interview should be held with the
individual who has been evaluated.
The scale and definitions below provide a rating of the employees being evaluated.
4 Outstanding - A select number merit this classification. These people's
performance exceeds that required by the job description. They are eager,
creative, fair, prudent, economically efficient, highly motivated - and
able to convey these characteristics to their subordinates. Meets the
expectation of the rates.
Commendable - Often exceeds expectation of job description. He/She is
responsive to change in the administration of ordinances and policy decisions,
handles himself/herself and his/her subordinates well during stable as well
as crisis periods. Is a responsible and dedicated leader of the city operation.
Satisfactory - Meets and sometimes exceeds job descriptions and duties.
He/She can handle almost anything that might develop and can be a very
effective participant in decision-making. Makes good use of tools available
to him/her but occasionaly falls short of goal achievement. Potential.
Needs Improvement - Doesn't always do what needs to be done in his/her area
of responsibility. Lacks consistency in doing his/her job, may find change
hard to accomodate, wastes time and can't always communicate the right
ideas at the right time. Needs occasional supervison or direction.
Unsatisfactory - Consistently fails to do what is required of him/her.
Itis/Iter performance falls short all the time. Needs constant supervision
or correction. Unable to make decisions on his/her own or follow directions.
39a
T
I- MICROFILMED BY
d.
—DORM --MIC R6LAB-
LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES 1
� I
I
GUIDELINES FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
CITY MANAGER AND DEPARTMENT HEADS PERFORMANCE
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Employee: Position:
i
Division/Dept.: Anniversary Date of Employment:
Current Monthly Salary: Period Covered by Evaluation:
'Ibis Evaluation is:
Annual: Promotional: Probationary: Other:
A. MANAGEMENT
1. Mana in Human Resources 01234
i ity toe ective y train and motivate employees to secure I
optimum results and cooperation from others. Does he/she develop and
evaluate employees; handle grievances, affirmative action complaints;
maintain discipline; monitor employees records, receive few complaints?) 1
I
I 1
i
2. Or anization 01234
1 ity to maintain control and manage all city functions effectively;
Organize as well as maintain on-going programs offered by the city.)
3. Settin Ob'ectives 01234
s �e sie a e to achieve goals by using MEO guidelines consistant with
the present City and Council goals and priorities?)
• M1
39�
i
i 141CROFILIIED BY
lI—JORM--1
-MICR�IC"/Y8 -
L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M01 NES '
2-
4. Mans in Information 01234
W1 i o communicate verbally and in writing in a concise understand-
able manner, effective in informal talks and conducting meetings;
commmiciates with community groups and public; keeps staff informed.)
S. Decision making 01234
s he/she able to assume responsibility for those decisions which are
his/hers to perform and any alternatives which may be developed that
affect proper administration of laws and ordinances? Are results measured
against goals and if needed corrective -steps to solve those problems?)
6. Poli Makin 01234
6es e s ne recognize the bounds of policy making, policy coercion,
policy administration and enforcement caused by political interruptions?
Does he/she communicate policy decisions determined by Council to all
other employees?)
7. Dele ation of Authori 01234
r ity to a ect�ve y control events through proper delegation of
authority and responsibility.)
i MICROFILMED BY
-JORM-'MICR6LA1E§*_
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
3911
I
JI
-3- r"�
B. I' leo ant Ronulation 111234
ations nr h ring personnel (federal Regulations, Union Contracts,
Affirmative Action, Civil Rlghts Acts) (mown and followed. Are the
regulations know by the Council and staff?)
9. Accola�lishments/Results 01234
�i3ity to wore at a professional level comparable with past accomplish-
ments/results or professional standards.)
10. Mergovernmental Activity01234
s to s e able to wort with other local county, regional, state or
federal governmental representatives in administering ordinances and
appropriates to the City?)
B. TECHNICAL SKILLS AND ABILITIES
1. Re rtin A enda 01234
s e s e e to provide accurate and complete reports that are readable
and comprehensive? Are recommendations timely, fit into the agenda, provide
possible solutions to problems which may arise?)
MICROFILMED BY
JORM_.-MIC R6LAI3
1 I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES }
�---. - -- - - ---- i
3901
4- r�'
2.Huci et 01234
s is/her budget accountable and realistic? Does it provide for maximum
city service to the public, adequate financing of these services and achieve
economic utilization of monies provided to the proper agencies? Is the
budget balanced?)
3. Keeping Current (Up with the times) 01234
s he/she able to stay abreast of new developments in management of cities?
Are problems which may come up able to be dealt with by using the existing
system and not result in duplication of effort?)
4. Quality Of Work 01234
s the quality of his/her work able to serve as a model for
continued accuracy and thoroughness and study by colleagues?
Are the results up to current professional standards?)
S.Quantity (Work load) 01234
s he/she able to adapt his/her work schedule if needed and
maintain a record of consistently high productivity when his/her
schedule is amended?)
I
J MICROFILMED BY _I
-.JORM--MICR6L:AB- I
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
39i.
i
0
J
f
f
-s-
C. PERSONAL CRITERIA ON PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
1. 0L%Ctivit 01234
re t e evelopment of his/her ideas logical and professional, no biases
or commitments? Information used in his/her recommendation is based on
objective and factual material.)
i
I
J
2. Personal Attributes
01234 J
s e s e energetic, enthusiastic, cooperative, willing to change? Is
he/she personally committed as well to the sound functioning of the City?) i
I
1
i
r
f
i
3. Professionalism 01234
s he/sheable— to execute the duties of his/her position in regards to t
educational background, the professional ethics of a manager/department
• head, and leadership?)
i
D. CCKUNITY RELATIONS
1. Citizen Interests 01234
s e s e a e to handle citizen complaints promptly and in a manner which
is satisfactory to the citizen and the City?)
34a
MICRDEILMED BY
�- -�
JORM- MICR;ICAB-
!` ( CEDAR RAPIDS •DES I40 PIES i /
-6-
i
2. City Interest 01234
es o s c dcfond the City, the Council, employees and their respective
reputations to maintain integrity, trust and ahllity in the functions of
the City government?)
3. Cit As An Exam le For Others 01234
W
of er city governments able to look at the present operations and see
how they can improve their own positions and services? Is the administrator
able to provide imaginative and proper suggestions to professional consultant
or associations [CMA]?)
4. Conmunit Activit 01234
Res manager department head get out and personally see what is going
on to get a first-hand idea of what might be recommended or continued in
departmental operations?)
MICROFILMED DY
-DORM-'-MICR�ICAB- ri
{f CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MDIIIES
I
11-76
39a -
n
r1
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM _
Date: February 25, 1983
To: City Council
From: City Manager/���
Re: Bids for Pipeyard Property •r^-�-�
On Wednesday afternoon, bids were opened for the City Pipeyard property on South
Gilbert Street. All three bids received were for multiunit residential
development with bid prices all above the $164,000 minimum bid price. The bids
are described below:
(A) James and Loretta Clark from AUR Construction bid $189,000 for a 21 -unit
multi -residential building at a proposed development cost of $700,000,
which includes 9 one bedroom units, 6 two bedroom units and 6 three bedroom
units. The appearance of the development is very similar to Ralston Creek
Village Apartments. Special features include a central laundry facility
and security system wiring. Both conventional financing and Industrial
Revenue Bonds are being considered for project financing. The developer
expects to have the apartments completed by August 1, 1983.
(8) Hawkeye Associates bid $165,000 for a 28 -unit multi -family residential
building which includes 26 one bedroom units and 2 efficiency units. The
developer states the project is designed primarily for elderly tenants.
While the developer anticipates that 20% of the units will be eligible for
Section 8 housing assistance, the financial assumptions of the developer
are predicated upon 10% of the units being Section 8 assisted. The total
development cost is estimated at $915,000 with completion expected within 6
months from the closing on the property.
Special features include a central laundry facility, a security system, an
elevator, a community room, all entrances and apartments accessible for the
handicapped, and a small area reserved for garden plots. The investors
will contribute approximately 25% of the project cost and the balance will
be financed with industrial revenue bonds.
The offer by the developer is "contingent upon a 2,000 pound per square
foot allowable soil bearing capacity at the footing elevations...."
(C) John Roffman Construction Company bid $200,000 for the property and
proposes to construct a 32 -unit complex. All units will provide 2
bedrooms. The building is designed for "...the older, mature, professional
resident,... working downtown, or the elderly."
Special features include extensive parking under the building, an interior
courtyard and walkway so that all apartments face the interior open area,
willrbe utildized. Thetanticip ted de el�opment costo ise$1.4nmillion nvntioal nwith
completion expected by September.
3 93
141caonu4Eo BY �
l
`""JORM 'MIC RdLAB
1
L� •` f -
I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1401YE5
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 18, 1983
To: Neal Berlin, City Manager
From: Chuck Schmadeke {,
Re: Railroad Safety 777
The Iowa Department of Transportation, Railroad Division, inspects
railroad trackage within the state and attests to rail safety. In
addition the railroad section crews and bridge crews are required to
report any trackage or bridges that they consider unsafe.
The Iowa Department of Transportation requests that cities report to the
Railroad Division of the IDOT in writing any unsafe condition that may
exist within the city limits.
bj5/12
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 25, 1983
To: City Council and City Manager
From: Frank Farmer, City Engineer
Re: Highway #1 Bikeway/Sidewalk - Dubuque Road to Highlander,
Proposed CIP FY84
The project, as proposed, provides for an 8' wide, 6" thick asphalt
bikeway/sidewalk running adjacent to the west side of Highway #1 from
Dubuque Road north to the Howard Johnson and ACT entrances and then
proceeding north on both sides of Highway #1 to the Westinghouse and
Highlander entrances.
This project was proposed to the Iowa Department of Transportation,
to be constructed at the same time as the State's Highway #1 widening
project. Upon notification that the bikeway/sidewalk would not be
funded by the IDOT through the Highway #1 widening project, this
project was then added to the City's Capital Improvement Projects.
After further conversation with Bob Henley, District Engineer with
the Iowa Department of Transportation, Federal funding would very
doubtfully be considered for this project. In addition, the IDOT
would be very reluctant to allow the bikeway/sidewalk to be placed
adjacent to the highway since the State's normal procedure is to
maintain a 30 foot clearance from the edge of the pavement.
bj3/4
j 141CROFILMED BY
r �" DORM-MICR46CAO.- __
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES t401AE5 1`
� I
13115
Jj
City of Iowa Cit, '
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 24, 1983
To: City Council and Neal Berlin
From: Frank Farmer, City Engineer
Re: Linn Street Improvements - Burlington Street to Washington
Street
Since the proposed Department Store has been delayed, Public Works
recommends that all paving improvements on Linn Street be completed in
FY84. The amenities and sidewalks would be completed in all locations
except along the west side of Linn Street, south of College Street. This
would allow completion of the plaza along the Library and would require
closing Linn Street only once. The sidewalk and amenities along the
proposed Department Store site could be completed with the construction of
the Department Store.
The estimated project costs for the immediate construction is $205,900.
Additional costs would depend on what type of sidewalk and amenities would
be utilized.
bdw4/13
MICROFILMED BY
1' --JORM-MICR6L'AB�_. 1 1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I�
314,
Johnson County Council of Govemments
410 E\X hshingta ISt Iaow Ciry, bbw 52240
Date: February 23, 1983
To: Human Service Agencies Requesting FY84 Funding from Iowa City and
Johnson County
From: Mary Neuhauser, Mayor, City of Iowa City {N1•f•`l(.
n5Don Sehr, Chairman, Johnson County Board of Supervisors
Re: Iowa City FY84 Budget for Human Service Agencies
The Iowa City Council, at its February 7th work session and the Johnson County
Board of Supervisors at its February 9th work session, informally adopted the
following FY84 funding amounts for human service agencies:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
fund was
encneeds as
outin set
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
$ 19,910
United Action for Youth
35,000
Crisis Center - Intervention
7,220
Crisis Center - Emergency
7,843
Willow Creek Center
7,070
Elderly Services Agency
23,500
Mayor's Youth Employment
25,000
Rape Victim Advocacy
8,969
Domestic Violence Project
8,250
HACAP Neighborhood Center
2 000
TOTAL AGENCY FUNDING
144, 62
Contingency Fund*
TOTAL FUNDS
2
J
*Contingency
tion 81-24begun and to83 to provideofor otherycroiticalfr rneeds which might
surface during the year. In addition, the Council deferred its final decision
on funding for the Elderly Services Agency and the Johnson County Chapter of the
American Red Cross. Funds for these agencies might additionally come out of the
Contingency Fund if such is determined later on.
It was determined that MECCA would not be funded this year but that the City
would like to help MECCA work on finding less expensive space for their program.
i MICROFILMED BY
I �- -JORM- MICRdL:Al9` 1
CEDAR RAVIDS DES MOINES
i
391
J
2
The City Council's public hearing on Revenue Sharing is scheduled for March 1st
during the Council's formal meeting which begins at 7:30 p.m. It is not
necessary that City funded agencies attend this hearing. However, if you have
any concerns about funding decisions, the hearing would be an appropriate form
for making them known.
JOHNSON COUNTY
Big Brothers/Big Sisters $ 8,000
United Action for Youth 35,000
Crisic Center - Intervention 22,000
Crisis Center - Emergency 7,843
Mayor's Youth Employment 2,000
Rape Victim Advocacy 8,969
Domestic Violence Project 8,250
MECCA 95,000
Red Cross 3,000
HACAP Neighborhood Center 4,175
Youth Homes 5,000
CAHHSA 107,750
Free Medical Clinic 27,180
Community Mental Health Center 266 489
TOTAL FUNDING 600, 6
The City and the County have some general concerns regarding human service
agency funding which we want to share with agencies. If the Council or Board had
thoughts which they wanted communicated to your individual agency, these are
added at the end of this memo.
The City and the County, together with United Way, want to work with the
agencies this year to explore cost savings by increased cooperation among
agencies. Local government funds are not increasing and with increasing agency
needs and inflation cannot keep pace. Areas which we are generally concerned
about include high administrative overhead, rents, utilities, and major
equipment expenditures. We feel it is important that we begin to focus on
trimming expenses that do not directly serve people so that more resources can
i MICROFIL14ED BY
�. -JORM MICROLAS' -1
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
391
4.�
Ji
r �
i
Id -
3
S
go to direct service. For example, several agencies have mentioned
investigating computerization of their program records. We would discourage any
new use of data processing by agencies until we can look together at the most
efficient way of proceeding. Perhaps several agencies could go together on a
particular system or tie into an existing one and save money.
i
i We will be contacting you and the other agencies in your service area to discuss
opportunities for joint cooperation which might be explored. 1
i In line with this concern we are asking agencies receiving City or County
funding for FY83 and FY84 to inform the JCCOG Human Service Coordinator of
personnel adjustments or new plans for purchase of major office equipment during
the year so that your budget may be revised to accurately reflect these changes.
I
I We feel that all of our agencies are doing a great job or we would not be ±
supporting them with our funds. We also recognize the concerns you face as non-
profit agencies in today's economy and we hope that you will work with us to help
keep the level of service to Iowa City and Johnson County residents high while j
trying to keep costs as low as possible. '
bdw/sp j
I .
i
391
MICROFILI4ED BY 1
'JORM--MICR6LAB'-
"••..,
CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES
- -
.- _\ r" 1
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 17, 1983
To: Iowa City City Council
From: Resources Conservation Commission
Re: Response to C. A. R. G. Community Energy Study Proposal
The Iowa City Resources Conservation Commission recommends that the Iowa
City City Council pursue and reach an agreement with the Community Action
Research Group (C.A.R.G.) to undertake a community energy study.
The value of conservation has been demonstrated in Iowa City. Therefore,
we recommend that the study evaluate energy conservation strategies for
Iowa City including cost -benefit analysis for specific projects; such as
low-interest loans for weatherization, subsidies for purchasing energy
efficient appliances, and converting mercury vapor streetlamps to sodium
vapor lamps.
The Resources Conservation Commission would like the opportunity to
participate further in the development of this study.
bdw3/6
cc: Neal Berlin, City Manager
Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager
J �
MICROFILMED BY 1
17" - —JORM"—MICR CA13 1 1
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES Id014E5
COMMUNITY ENERGY USE REPORT
A Report to the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa
Prepared and Submitted by the Iowa City
Resources Conservation Commission
June 25, 1982
In 1971 the U.S. imported 3 billion dollars worth of energy. Ten years
later the figure came to 90 billion dollars or an increase of 3000%. This
represents approximately 20% of the total energy used in this country. To
appreciate the implications of that 90 billion dollar bill for imported
energy we have only to note that the entire worth of our national agricul-
tural exports for the same year was only 40 billion dollars. By 1985,
according to many experts, our annual bill for imported energy could go as
high as 500 billion dollars.
The situation for the State of Iowa is even more alarming because we
import not 20%, but 98% of our energy -- 5 billion dollars worth in 1980
alone. According to the Iowa Energy Policy Council (IEPC), the average
Iowa family spent $2,646 for energy in 1980, or 18% of its disposable
income. There is every reason to believe that these amounts will
increase. If present trends continue, Iowa's energy bill could
conceivably be as high as 25 billion dollars by 1985. The effects of this
kind of increase in energy costs on the average Iowa family and the
economy of our state are difficult to imagine.
There are direct relationships between energy expenses and both the local
economy and the availability of jobs. According to the former director of
the IEPC, Ed Stanek, 15% of the money spent on imported energy stays in
the state in the form of wages, taxes, etc., while 85% of the dollars
spent on energy in Iowa leaves the state. On the other hand, of the
dollars spent on conservation and other non -energy expenditures such as
retail goods or services, 60% stays in the state and is therefore more
productive to the local economy.
This productivity is measured by economic multipliers which reflect the
additional economic activity generated by an initial expense. The
Minnesota Energy Agency's "1980 Energy Policy and Conservation Biennial
Report" lists some economic multipliers for various energy sources.
Local
Money Economic
Money Economic Leaving Multiplier
Spent Multiplier State Effect
Petroleum
Product 1.00 1.35 .80 .55
398
i 141CROFILMED BY
-DORM 'MIC ROLA 13 1
CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES /
I �
i
F
Nat. Gas 1.00 1.40 .81 .59
Electricity 1.00 2.02 75 1.27
Conservation 1.00 2.55 .34 2.21
We see, for example, that a dollar spent on natural gas generates $1.". of
economic activity, of which $.81 leaves the state. A dollar spent on
conservation generates $2.55, with only $.34, of the $2.55, leaving the
state. Thus, there is a net gain in local economic activity of $1.62 when
a dollar is spent on conservation rather than natural gas.
The relationship between how money is spent and the availability of jobs
is equally strong. At the national level, major energy -producing and
energy -using industries consume 33% of the nation's energy while directly
providing only about 10% of the nation's jobs. Mr. Skip Laitner, of
Community Action Research Group, using figures from a 1976 Nebraska study
and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, estimates that approximately 10 jobs
are associated with every 1 million dollars of economic output for gas and
electric utilities. However, a million dollars of output from
construction results in 'approximately 41 jobs; the same million from
I intercity bus and local transit means approximately 66 jobs; and from
educational services approximately 126 jobs. Thus, if the local natural
gas bill increases by 1 million dollars, 10 jobs might be created, but
i probably not in Iowa City. If that same 1 million were taken from, say,
construction, approximately 40 jobs would be lost, quite likely in the
Iowa City metropolitan area.
j To see how these figures might apply to Iowa City, we can use as an example
the electricity and natural gas bill for 1981 which was $36,033,286. The
following calculations show that there could be a net gain in local
i economic activity, for one year, of $3,711,427 by conserving only 10% and
II spending that money on conservation.
$36,033,286 spent on electricity & natural gas
j x 1.18 local economic effect*
42,519,277 total econonic activity in I.C. community
*1.18 is a weighted average of the multipliers for natural
gas and electricity.
versus
$32,429,957 spent on elec. & nat, gas after 10% conservation
x 1.18 local economic effect
$38,267,350
plus
$3,603,328 spent on conservation
X_ 2.21 local economic effect
i MICROFIL14ED BY
1. JORM"MIC RdL'AB - l
CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401'IES
398
J
1
/
I
/ I
$7,963,354
$46,230,704 total economic activity in Iowa City community
Summary:
total local economic activity without conservation $42,519,277
total local economic activity with conservation $46,230,704
net gain in local economic activity $3,711,427
If this "saved" money found its way into construction, it could represent
a net gain of over 100 jobs. These savings result from only a 10%
reduction in natural gas and electricity consumption and do not include
gasoline or diesel fuel. If we apply these same calculations to the total
energy bill for Iowa City in 1981, $80,201,000, and assume a higher rate
of conservation, we see the potential for significantly increased savings
as well as increased local economic activity.
On the other hand, the effect of not conserving energy is double-edged.
First, as seen in the above discussion, money spent on energy is less
economically productive, locally, than money spent on conservation,
retail goods, etc. Second, as energy bills increase, a smaller percentage
of people's income will be available to be spent in the local economy. At
some point in the future as high energy bills preclude any other spending,
money will not even be available for conservation measures.
The only way to avoid these difficulties is a strong conservation program,
with immediate and long lasting benefits. Initially, money spent on
conservation stimulates the local construction, retail, and wholesale
sectors. After the payback period for these measures, money continues to
enter the local economy in ways that may be even more beneficial to it.
Also, money saved through better energy management is immediately
available to spend. The local economy is made more secure and the
economic future and the jobs of the people of Iowa City are made more
secure. The economic health of Iowa City, the businesses, and the people
of Iowa City cannot be separated. For attracting new business and
stabilizing existing businesses it is more important to have a healthy
local economy than to provide tax incentives. It does no good to be a
regional shopping center if no one has any money to spend.
The Role of the RCC
From its beginning in 1977 the concerns of the RCC, reflecting the need
for conservation in almost every area of community activity, have been
extraordinarily broad and, as a consequence, extraordinarily difficult
to focus. Thera are many concerns or projects which the Resources
Conservation Commission could deal with or undertake within the
boundaries of its purpose. These range from the intangible - conservation
of the City's bonding capacity (a limited resource) to the physical -
recycling leaf mulch, automotive oil, and recycleable trash. The RCC
could affect community attitudes towards energy use and conservation
through the development and implementation of education programs. It
could aid industry and businesses by encouraging employees to commute by
UMM
i MICROFIL14ED BY
'JORM MICR6LAO'
J
` L % CEDAR RATIOS • DES 1401OE5
i
i r
4
bus or car pool. The RCC could involve itself in City planning by helping
to write a City Energy Code or by reviewing subdivision applications with
an eye toward discouraging leapfrog development and toward encouraging
the use of solar energy for residential space heating. Finally, the RCC
could focus on energy conservation and alternative energy sources by
providing or encouraging low cost/no cost weatherization programs or
encouraging the acquisition of a city -owned hydroelectric power plant.
Because of this wide range of possible involvement and activity, it is
essential that the RCC be given a clearer mandate or stronger expression
of support from the City Council if it is to function effectively and l
efficiently. Perhaps by more clearly defining the purposes_ of the RCC,
the City Council could help present Commission members decide if they wish
to continue to serve and encourage potential members to apply.
i
In the past the RCC has been frustrated by its attempts to deal with all
j areas of resources conservation on a piecemeal basis. It has also been
frustrated by the lack of communication with the City Council on proposals
which have been submitted to the City Council and have received no
response (e.g. tying busfare rates to parking ramp fees).
I The RCC's long-range goal as we see it is to alter how money is spent on
ienergy in Iowa City. That is, we encourage spending money on conservation
measures and renewable energy sources which benefit the local economy and
discourage energy consumption that drains the local economy.
i As transitional or short-range goals, the Commission proposes to: (1)
conduct an energy fair for the general public, (2) sponsor regularly
scheduled resources conservation related cable TV programming, (3)
conduct a town energy and franchise renewal meeting, and (4) formulate
recommendations an the Iowa -Illinois Gas & Electric franchise renewal.
These projects will promote energy awareness and provide feedback from the '
public which will aid the Commission in planning future projects. This is
all part of the long-term strategy to become more self sufficient with
respect to energy.
Conclusion
The Commission has presented this report in order to develop a framework
within which future activities and projects will find a clear
justification and purpose. With the reduction of the position of the
Energy Program Coordinator to 1/2 time we foresee a change in focus of the
Commission away from City conservation toward community conservation. As
established above, energy conservation by the community will benefit the
city government and Iowa City as a whole.
We, as a Commission, believe that this is the area where we can have the
greatest impact. Our proposed projects will require both greater
participation from the RCC (which we are committed to provide), and a
greater dedication from the City Council to energy conservation. To show
this dedication we request the following:
(1) a 4 time staff person from the Planning and Program Development
Department when the Energy Program Coordinator position is cutback,
-399
i 141CROFIL14ED BY j
--JORM MICR6LA9
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MO!AES I
'
. A
�
^ S �
�
�
� .
(2) funding for the projects for items such as advertising' printing, �
rental fees for films` and materials fora fair booth, (estimated at
$1000), and �
[3) the City Council's willingness to aid us in promoting the energy �
fair, the cable TV programs, and the town meeting ~ means of �
resolutions, official appearances and speeches, etc. � `
! We appreciate your consideration uf this proposal and luuk forward to your
response.
.
`
�
!
!
'.
!
/ | �
�
| �
`
L.
MICROFILMED BY
~~'^—~^`-R'r—A— /
� /
NUTS & BOLTS CONTINUED
a "hard sell," it simply attempted to inform voters of the cost of city projects
and the need which justified each improvement. Of great value to the promotional
campaign was a 30 -minute program produced by the local cable television company.
This program included a general discussion by the mayor, details of the financing
by the city manager, a tour of the old fire station, and a visit to other sites
needing improvements. The program was well publicized and shown several times
on the local programming channel of the cable system. For more information,
contact Wayne Bowers, City Manager, City of Jacksonville Beach, II North Third
Street, Jacksonville Beach, Fla., 32250, 904/249-2381. -
TUNE IN The town of Glenarden, Md. (pop. 5,000, Ronald Downing, TM), utilized its cable
NEXT WEEK television capability to encourage citizen participation at a recent public
hearing on rezoning/annexation of a 50 -acre site near the town. Town officials
decided to televise this particular meeting because of a controversy surrounding
the rezoning and annexation of this land. TM Downing secured the volunteer
services of two students from Howard University School of Communication to operate
cameras, and a local company provided technical assistance. Three high school
students volunteered to man telephones to receive questions and comments
from citizens. This experiment was well received and the town is preparing
to broadcast future council meetings on a regular basis. For additional infor-
mation, contact Jerry Carter, Glenarden Municipal Center, 8600 Glenarden Parkway,
Glenarden, Md., 20706, 301/773-2100.
g of s lgovernments (COGS }
COG IN THE Councils ) play an important role in today's urban life.
Here are a potpourri of things the Centralina COG (Charlotte, N.C., George
MACHINERY
Monaghan, exec. dir.) is doing to help local governments save money. The COG
operates a regional investment pool. Twelve towns have invested $965,000, which
piggyback on the COG cash flow management system, to buy federal overnite
purchase agreements. They also have a regional joint purchasing program. -
One local government serves as lead agency and the others buy off its contract.
Also, the COG is helping two counties move to a single "Intake" and case
management system for their human service clients. This will save money by
increasing coordination between county departments, For more information, j
contact George Monaghan, Executive Director, Centralina Council of Governments,
P.O. Box 35008, One Charlottetown Center, Charlotte, N.C., 28235, 704/372-2416.
THE WHOLE Iowa City. Iowa (pop. 50,508, Neal Berlin, CM), has a new piece of public art,
one of a number of outdoor pieces placed throughout the city. An employee of
CITY IS A the city's traffic engineering division also is an accomplished sculptor and
GALLERY his latest work is a massive geometric abstract in bright primary colors that
changes its form as one moves around it. Fabricated from sign blanks, shafts
from an overhauled boom truck, a useless concrete form, and a variety of
other discards, the city donated equipment and picked up the coats ur the
concrete and digging the hole. For more information on this and the city's
public arts program, contact Neal Berlin, City Manager, Civic Center, 410 East
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, 52240, 319/356-5000.
An article on a multipronged comprehensive energy conservation program in
PLEASE
Landover Hills, Md., was featured in the January 24 Nuts L Bolts section of
NOTE; -the-Newsletter. David Felzenberg is the town administrator of Landover Hills
and Mark Giffin is project director of the Energy Conservation Program.
Send your Nuts L Bolts Ideas to Jay Muzychenko (202/626-4628).
International City Management Association, 1120 G Street. N.W., Washinglon, D.C. 20005
8
399
i MICROFILMED BY I
` -JORM _MIC REAL A B' ) 1
ICEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIRES ( /�
1
t
r
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Community Survey
1. Perceptions of the overall frequency and rate of change in crime
did not differ by area of residence.
2. Feelings of personal safety did not differ by area of residence
with one exception; residents of the South Area were less likely
than others to say they would seek help from their neighbors if
they were attacked on the street.
3. Although most respondents felt that people in their neighborhoods
are safe in their houses at night, about one half of the total
sample is afraid to walk alone on the street at night and one
fifth believes that a woman is safe alone on the street after
dark.
i
4. The residents of the South Area were much more likely than the
residents of the North and Central Areas to feel that their
street lighting should be improved and that improved street j
ilighting would reduce crime, enhance safety, and increase police I
effectiveness.
i
5. There were no statistically significant differences in
self-reports of being victims of various crimes and incidents
across the study areas during the year prior to the survey.
6. There were no major differences across the study areas in terms
of knowledge of victims of various crimes and incidents occurring
in the respondent's neighborhood during the year prior to the
survey. One difference was statistically significant: residents
of the North Area were more likely than others to report knowing
victims of window peeking.
7. The proportion of respondents saying that certain crimes or
incidents were a frequent problem in their neighborhoods differed
significantly by area for three types of incidents. Those living
in the South Area were less likely than others to see auto
accidents, window peeking, and "other" sex offenses as frequent
problems. Residents of the Central Area were most likely to see
these as frequent problems.
8. The frequency of going out at night did not differ by area of
residence. However, the residents of the South Area were less
likely to walk when they go out than the residents of the other
two areas.
I
I rf OD
i
'r
i 141CROFILMED BY
—DORM"MICRO* CAB - -�
Lf� I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i /
I
ICPD Complaint Data
1. The study areas exhibit substantial differences in the
proportions of complaints associated with burglaries, thefts, and
property damage. Complaints for incidents occurring in the
Central Area were much more likely to involve property damage
than complaints for incidents occurring in the other two areas.
Burglaries and thefts were relatively less frequent in the
Central Area than in the North and Central Areas.
2. Nighttime offenses were more frequent in the Central Area than
the other two areas although a majority of all incidents included
in the analysis occurred during the nighttime regardless of area -
or type of incident. The differences by area related to time of
occurrence hold true only for property damage complaints; the
time of occurrence for thefts and burglaries did not differ by
area. In the Central Area, property damage incidents were most — ---
frequent between 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
3. Complaints involving burglaries were about equally distributed �
across the three areas; those involving thefts and property !
damage tended to be more highly concentrated in the Central Area.
I
I
EVALUATION OF NORTH SIDE STREET LIGHTING PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
In May 1981, the City Council of Iowa City approved a proposal
submitted by a citizen's group known as CLASS (Citizens for Lighting and
Safe Streets) which requested the installation of additional street
lights in the area known as the North Side. The proposal set forth a
research design for evaluating the impact of additional street lighting
on the occurrence of crime in the area and the attitudes of its
residents. In April 1982, the installation of 109 street lights on the
North Side was completed.
The evaluation of the street lighting is being undertaken in two
phases. Phase I includes the collection and analysis of data for a
period prior to the installation of the street lights. This analysis
will describe differences among the study areas and therefore establish
"baseline" data against which data from the post -installation period may
be evaluated. Phase II will be a follow-up analysis approximately one
year after installation. This report presents the results of the
research activities undertaken during Phase I.
Three types of data will be examined for the evaluation:
1. a questionnaire survey of residents of the designated study areas
(described below),
2. complaints received by the Iowa City Police Department for
incidents occurring within the study areas, and
3. incidents reported to the Rape Victim Advocacy Program (RVAP).
At the inception of the evaluation project, three areas of Iowa
City were designated for inclusion in the study. The North Area is an
analogue to an "experimental" area since it is the only area to receive
additional street lighting during the project. It is bounded on the
north by Brown Street, on the south by Market Street, on the west by
Clinton Street from Market to Church and Dubuque Street from Church to
Brown, and on the east by Governor Street. The Central Area is bounded
by Market Street on the north and Burlington Street on the south. The
South Area is bounded by Burlington Street on the north and Benton and
Page Streets on the south. The west and east boundaries of the Central
and South Areas are Clinton Street and Governor Street, respectively.
Figure 1 presents a map of the three areas.
- 1 -
MICROFILMED BY j
L ` DORM 'MIC R�C
}
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES HONES
(J
'I t
J
Ar ; Figure 1. Map of Street Lighting Project Study Area.
10
PY
r —
,k! / �I��.. h' I:. ;iii ;�,�•- ,
j
F.,i ::iy.:LLL— � :M
.: 14
.i ._.If•: -fir--�- c
J L____J
j 17.
777 --
{
sGT.IoN.QNE— - L_J'..L I r i
.�._. 1. _.. 1:..1!• �l( 11 :.'I ,•, .�:: u��-]
IF_JL'Jl-)rte -
�� 1
.�ILJ L r fit: •� : r - 11.E I-,.. -
� - II�
E
ElC
JVI_JjL
L
'Prat
�l.
.
Vit- I
i, i r
E
ElC
Ili U,
EJ
Section One: improved lighting and neighborhood safety project- Market, Clinton
Er—ow—n, — Governor
Section Two: improved lighting only- Burlington, Clinton, Market, Governor
Section Three: control, no lighting or safety projects- Page/Benton, Clinton,
Burlington, ;unfit/Bowery/Governor
i 141CROFIL14ED DY
i- -JORM-MICROLA13-
I+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
SFCD
J�
Vit- I
i, i r
Ili U,
EJ
Section One: improved lighting and neighborhood safety project- Market, Clinton
Er—ow—n, — Governor
Section Two: improved lighting only- Burlington, Clinton, Market, Governor
Section Three: control, no lighting or safety projects- Page/Benton, Clinton,
Burlington, ;unfit/Bowery/Governor
i 141CROFIL14ED DY
i- -JORM-MICROLA13-
I+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
SFCD
J�
' 1
I
r
2
The Central and South Areas may be thought of as "control" areas
since they have not received additional street lighting. However, the
Central Area is kept distinct from the South Area because a large
portion of it constitutes the downtown area of Iowa City with a high
concentration bars and other commercial establishments. The two control
areas are important because they will permit a more rigorous test of the
effects of the street lighting improvements and the data from these
areas may indicate problems in areas of the city other than the North
Side, areas.
14ETHODDLOGY
The Community Survey.
In early June 1982, a questionnaire was mailed to a sample of 50%
of the residents of the three areas. The sample was obtained from the
Iowa City telephone directory by using a random starting number and then
selecting every other name. It had been determined beforehand that a
50% sample would yield a sufficient number of respondents from the three
areas to permit a reliable statistical analysis. A copy of the
questionnaire is found in the appendix to this report.
j
The questionnaire included questions covering the following areas:
I
1. respondent characteristics and behaviors,
1
2. perceptions of crime and the effectiveness of street lighting in
the area of residence, and,
i
3. for selected types of incidents, respondent victimization, I
knowledge of victims, and perceived frequency in the area of
residence.
The questions concerning victimization, knowledge of victims, and
frequency of crime referred to incidents in the respondent's
neighborhood during the year prior to the survey. This time period
corresponds approximately to the year prior to the installation of the
street lights.
2,431 questionnaires were mailed which yielded 649 useable
questionnaires for an apparent response rate of 27%. However, it was
not possible to ascertain the number of undeliverable questionnaires due
to an oversight in handling the bulk mailing process. Undeliverable
questionnaires are not usually counted in calculating the response rate
so it may be assumed that the "true" response rate was well over 30%
which has been typical of similar surveys conducted in other areas of
Iowa.
I
i 141CROFIL14ED BY
L_.
J--JORM_MICF?6
CEDAR RAPIDS DES140
ICPD Complaints.
At the time of this report, complaint data drawn from the records
of the Iowa City Police Department have not been completely processed.
There has been considerable delay in obtaining these data due to a
number of factors including coders who work on a part-time basis, coders
overlooking a number of complaints, and the time required to manually
transcribe the data on code sheets and enter the data into the computer.
However, the Iowa City Police Department has been most helpful and
cooperative at all times.
934 complaints have been coded and entered in to computer; a
preliminary analysis of these complaints is presented later in this
report. Approximately 1,400 additional complaints have been coded and
will be available for analysis soon. The additional complaints will
include those missed during the first round of coding (primarily
complaints involving disorderly conduct and similar incidents) and all - -
complaints through the end of April 1982 when the street lights were
installed. The final complaint data set for Phase I will cover the time
period of January 1, 1981 through April 30, 1982 and will consist of
approximately 2,300 complaints.
For each complaint, a number of characteristics have been coded
including the type of incident, location, date, and time of day. The _
types of complaints included in this study were selected to reflect j
incidents likely to be related to street lighting. Incidents involving i
such things as fraud, shoplifting, and other miscellaneous offenses were
excluded. Documents related to the complaint data and coding procedures
are included in the appendix.
Since the complaints which are not yet ready for analysis primarily
involve public disorder offenses, the preliminary analysis presented in
this report includes only offenses against property which are
essentially complete for 1981. These data consist of 800 offenses
against property including 180 burglaries, 236 thefts, and 384 incidents
involving property damage.
Although the term "offenses" is used synonymously with "complaints"
for convenience, it should be emphasized that the data are based on
complaints received by the police department and may or may not involve
an actual criminal offense. However, it may be assumed that complaints
received by the police are correlated with the occurrence of crimes and,
at a minimum, reflect incidents perceived by citizens as worthy of
police attention.
*00
r MICROFILMED BY
_
""'JORM --MIC R(�L AB
LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
RESULTS
The Community Survey.
L9
The characteristics of the respondents to the community survey are
presented in Table 1. The data show that 44% of the respondents live in
the North Area, 24% in the Central Area, and 32% in the South Area.
These differences probably reflect the actual population proportions
since the response rate did not appear to be different for the three
areas. Females are overrepresented in the sample which
consists of 62% females and 38% males. The sample consists of a
majority (57%) under the age of 35 which reflects the presence of
students in the sample (43%). 29% live in one-person households and 30%
live in two -person households.
To help assure that any differences in responses by area of
residence are due to the characteristics of the area, it is necessary to
rule out other explanations. An analysis of the distribution of
respondent characteristics by area (not shown here) indicated that the
respondent's sex, age, household size, and student status were not
related to area of residence. This means that any relationships
reported in the following tables between area of residence and responses
concerning crime and street lighting are not due to differences in the
distribution of sex, age, household size, or student status across the
study areas.
Table 2 presents the responses to questions concerning crime and
personal safety in the respondent's neighborhood. The differences by
area of residence were statistically significant for only one question.
The data show that the residents of the South Area would be less.likely
than the residents of other areas to seek help from their neighbors if
attacked on the street. Overall, however, the data show no marked
differences in these attitudes by area of residence. This means that
the perceptions of the residents in terms of the crime rate and personal
safety in the three areas do not differ greatly regardless of
"objective" differences in the actual crime rate across the three areas.
The responses for the total sample show that slightly over one
fourth (28%) see their neighborhood as having a higher crime rate than
other areas of Iowa City, one fourth (26%) see the crime rate as
increasing in their neighborhood, one half (47%) are afraid to walk
alone on the streets at night, one fifth (20%) believe a woman is safe
alone after dark on the streets of their neighborhood, about three
fourths (71%) would seek help from neighbors in case of attack, and over
two thirds (69%) believe people in their neighborhood are safe in their
houses at night.
Table 3 presents data concerning the respondents' attitudes toward
street lighting by area of residence. Unlike the attitudes concerning
crime and personal safety, the perceptions of street lighting are
related to area of residence and the differences are statistically
significant for each question. The general pattern shows that residents
of the North and Central Areas were similar in these attitudes while the
1
J 141CROFILIIED BY -
_"JORM MICR6LAB'
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
*00
J
Table 1. Characteristics of the Community Survey Sample.
Number of
Area of Residence Percent Respondents (N)
,North 44% 283
Central 24 158
South 32 208
Total 100% 649
Sex
Female 62% 399
Male 38 246
No Response 1 4
Total 101% 649
Age
Under 30 57% 372
30 - 39 19 124
40 - 49 3 20
50 - 59 3 17
60 - 69 7 44
i 70 or Older 10 68
No Response 1 4
Total 100% 649
Average Age = 35.8
I
Number of Persons in Household
One
29%
186
Two
30
196
Three
15
96
Four
9
60
Five or More
16
105
No Response
1
6
1002.
649
Average Number = 2.5
*00
I
I'
J MICROFILMED BY
' DORM- ...
L
� CEDAR RAPIDS
• DES DES MOINES
IIICROFILRED BY
� I
1--JORM-"MICR(�LAB�-
�" ..
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOItVES
t
Table 2. Attitudes Toward Neighborhood Crime and Safety by Area of Residence.
The crime rate is increasing in my
neighborhood.
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
I am afraid to walk alone on the
streets of my neighborhood after
dark.
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
25%
Area
of Residence
26%
35
32
32
Total
40
North
Central South
Sample
My neighborhood has a higher crime
100%
100%.
99%
rate than other areas of Iowa City.
158
207
646
29%
31% 25%
28%
Agree
47
45 45
46
Disagree
24
24 30
26
No Opinion
Total
100%
100% 100%
100%
281
157 207
645
N
The crime rate is increasing in my
neighborhood.
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
I am afraid to walk alone on the
streets of my neighborhood after
dark.
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
25%
24%
30%
26%
35
32
32
33
40
44
38
40
100%
100%
100%.
99%
281
158
207
646
45%
48%
51%
47%
51
48
45
48
4
4
4
4
100%
100%
100%
99%
281
158
207
646
1
J MICROFILMED BY
�-- JORM "MICR#L"A8'-
CEDAR RATIOS DES MOINES
�1
Table 2. (Continued).
Area
of Residence
Total
North
Central
South
Sample
A woman is safe alone after dark
on the streets of my neighborhood.
Agree
23%
17%
20%
20%
Disagree
62
64
66
64
No Opinion
15
20
14
16
Total
100%
101%
100%
100%
N
281
158
207
646
If I was attacked on the street in
my neighborhood, I would seek help
-., from my neighbors.*
Agree
74%
76%
63%
71%
Disagree
13
11
23
16
No opinion
13
13
14
13
Total
100%
100%
100%
100%
N
281
158
207
646
People in this neighborhood are
safe in their houses at night.
Agree
70%
68%
67%
69%
Disagree
17
19
19
18
No Opinion
13
13
14
13
Total
100%
100%
100%
100%
N
280
158
207
645
* The differences by area of residence nre statistically significant at the
.05 level -
1
MICROFILMED BY
—JORM IDS S MOMES
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES
n
Table 3. Attitudes Toward Street Lighting by Area of Residence.
The street lights on my street light
the sidewalk.*
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
It would be safer on my street after
dark if the street lighting was
improved.*
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
46%
Area
of Residence
38%
50
46
71
Total
5
North
Central South
Sample
The street lighting on my street
100%
100%.
100%
should be improved.*
158
207
645
Agree
52%
45% 73%
57%
Disagree
36
37 16
29
No Opinion
12
18 11
14
Total
100%
100% 100%
100%
N
281
158 207
646
The street lights on my street light
the sidewalk.*
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
It would be safer on my street after
dark if the street lighting was
improved.*
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Total
N
46%
44%
22%
38%
50
46
71
55
5
10
7
7
101%
100%
100%.
100%
280
158
207
645
57%
54%
76%
62%
28
25
10
22
15
21
14
16
100%
100%
100%
100%
281
158
207
646
fl00
I
141CROFILIIED BY
r
� JORM"'MICR6C,4 B'_
L+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
�1 �
Table 3. (Continued).
Area
of Residence
_
Total
Improved street lighting
would
North
Central South
Sample `
reduce the crime rate in
my
neighborhood.*
Agree
Disagree
46%
48% 58%
50%
No Opinion
23
18 10
18 _ _.. ......._
32
35 32
33
Total
101%
101% 1007.
101%
N
281
158 207
646
Improved street lighting
would
increase police effectiveness
- in my neighborhood.*
{
Agree
Disagree
48%
48% 64%
53%
i No Opinion
20
18 11
17
32
34 25
30
Total
100%
100% 100%
100% i
N
i
281
158 207
646
* The differences by area
of residence are
statistically significant
at the
.05 level.
fl00
I
141CROFILIIED BY
r
� JORM"'MICR6C,4 B'_
L+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
�1 �
I.
/I
L
residents of the South Area held more unfavorable attitudes toward the
street lighting in their neighborhood. For instance, nearly three
fourths (73%) of the South Area residents believe the street lighting on
their streets should be improved as contrasted with about one half of
the residents in the other two areas. Responses to other questions
indicate that about one fifth (22%) of the South Area residents believed
that the street lights on their street light the sidewalk, three fourths
(76%) believed that their street would be safer if the street lighting
were improved, three fifths (58%) believed improved street lighting
would reduce the crime rate in their neighborhood, and almost two thirds
(64%) felt that improved street lighting would improve police
effectiveness. In each instance, these proportions were substantially
higher than those among residents of the other two areas.
In short, the residents of the South Area were more likely than the
residents of the other two areas to believe that their street lighting
needs improvement and that improved street lighting would reduce crime
and enhance safety in their neighborhood. In addition, it should be
noted that the residents of the North Area did not differ much from the
residents of the Central Area in terms of their responses to these
questions despite the fact that the survey was conducted about one month
after the installation of the street lights. However, it may be that
their attitudes were less favorable prior to the installation of the
street lights.
Table 4 shows the percent of residents in each area who reported
being victims of various types of crimes and incidents. The results
indicate that the differences in victimization across the areas were not
statistically significant. In addition, the proportion victimized for
the different types of incidents is consistent with the actual
distribution of crimes, that is, the more serious types of incidents
were experienced by relatively few respondents.
Despite the lack of statistically significant differences, there
may be some trends in the data which are consistent with differences in
the characteristics of the areas such as the proportion of family
residences versus apartments. For instance, the proportion reporting
property damage was slightly higher in the North and Central Areas than
in the South Area. Residents of the South Area appeared to be more
likely to report being victims of verbal threats and harassment. Those
in the North Area reported more juvenile pranks than in the other two
areas and residents of the Central Area were slightly more likely than
others to report being victims of window peeking. Residents of the
South Area also reported being victims of burglaries about twice as
often as residents of the North Area. However, these results must be
interpreted with caution since the lack of statistical significance
means that the differences just mentioned could have occurred by chance.
Overall, however, there do not appear to be any major differences
across the three areas in terms of the likelihood of being a victim of
the incidents included in the questionnaire. In the context of the
street lighting project, this suggests that the actual experience of
being a victim may be independent of the perceived need for street
MICROFILMED BY
`- .-DORM MICR6LAB - -
CEDAR RAPIDS DES M01 E5 /�
Table 4. Percent Who Were Victims of Indicents Occurring in Neighborhood
During Previous Twelve Months by Area of Residence.a
Type of Incident
Auto Theft
Other Theft
Burglary
Property Damage
Auto Accidents
Verbal Threats or 11arassmenL
Personal Assault
Robbery
Pranks by Juveniles
Rape or Attempted Rape
Window Peeking
Exhibitionism
Other Sex Offenses
N
a See appendix for wording of questionnaire item. Percents do not add to
100 because the items are not mutually exclusive.
J II�
J MICROFILMED BY 1
—CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
� .1
,/DD
Total
North
Central
South
Sample
1%
22
4%
2%
21
19
22
21
5
8
11
8
27
28
21
25
8
12
9
9
21
24
28
24
1
4
2
2
4
6
5
5
25
20
20
22
1
0
2
1
13
18
10
13
4
5
3
4
1
3
1
1
277
157
202
636
a See appendix for wording of questionnaire item. Percents do not add to
100 because the items are not mutually exclusive.
J II�
J MICROFILMED BY 1
—CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES
� .1
,/DD
11
lighting and its relation to feelings of personal safety. Previous
research on street lighting and citizen attitudes indicates that this
may be the case.
Table 5 shows the proportion of respondents who said that they knew
victims of various crimes and incidents occurring in their neighborhoods
during the previous year. The results are similar to those found for
victimization, that is, there are no major differences by area of
residence with one exception. Residents of the North Area were more
likely than others to say they knew victims of window peeking. This
pattern is interesting because the residents of the Central Area were
slightly more likely than others to report being victims of window
peeking than residents of the North and South Areas.
It should also be noted that the proportions knowing victims of the
various incidents was higher than the proportions reporting
victimization. For instance, 21% of the total sample reported being
victims of theft in contrast to 39% who said they knew victims of theft.
The proportion of respondents saying that the crimes and incidents
are a frequent problem in their neighborhoods is reported in Table 6.
Statistically significant differences by area of residence were found
for three types of incidents: auto accidents, window peeking, and
"other" sex offenses. The pattern of responses is such that residents
of the South Area were less likely than residents of the other two areas
to see auto accidents, window peeking, and 'other" sex offenses as
frequent problems in their neighborhood. Also, about one fourth (24%)
of the Central Area residents see auto accidents as a frequent problem.
It is also noteworthy that one fifth or less of the total sample
see any type of incident as a frequent problem. Among the more
frequently cited problems were property damage (21%), theft (18%),
verbal threats or harassment (18%), pranks by juveniles (18%), and auto
accidents (17%).
Table 7 shows the frequency of going out at night by area of
residence and the finding is that this did not differ by area of
residence. Thus, although the residents of the South Area have a less
favorable perception of their street lighting than the residents of the
other two areas, this does not appear to be related to the likelihood of
going out at night.
However, Table 8 indicates that the South Area residents are much
less likely than others to walk as opposed to using some form of
vehicular transportation when they go out. It would appear, then, that
attitudes toward the adequacy of street lighing may result in adaptive
behavior such as avoidance of walking on the street. It may be recalled
that the data presented in Table 2 suggested that the residents of the
South Area may be more fearful of walking alone in their neighborhood
after dark than residents of the North Area although the difference was
not statistically significant.
The results of the community survey may be summarized as follows:
r MICROFILMED BY
L
-'DORM M IC R(SLAB-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES
* DO
Table 5. Percent Who Know Victim
of Incident Occurring in Neighborhood
During Previous Twelve
i
Months by Area of
Residence a
j
Area
of Residence
Type of Incident
North
Central
South
Total
Sample
Auto Theft
9%
7%
10%
9%
Other Theft
43
33
38
39
Burglary
27
18
28
25
Property Damage
40
38
35
38
Auto Accidents
33
31
24
30
Verbal Threats or Harassment
28
33
30
30
Personal Assault
9
14
12
11
Robbery
13
11
14
13
Pranks by Juveniles
33
24
28
29
Rape or Attempted Rape
12
16
14
14
Window Peeking*
30
24
17
24
Exhibitionism
12
10
7
10
Other Sex Offenses
5
8
5
6
N
277
157
202
636
a See appendix for wording g of questionnaire item. Percents do not add to
100 because the items are not mutually exclusive.
* The differences by area of residence are statistically significant at
the .05 level.
yDD
1 IiI
i MICROFILMED BY J
LDORM "MIC R#G"A9
fl I CEDAR RAMOS DES MO18E5 'I
Table 6. Percent Saying Incidents Have Been Frequent Problem in Neighborhood
During Previous Twelve Months by
Area of
Residence
a
Area
of Residence
Type of Incident
—
North
Central
South
Total
Sample
Auto Theft
1%
1%
4%
2%
Other Theft
19
19
16
18
Burglary
13
12
13
13
Property Damage
24
21
17
21
Auto Accidents*
18
24
9
17
Verbal Threats or Harassment
16
22
18
18
Personal Assault
5
9
7
7
Robbery
Pranks by Juveniles
6
21
5
17
5
14
5
18
Rape or Attempted Rape
14
15
11
13
Window Peeking*
13
15
5
11
Exhibitionism
5
3
4
4
Other Sex Offenses*
4
8
2
4
N 277 157 202 636
a See appendix for wordingof
questionnaire item. Percents do not add to 100
because the items are not mutually exclusive.
* The differences by area of residence are statistically significant at the
.05 level.
i 14111111IM11 11
D0RM-'-MICR6 AO -
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MDIRES
Ji
Table 7. Frequency of Going Out at Night by Area of Residence.
Area
of Residence
Frequency of Going Out at Night
North
Central South
Total
Sample
Never
3%
3% 2%
3%
Less Than Once a Month
3
1 4
3
Less Than Once a Week
6
6 6
6
1 or 2 Nights a Week
24
14 ou
oc
Table 8._ Usual Mode of Transportation When Going Out by Area of Residence.
* The differences by area of residence are statistically significant at the
.05 level.
i MICROFILMED BY
L. JORM--MICRI�LAB` �-
ICEDAR RAMIDS DFS MOINES
fOD
Area
of Residence
Usual Mode of Transportation*
North
Central South
Total
Sample
Car
53%
52% 54%
53%
Bicycle
6
4 8
6
Bus
4
4 9
5
Walk
38
41 29
36
101%
101% 100%
100%
N
282
158 206
646
* The differences by area of residence are statistically significant at the
.05 level.
i MICROFILMED BY
L. JORM--MICRI�LAB` �-
ICEDAR RAMIDS DFS MOINES
fOD
7
1. Perceptions of the overall frequency and rate of change in crime
do not differ by area of residence.
2. Feelings of personal safety do not differ by area of residence
with one exception; residents of the South Area were less likely
than others to say they would seek help from their neighbors if
they were attacked on the street.
3. Although most respondents feel that people in their neighborhoods
are safe in their houses at night, about one half of the total
sample is afraid to wa:k alone on the street at night and one
fifth believes that a woman is safe alone on the street after
dark.
4. The residents of. the South Area are much more likely than the
residents of the North and Central Areas to feel that their
street lighting should be improved and that improved street
lighting would reduce crime, enhance safety, and increase police
effectiveness.
5. There are no statistically significant differences in
self -reports of being victims of various crimes and incidents
across the study areas during the year prior to the survey. This
is an important finding since it indicates that the respondents
living in the North Area were not more likely than others to be
victims despite any inadequacies in street lighting which may
have existed or other differences in terms of the actual crime
rate.
6. There are no major differences across the study areas in terms of
knowledge of victims of various crimes and incidents occurring in
the respondent's neighborhood during the year prior to the
survey. One difference was statistically significant: residents
of the North Area were more likely than others to report knowing
victims of window peeking.
7. The proportion of respondents saying that certain crimes or
incidents were a frequent problem in their neighborhoods differed
significantly by area for three types of incidents. Those living
in the South Area were less likely than others to see auto
accidents, window peeking, and 'other" sex offenses as frequent
problems. Residents of the Central Area were most likely to see
these as frequent problems.
8. The frequency of going out at night does not appear to differ by
area of residence. However, the residents of the South Area are
less likely to walk when they go out than the residents of the
other two areas.
4too
i
J MICROFILMED BY ;
'JORM" MIC R#LAB'
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I /�
J
E
ICPD Complaints.
The data presented in the next set of tables are based on
complaints reported to the Iowa City Police Department for burglary,
theft, and property damage during 1981.
The top panel of Table 9 presents the breakdown of the three types
of complaints by the area where the incident occurred. The results
indicate that the frequency of the three types of incidents differed by
area. Burglaries and thefts made up a greater proportion of complaints
in the North and South Areas while complaints concerning property damage
were much more frequent in the Central Area. Many of the property
damage incidents involved commercial establishments in the downtown area
and therefore may be assumed to have little impact on the perceptions of
residents or bear little relationship to street lighting since the
downtown area is well lit.
The second panel of Table 9 shows that almost three fourths (71%)
of all incidents occurred during nighttime hours (6:00 p.m. to 6:00
a.m.) and that the time of occurrence differed significantly by area.
Three fourths of the property offenses in the Central Area occurred at
night while approximately two thirds of the incidents in the North and
Central Areas occurred at night. Nevertheless, it is important to keep
in mind that the majority of these incidents occurred at night
regardless of the area.
The more detailed breakdown by hours of the day presented in the
bottom panel of Table 9 indicates that almost one half (46%) of the
incidents in the Central Area occurred between the hours of midnight and
6:00 a.m. versus one fourth (27%) in the North and Central Areas.
Further analyses of the hour of occurrence by area showed that
there were no statistically significant differences by area for
burglaries and thefts. In other words, the hour when a burglary or
theft was likely to occur did not differ across the three areas.
However, the time of occurrence did differ for property damage offenses
as shown in Table 10. These data indicate that over half (56%) of the
property damage offenses occurring in the Central Area happened between
12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. as contrasted with a little over two fifths
(42%) in the North and South Areas. These data suggest that the
observed differences by area with respect to time of occurrence are
primarily associated with a high proportion of property damage incidents
occurring in the Central Area during the hours of 12:00 a.m. to 6:00
a.m. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that a majority of
the complaints involved incidents occurring between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00
a.m. regardless of area and type of complaint.
Table 11 shows the distribution of complaints across areas by type
of complaint. Burglaries were about equally distributed across the
three study areas, thefts were more frequent in the Central Area than
the other two areas, and property damage incidents were about twice as
frequent in the Central Area than the other two areas. In addition, the
proportion of burglaries, thefts, and property damage incidents was
about the same in the North and South Areas.
� IdICROE ILIdED BY
"JORM-"MICR(6LAB I
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401 ES I
I
SOD
Table 9. Type of Complaint, Time of Day, and Hour When Incident Occured by
a
Type of Complaint*
Burglary
Theft
Property Damage
N
Time of Day*
Nighttime
Daytime
N
Hour*
6:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m.
12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
6:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
N
65%
Area
69%
71%
35
25
31
Total
North
Central
South
Sample
32%
14%
31%
23%
32
27
32
29
36
59
38
48
100%
100%
101%
100%
190
407
202
799
65%
75%
69%
71%
35
25
31
29
100%
100%
100%.
100%
172
375
183
730
30%
25%
32%
28%
27
46
27
37
19
11
19
15
25
18
22
21
101%
100%
100%
101%
128
302
137
567
a Includes only 1981 complaints involving offenses against property. "Night-
time" is defined as 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. "Daytime" is defined as 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. Complaints for which hour could not be determined are excluded
from bottom panel of. table.
* The differences by area are statistically significant at the .05 level.
1
i
MICROFILIAED BY
JORM"MIC R4IC"AB
( CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
0,96
� � t
it
Table 10. flour When Incident Occurred by Area (property Damage Complaints
Onl ).a
I
1
Area
I
Hour* Total
North Central South Sample
6:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m.
26% 237. 28% 24%
12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
42 56 42 51
6:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
14 7 21 11
12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
18 14 9 14
100% 100% 100% 100%
N
50 192 53 295
i
a complaints for which hour could not be determined are excluded.
* The differences by area are statistically significant at the .05 level.
7
t
¢o or
J141CROFIL14ED BY
� •`` � JORM'--MICR�CAB`-
Lf� CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M014ES
�—
/ \ c
I �
I Table 11. Area Where Incident Occurred by Type of Complaint.a
Type of Complaint _
Property Total
Area Where Incident Occurred Burglary Theft Damage Complaints -
North 34% 26% 18% 24%
Central 32 47 63 51
South 34 27 20 25 \
100% 100% 101% 100 _ ..._.._..._._.._., ,
N 180 235 384 799
a Includes only 1981 complaints involving offenses against
property.
_ I
44,010
�1 I41CROFILMED BY
L...111
DORM `MICR#CA O'-
j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
9
Although the data in Table 11 show that the areas differ in terms
of their "shares" of complaints for a given type of incident, the
results are not necessarily inconsistent with the absence of area
differences in victimization reported by respondents to the community
survey. For instance, many of the thefts occurring in the Central Area
were thefts from autos which might not be included in responses to the
survey question which asked about thefts occurring in the respondent's
neighborhood. And, as discussed
complaints involved commercial esabove, many of the property damage
tablishments. Finally, it is important
similar
to note that the frequency of complaints for these incidents was quite
there were re the North and south Areas during 1981. This suggests that if
problems with street lor,ighting in the North Area during 1981
res alternatively, a current lack of lighting as indicated by the survey
complaints associated with bu
respondents in the south Area, this is not reflected in the frequency of
rglaries, thefts, or property damage. At
the same time, the frequency of complaints for certain types of offenses
against persons is known to differ by areas of the city. Analyses of
such complaints will be reported in a future version of this report.
The results of the analyses of complaints received by the Iowa City
Police Department for burglaries, thefts, and property damage during
1981 may be summarized as follows:
1. The study areas exhibit substantial differences in the
proportions of complaints associated with burglaries, theftsand
property damage. Complaints for incidents occurring in the ,
Central Area were much more likely to involve property damage
than complaints for incidents occurring in the other two areas.
Burglaries and thefts were relatively less frequent in the
Central Area than in the North and Central Areas.
2. Nighttime offenses were more frequent in the Central Area than
the other two areas although a majority of all incidents included
in the analysis occurred during the nighttime regardless of area
or type of incident. The differences by area related to time of
occurrence hold true only for property damage complaints; the
time of occurrence for thefts and burglaries did not differ by
area. In the Central Area, property damage incidents were most
frequent between 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.
3. Complaints involving burglaries were about equally distributed
across the three areas; those involving thefts and property
damage tended to be more highly concentrated in the Central Area.
4400
1
MICROFILMED BY
I` --JORM""MICROLA6'-..��
CEDAR RAPIDS DES I401RE5 I /�
/
% � f
� 1
CITY CSF
IOWA .
CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASH! CIT Y
NGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-50N
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
COMMUNITY SURVEY
Dear Resident:
This questionnaire is part of a research project designed to assess the effect
of street lighting improvements in certain areas of Iowa City. As part of this
. ....................
project, we hope to gain a better understanding of your feelings and experiences
in your neighborhood.
You have been chosen to participate in this survey through a scientific sampling
procedure. Your cooperation is very imp
Please ortant for its success and the validity
of the results. take fifteen minutes or so to complete the
questionnaire.
j
i Your responses to thisquestionnaire are completely confidential.
i
questionnaires will be seen Individual only by an independent research consultant and his
1
staff. Individual responses will not be revealed to Iowa City officials.
Please return the questionnaire in the postage -paid envelope within one week.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call Jim Curry at 351-6239 or
Kathy Ward at 337-4075. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely urs,
00,
Neal G. Berlin
City Manager f
Most of the questions can be answered by simply circling the number which
indicates your response. Please ignore the numbers in parentheses on the right
margin of the questionnaire.
I. Please indicate your current address: 1-4
i Office Use Onlv
Area: (5)
Number: (6_9)
Street: (10-11)
PLEASE TURN TO OTHER SIDE
r
MICROFILMED BY
-DORM--MIC R(L E:O-
I CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1101NES
141CROFILMED BY
r 1'- JORM "MICR6LAEV- �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES POINES
M
1
2
We would like to know your opinion on
topics
such as crime, safety, and street
lighting in your neighborhood. Please
think
of your neighborhood as the area of
Iowa
City within three blocks of your
current address. Indicate
your opinion by
circling the number which best expresses your
own attitude.
No
Agree
Disagree
Opinion
2.
My neighborhood has a higher
1
2
3
crime rate than other areas
of Iowa City.
3.
The crime rate is increasing
1
2
3
in my neighborhood.
i
4.
I am afraid to walk alone on
1
2
3
the streets of my neighborhood
after dark.
5.
A woman is safe alone after
1
2
3
dark on the streets of my
neighborhood.
6.
If I was attacked on the street
1
2
3
in my neighborhood, I would
seek help from my neighbors.
7.
People in this neighborhood
1
2
3
are safe in their houses at
night.
j
8.
The street lighting on my
1
2
3
street should be improved.
9.
The street lights on my
1
2
3
street light the sidewalk.
10.
It would be safer on my street
1
2
3
after dark if the street
lighting was improved.
11.
Improved street lighting
1
2
3
would reduce the crime rate
in my neighborhood.
12.
Improved street lighting would
1
2
3 (12-22)
increase police effectiveness
in my neighborhood.
PLEASE
GO TO
PAGE 3
141CROFILMED BY
r 1'- JORM "MICR6LAEV- �
CEDAR RAPIDS DES POINES
M
3
13. Listed below are
several types
of crimes or
incidents.
For each one,
please indicate
your
knowledge of such incidents
in
your current
nei hborhood during
the
last twelve
months (regardless
of how long you have
Medthere) by circling
I
the appropriate number.
Have
you
Has
this
been
been
a
Do you know
a frequent
victim?
any victims?
problem?
Don t
Yes
No
Yes No
Yes
No
Know
Auto theft............
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Other theft...........
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Burglary ..............
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Property damage.......
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Auto accidents........
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Verbal threats or
harassment............
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Personal assault......
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Robbery ...............
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Pranks by juveniles...
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Rape or attempted rape
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Window peeking........
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Exhibitionism.........
1
2
1 2
1
2
3
Other sex offenses....
1
2
1 2
1
2
3 (23-61)
14. Are you a student
at the
University
of Iowa?
Yes.................................1
No..................................2
(62)
15. What is your sex?
Female..............................1
Male................................2
(63)
PLEASE TURN
TO OTHER SIDE
IdICROFILMED BY
L --� -i
f JORM---MICR6CAS�—
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
}
I
qp D
WAN
4
16. On the average, how many nights a week do you go out?
Never......... 1
Less than once a month ........ 2
Less than once a week ......... 3
1 or 2 nights.................4
3 or 4 nights.................5
5 or 6 nights.................6
Every night...................7
How do you usually travel when you go out?
Car or other motor vehicle .... I
Bicycle ............. ...2
City bus ............ .......3
Walk.................. 4
Other................ 5
Please specify
17. What was your age on your last birthday?
18. How many people, including yourself, "ve in your house
or apartment?
19. Do you have any comments or suggestions?
THANK YOU
JJff I
J r
MICROFILMED "
JORM--MICR6LAH'- l "
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
I
(64)
(65.)
(66-67)
(68-69)
-77-0--717-
4
0-71
.1 ,1'
1981 Classification Codes
1. CRIMINAL 119141CIDE
a. Murder d You-negli.gcnt uuwslaughtcr
b. Manslaughter by negliegence
2. RAPE
a. Forcible rape
b. Attempted rope
3. ROBBER('
a. I' 1 rea I, III
h. Knire or rutting; instrument
c. Other dangerous weapon
d. (lands,-f1aL, feet (aggravat,d)
. e. Other (simpl(!, nun-nggrnvated)
Ni. ASSAULT
a. Firearm
b. Knife ur tuLting instrument
I'. 0 h P r dangerous woapon
d. Hands, fist, feet (aggravated)
c. Other (simple, non -aggravated)
i
i
5. BURCLAIt1' (BREAKING AND ENTERING)
a. Residence (dwelling, apt., hotel, etc.)
b. Non -residence (store, office, etc.)
i 6. LARCENY -THEFT
n. Pocket picking
b. Purse snatching
c. Shoplifting
d. From interior of ?i/V
e. t part
M/V parts d aceessortesX(hrb ca�ss d accessories)
f• Bicycles capss
gasoline, CB s)
g• All other
1. From buildings
2. From Yard
3. Livestock (regardless of where stolen)
4. Short charge -skip out
5. Mfsc.
h. From coli operated machines
7."10TOR VEHICLE'rIILF'IjS
a. Autos
b. 'rrucks and Iiuscs
c. Motorcycles and Minibikes
. Other motorized vehichles
e. UAIVOC plus mise., (snowmobiles, no-peds,go-carts,etc
eJoy-riding
8. OTHER ASSAULTS (simply assanity)
9. ARSON
10. FORGERY AND COUNTER=INC
a. Forgery, except checks
b. Forgery of bank checks
C' Countcrl•eitln),
I
r MICROFILIdED BY
DORM--MICR#LAB'-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
=10
J�
11. FRAUD
a. Confidence games
b. Fail se check~ (insufficient funds -no account)
c. Defrauding innkeeper
d. Other frauds
12. EMBEZZLEMENT
a. Failure to return rented/leased vehicle
I b. Failure to return other rented/leased property -
! c. Other embezzlement/conversion of property
I
13. STOLEN PROPERTY BUYING, RECEIVING AND POSSESSION
14. VANDALISM
a. Public bldgs. and public property, except schools\
b. Schools ........_ .-......�.
c. Bus iness/cummereIaI
d. Residence/private property, except mail boxes
e. Ila i 1 boxes -
I. Injuring/tamper Ing with M/Vehicle
g. Mise.
i
-- - 15. WEAPONS: CARRYING, POSSESSING, ETC.
_. 16. PROS'PI'L'UTUION AND CONIPIERCLILILL'D VICE
--
17. SEX OFFE4SIiS
a. Indecent exposure
b. Abnormn1 sex relnLIo11
c. L11deCts nt11berLics,Ric] Lastarfern, lasivious acts
d. Window peeping; -
e. MISC.
I � ,
18. CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES j +
a. Sn10 of a controlled SubsLan,L
j b. Possession of a controlled substance
c. Misc.
I
19. GAMBLING
20. OFFENSES AGAINST FAMILY AND CHILDREN
a. Desertion, abandoment, non-support
b. Child stealing
c. Neglect or child abuse
d. Spouse Abuse
e. Mise. domestic, civil family problems
21. OMVUT
a. ATI. UIIVul
b. Arrest of OMVUI
-2-
141CROFILMED BY
1_
JORM--""MICR#L-AB•-
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ' /
22. I.iOUOR LAW VIOLATIONS_
a. I'ossessIou by a minor
I+. Naklug boor o Ilqunr :r .Viable C(I :I m I I I o r
c.
lie [ng in a tavern as a minor
d. SeLLing beer or liquor Lu a minor
e. Consumption in a public place, highway, or while driving
f. Uuotlegging/selling without a license
23. INT(IXICATI;ON
24. DISORDIiRLY CONDUCT
a. Unlawful assembly/riot
b. Disturbing the peace and quiet (parties, etc.)
c. Obscene I,iu;ul:igc
d. Refusing Lo as'list an officer/interference with official
c. Fight
f. Discharging; firearms
g. FLrcworks
h. Littering
I. Civil rig.;hLs dlsputos
j. I'lione calls/obscene/harrassment
k. Prowler
1. Solicitors
In. lllse.,'snuw baLl.ing, frisbies ere.
25. VAGRANCY (pan handling, littering, etc.)
26. ALL OTHER CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS -EXCEPT TRAFFIC
a. Abortion
b. lilack-mail, uxtortton , kidnapping
c. Burglary Luuls (possess[oil , utc.)
d. Escape from JaI I/custody
e. Contemptof court
f. Contributing to delinquency -non liquor related
g. Possessiun/distribution/manufacture of obscene material
It. public nuisance (noise, etc.)
1. Conspiracy
j. PInlLciuus Lhreats
It. Bomb threats
1. Found homb
2. Explosion of bomb
1. Resisting arrest
in. Parole/probaLIon viotaLlon
n. Trespass, car prowling
o, franks
p. Mi sc.
27. SUSPLCI(Ili
it. Susplelons person
b. Suspicious vehicle
I'. Other suspicions
28. .IUVENILIi
a. I.uiLering
b. Curfew violation/truenoy
c. Pranks
d. Mist,
-3. -
IdICRDF ILMED BY
JORM--"MICR#LA0 "�
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
# DD
e
i
29. MENTA(.. '
30. SUICIDE
a. Attemp
b. Misr..
31. SN01JM0611,1? COFII'LAIN'I'S
32. -'N *1, VEHICLE
a. Property damage
b. Personal injury _
C. Fatal
d. flit and Run, PI)
e. Hit and Run, I' L
Hit and Run, fatal ..
I 33. ACCIDENT -OTHER
a. Property damage
ib. Personal injury ! .
C. Fatal
34. ASSIST AND SERVICF: I
a. Assist other law enforcement agency
b. Assist other criminal justice agency 1 --
c. 'Traffic control
d. Vacation check j
e. Cancel Vacation check
f. Unlock
)t. Del Ivor emery;cury messago
h. lie.lay personnul or property -
i. ES CUrL
.l• Stranded motorist
k. Special event patrol/vxtra security '
I. Open dour or wiudnw I .
m. Medical nss[st/assist ambulance
n. Assist indigents/transients/welfare
o. Mise. (bar assists, etc.) -
35. FIRE I - -
a. Alarm, not a ca11 in
36. ALARM, INTRUSION Oft TROUBLE-SLLENT
37. ATTEMPT TO LOCATE
a. Missing person, adult
b. AWOL, Military
c. Warrant/miLtimus/other pickup by legal order
d. Escapee or walkaway
e. For emergnnry message
f. Wanted vchlcle, except stolen .i.d hit and run
g. For criminal activity
h, Missing/runaway juvenile
L. lost/found child
•j. Cancel ATL.
k. M -Ise. A'I'L
38. CIVII, DISI'll'I'li
39. SUDDEN DEATH ,S BOD(f•.S FOIIND
-4-
MICROFILMED BY
JORM—MICRfLAB-
i CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i
q,04D
r,
40. GUNSHOTS
41. MISC. INVIiS9.ICAT1(1N
42. MISC. COMPLAINT AND SI•:RVICIi I( -.'QUEST
43. MISC. INFORMATION 010 officers assigned)
44. LOST AND_ FOUND PROPIIRTY
a. Lost Property ---
b. Found property
45. RECOVERLL) STOLEN 1'R0P1..RTY-VEIIICl.F.S
46. Do(:CAT AND 1,I1SC. ,\N [MA
.a - t Large - stray - MA.LS..
h. Lost - found
c. Mistreatment and abuse
d. Nu is it tic and barking
e. Rites and rabies
f. Dead and rued kills
g. Misc,
47. LIVESTOCK
n. Stray, LosL and found
b. Mlstreatmaot and abuse
c. Dond and rand kills
d. Mi Su:,
48. WI LDL KILLS
49. 14Ee\T1,RR/BAD (tornado, blizzard• tidal waves, typhoons)
50. RA7.ARDOUS ROAD CONDTTT_ON_S
51. TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS
a. Speeding
b. Reckless driving/exhibltlon driving/drag racing/
squealing tires
c. Signs and signals
d. 1117;ht of way, bad pass
e. Driver's license violations
f. Misc. traffic complaints or violations \m e
I b"i'kes, skateboards
52. ABANDONED AND RECOVERED VEHICLES -TOW IN ,
a. Highway or public area -towed
b, Ilil;hway n1' pnlrl 1 arra
c. Private property -towed
d. Prlvato property
e. .`Ilsr. abrrnduued VVItII.I
f. Misc. tow -in
53. !'A_RKINO
a, Illegal parking-nnb1Tc property
b. Illcyal parking-prlvatu property
c. Tow -Cl Lat. ion
54. BOATING AND RBCRE_ATT_ONAL IdATER COMPLAINTS55, HUNT1Nf COMPLAiIV'f-IiBCLUDIN( TRESPASS
' r
11111011011 BY
—JORM--MICR�fLAB-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIaES
FDD
d
CODE SHEETS: ICPD COMPLAINT REPORTS
IOWA CITY STREET LIGHTING IMPRGVEMENT PROJECT
i
ape of Complaint -Primary ..............
• 1 3
-Secondary ...............................
Place of Occurrence 3 4
(Enter Place of Occurrence)
Street Number ................... _
5. 6 7 8
Street ..................................
9 10
Area ....................................
•
Date of Occurrence ........................ 11 13
13 14 15 16 17 18
Time of Occurrence ................................
19 20 21 22
How Reported ..................................................
23
Sex of Victim .................................................
24
Sex of Offender ...............................................
Age Status of Victim. f-5-
.............. ..........................
26
Age Status of Offender ..................................
27
Complainant...................................................
28
Location......................................................
29
Level of Force or Violence ....................................
30
DiSpoSltiori...................................................
31
Comments:
�i
I
'I
1
11ICROFILIIED BY
L
i MIC Rf�LAB JORM
CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1
4018ES
V06
J�
CODING MANUAL: ICPD COMPLAINT_ REPORTS
IOWA CITY STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
i
1• �CQdmdeea�ionntd: Use the numeric codes which correspond to
tdare listed on the following pages. Code both
ary classifications if they are reported. If
no classification is reported, enter 91s,
2. Place of Occurrence: WriLe Che aLreeL number and Lhe name (jr the
street in the blank space. The street number, street codes, and
area codes will be entered later. If the name of an establishment
is reported, enter it in the blank space. If the place of occurrence
is not reported, enter "Unknown" in the blank space.
3. Date of Occurrence: Enter numeric codes for day, month, and year.
For example, June 1, 1981, would be 01 06 81. If the date of
occurrence is not reported, enter 91s,
4. Time of Occurrence: If the time of day is reported, use the
"military" codes shown in the following
ages. If you can
mine that the incident occurred duringeither the daytime ortnight-
time, note this in the comments section. If no Lime of day is
reported, enter 91s.
5. HowHow Rede Enter the code shown on the complaint report. If
none 1s reported, leave this field blank.
6. Sex of Victim: Male.,
Female .............................1
Two or more males.. ....2
Two or more females. .................3
Multiple victims -mixed sex.. 4
.............".."..'SMot applicable (proprrLy orrense)..8Not reported 9
7. Sex of Offender: Male..
Female ...........................1
Two or more males........ 2
Two or more females., 4
Multiple offenders -mixed sex ..... 5
Not reported.....................9
S. Age Status of Victim: Adu1L (18 or over) .......... I
Juvenile (17 and under) ..... 2
Mixed ages. • .,3
Not applicable ...,,,,,,...8
Not reported................9
1/00
I
MICROFILMED BY
-DORM"MIC R#LAB'-
LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I /
L
MICROFILMED BY
i- -
� JORM"-MIC RICA B�-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
r
Coding Manual -Page 2
9.
Age Status of Offender: Adult (18 or over).. ..........1
1J
Juvenile (17 or under) ...........
2
Mixed ages.......................3
Not applicable...................8
NoL reporLed.....................9
10.
Complainant:
victim...... ...............1
Relative of vicLim...............2
Other civilian...................3
Police officer...................4
Not reported.....................9
11.
Location:
Inside residence...... .......1
Inside business/commercial .......
2
Outside ..........................3
Not reported.....................9
12.
Level of Force or
Violence:
- -
Offense against
person -no force ur violence ...........
1
Offense against
person -threat of force or violence ....
2
Offense against
person -force or violence used .........
3
Not applicable -not offense against person.............8
Offense against
person -level not reported.............9
i
13.
Disposition:
Informal -not referred ............
1
Arrest ......... .................2
j
Agency referral... .. .......3
Detective Bureau referral ........
4
I
I
Not reported.....................9
i
i
�
I
MICROFILMED BY
i- -
� JORM"-MIC RICA B�-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
r
ring Manual -Page 3
CODES FOR 'TYPE OF COMPLAINT
ICPD 3.981 Classification Cndos ,*)nd prsr_ri I-jnn Numeric
L' coda
01 -Criminal Homicide
and
a -murder manslaughter........,
i b -negligent manslaughter..
................. O1
.. .............02
02 -Rape
a -forcible rape.........
b -attempted rape ........................................... 03
.......... 11011
03 -Robbery
a,b,c-robbery with a dangerous weapon ......................
d -aggravated (with hands, fists, etc.)05
.
e-nonaggravated.............. " " " "' 06
07
04 -Assault
a,b,c-assault with a dangerous weapon ...........
d -aggravated (with hands, fists, etc.) .... "' 08
e-nonaggravated............. 09
10
05-Buro1,ary (B&E)
aa-resi'denCe........
b -nonresidence .................. 11
..........,12
06-L_arcenv-Theft
a,b-pocket picking,purse snatching ........................13
d,e-from motor vehicle..
f,91,g2-miscellaneous......•...............................14
............................ 15
07 -Motor Vehicle Thefts (all types).....
08 -Other Assaults (simple assaults
10
09 -Arson ...... ,....................................
14 -Vandalism (all types).
18
15 -Weapons ..............
17 -Sex Offenses
a -indecent exposure..
b -abnormal sex relations.. " " " " " ••20
c -indecent liberties, etc....... ...... "•'••••'21
d -window peeping ............. ..........,................22
e -miscellaneous,.... 23
24
24 -Disorderly Conduct
b -disturbing the peace..........
e -fighting.....•....,..... 25
k -prowler,........... 26
27
M
i
141CROFILMED BY J
r )" JORM'-MIC RER[:'A B-
CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401AES
r ,
R
0
.-,
C—ing Manual -Page 4
26 -All Other Criminal ViolaLions
c -possession of burglary tools..,,....... .28
h -public nuisance.. 29
n -trespass, car prowling ................ 30
0 -pranks ...................................................31
27 -Suspicion
a -suspicious person ..................... .32
b -suspicious vehicle ........................... 33
c -other suspicions.........................................34
28 -Juvenile
a -loitering.. .35
b -curfew violation/truancy ..................................... .36
c -Pranks.. .37
d-miscellaneous............................................38
32 -Accident -Motor Vehicle
a -property damage.., .......................... .39b -personal injury ....................... .........40c-fatal.......
41
d -hit and run, property damage .............. ,42
e -hit and run, personal injury... ............ .43
f -hit and run, fatal.......................................44
STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES
To determine whether or not a complaint should be coded, check the
Place of Occurrence against the street numbers listed below. If the
incident occurred within the study area, it should be coded. If the
Place of occurrence is not reported, do not code the complaint. If
an incident is reported as having occurred on one of the corners of
the study area, it should be coded. Use the attached map or the
telephone book to help resolve additional problems such as locating
commercial or business establishments.
Street Numbers
in Study Area
200 East to 899 East
100 East to 899 East
899 South to 799 North
Streets Included
Brown, Ronalds
Church, Fairchild, Davenport,
Bloomington, Market, Jefferson,
Iowa, Washington, College,
Burlington, Court, Harrison,
Prentiss, Bowery, and Benton.
Clinton, Dubuque, Linn, Gilbert
Van Buren, Johnson, Dodge, Lucas,
and Governor.
f06
i 14ICROFIL14ED BY +1
�-�,.•„' DORM "MIC RtI1C"A B -
LI CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIMES
I4(s
-Fac o
�J .`� :_.J I�:J L1..-. UJ t�1.•7 lL:_J [r.LtiL
JURNGw 51 (rfl
-1P Ilii -:
•I li. r—i .:.A
rd M• s IOW (��p j�AV( K..
"} F1
•SnnfrM n5[ YL�
j I
V •eWiNF 71
GrB
Manual -Page 5
F
Ir
i
C
1�I3fM•r Bwr 'J 1 L
u.
[71
Off•
Section One: improved lighting and neighborhood safety project- Market, Clinton
Brown, Governor
Section Two: improved lighting only- Burlington, Clinton,'Market, Governor
Se tic on Three: control, no lighting or safety projects- Page/Benton, Clinton,
Burlington, Summit/Bowery/Governor
)Ir'—
I '
i MICROF IL14ED BY
1. --JORM MICR46LAS
' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES
I
I
J�
foo
141CROFIL14ED BY
DORM ---MIC RbLAB --- �
\..
CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401NE5 '
Owing Manual -Page 6
i
TIME OF
OCCURRENCE
CODES
12:00
AM 0000
9:00
0900
6:00
1800
1:00
0100
10:00
1000
7:00
1900
2:00
0200
11:00
1100
8:00
2000
3:00
0300
12:00 PM
1200
9:00
2100
4:00
0400
1:00
1300
10:00
2200
5:00
0500
2:00
1400
11:00
2300
6:00
0600
3:00
1500
7:00
0700
4:00
1600
8:00
0800
5:00
1700
foo
141CROFIL14ED BY
DORM ---MIC RbLAB --- �
\..
CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401NE5 '