Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1983-02-15 Info Packet
City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM DATE: February 4, 1983 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule February 7, 1983 Monday 4:30 - 6:30 P.M. Conference Room 4:30 P.M. - Discuss Central Junior High Property 4:45 P.M. - Discuss Police Department Staffing Level 5:00 P.M. - Funding Decisions - Human Services Agencies 5:30 P.M. - Finalize FY 84 Budget Decisions 6:30 P.M. - Council time, Council committee reports February 8, 1983 Tuesday 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. Special Informal Council Meeting - Conference Room 7:00 P.M. - Review Comprehensive Plan Amendments 8:00 P.M. - Discuss Zoning Ordinance Timetable 8:15 P.M. - Discuss Zero Lot Line Housing 8:30 P.M. - Review new Zoning Ordinance (Residential Zones) February 14, 1983 Mondav 4:30 - 6:30 P.M. Conference Room 4:30 P.M. - Meeting of City Conference Board Public Hearing and Action on City Assessor's FY 84 Budget 4:45 P.M. - Discuss Housing Market Analysis 5:15 P.M. - Discuss Mandatory Parkland Dedication 6:00 P.M. - Council agenda, Council time, Council committee reports 6:25 P.M. - Consider appointment to the Human Rights Commission February 15, 1983 Tuesday 7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers Y 14TCROFILIBY-DORM -M ABCEDAR RAPIDS4ES i I M J I I i, i I 1 M J ' 1 City Council February 4, 1983 Page 2 PENDING LIST Priority A: Iowa-Illinois Utilities Franchise Revenue from Public Housing Sites Priority B: Discuss Council Majority Voting Requirements Discuss Affirmative Action Task Force Report Tour Shamrock/Friendship/Arbor Drainage Area Evaluation of City Manager Priority C: Discuss Job Evaluation Studies Meet with Design Review Committee regarding recommendations I Traffic Signals - Flashing Mode Parking in Central Business District j Extension of Revitalization Area to Sturgis Corner 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. I l I I I i I City of Iowa Cit; MEMORANDUM Date: February 1, 1983 To: City Council From: City Manager/vP�rf—� Re: Campaign Finance Ordinance Changes In November 1981 (see attached minutes) the City Council discussed the campaign finance ordinance. At that time the City Clerk, City Manager and City Attorney presented the City Council with a proposal relating to the filing of campaign finance records. See attached memorandum. It is our recollection that the City Council did not agree with the staff's proposal and wanted changes in the ordinance. However, the Council did not reach consensus as to the nature of the changes. Perhaps it would be best to just eliminate the City filing. Your guidance is requested. bdw/sp cc: City Attorney Acting City Clerk 141CROFIL18YJORM��-MAB- CEDAR RAf�1DSNES 41 f i 1 I , Informal Council Page 2 November 23, 1981 The petition'from residents, on the agenda, requesting a moratoirum on demolition and building permits in areas to be downzoned was dis- cussed. The exact area is not known. City Manager Berlin summarized Council's decision as, it will be appropriate to consider the proposal at the time when specific recommendations go to P&Z for downzoning the area. If staff has any strong feelings about whether this is the way to follow, they are to let Council know. CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE CHANGES 275-460 Vevera commented that the memo from the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the City Clerk did not solve any of the problems regarding the dead- line for reporting of contributions. If the ordinance is not enforced, he stated, why have it? He thought the State regulations for reporting contributions were sufficient. Neuhauser agreed. Berlin noted that the staff had also had these questions, and thought the purpose of the legislation was to make all contributions public, and the remedy was Ij unworkable, as it is absurd to have the staff have the responsibility to enforce the ordinance. Lynch questioned the procedure needed to amend the charter. Neuhauser asked if the Council had the power to en- force the penalty now in the Ordinance. Jansen commented that that is a question which would arise in trying to enforce the present penalty. j She suggested publishing all contributions. Some did not want the City to pay for publishing. Several agreed on elimination of filing with the City. The City Attorney, City Manager and City Clerk were directed ! to come back with a solution regarding filing, and with a workable 1 penalty. Roberts voiced dissatisfaction with public access TV programs which were biased regarding the candidates. Berlin offered to go to the CATV Commission and ask for guidelines for local elections. Procedures as used in commercial TV were suggested. Council agreed that guidelines are needed, and the City Manager will follow up with the CATV Commission. i ORGANIZATIONAL COUNCIL MEETING Jansen reported tat new Counct members should be sworn in before noon on Saturday, January 2nd, 1982. The organizational meeting (on second secular day in January) could be held on Monday, January 4th, 1982 at 11:30 P.M. It was decided the new Councilmembers would take the oath at the Dec. 8th meeting. There were no objections to the schedule from those present. COUNCIL BUSINESS 460-570 1. Mayor Balmer commended City employees for their generous giving to the United Way Campaign this year, an increase of 36% over last year. 2. Balmer stated he was not interested in the two signalization projects on Governor and Burlington Sts. as outlined in the memo. They will be discussed at the Capital Improvements Program meeting. Neuhauser advised she would not be present for the Nov. 30th meeting and the discussion of the CIP. 3. The Mayor suggested that the Assistant City Manager set up a meeting of the Council Legislative Committee with the area Legislators in December, and prepare an agenda of discussion items. AGENDA �•�. 1. Vevera advised he would be voting 'no' on the Resolution re COBG program statement, Item 15, because of the amount for Public Housing. 2. Balmer commented that he did not favor flag poles for City Plaza. f Berlin will check the status of the contract. No one favored spending ji City money on them. all I_ 4 IdICAOE ILIdED BY i —DORM MICR4/LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES I _L i City of low. Cl �- MEMORANDUM Date: November 18, 1981 To: City Council From: City Clerk, City Manager and City Attorney Re: Campaign Finance Ordinance Recently there has been publicity concerning timely filing of campaign finance reports with the City Clerk. As the enforcement mechanism for this ordinance is somewhat uncertain and the purpose of the ordinance was to provide public information concerning campaign finances, it appears that the City Council should consider adoption of a policy which would provide public notice. It is proposed that the City Clerk provide a written report on the status of the filing of campaign reports at the first City Council meeting after each filing date or as soon as practical thereafter. In this manner public notice should be sufficient to remedy any delayed filing of reports. There are a couple of minor administrative changes which also can be made. The campaign financial disclosure affidavit filed by each candidate will be revised to include the required City filings. In addition, a list of the filing dates will accompany the ordinance which is provided to all candidates. We will be pleased to discuss this matter at an informal session or if you have any questions, please give us a call. bj/sp 1 I' 141CROFIL14ED BY I `-- JORM--MICR4�LA B" CEDAR RAPIDS DES hI0I1JES f CAMPAIGN FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE AFFIDAVIT "I am aware that I am required to file campaign disclosure reports with the County Commissioner of Elections in accordance with Chapter 56, Code of Iowa, 1981, and the City Clerk in accordance with Sections 10-16 through 10-22, Code of Iowa City." (Signed) _ Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me by _ day of (L. S.) on this 19_ Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa +(I 1 S 141CROFILMED OY I-JORM-MICR#L-AB-- 1 r CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES II� ANW AV i i� City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 3, 1983 To: City Council From: City Manager and City Attorney Re: Central Junior High Property 10� Enclosed is a copy of the agreement for disposition of the Central Junior High property which the Iowa City Community School District approved on January 28, 1983. At a meeting on January 21, 1983, the City Attorney and the City Manager met with Superintendent David Cronin and Mr. Cruise to discuss two alternative proposals which they prepared for submission to the School Board. At that time, we indicated which of the proposals we preferred and presented the position of the City Council. However, the agreement which was ultimately approved by the School Board [enclosed] is not responsive to most of the issues which we raised in that meeting, as follows: 1) The City is required to transfer any interest which it might have in the property to the Iowa City Community School District without any assurance that preference will be given by the School District to the use of the south half of the property for congregate housing. 2) The agreement refers to the highest bid. A provision of the state law provides that the school district may transfer school property to other government agencies without taking into account the need for appraisals or the highest bidder. This is recognition that property and building investments which have been acquired by the local taxpayer may be, wherever possible, utilized for the benefit of the taxpayers for other uses. 3) The agreement provides that the School District may sell the north half of the property without restrictions. Because there are sewer lines on the Central Junior High property, it is necessary that there be no -build easement restrictions for any new construction even though one of the lines currently runs under the Central Junior High building. 4) The agreement provides that the School District shall prepare the specifications for the south half of the property. Considering the nature of the proposal for congregate housing, it would seem that the City has the expertise for preparing such materials. 5) Previously the City Council has had to write down the value of land for various housing projects because these projects generally are not financially feasible if they have to bear the full value of the land. We indicated that aqreement lanauaae should he nrovidpd whirh would allow the ( in the agreement. WA 6) The agreement provides that if a proposal is received for congregate housing, even if the bid is the highest bid, the District may reject the highest bid for any reason whatsoever. Therefore, even if an acceptable congregate housing bid is received as the highest bid, the District is under no obligation to accept that bid and under the terms of the agreement the City would have previously relinquished all of its claim to the property. It is the recommendation of the City Manager and the City Attorney that a letter be sent to the School District outlining the issues of this memorandum and other additional concerns of the Council. This matter will be scheduled for discussion at the informal meeting on February 7. be/sp �I— I4I CRDFI LIdED BY �. -- _ _.. ... _.. _�... .1'.._ JORM MIC R(�LAB j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 1 Wfm I i 2 6) The agreement provides that if a proposal is received for congregate housing, even if the bid is the highest bid, the District may reject the highest bid for any reason whatsoever. Therefore, even if an acceptable congregate housing bid is received as the highest bid, the District is under no obligation to accept that bid and under the terms of the agreement the City would have previously relinquished all of its claim to the property. It is the recommendation of the City Manager and the City Attorney that a letter be sent to the School District outlining the issues of this memorandum and other additional concerns of the Council. This matter will be scheduled for discussion at the informal meeting on February 7. be/sp �I— I4I CRDFI LIdED BY �. -- _ _.. ... _.. _�... .1'.._ JORM MIC R(�LAB j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 1 Wfm I AGREEMENT FOR DISPOSITION OF CENTRAL JUNIOR HIGH PROPERTY This Agreement for disposition of Central Junior High Property is made on this 28 day of January , 1983, by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, (hereinafter "City") and the Iowa City Community School District (hereinafter "Di- strict"). . PREAMBLE The parties to this Agreement recognize that there now exists a bona -fide dispute concerning their respective inter- ests in the property known as the "Central Junior High Proper- ty" legally described as follows: All of that property designated as Centre Market on the original plat of Iowa City, Iowa. Further, each of the parties has carefully evaluated its posi- tion and has determined that it would be in its own best inter- est to resolve the title dispute by mutual agreement rather than engaging in litigation, and both parties agree that the existing dispute between them should be resolved within the time limits provided herein. Therefore, City and District enter into this Agreement as a complete settlement concerning their respective interests in the Central Junior High Property described above. II 1 1 1 141CROFILMED BY 1" -DORM--MICR#L'A9 _ CEDAR RARIDS DES MOINES I1 Em! I -2- Now therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants made herein, the parties agree as follows: CITY'S COVENANTS i i 1. Within thirty (30) days after both parties execute this agreement, City shall execute and deliver to District two Quit Claim. Deeds. The first deed shall be to the north I one-half of the Central Junior High Property, described as follows: 3 The North one-half of all of that property designated as Centre Market on the original plat of Iowa City, Iowa. The second deed shall be to the south one-half of the Central Junior High Property, described as follows: f The South one-half of all of that property designated as Centre Market on the original plat of Iowa City, Iowa. I City shall comply•with all statutory requirements regarding the execution and delivery of said Deeds. However, City's deed to the south one-half of the Central Junior High Property shall be i subject to and restricted by the terms of this Agreement. j i 1 2. City may, at its option, record this Agreement in the Recorder's Office, Johnson County, Iowa. However, upon obtain- ing full compliance with this Agreement by District, City shall execute and record a proper release for the benefit of the a8;L 1rr i 1 j 141CROFILMED BY .-DORM-MICR6LLA13_ - I 1....,, 1 L ! I CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MOIYES -3- District to remove any cloud upon the title to the south one-half of the Central Junior High Property. 3. City recognizes District's rights to sell the north one-half of the Central Junior High Property at anytime, without restriction, and said sale may be made at the same time as the sale of the south one-half of the property. 4. City shall assume the responsibility and expenses for soliciting developers for congregate housing for the elderly as provided below. DISTRICT'S COVENANTS i 1. District agrees that it will join with City to solicit bids on the south half of the s subject property for a preferred, public use, to -wit: Congregate Housing for the Elderly. However, District shall retain the right to solicit bids on the south half of the subject property for any other use and said bids may be submitted at the same time as bids for congregate housing. 2. District further agrees that it will sell the south half of the subject property, upon receiving a proper bid, as determined by District, to a developer for the construction of congregate housing if said bid is the highest bid on the property, subject to the District's right to reject any or all bids regardless of the intended use for the property. I I i IIICROFIL14ED BY I �.. JORM--MICR6LCA9- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES Olga -4- MUTUAL COVENANTS 1. District shall prepare bid specifications for the southern half of the subject property and both parties shall actively promote a sale of that property for congregate housing. District shall be responsible for advertisements required by statute. City shall be responsible for advertising and soliciting private developers specially interested in constructing a congregate housing project. 2. City will offer Industrial Revenue Bond financing in- centives to a preferred developer building congregate housing for the elderly. 3. All bids for the southern half of the subject property shall be directed to District and any and all proceeds of a sale'of the subject property shall belong to the District. 4. The final date for receiving bids pursuant to this Agreement shall be no later than April 26, 1983 and the bid shall be awarded, if at all, within thirty (30) days after April 26, 1983. 5. If an acceptable bid for congregate housing, as determined by District, is received on or before said date, District shall convey title in exchange for the sale proceeds on or before July 1, 1983. r 6. If no acceptable bids are received for congregate housing on or before said date, or if any bid for congregate housing is not the highest bid acceptable to District, City ..... ...__.._._.. 1 i 141CROFILMED BY I l 1 i - JORM""MIC R�LA B'_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES I i ffm J 1_/ , -5- shall, nonetheless, relinquish to District any interest it may have in the property and release District from the terms of this Agreement. 7. District may, at its option, advertise and sell the north half of subject property at any time without restriction and shall receive the proceeds therefrom. 8. City and District agree to do all things necessary to implement the terms and provisions of this Agreement. Executed at Iowa City, Iowa, on the dates as shown below. CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA DATED: BY: Mary Neuhauser, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk DATED: January 28, 1983 ATTEES�ST--:--`` -- II eenn Richard Lahr, Board Secretary IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BY: L1(1 Ca _. (!98 ° G n f1 Cs� Lyn a Cannon, Board President MICROFILMED BY -"JORM"MIC RICA B'- !�! CEDAR RAPIDS • DES WINES ! a701- MICROFILMED sp City of Iowa CI I MEMORANDUM Date: September 24, 1982 l.�p�To: Robert Jansen, City Attorney {7 From: Richard J. Boyle, Assistant City Attorney V Re: Center Market Square (Central Junior High Property) BACKGROUND In April 1891, November 1896 and May 1897, the Iowa City Council granted to the Independent School District of Iowa City, for public school purposes, three separate parcels comprising the entire tract upon which Central Junior High School is located. That tract was shown on the Original Plat of Iowa City as Centre Market Square. I have found no records that the grant was other than a donation. Although there are minor wording differences, each of the ordinances was substantially as follows: "An ordinance granting the use of.. Centre Market Square... to the Independent School District of Iowa City for public school purposes. Sec. 1. Be it ordained by the City Council of Iowa City that the use of... Centre Market Square... is hereby granted... for public school purposes.... Sec. 2. This grant shall be perpetual so long as said premises so granted shall continue to be used and occupied... for the purposes herein specified. Whenever said premises shall be used for the purposes other than herein specified, then this grant shall be void and said premises shall then revert to said Iowa City for the use of the public." All of the ordinances were recorded in the County Recorder's office, in the Deed Book, in 1897 (Deed Book 80, pages 15-17). No deed or other form of conveyance has been found. The Board of the Iowa City Community School District has voted to close Central Junior High School at the end of the current school year. The Board has also voted to sell the property, and has received voter approval for sale. In reviewing the matter, the School Board's attorney, John Cruise, has suggested that the City of Iowa City has an interest in the property which might cloud the School District's title. By letter dated July 2, 1982, addressed to the City Council, Stan Aldinger, President of the School Board, requested that the City quit claim to the School District its interest so as to clear that title. That request prompted our review. i MICROFIL14ED BY J 1' JORM'-MICROL"A9- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i i A93 m 2 QUESTIONS PRESENTED I 1. What was the legal effect of the City's ordinance? That is, what interest did the City transfer to the School District? Fee? Easement? Something else? 2. If the City converyed a fee interest, does the City have a reversionary interest in the property which would be barred by Iowa Code (1981) sec. 614.24 (the Iowa statute barring state uses and reversions?) i i 3. If the City transferred something other than a fee interest, what is the nature of the City's interest in the property? 4. If the City has an interest in the proprety, may such interests he quit -claimed to the School District? CONCLUSIONS I 1. The City conveyed only an easement to the School District. 2. The City's interest in the property is not barred by Code sec. 614.24. 3. When use of the property for public school purposes ceases, the property belongs to the City. 4. The City may not convey its interest in the property without receiving fair and reasonable compensation for its interest. DISCUSSION E Section 614.24 of the Iowa Code (1981) provides as follows: Reversion or use restrictions onland preservation. No action based upon any claim arising or existing by reason of the provisions of any deed or conveyance or contract or will reserving or providing for any reversion, reverted interests or use restrictions in and to the land therein described shall be maintained either at law or in equity in any court to recover real estate in this state or to recover or establish any interest therein or claim thereto, legal or equitable, against the holder of the record title to such real estate in possession after 21 years from the recording of such deed of conveyance or contract... unless the claimant shall... file a verified cliam with the recorder of the county wherein said real estate is located within said 21 year period. In the event said deed was recorded or will was admitted to probate more than 21 years prior to July 4, 1965, then said claim may be filed on or before one year after July 4, 1965. Such 1 141CROFILMED DY ; 1— JORM --MICR6LA9—. c� CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES ,283 JI 3 claims shall set forth the nature thereof, also the time and manner in which such interest was acquired. For the purposes of this section, the claimant shall be any person or persons claiming any interest in and to said land or in and to such reversion, reverter interest or use restriction, whether the same is a present interest or an interest which would come into existence if the happening or contingency provided in said deed or will were to happen at once. Said claimant further shall include any member of a class of persons entitled to or claming such rights or interests. In the matter at hand, essential elements to be considered in applying that statute are as follows: 1. A deed, conveyance, contract or will. 2• A reversion, reverted interest or use restriction in such deed, conveyance, contract or will. 3. A claim based upon such deed, etc., against the holder of record title who is in possession. 4. Failure of the claimant to file notice of his, her or its interest. Were the Ordinances Deeds or -Conveyances? In our situation, no notice was filed by the City, so element 4 is not an issue. The School District's attorney is taking the position that the ordinances, in effect, conveyed a fee interest with use restriction and right of reverter. That is, it claims to be holder of record title, in Possession under the terms of a deed, conveyance or contract, so that the City's interest, if any, is barred by section 614.24. At this point it should be noted that although, as a general rule, statutes of limitation do not run against the state or its subsidiaries unless expressly so stated, section 614.24 has been held to apply to bar claims by municipalities. Chicago P. North Western Rv Co Osage, 176 N.W.2d 788 (Iowa, 1970). v City of Therefore, the first question in our case is whether the ordinances were or may be deemed to be equivalent to deeds, conveyances or contracts. As background, it may be noted that "Neither the former law, nor the law in effect in 1950 provided the method by which cities were authorized to sell land. It was and is simply provided that they shall have the power to dispose of and convey land under certain specified conditions." Madsen, Marshall's Iowa Title Opinion and Standards (2nd Ed. Rev. 1978, hereinafter cited as "Marshall"), sec. 17.1(c), p. 385. i IdICRDEILMED BY 11' JORM"'MIC Ft. LAW CEDAR RAPIDS • DES rJOINES 03 J Under the law in effect at the time the ordinances were enacted (Ch. 75, secs. 1 & 2 of the laws of the 21st G.A., codified as secs. 931 and 932 of the Iowa Code (1897)) it was provided that the people of any town may transfer or rededicate any public square or plat to an independent school district for school purposes, but such transfer was only to be made follwoing a petition from one-half the resident voters, and, after notice, upon approval of two-thirds of the votes cast in an election on the question I have found no record that the procedure was followed in this case. Further, three other things should be noted: First, it may be that "public squares" were considered to be different than "public markets or market places." Code (1897) sec. 880 authorized cities to acquire land for, among other things, "parks. ..public squares... public markets and market places." Second, cities and towns were sometimes treated in separate Code sections, and it is not clear that section 931 applies to cities. Third, if section 931 of the 1897 Code was either not applicable to cities, or, if applicable, its terms were not followed, it is doubtful that the City had powers to convey the land to the School District without payment for it. In Brockman v. City of Creston, 79 Iowa 587 (1890) the court ruled that, absent express statutory authorization, a city did not have power to convey land to a county for use as a county seat. Section 470 of the 1873 Code of Iowa relating to the powers of cities, provided as follows: "They shall have power to purchase or condemn, and pay for out of the general funds... any lands... for the use of public squares, streets, parks, commons, cemeteries, hospital grounds, or any other proper and legitimate municipal uses. ..and shall have power, in case such lands are deemed unsuitable or insufficient for the purpose for which they were originally granted, to dispose of and convey the same, and conveyances executed in accordance with this chapter shall be held to extinguish all rights nad claims of any such town or city to such lands existing prior to such conveyances." The City of Creston planned to donate to the county in which it was located land and buildings for use as a county seat, which was to be relocated from elsewhere in the county. In enjoining the transfer, the court stated (79 Iowa at 590-591): "The statutes authorize the cities to dispose of the lands. It may be admitted that the purposes of the disposition are not prescribed by the statute. It surely does not prescribe that such disposition shall be made to enable the city to do things for which no authority is conferred. The exercise of such power is not incidental to the exercise of power conferred upon the city, or necessary for the exercise of any express powers. Should there be any doubt upon the subject,—and surely it cannot be claimed that these statutes should be interpreted to confer the power in question without doubt,—that doubt must be resolved against the existence of the power in, and its exercise by, the city." a83 i MICROFILMED BY � 1 'DORM- MICRbLAB' - 1 LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES l i i I That is, the City did not have power to donate the property. (The court was not faced with any question concerning possible sale.) Accord: Gritton v. City of Des Moines, 274 Iowa 326, 73 N.W.2d 813 (1956). The foregoing is cited primarily to reflect the situation at the time the ordinances were enacted rather than as authority for the proposition that the transfers were either void or voidable. Any such claim by the City may be barred by Section 614.17 of the Code (which originally became effective in 1950), which bars claims to title antedating 1950, unless notice of such claim was filed by the claimant within one year from July 1, 1980, and no such claim was filed. While Marshall, Sec. 17.1(A), p. 382, says such statute of limitation would not run against the state or its subdivision, that opinion does not seem to take into account the Chicago & Northwestern Rv. Co, v. Citv of Osage case referred to above. Without judicial interpretation, a title examination would have to consider that Section 614.17 did not apply. In any event, the City was, presumably aware that there were limitations on its power to convey a fee interest in property without consideration. If that were the case, the City may have intended to grant something less, such as an easement, since no warranty deed or deeds were"ever executed or filed. On the other hand, section 1918 of the Code of 1873, relating to the powers of countries to acquire lands on account of debts, and to resell such property, states that the transcript of supervisor's approval of such sale "shall be sufficient deed of conveyance by such county." There do not appear to be any Iowa cases relating to the form of conveyances by municipalities, although there are a number of cases involving interpretation of deeds. However, for the reasons stated below, in my opinion an Iowa court would construe the ordinances as either deeds or conveyances. First, possession and use of the property were transferred to the School District, and it has been used for school purposes at least since 1897. Second, the County Recorder recorded the ordinances in the deed book. Third, while not conclusive, the statute authorizing conveyances by counties by transcript of suprevisors' proceedings is some evidence of an acceptable form of conveyance by a public body. In view of those factors, it is my opinion that the ordinances would be construed as either deeds or conveyances coming within the purview of Section 614.24. Attached to this memorandum is a copy of a memorandum prepared for the School Districts by its attorney (hereinafter referred to as "Cruise Memorandum"). I agree with the conclusion drawn at the end of his section (at pp. 2-3) entitled "Ability of City to Convey Land by Ordinance," although I have some questions about his rationale, and would suggest that the City had no power or authority to make a gift of the property. See: Brockman v. City of Creston supra, and Gritton v. City of Des Moines, supra. aa13 n1CR0EILMED BY 1" -DORM "MIC RdL'AB J CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'11014[5 i 9 t Interests was Obtained by the School District In any event, assuming the ordinances are construed as either deeds or conveyances, the next question is: what interest or title did they grant to the School District? Fee simple title? An easement? A license? If a fee simple interest was conveyed, the School District can be said to be owner of record title, and an Iowa court would probably construe the ordinances as imposing use restrictions, thereby bringing them within the language of section 614.24. See Presbytery of Southeast Iowa v. Harris, 226 N.W.2d 232 (Iowa, 1975) a case involving a warranty deed with language restricting use of the property for church purposes. In that case, the court said such language created a "possibility of reverter" which was precisely the type of interest the statute was intended to bar. In Calamus Community School District v. Rusch, 299 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa, 1980) the court interpreted an instrument labeled "lease" which contained the limitation that the tract should belong to that school district "to have and to hold during the time it should be used for school purposes." The court held that defendant's interest was a contract right of reversion and section 614.24 applied to bar such claim. On the other hand, the ordinances merely grant the use of the property for ispecified purposes. Such grants can be construed as grants of easements. "[A]n easement is an interest in property... This court has held that an easement is a liberty, privilege, or advantage in land without profit existing distinct from ownership of the soil and... it must be founded upon a grant by writing or prescription. [citation omitted] An easement may be founded upon arg ant by writing or by prescription... we have held an easement may be created in three ways: (1) an express written grant; (2) by prescription; and (3) by implication." (Emphasis added) Independent School District of Ionia v. DeWilde, 243 Iowa 685, 53 N.W.2d 256 at 261 (1952).' That is, an easement is a right of one person to use the land of another for a specific purpose. 25 Am, Jur. 2d. Easements, sec. 1. An easement given no title to the land on which it is imposed City of Dubuque v. Maloney, 9 Iowa 450, 456 (1859). It is not an estate in land (25 Am, Jur. 2d. Easements, sec. 2), and such permissive use can never ripen into title. Gerdts v. Mulford, 230 Iowa 647, 653, 298 N.W. 873 (1941). Johnson v. Burlingenton Northern, Inc. 294 N.W.2d 63 (Iowa Ct. App. 1980, Appin for Review Died) involved Lie interpretation of a deed granting to the railroad's predecessor in interest certain property "for said railroad and for railroad purposes only" (294 N.W.2d at 64). That language is very similar to the language in the ordinances. In finding that the deed only granted an easement, the court said (294 N.W.2d at 65): a? 003 7 ' 1 r 141CROFILMED Or 'JORM-'MICR6LA13' 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I �� 7 i "Where, however, the deed limits conveyance to the railroad on the requirement the property be used for only those purposes incident to the construction and operation of the railroad, only an easement is granted to the grantee. Keokuk County v. Rainier, 227 Iowa 499, 503, 288 N.W. 676, 678 (1939). An easement is an advantage or privilege in land without profit existing distinct from ownership in the soil. City of Dubuque v. Maloney, 9 Iowa 450, 455 (1859)." Accord: Atkin v. Westphal, 246 Iowa 822, 69 N.W.2d 523 (1955), but cf. Chicago North Western Ry. Co. v. City of Osage, 176 N.W. 2d 788 (Iowa, 1970). See: Marshall, Sec. 12-3(A), p. 270, where it is said that language very similar to that used in the Johnson case "constitutes a perpetual use," and reversion language would make such a grant a perpetual use with a reversion attached." In the case at hand, the ordinances merely granted the use of the property for public school purposes, with the property to revert to the City when no longer used for such purposes. Such language is consistent with grant of an easement since all the School District acquired was the appropriate use. Nowhere in the ordinances is there a grant or conveyance of anything other than such use. i If that analysis is correct, the School District's interest was other than as "holder of record title" since an easement is not an estate in land. City of Dubuque v. Maloney, supra. Therefore, section 614.24 could not be applicable because, by its terms, it only bars claims against the holder of record title. See: Marshall Sec. 12.3(B), p. 277. The Cruise Memorandum section (pp. 3 et seq) discussing the Tva of Estate Conveyed, in my opinion, is based upon several erroneous assumpt of ns or conclusions. T W Phillips Gas & Oil Co. v. Lingenfelter, 262 Pa. 500, 105 N.E. 888 involved a deed similar to that In the ty of Osage case. That is, a warranty deed with use restrictions. Such is not the case here, where all that was conveyed was a limited use. At page 4, the Cruise Memorandum states that: "The language of the Centre Market ordinance is similar to that of Dvorak and Reichard which were construed as fee simple with right of reversion." That statement is wrong. Reichard v. ChicagoB&QR Co., 231 Iowa 563, 1 N.W.2d 721 (1942) involved a warranty deed conveying a strip of land with the following proviso (231 Iowa at 566): "Provided that in case the said Railroad Company does not construct their Road through said tract or shall, after construction, permanently abandon the Route through said tract of land, the same shall revert to and become the property of the grantors their heirs or assigns." a83 I_ MICROFIL14E BBY ----'� I 1- -JORM--MIC RdLAB ..1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES t401N[S D The court noted (231 Iowa at 568) that: "Both sides concede that the estate conveyed was a fee simple, subject to defeasance." Thus, that case did not involve the question of what was originally conveyed, only what interest remained upon the happening of the event stated in the deed. Dvorak v. School District Tp of Dodge, 237 Iowa 442, 22 N. W. 2d 238 (1946) involved a conveyance by warranty deed with the following proviso: "The same to be revertible to the owner of the [adjoining tract] when it shall have ceased to be used for school purposes." The issue in that case was, as stated by the court (22 N. W. 2d at 239), "Thus it will be seen that the principal question in the case is whether appellant has ceased to use said school site for school purposes." Neither party contended that the original conveyance was anything other than a fee simple with right of reversion. Neither Reichard nor Dvorak helps the School District since both involved conveyances of fee simple title. Perhaps the strongest point raised in the Cruise Memorandum supporting the Position that the grant was of something other than an easement in the argument (p. 5) that: "The reversionary rights indicate the conveyance of a fee rather than an easement. An easement would automatically terminate if the use did not comply with the terms of the easement. An easement would have spoken of termination of the easement or privileged use instead of "reversion of the property" to the City for public use." The language used in the ordinance was that if the specified use ceases "then the grant herein made shall be void, and said property revert to Iowa City for the use of the public." (There are minor insubstantial variances in the language of the ordinances.) Even if one concedes that such language is not entirely legally consistent with granting of easements, it does not follow that the language shows an intention to convey a fee interest. As noted above, the Dvorak and Reichard cases both involved fee simple conveyances with possibilities of reverter, and the Iowa Supreme Court was only asked to enforce the terms of those deeds, not their meaning. While the reversion language may not have been necessary for extinguish- ment of easements, it is not inconsistent with such interpretation since it merely states what will happen when the specified use cease possession would revert to the City. With respect to the reference to 28 Am. Jur. 2d. Estates, sec 11, p. 83, I would only note that the ordinances clearly did not convey "without limit or remainder over. They very clearly limited the School District's use of the property (public school purposes only). c _r!zu l MICROFILMED 9Y 1. ` -JO RIRAPIDS CR4'1CA B' RAPIDS CEDAR • DES'MOINES I �� r I 9 Another possible interpretation of the ordinances is that they granted a license to the School District. A license is authority or permission to do a particular act or series of acts upon land in possession of another. Resnick V. Citv of Fort Madison 259 Iowa 578, 145 N.W.2d 11 (1966). Generally, licenses are granted for acts such as mining or cutting of timber. However, since the School District has had possession of the property, it is hard to see how the City's grants could be construed as licenses. Another approach the School District might take is to claim title by adverse possession. However, without going into the technical require- ments for showing title by adverse possession, it should be noted that adverse possession is generally not available against the state (Sioux City v. Betz, 232 Iowa 84, 4 N.W.2d 872 (1942) nor against a municipality (Schultz v. City of Oskaloosa, 193 Iowa 781, 187 N.W. 867 (1922). What can the ity do? One final matter merits discussion: What can the City do to resolve the problem? It seems clear that, assuming the City does have an arguable claim to title in the property, it cannot dispose of that interest unless it receives fair and adequate consideration for its interest. Section 364.7 of the Code (1981) provides that: "A city may not dispose of an interest in real property by sale, lease for a term of more than three years, or gift, except in accordance with the following procedure: I. The council shall set forth its proposal in a resolution and shall publish notice as provided in section 362.3, of the resolution and of a date, time and place of a public hearing on the proposal. 2. After the public hearing, the council may make a final determination on the proposal by resolution. 3. A city may not dispose of real property by gift except to a governmental body for a public purpose..." The Iowa Supreme Court has held that the powers of cities to convey property must be strictly construed. Brockman v. Citv of Creston, supra, Gritton v. Ci of Des Moines supra, both of which involved statutes in effect prior to enactment of the current Code provision. Brockman disallowed donation of property to a county, and Gritton disallowed a bargain sale to a non-profit charitable foundation. Assuming the City Council wished to donate its interest to the School District, it is doubtful that it has such power in the present circumstances. Section 364.7(3) would allow a gift to a governmental body "for public purposes." However, since the School Board has decided to I 1 t i MICROFILMED BY �1. a JOR M�'-MIC R�ICAB' } CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIRES 1� a P3 r� J aI JORM"'MICR L/CB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 140IYE5 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: December 1, 1982 TO: File i FROM: Richard J. Boyle RE: Center Market Square (Central Junior High Property) i The attached case, Hawk vs. Rice, 325 N.11.2d 97 (Iowa 1982), decided by the Supreme Court on October 27th, lends further support _. for the City's position in the above -referenced matter that what was I granted was an easement rather than a fee interest. cc: Robert W. Jansen, w/ enclosure � III 1 I i I I I i i C2 83 L MICRDFILMED BY JORM--MICR#L-AB - LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES M018ES l It. 2d SERIES arglary, unit the jury reslxlnd(d ely. The jury found defendant 1 first-degree burglary. The trial u sentenced him, and included the Y five year minimum on account e of a gun. Iowa Call• § 90'47 efendunt appealed. We unity treat defendant's con. ugether regarding speedy indicl- sircedy trial, :s the same consider. dy. Involves) is it logical exten. - holdings in State v. Johnson, 217 Ci (Iowa 1974), State v. Stewart, M 250 (Iowa 1974), State v. Bur - 4.W.21 577 (Iowa 1975), State v. 13 N.W.2d 235 (Iowa 1980), and iunclades, 305 N.W.2d 491 (Iowa c also State v. Csrmlls, 316 N.W.21 1982). C,omlwrisun of the ele. roldery anti burglary in the defi- :viuusly quoted demonstrates that rinses arc different; they do not the same elements. We thus different crimes charged in tan. ring out of a single state of facts. •rmissible under the principles of decisions, just as two different owing out of u single occurrence charged simultaneously. Iowa CAI) ("When the conduct of it . may establish the commission of 1 one public offense arising out of transaction or occurrence, the lie - my he prosecuted for each or such I. Rule 6(I) permits, hal dew not hat multiple offenses be charged fendumt armies that under rude he forty-five days to indict (or to uformation) ran from the time of I Ihat defendant was only arrested on he was originally apprehended i forty-five days before the bur. enation was filet. The limo does arrest, hot the question is, What is of :arrest for it defendant who is rarcenned under another charge nn of the same or another inti. •chills under it previous conviction ul of that or it different incident? ch filets we deem the time of HAWK v. HICK; lows( 97 (.Ile •% WwS 775 N.W.2a 9r arrest to be the time the new charge is filed. We do not think the officers should Merton V. HAWK, Appellee, have to engage in an idle evremmny of re- leasing the accused into the street and then V. retrieving him into the jail. Robert L RICE, et al., Appellants. 13) Defendant also argues that the pros. ecution treated him unfairly in letting time run out on the robbery charge :in(] then charging a different crime. The record does not disclose thud the prosecutor was trying to abuse or oppress defendant; lit - simply let the time expire In Camps the prosecutor actually lust the first case after trial, but we permitted a second charge W be filed of a different crime leased on the same event. 141 Nor does this case present unconsti- tutional delay under the four -step test in Barker v. Win6o, 407 U.S. 514, 530, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 2191-94 33 L.Ed.21 101, 116 (1972). See State v. Baan, 320 N.W.2d 824, 829-31 (Iowa 1982). 11. Effective assistance of counsel. The burglary information (If(]notcontain the required allegation of the use of a gun. Iowa Code § 902.7 (1979) (mandatory five- year minimum sentence); low•a II.Crim.P. 6(6), 21(2). When the trial court submitted interrogatories to the jury inquiring about ■ gun, defendant's trial counsel did not object that the information contained no such allegation. Defendant now contends thut the failure to object was not within the normal range of competency for a defense attorney. Defendant "requests this Court to remand this case for re -sentencing and deletion of the mandatory minimum sun - fence imposed pursuant W § 902.7, The Cade. 151 This is :another caw in which the record is inadequate for, determination of the charge of inadequate assistance of coun. sal. State v. Don, 318 N.W.2d 9111, 807 (town 1982). If defendant wishes to pursue this issue, he can initiate pmslcunviclion pru- ceedirigs under chapter MIA of the Iowa Cale. AFFIRMED. WN WM-1 I j MICA0FIO4ED DY ( I. ---JORM ,MIC R6LAB CEDAR ROIDS DES �40I 4ES No. 66614. Supreme Court of low•u. Oct. 27, 1982. Successor W g7antur of railroad right. of -way brought action to quiet his title in land after railroad abandoned trackage. The District Court, Grundy County, Peter Van Metre, J., held that only eawment was granted and quieted tilde in successor, and holder of quitclaim deed from railroad all - pealed. The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court, anti, on review, the Supreme Court, McCormick, J., held that original conveyance granted railroad only an ease- ment which reverted W successor when trackage was abandoned. Decision of Court of Appeals vacated; District Court decree affirmed. 1. Easements o I "Easement" is liberty, privilege, or ad- vantage in [unit without profit, existing dis- tinct from ownership. See publication Words and phrases for other judicial constructions and definitions. 2. Estates in Property o=6 In cunlrast to casement, "determinable fee" is estate in 0.•c simple that, will expire and revert to grantor upon happening of some specifiel possible future event or con. tingency. See publication Words and phrases for other judicial constructions and definitions. :I. Deeds m93 In conveyance of real estate, grunlor's intent is controlling, and it is aseertained by applying general contract principles. f J wu gllneu vrWieanv nrr1rR16R, W nr.nlrr 4. Railroads 0-69 Where conveyance grunted to rrilmad strip of land as "right of way" for construe - tion and operation of roilrsul anti added in habendum clause that it was "for any and all uses and pure les in any way connected with the construction, preurrvmtion, occupa- tion and enjoyment" of ruilroul, it ron- veyel only easement, notwithstanding that consideration given was chore to market val- ue and that grantor's wife released her dower rights in interest conveyed. 5. Railroads 082(3) Where deed granting righted -way to railroad conveyed only affirmative ease- ment, stale uses and reversions statute was inapplicable. I.C.A. § 614:N. William C. Wheatcrafl, West Ike Moines, for appellants. Michael F. Mumma, Jefferson, for appel- fee. Considered by UGHAND, P.J., and UH- LENHOPP, McCORMICK, LARSON, anti SCHULTZ, JJ. MCCORMICK, Justice. This case turns on whether a deed of right of way for a railroad conveyed it determinable fee or an easement. The rail- road abandoned its trackage in 1976 aml two years later quitclaimed its interest in the right of way to defendant Robert L. Rice. Plaintiff Merton V. Hawk, successor in interest to the original {,mentor, brought this action to quiet Lille to the Lend. The trial court held that the original grunt wits of a mere easement which reverted to Hawk when the lrucknge war abandoned, and the court therefore quieted title in him. Upon hire's appeal file court of appeals reverutd, holding that the deed conveyed it determinable fee that did not revert le - cause the possibility of reverter wits not preserved in axorlance with the stale its -e and reversions statute, town Gale section 614.24 (1975). We vacate the derision of the court of appeals and affirm the trial court. The original conveyance was by railroad form deed, dated April 21, ISM. A strip of Imtd fifty feet on each side of the centerline of (he railroad tracks, consisting of approxi. mutely six acres, was described. Coroidera. lion of one hundred dollars was recited. The granting clause provided that the grantor did grant, sell and convey to the -.till Toledo and Northwestern Railway, its successors and assigns, for the purpose of constmet- ing a Railroad thereon, and for all uses and purposes eonntclel with the con- struction and use of staid Railroad, the right of way for the said Railmml over and through the JdL4criled tract].... In its habendum clause, the decd recital that the railroad was To Have, Hold and Enjoy The land alcove descrilled, with the appurtenances, unto the said Toledo and Northwestern Rail- way, and its assigns forever, for any and all aced and purposes in any way connect- ed with the construction, preservation, ee- cupation and enjoyment of the said Rail. road. Previdel, however, that if the said Railroad shall not he constructed over and through the said premises before June Ist IK82 or if said Toledo and North- western Railway, or its assigns, shall at any time hereafter cease permanently In use said Road so to le constructed, and the same shall be abandoned, or the route thereof changed, so as not to be conlin- ad over the said premises, then and in that case said land hereby pgrantcl shall revert to the said grantor his heirs or assigns. Hawk contends the deed conveyed an ease- ment, and Rice contends it conveyed a de- terminable fee. 11, 21 An easement is a liberty, privilege or alvantagu in land without profit, exist- ing distinct from ownership, Radmll v. Wi:vl,'246 Iowa GDG, 610, 67 N.W'.'LI 516, 518 (1955). In contrast, it determinable fee is an estate in fee simple that will expire and revert to the grantor upon the hampening of some specified passible future event or con. tingency. Reichard v. Chicago, llurlington A Quincy Railroad, 7d1 Iowa 5 N,W.21 721, 726 (1942). 13) Every conveyance of n Passes rill of the grantor's inlery. contrary intent rearnmebly rill) 1 from the language used. Ie § 557.9 (1981). The grantors int trolling, and it is ascertained It: general contract principles. See 'ifichigan-Wisconsin PilkJine N.W.22 56, 14 Gro (Iowa 1968). [4) The granting clause ext scribed the conveyance in this right of way for construction anc . of a railroad. The halwildum ch that the railroad wits to have,: enjoy it "for any and all uses an', in any way connected with the coo preservation, occupation and enjc the railroad. Similar language, held in a lung line of cases to easement only. Sec Atkin v, DS Iowa SU, 826, 69 N.W2d 523, ("To have, hold and enjoy ... U all uses and purposes ... amen the construction (until operation said Railwuy"conveyed only ment); Brugman v. Bloomer, 234, 816, 13 N.W.2d 313, 314 (1944), almost identical to that in the pt conveyed only on easement subje; tory reverter upon abandonment! County v. Veinier, 227 lowu 491 N.W. 676, 678 (19.19) (similar Iii habendum clause—deed corteeyi right of way subject to statutory Boyer v. Chicago, Rock Island Railway, 186 Iowa 1133, 1139, 1611 G53 (1919) (similar habendum ch; effect war to convey an easement, & Northwestern Raihcay r. l Stockyards leo., 176 lows 659, tit;ti 769, 772 (19161) ("(A) grant or {gift for right of way is presumed to easement therein only:"); Rrown 69 Iowa 625, 626, 29 N.W. 9410 of way conveyed—"A mere rig' over land is, we believe, always r an easement."); Barlow v. Chh Island & Pacific Rsilway, 2D lou (1870) (conveyance "fur the cons i 141CRUILMED BY i I. JORM-MIC RdCA8 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES o(OO —�r J F, HAWK v. RICE Co, Il5 b,vS )tf N. W.7d 17 Quincy Itailroad, 731 Iowa 5G1, 569, 1 W.141 721, 7'16 (19.12). 31 Every conveyance of real estate 1.rc.4 all of the grantur s interest unless a atrary intent reasonably cull be iuferrcd im the Innguage used. lows Cock 557.3 (1981). The grantor's intent is cull ,)ling, and it it aseerlained by applying neral contract principles. :+v Flvnn v. fchigau-Wisconsin Pilot -line Cu., 161 W.'LI 56, 61 65 (Iowa 111(4). 141 'rhe granting clause expressly dc. filled the conveyance in this case as ,ht of way fur Construction and Iteration it ruilmad. 'fire hahendum clause added at lire milruad was to have, hold and .joy it "for any and all uses and purimevs any way connected with the construction, es enation, occupation ;sol enjoyment" of e railroad. Similar language has been •Id in at lung line of eaves by Convey an rcnnn7t only. &c Atkin v. treat L•all, 'Llai Wa 8011, 816, 69 N.W;dI fief, 5'15 (1955) I'll have, hold and enjoy ... for any and I uses and purlsosca ... conneclet] with construction (and] oltemtion ... of the ,id Itailw•ay"—eonveyal only an Case. .ent); 11rugnau) v. Bloomer, M4 Iowa NIA, 16, 13 N.W.'ld 313, 31.1 (1941) (language must identical to that ill the present vase nn•eyed only un uasemenl subject l(I sl:du- ry reverter ulsrn ubandonmenl); Keokuk bunks- v. [Mnicr, 717 luwlt •199, 5113, 1-N W. 676, 678 (1939) (similar language in uhendum clause --gleed conveyed only a fight of way subject to statutory reverter); lever V. Chicago, Rock !.41111)11 .f Pacific :ailw•ay, 186 low) 1113, 1139, WO N.\\'. 651, 53 (1919) (:+imihtr haln•ndan clause- Iogal !feel Was to cunvcy an nsenumt); Olicago Nurthwavlcrra Hailway v. ,Sinus 01Yzockrands f'1,., 1711 Iowa 1159, (i(K 159 N.W. 69, 771 (1916) ("(A) grunt or gift of ground ,,r right or way is presumed In Ice of an asemenl therein only."); Union v. Young, 9 lawn Qui, 616,'21 N.W. WI (KM) (right f way' conve)ed—"A meta• right of wa 3 lar land is, we Isdie'e, adwa)s regarded as n easement."); Harlow v. Chicago, fuck .dant St Pacific 16tilu'ay, :9 Iowa 176, 279 1870) (nnveyanet- "fur the construction of InWia 99 the second division of said railroad" w:es Conveyance of right of wap' only): .we also 1/aa•k C. Harlington Northern, Inc., 101.) N.W.7.1 1.77, ISA) (Iowa O.Altp.1980 (con. eeyunre "for said railroad and for r:ailm:ul purposes only" was of vaasemenl only'); ,luhnam v. Burlington Northern, lire., :^•1.1 N.W'.Ld (•:f, lib (lura Ct.App.19N)) (same). The court of apl+als relied prinvi)cdly on lte•frhnnl v. Chicago, Burlington g Quill;I Railroad, !'I'll Iowa SGI, I N.\t' :bl 731 (1111"_). fur a contraryresult. That case is distin- guishable, however, on two halm First, the parties in Beleha ni agreed the tvnvey- ance was of it determimahle fee so the na- ture It[ the Conveyance was not :m issue in the mic. Second, unlike the deed in the present case and other casement vices, (fie Reichanl decd did out contain language characterizing the conveyance ;is one of right of way, or for Construction and ulcera- tion of it railroad or for railroad purlsasrs. Although the deed did deserilc the nrltwY- anm as "fur Dela,) Grounds," the reversion- ary clause was basual solely on failure to construct lire railroad line, or after von. struction, lis minenl abandonment of the route. Thus it would nut lie unreasonable to conclude that the deed conveyed it fl -c interest In lire railroad roule, subject to the pvesa'ibilily of reverter. A similarity be - tweet] Beichanl and till. present case is (teat the lived in this case ulsu contains.1 a ret er• simnary clause. 'rhis, however, has nothing it, du in either ease with defining the inter- est that is subject to reverter. 'elm !resent rase is also diflin.guishablC from far other Lases in which an interest convcyed to It nailr of has Leen r:dlad ei- ther a determinable fee or at fee un a condi- tion suhscqurn(. Ree Chicago & North- wesh•rn Bnila•nl' v. Osage, 176 N.W.'_Id 748 !Iowa 197(1); dacohs e. Miller, lel Iowa 213, 111 N.W.2,1 671 Wirth; Connollc c. M's .;lames & Central Iowa Hafway, "16 Luca 471, l:4 N.\Lead ;I:,NI f I!I:r,); Po•s ,lfoilu •.t f'ify It:ailo•an' c. Urs .Nninrs, 183 Iow1a 1261, 159 N,\\'. 4511 (1!116). No limittion on lilt- nm• %eyunee in those eases woe identified vas Irving vuntain•d in either till- granting Anse or habvndunt Clause Koch appears i • NILHOf ILnED BY JORM MICROLA6- CEDAR kkPIDS •DCS '1013ES Em i� J F" IW Iowa :125 NORTH WFSTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIFS to have concerned a limitation either in a separate instrument or reversionary clause. None involved an casement issue. Rice contends the considcretion in the present case was close to the market value of the had, "Inking it unlikely the t,Tanlur intended to convey only an easement. Ile also contends the fact the grantors wife released her dower rights in the interest conveyed indicates an interest greater than on casement was involvol. It would not he unusual, however, for an easement for as railroml right of way to le priced at close to market value. The interest convey'rll was substantial and to ssibly here anent. Nor would it le unusual for a prudent grantee to require dower rights to le released. &,I! Chicago 14 South-western Railway v. Swin- ney, 38 Iowa 181 (1874). These circum. stances IW not niter (our • conclusion, hosed on the language of the dead, that only silt casement was conveyed. 151 Because the deed convcyel only an "affirmative" easement, the stale uses and reversions statute, section 614.24, is innppli. cattle. Sir Amama Society v. (idnnv Inn, Inc., 315 N.W.2d 101, 110 (Inwn 1982). We have no occasion in this Paye to consider the 1980 amendment to the statute, exempting reversions of railroad prolerty caused by abandonment after July I, 1980, from its terms. Sec 1950 Inwn Acts ch. II15, 0 fi. We vacate the derision or the court of appeals and affirm the quiet title hx-rtv of the district court. DECISION OF COURT OF APPEALS VACATED; DISTRICT COURT DECREE AFFIRMED. w A SIIa YJY11131$IIY STATE of Iowa, Appellee, V. Adolfo Rodriguez A(IIIII.AR, Appellant. No. 66828. Supreme Court of Iowa. Oct. 17, 1982. Defendant writs convicted in District Court, Polk County, Dade S. Alissildine, J., of fir: tregr a murder, and he apleuled. The Supreme Court, McCormick, J., held that: (1) defendant haul bunlen of .showing third mental examination at public expense was reaWmahly necessary; (2) trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying'de. fendnnt's motion for additional psychiatric evaluation; and (3) trial court did not err in refusing instruction to jury on defense of diminishal rasiaonvihility. Affirmsl. 1. Costs 0-302.1 Defendant charged with firstrlegree munler lilt(] hunlen of showing thin) mental examination at public expense was reason- ably nectxsnry, and mere assertion of desire for examination W explore IYxssible dimin- ishlal respwmsibility defense did not compel finding of reasonable necessity. 2. Mental Health 0-434 Where recunl did not establish that Ile. fendant in fiat -degree munler prosecution had symptoms inlhcating lxlssilde laethologi. cal intoxication sat that. of allegal offense or that palhulogicnl intoxication would sul$- porl theory of diminished reslsmaibilily, tri- ol court did nut ahtse its discretion in deny- ing defendant mutiun for thiel pny'chialrie evaluation. 3. Criminal lAw 0- 46, 53 f 1 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 4, 1983 To: City Council From: Gale Helling, Assistant City Manager Re: Cable Television Rate Increase Request Attached is a copy of a letter from the General Manager of Hawkeye CableVisionivin - g g preliminary notice that an official request for a rate increase for basic cable service will be forthcoming in the near i future. The local regulatory ordinance addresses the process for review of a rate increase application and this includes consideration by the Broadband Telecommunications Commission with a recommendation to the City Council whether or not the rate increase should be approved. At such time as a formal request is received, that information will be forwarded to Council along with a chronological summary of the process of review. The Broadband Telecommunications Commission will review financial information which may be requested of Hawkeye CableVision. Based upon the receipt of this preliminary notification, staff will begin working with the Commission to plan the review process and to determine what financial information will be requested for consideration. If you have questions or concerns at the current time, please contact me at your convenience. tp4/19 cc: City Manager Broadband Telecommunications Commission Drew Shaffer t MICROFIL1ED 1 l ' JORM"-MI I CEDAR RAPIDS agf J t 1 ��ICai�rke e - CCtbl¢�TSi January 27, 1983 i I i i I , j Mr, William Terry I - Broadband Telecommunications Commission Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Terry: - The purpose of this letter is to officially notify the Broadband Telecommunications Commission of our intentions to formally apDly i for an adjustment in basic rates within the coming weeks, So that this' apPlication can be submitted with all necessary supporting documents, we need to know from the Commission I` what type of financial information will be required of us. The franchise is somewhat vague in this respect. In order that this application can proceed as smoothly as possible, we would appreciate hearing from the Commission and the City of Iowa City Fs financial people at your earliest convenience. If I, personally, can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully, �J [dihiam L, Blough O General Manager 1 FILB/ j e cc: Kathy Cance, Acting Regional Manager f Drew Shaffer, BroaBhand Telecommunication Specialist 1 j {{{� P.O. Bo: 4500 I 546 Southgate Avenue Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351-3984 A subsidiary of American Television & Communications Corp. MI CROF ILI4EO BY I�...`..� �. �.... J11i1 O } OR" -"MIC RbLA- 1 % CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MDI9E5 i / Community Action Research Group P.O. Box 1232 Ames, Iowa 50010 (515) 292.4758 SALLY KRISEL Execudw Dlrc RICHARD P. COOL Dom•, Energy s (Judy P plea Mayor Mary Neuhauser 914 Highwood Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mayor Neuhauser: January 22, 1983 All of us are painfully aware of the financial costs of increasing energy consumption. Winter natural gas heating bills are soaring. Electric ratepayers are asked to pay for new power plants at exhorbitant prices. In Iowa City, however, the additional costs of new facilities was recently driven home. Approval, by the City's Zoning Board of Adjustment, of an eleven - story high transmission line through a residential neighborhood illustrated the social, environmental and aesthetic costs as well. In light of these costs, a town like Iowa City can do one of two things. It could do nothing and deal with each new pro- ject as it is proposed. Or, a town could begin taking steps to develop a local plan to minimize those social, environmental and economic costs. CARG proposes that Iowa City do the latter. CARG proposes that Iowa City undertake a community energy study. Such a study would inventory the community's energy use, f II assess the potential for curbing that use through conservation and alternative energy strategies, propose specific strategies for the community to pursue, and assess the financial and economic impacts of the resulting "business -as -usual" and "conservation" scenarios. I have enclosed several press clippings to give you an idea of how these studies have been received in other communi- ties. CARG has done them in Hardin, Story, Marshall, Tama and Powesheik counties. I'll call you within the next several days to set up a time when we can discuss this proposal in person. I look for- ward to meeting with you. Sincerely, Ager D. Colton 1 \ CARG General Counsel it 0a0 e MICROFILMED BY —JORM--MICRbCAB._ L(; I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES r - Tappin �:.� .. rgry sources. could pay odor Iowa ay owele! ■eL�lrlltAr, _ _ w JAN=A L=011 Jou :`.. �+ mall w11+ •e lar a int. 02PZNDRtICiwle r,+eY 1 lw at epVi areM lY1Y'let 2 tingled eat them theles ammedty hleii �sl[•ldaw Mel watax,r Pellet tae; trdt♦fea miltloe asooany y p W .M epdkD/ ay.. sillar` to 19 W. Recently tmepleftl ftrdles o/ Banliq Story, lisrsiell, Tama and The s 'llghlisg efficiency, modifying Poweshldt cantles tedy.lds+tlped perrotaum y t rreuingy serkoua s elfkts of prothatiftm N'Mldq the Iowut ojSeraling pd preventive materials rising energy cab. The research was wxooa�mlo leaaot b Stay Carry, recycling and prermtlte malate condactd by the Cornmmity Action grog'sthe ewp aeY D°�1 aeA Ftsxarch Croup of Ames'Md-lna glMo Ileed'froarigy eau- s fairly modest d recapture Communis A mats wan eotmfdtred' Irom a resource program could rlion ecapture In p re y ilii Inc., a five lonely commuly ecmakin u the tanalnm na•proflt Crpneatlom Serving low. c+arembmed mmmom al�osy b• fhe dativly, The study atJmated that If heady. h00+shsld4 "Dissipoed the lam r luwardmM liar ars N etndy. . segllm, pereeet of homes and btetaeaw Ina imports Of percent of Its Soil RgMN.. ie11pat—to many install some form of solar heating by fid, needs and ells more them aNNQ4 a t Nd Pollermakea an 11110, about 23 percent of the almost a11temane leap toward ! Projhted beat demand to the resider• See edimorial .synthetic lees dw the need for move : tial and commercial rectors could be un opposite page © they Ignore the *400 met. tet Ian Beage t Id hbsew�Q donars' To cnmm m s the s+etysDmslre fm ca need to begin the swlkA i teLae['the lora! from conventional resources to economy is UPON aategy. Iina eefp easesla est�6ie 'the r! locally based conservation and gine maremft a�iwy that the lowest renewable alternsuvee The major I o sT 11 Maw by a wall bi m+rossig i nest d a erdnioe 8=3 at obstacle to accomplish this is high. That wan energy tiew be waited by liner fhrenlog. The small-business or reap wary reytesmt the sOQV used in Lim CmiWinbudwammeoethm r deellal consumer may see the Story County In 1930 LLS an"Lloo. a coowmr ne,� to IR taaomhat. i Advantage of breaking away from barrels). i A tecboiga taped the multiplier Ableldwor be n put ls as imbeadthy i taaventlpoai resource but frequently ; aoalyais allowed the researchers to doe roan that resource I& too strapped for funds m acquire do beyosd the up-1}mt comb of a most be seed a ftklaetly. the Allesnative. ex's KYSwrcadid tomeasure the fWl The study projected tbaC t Flnaoclug energy alternativn beoelt t provided to the local coesemen ta the Breewaty gra dmew be a major project at all levels resources radaned their energy use P tomos _ tzmmmlty Issdenhi In both the d ID um (oatiural Many Producu)reit � l Inlty. or be die � Cold be reduced twthe Anticipated odihtds, or financialuctivity mechanism private a e being l aorta I°it from pled mlltim to $70 million. - developed arced the country. from a dollar, itpmt B comparison. the area's ecousemy could be getting Coesmvatlaa Snows cdstventbiaf Federal and state gover®emts bave "lure yam ILaa In benefit from a reoamas s be lad effectively while developed grant ad tax programs. dollar spent on locally produced proves m eroenmlc boost to the Same r®vdtlea have CsaUoms d1lods and services. The recently IOW ateeem3 Cossetvalbns hlgh d honks and lading tandistlene to vtnpleted study &bowed that Stn msUOW Sears partly became of rare capital. Coopentivew our to County alone could be losing ma e an �er d %� n aesks. Fa a ier"rvice owpawNtaam have U= $77 melon in productivity iu ° for maw aFssditmed 11 million Mob autd to pmelaset; fiaage our 1990 became of this lar in bol Ps provwss 9.11 jobs a• taw few essrp tabltaafedatmld a+wmmk attivty. Umad k winds 11 ssBllom paw for b as Rami Electrical Qa/ara H TWO of ltarahan County's largest sWtin.provilk 16N Jobs. A MPds+tud'+tssblslnmvi0ela eaergy users — P"AT Controls Red tlmjmdy d the jobs aoaud thrceg► rated meas. Apr r these made✓ erg the Iowa Soldiers home — iBeserata trabstm came fl'am leeuuy laud + majr atvmsamle rvtan 400 ore potential eoaegmences of htaiaamaa that rJl and imtan IL atme+db. end mom riled beeems uw•reasad tots a local lammtlora I Weis mat of the gas jobs are sspsspportingS ad retan dlvldmm +oJ `.salaaul u Ft bar continues to i elsawhera' to their msmbes or Inrestmt .us "(UAL am at is prepm level — within the uMatrial sector, there We to Iowa will alani". n0edre J4 mmWod cubic fast In 1084 _ t wW money for energy. bet will there be Wr faoD•DeD in Ilea, oompu•ed with money for anything elm? Constantly l2rd,dde in Ilia The Soldisrs Borne heart" the burden d id" Warp cwld be maglleg•fo pay m".ON cats will not tate am d the (twits jig minas eahie set per yin. problem; we most plaii dr s Mme To make esti y+ymanta, imdta- for ourselves Sad or sdNee In u -'a may bsR to cat back m their future at'afomle detelspmmlt, em L.7 >n vita and sta[L p ills yppenR the planning mart be a major consldera• DES MOINES REGISTER DECEMBER 8, 1982 tlon. IJke the 19th-ecotm7 towns that fulled whes the railroad bypassed tbem. rommudtles that let new 'nrra• opgortunitry par them by rel!11e!I. 141CROE ILI•IED By JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 0185 k1 New vision on energy. RE A lot of time, money and effort. "',diff er este It's pie -to -the -sky to ' go into snaking America believe think,M really changing energy - that the way. it tius•esergy is usepatterns... really the only. way,. li.vt;.tbis But is that so certain? America goes, 6f reasoning goenergy use makes significint changes in and productivity are so linked energy we all the time. Some are that you -can't use iesv energy fueled by the government — yes. i without hartlpB'Frotluctivity; even today, amid President that takes care'd:cauernd61L ; Reagan's free-market protesta- Second, new and -different energy , tions. He is»king for more than sources are jot tgo wtfd-eyed for sl billion for nuclear energy. serious consideration; so mueh'r; What about the hidden costs in for renewables.- "i' � ' co the rrestsystem? N&Iowa j That leaves the current set-up:' ' Community 'Action Inc. has a foolhardy reliance on other':., performed the unusual service of nations, a phenomenal drailr'ow :; showing; what several Iowa the economy and.■ feeltoflk.:, ' eouoties':`current energy use defeat and helplesrAm"Is thb 'costs them and how changing it the way it has to be? Or does could mean money spent in Iowa most everyone think so because Instead of Saudi Arabia — or of a lack of imagination, too few Louisiana. (See article on i resourcces devoted to change and. oppoaftepage.) the towering interests of some of The people who put together America's largest companies? the five -county reports laid out How would It be to switch, to proposals for the boards of super- windmllir could you live happily vi ms on bow to begin looking at ever after? To discover that con- energy differently. in a similar servation doesn't have to man vein, the leaden of the Des going to sleep with a cold'nose? Moues Advisory Committee on To reed of healthy prospects in Environmental Quality have solar grain drying'• suggested that the City Council But you have to be realistic consider alternatives to renewing These alternatives are piddling Iowa Power's franchise with the compared to the big stuff: the oil, city when it conies up :,, 1985. j gas and electricity that keepthe How wild are these sugges• country running. It's prohibitive tions? Wilder than a $214 million ly expensive to get alternative energy bill .'or five cent: al Iowa energy sources operating at counties to 1990' Maybe t•f lime levels sufficient to make much to ask i f � I- I4ICROFIIndED BY —JORRA"MICR6LA13 % CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES J ERA J Supervisors Hear Energy Report, Task force Suggested The Teia Canary loud of POM- part •7w, Wnn7 ua tJn and renewable once&.. Sop ciYon wea asked . b. aldr 27as0gou. The study estltaated that d = oElddly .tpamsar u nip d, a• airly. •tee. agree •par and of the Pretest task hq Aim t'eui. Canty . 19e0 eat Iht'aited 1e Tamil amu sed Is mnsery . the � • Couij'iailnuf io.. ' couews: prddubtuffy logo mme�fae T, a- balm of , the study could be' ed heft'SN'en M tee egqunt esime fyem osaicbd.byhCPA'shoor that' mils. To eompYmy reabop' npnredtyia Or bod.lowa Tema em Ile chap per the lou dug es;•beeamd •. Ailtig dnC!►) npr thee. Ma' tab as a energy prlcos. °' nee study flrj whose i,sb* su1 '11 dab, peeusb;.mwu b end recommended the use of oompMmd 17 the.Qontmedy. w than mime; renewable' resources, Ikmar AaNi'lldiutii'Graep for e' ael�b morjg� " ; anj& MICA pMdcf.-Coimmenity. The.iWor egad of warp';' Llerow, Bald MIG writhes to S°��0! b�e'ltetrin Be lhi tenses tea M core lea : said 6 orgaehileg a county. doffir'dLht. Llmow add. it m'. wide task fop m mike the ww+d IRs b $bdy the. ndm#ad thin 0 per aeat.or-1 redevelopment of energy Repel RP• . man d t1ge•600to paid for atWmtbe a readily: The task The puepae d the Redoes m mete to outside of [urea. totes couldcaatut a the search ProJect. aseotdbg, to Jim Ao4 the lou of the foil use of lot• Walloon to the energy Liaow, McA eeetphsfetma•, tbe.doDar do muni the bas problems. *0 coordinator. fiLto aplue dlobe. • Llerow suggested if such a mmmuullymkatbmebeamp Umm sof Wheaten that task force to formed that probleedslbGwSmedswith Tena County cftn ww be,. PwmN members would be tmn the Ere md, r maw. paying 60 Per ad man for?: sillily tcpteiatod"N. eon. energy In 1990 than In 19903 tractors add chYmber of Daring. the, lad hating while rep colli Increase osiy' commerce repro tsdves. Kama, hUG caved • ow 10 per amt. 10.000. 'through ., the Rome The effect onthe county's Paap.•ArYmes Ptogruim. amnesty would be a deaeue Of more than 51.000.000 spent In eomotok: produdbfty by to help poo* ptthieolb aha SID Million dollars, llewrew heating , season, also not mid. The da0aa•tbat would SM.412 was $bin b' 1.691 have been sped in the county . Tama Couniq d 1 1 . - to p4 kr goads gad smite. In aAA�lpe, MCA's Restb• would Ian the aunty to pay crizatin for reduce Ioerbaoime'�depon. kat examples donee on heating eaagy d the due d prodsedrKy — udemw by In" sap lossof boylag power. detinue ommmmdm In sort lon; decreer to Wes, Lic ow gold the energy and an hao�uia to agriculture probleme.poce preop. fame corm today an.a preview d what Lbraw said. the study the reel of the coarmunhy retomAeaded a rhlft of would fjce Wm'to w. speedlag to ahernato ever& lcnxdlej to Uerow's re. metre Including couservetion "OLEDO CHRONICLE 1000ST S, 1932 1 IUCRorILI.1ED BY i "-CORM MIC ROLAB CEDAR ANDS • DES '401AES a 85 T � f 4 1 1; ',IICUSI' 9, 1932 The energy Deady L 7i:.d.r dtu,� .. ns' . teas jttiy' �lor� .boiti a report. vriaengid°wcdaollr.nm. WWO tradl game d•16s eaeaktdeee Cmedeeq lA tbkt�. a bl•1Od 7Aaw fkmmtdti Ac oat, lne (MICA), wetw ww tbw� s tittle eseortre. IORIt31 It_nj—* `•®"`sma[ms 7wlBspmdat ofttr'deeade—endI tb■mwaooabQalgoAlm.bytheand 7battrigm�egi�gSOWD bill Will be SMWitbnt���tl0glain aassisim on. to am t� b Psodtl[tlrlly, orAbout 31ao0 cOmWe Amod 110 ke Aer4 will IoerA■a1110 murk r g.pWeA A Ares yur, by as Noon Of.thtransi*ward a camas Y A teal dWL Ereysae knows that the la�e Math s1M°�dem0litlmbgamtoAlla.nga and fl Wwd at raise i g such sla rued as Aahrd go and blYtldg all Ing bpPfbverthdese �deehlcltyb,alao.gohtgtoCoatumsego• . tlavbrtyAs It Affeeb Powe ek Of County black and irWta — Lbe lea■t. ■ebelt+g. ts my 16e fat tbN lap' daan't merely COOcenlnte on the bed Dews. It alsoafa s eons'C"tructive naesUms, alike. and we hop three ■ug. gestlorw us' seized M aed uployal andab and private citizens FUst of ere Is UWall, there matter Of Com used use a such alter - me llve anergy Nouteee asthe DDD, wind and blame=. Many. residents a the county doabns have■m Nome a w thenewin& Wows+ geaanWe bdsg Driven by Iowa bnms, And sake.ap n plicatioatw or alY me oammoo these dajw. But t is use of curb techsiga■e 1& set yd AN wldeprad Y It ■held be. AetordltK to. rasearth 9POtW'b stsdy, even modest Wave" in the d. wind and soba power ebLdd have wall C&d.im almd tsthe b - Y Wort to convert W mi tau a Iml>aemeetlq wte8 Pared ti ilm But the report mpatne b ad, PO that its Dls•Iaak. of chane. reaudc tech. And one ndatko am b a iie' wlthlo Iskmedbtdy. It b thAf Iha assish rscanmmdatloo can be adopted Im. setups'leir300 11sacoordinatewpprimlrlm ywhoYdvd w b b both memeieNe 4=11"416V � pagoy b the eaely, working un of _ pushing for the joeteasad Members of Me� yep�e raedved the report m Mondays eanass d'tbe Complexity of the seedy, Abe. board undesbedaW ass tofakanmNtlmaODalgstltsmotaotN. Wa would hope, tbmgb, that baud members teeoptlse the tun• medbey of tb• prob4m aad s:t acCeg F..7be I at all enagy'eommb■law ek" a great deal of-- and It to something Vhkb could Im ' leastglvethecem n■ a�entedqukkly.7halwaildat ty etartmde■Ihegwith theadvere,eennomlc lmtact which would be felt it the status quo were maintained. IMICA ta to be Congratulated for commissioning the study. n .crura to toward the ama� � �Oem" of a daoothing atUtude ty asara situation. a?s I-MICROEILIIED BY -� �- JORM MICROLA B ' % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES !4011H � I r 7 , i IOWA CITY/ CORALVILLE r maw","" f February 4, 1983 i E To Iowa City Council: Enclosed is a budget estimate for the Convention,'Bureau from February 1983 through November 1983. This will be referred to as the interim period. By December, both cities should be receiving motel tax revenues and allocating them to the bureau. The bureau is presently funded by memberships. The majority of memberships come from local motels. These motels pay dues twice a year, in December and June. The motels have agreed to pay December 1982 dues, but not June 1983 dues. Thus, the bureau goes broke. We are asking both Coralville and Iowa City Councils to advance the bureau money to exist. We will pay you back with our first and second motel tax allocation. If you note deficit on the budget, we will need about $12,000 to exist, as we do presently. We are requesting $6,000 from Iowa City and.$6,000 from Coralville. This is AN ADVANCE, and will be paid back in full. Yours truly, Renee Jedlicka Director Iowa City/Coralville Convention Bureau P.O. BOX 2358 IOWA CITY IOWA 52244 (319) 337-9637 i r I-01 CROFILMED BY _ r"- JORM--"MICROCAB' -i l+ I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES } ._1 aft J1 'c G CONVENTION BUREAU BUDGET FEBRUARY 1983 THROUGH NOVEMBER 1983 I - DISBUR_ S, EMENTS (per month) Salary/benefits $1088.45 Office supplies 100.00 Postage 50.00 ' Telephone 50.00 Travel/meetings 125.00 Publications 50.00 Misc. ' j 50.00 ; SUBTOTAL $1513.45 $1513.45 for 10 months $15.134.50 iDOITIONAL EXPENSES i Great Rivers Region $366.66 Slide Show 150.00 Stationary 250.00 ---------------------------- Subtotal 766.66 DEFICIT — Disbursements $15,901.16 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS $15.901.16 Receipts $ 5.314.69 --- ------ ( Deficit $10.586.47 -------------------------y- RECEIPTS (from dues owed) I j--------------------------- February $ 544.00 i Marc 1107.63 May 501.25 , i y 100.00 ; (implement new dues structure--$50/business/year?) June 150.00 ' July 50.00 ' August 50.00 ' September 50.00 ' October 50.00 ' November 450.00 SUBTOTAL 3052.88 ' PRESENT FUNDS ' Savings 1715.81 ' Checking' 546,00 TOTAL RECEIPTS ' � $5314.69 ` ------------------------------w �f a86 ` i ^ MICROFIL14ED BY J0AIVI---MICR46LA6-' - CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401NES I J1 Convention Bureau Budget Estimation s Revenues Motel Tax Estimation 100,000 Membership Dues 5,000 i TOTAL 105,000 1 Expenses 9 � Salaries E Director 22,000 Taxes Secretary 11,000 f G Social Securi011w a 3,630 1 Unemployment „ Fringe Benefits Insurance @ .1q 3,630 (life and : alth) i Operating Expenses Rent ($250/w. th) 3,000 Postage 1,200 Telephone 1,200 Office Suppli.s 2,500 Bill Boards ( 3933.63/mo) 12,000 Bookkeeping (5120/month) 1,440 Equipment 11000 Travel Auto, room, meals 3,300 Trade Shows Booth expenses 2,000 Promotion Brochures 3,000 Favors/give aways 1,000 Hospitality rooms 11000 Bonding, Audit 600 Group Memberships, Staff Training 2,000 Hospital Information Center 1,000 TOTAL 76.500 �� MICROFILMED BY -1"- JORM -MICR46LAB'" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVES ff' a4 F Convention Bureau Task Force January 11, 1983, 3 p.m. Coralville City Hall Members present: Balmer, Boyd, Gr—e—e-nw—o—oF,-'R—aney, Holcomb, Rubright, Trott, Winter and Jedlicka Balmer motioned that Holcomb chair the force, Greenwood seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Holcomb appointed Jedlicka to be secretary. Holcomb stressed thatthis group will be making recommendations only to city councils. Discussion ensued over the budget. Balmer suggested we -follow a fiscal year budget. and make presentations once a year to the councils concerning this budget. He noted that because the 25% commitment holds for three years, a notification one year in advance should be allowed if the council intends to terminate this funding. Greenwood motioned that the organization be incorporated. Haney seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Greenwood recognized the need for legal assistance on this task force. Discussion ensued over the items for consideration. Limitations on functions and responsiblities was added, as well as care and maintenance of the two travel boards. The name of the organization was tabled until next month. Discussion ensued over the dues structure. Jedlicka was inquire concerning other convention bureau's structures. Location .of the office was discussed. Holcomb asked Haney to determine the cost of rent at the Chamber office. The finanical situation of the present Iowa City/Coralville Convention Bureau was discussed. Balmer recommended the bureau present a budget for the next couple months and present it to both councils. Holcomb suggested that the present board of directors of the bureau make recommendations concerning goals, staff, budget, and committees. These should be presented to the task force for consideration. June 1 will be the deadline for the task force recommendations, as July 1 will be the starting date of the new corporation. The next task force meeting will be February 1, 3 p.m., in Meeting Room B of the Iowa City Public Library. Meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. Renee Jedlicka Secretary 246 IIICROFIL14ED BY JORM--MICR#LAI3' -J Ii CEDAR RAPIDS DES MINES 1 �� r Convention Bureau Task Force February 1, 1983 Iowa City Public Library I Members Present: Balmer, Greenwood, Holcomb, Rubright, Trott, Winter, y Jedlicka, Mitchell. Balmer moved that the January 11, 1983 minutes be approved. Winter seconded. Motion carried. I Jedlicka reported that the Chamber of Commerce determined a $250.00 ---- -' fee per month for services rendered. They will outline what this includes. a Greenwood reported that he will continue to explore non-profit tax status. f Balmer proposed a recommendation that the name of the corporation be termed, Iowa City/Coralville Convention and Visitors Bureau. Trott seconded. Motion ¢ carried. E Rubright presented budget. Discussion ensued. The budget was tabled. E E Jedlicka reported on other convention bureau dues structures. Trott moved we recommend $50.00/year/business dues. Winter seconded. Motion carried. t i Trott moved that the present task force become the Board of Directors for fiscal year 1983. Winter seconded. Motion carried. i Holcomb recommended that Jedlicka present both councils with an interim budget as to the bureau's needs through November. e t The next meeting will be February 22, 1983, at Meeting Roam B of the Public j Library at 3 p.m. Renee Jedlicka Secretary i 11CRO1101D BY 'JORIVI—MICR#G'AB— CEDAR RAPIDS DES M014ES Q74 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 2, 1983 To; City Council From: X(�ndrea Hauer Re: Parcel 64-1a Schematics - Remuneration At the February 1, 1983, Council meeting, the question was raised as to the payment to Zuchelli, Hunter & Associates for the Parcel 64-1a (department store site) architectual schematics. While the contract between the City and ZHA does not address this issue as to whether the City or the developer should pay, it was noted at the March 3, 1982 meeting by Mr. Zuchelli that if there was no development on either the department store and/or the hotel site, the City would be responsible for payment. In addition, on page 4 of the Parcel 64-1a Prospectus, it states: "The preliminary plans and schematic architecture for the proposed development site will be provided to the designated redeveloper with the remuneration for these documents to be included in the consideration for the execution of the land disposition agreement for the site." Thus, because Contract for Redevelopment was not executed with Armstrong's, Inc., the City is responsible for payment of those fees. tp3/2 1r - I 1 i 141CROFILIIED BY 1 I--DORM-MICR46CAB- - J CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i a87 City of lows City MEMORANDUM Date: February 3, 1983 To: City Council �/�/ From: Karin Franklin, Planner .I, Re: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Update Review The Council was sent, in their packets of January 28, the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommended 1983 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Land Use Update. Various revisions have been made to the document since the Council last reviewed it. Many of these changes were grammatical revisions, changes in presentation, or modifications to ensure consistency between sections. Throughout the document, language has been added to reflect the possibility of an alternative to construction of the Water Pollution Control Plant. The suggested phasing in the Update rests on the premise that the sewer problems will be solved in some manner and is no longer dependent upon construction of the plant. Outlined below are sections in which substantial changes have been made and sections which the Council has not fully discussed at previous sessions. II.C. Housing, page 8 The wording of this section has been revised considerably to conform to the format of the rest of the text. Discussion of this section was deferred by the Council pending receipt of the Housing Market Analysis; the Analysis was sent to the Council in the December 30 packet. III A. Schools, page 13 This section was revised substantially in response to comments received from the Superintendent of schools. The neighborhood school concept is more clearly defined and the alternatives to busing are deleted since the implementation of those alternatives was not in the power of the City and did not express a policy of the City appropriate to the Plan document. III.B. Trafficway Patterns and Transit, page 15 A clarification of the "loop" concept in transit is provided as requested by the Council. III.C. Human Needs/Services, page 17 An attempt is made to tie human services provision to land use decisions. III.D. Recreation/Open Space, page 18 The 1981-85 Parks and Recreation Plan proposed parks are li.sted and assumed to be a goal of the Councl—the Planning and Zoning Commission chose not to show the five parks on the short-range map since the specific sites were not known. I IEICROFILRED BY 11" DORM-MICR�LA- E5CEDAR RAPIDS - DESMOI,*e Ji 2 III.F. Neighborhood Commercial Centers, page 19 The range of sizes for commercial centers was expanded to allow smaller sites. The Commission did not favor two different designations of Neighborhood Commercial and Neighborhood Convenience centers; they were concerned that a neighborhood convenience center zone would result in the proliferation of a type of 24-hour service store which generated increased traffic not compatible within residential neighborhoods. III.G. Economic Develo ment ! page 20 This section is new; the Council saw it as a separate document, apart from the Plan, during discussions of economic development with the Chamber of Commerce. 1 VII. Studv Arewses I j Penin p_3: Discussion in the City/County Urban Fringe Committee of Committee that commercial j commercial development north of I-80 resulted in a consensus of the development should the urbanized area south of I-80. The Council indicat dl at the January 2take lace 4 informal meeting a desire to look at specific sites for neighborhood commercial development in or near the Peninsula Area. The Update provides generally for the possibility of a neighborhood commercial center in this area; a specific site may be indicated with adoption of the Zoning Map. Alternative sites can be discussed at the meeting. Inner Cit IC -7: A rationale for the low-density residential designation around Co lege Hill Park is presented. At our meeting on February 8, I would like the Council to indicate whether there is any disagreement with what is presented in the Update, rticularlwithin the sections cited above and then in the document as whoe. The listing above can serve as an agenda; we can then discuss any concerns Councilmembers have with any other parts of the Update and conclude with a review of the development sequence map, the Short Range Density of Development map, and Lon Development map. I g Range cc: Don Schmeiser I Doug Boothroy tp/sp Neal Berlin a it i MICROFIL14ED BY JORM- -MICROLAB'- - l 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES ROIYa I /� City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 3, 1983 To: City Council From: Robert Jansen, City Attorney Donald Schmeiser, Director, i ' & Program Development Re: Scheduling of the new Zoning Ordinance s Since the City Council has in a desire to adopt the new proposed zoning ordinance around the first of July, the staff has prepared a review schedule which shows an adoption date of July 7. The schedule illustrates the minimum amount of time required to adopt the ordinance without short - cutting normal due process procedures. We would like to point out that there may be two serious problems with r' such an accelerated schedule: (1) it does not provide for any review of is the zoning ordinance by the City Council prior to the Commission setting dates on February 17th for public hearings in March, and (2) the Planning & Zoning Commission has already indicated that it would be difficult to r meet such a schedule. We feel it is essential for the City Council to give all due deliberation to the proposed zoning ordinance and particularly the zoning ma r its being set for public hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commissiorior n The more Council review there is of the ordinance, the more legally defensible the ordinance will be. The Planning & Zoning Commission has indicated that it would prefer to review the new proposed ordinance according to the second zoning ordinance review schedule attached which fi shows an adoption date of August 4. t We cannot over -emphasize the importance for the City Council to now establish a set timetable for adoption of the new ordinance. We request that the City Council adopt a review schedule either as submitted or amended at the meeting on February 8. Both the Commission and staff are committed to expediting the review and adoption process in the shortest time possible. i bdw4/4 i i I 1 i i a�9 RICROF I LMED BY 1-JORIVI-MICRbCA9 IJ% I CEDAR RAPIDS DES I401YE5 _ I MICRorILMED BY —JORM --m C R6LA 8 Mol. CEDAR R I— APIDS DES ]IE JUNE JULY 4 21 28 x x x I x _0 x Itn'? 141CROMMED IBY -JORM - m C R 1--A •D 01. CEDAR RAPIDS E ]4E� J JULY AUG. AUG t12 19 26 x x x x i 02 x 04 Y City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 4, 1983 To: City Cou . From: Don Schmeis Re: Zero Lot Line Housing Attached hereto is a report prepared by staff at the request of the City Council addressing the various aspects of the above subject matter. If the Council is still inclined to adopt an ordinance permitting this type of housing development previous to adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance, the staff would proceed in the manner as follows. There are certain questions and policy considerations which must be addressed by the staff as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Those questions and issues are addressed in the report. The staff proposes to resolve as many of the questions and issues to which there is a staff consensus. Those issues which are fairly debatable will be referred to the Commission and the Council for resolution. The staff will then prepare an ordinance permitting development of zero lot line housing with attendant regulations. Assuming that the Council wishes the staff to proceed with the preparation of a zero lot line ordinance, we would anticipate that the ordinance could be prepared within one month and adopted within three months of this date. bj3/15 I I F TAFF REPORT P E RO LOT LINE HOUSING JANUAR 1983 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA Jf)NM %il(:F101 A11 .E 7 ZERO LOT LINE HOUSING Table of Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ZLL Housing Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ZLL Housing Compared to Apartments and Condominiums. . . .. 1 Alternate Forms of ZLL Housing Construction. . . . . . . . . . 2 Advantages of ZLL Housing Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disadvantages of ZLL Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Mitigating ZLL Disadvantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Lot Area Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ZLL Experience in the City of Coralville . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Building Code and Utility Service Requirements . . . . . . . . .10 Decisions necessary to draft a ZLL Housing Ordinance . . . . . .13 ZLL Ordinance Decision Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Additional Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Figures Figure 1 - Types of ZLL Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Figure 2 - Zero Lot Line Ordinance Provisions, . . 9 City of Coralville, Iowa Figure 3 - Building Code Application to various forms 11 of ZLL Construction, Rental and Condominium Units, City of Iowa City, Iowa Figure 4 - Hyland Hill No. 7 ZLL Development, . . . . . . . . .19 Beaverton, Oregon 141CROFIL14ED BY -DORM"-MIC R�IL AO-� CEDAR RAPIDS DES MD IBES un . . i ZERO LOT LINE HOUSING Introduction — Zero lot line housing (ZLL) is one of a number of alternatives that are being utilized to meet housing needs and provide a spectrum of housing choices in many communities today. It is not a new concept. - The ZLL form dates back some 4000 years to the atrium houses of Egypt, Greece and Rome. The patio houses and enclosed courtyard — houses found in Latin America and the southwestern United States are _ ZLL forms first introduced by the Spanish culonists. The row houses j and town houses that developed in many northern cities are ZLL forms with origins in the cities of northern Europe. Over the past 30 years several contemporary approaches to ZLL housing have been advocated and developed, with varied acceptance and success in the market place. L The current interest in ZLL expressed by both home builders and E ` potential home buyers is the result of a combination of factors, concisely presented in the foreward to the Urban Land Institute (ULI) publication "Zero Lot Line Housing": "Today more and more people are being forced out of the housing i market. Yet the demand for housing that will maintain the _ desirable characteristics of the single family detached house i remains a strong preference for a significant portion of the population. The decade of the 80's therefore will see a search for housing forms and designs that can accommodate new circumstances - the need to reduce per dwelling land and improvement costs, energy consumption and maintenance demands; the necessity for households to have two incomes to support a house purchase; the need for a smaller housing unit which reflects changing demographics; and the need for housing — designs suitable for new sites where higher densities of townhouses and apartment condominiums are inappropriate. All of these needs must be balanced against a continuing desire for i— a house on a lot with private open space."(1) The extent to which ZLL can achieve this balance in any community will depend upon how it is defined, how it is designed and where it — is permitted. ZLL Housing Defined — While there are many possible forms of ZLL development, the basic form is a single family detached dwelling unit located on a lot with one or more walls placed on one or more lot lines with "zero — setback." Hence the name "zero lot line." Variations include minimally connected units with the connecting links being storage space, carports, or entry porches, as well as two or more dwelling units with one or more common walls along a lot line. -I- I i I I i 141CROf4LMED BY 1- -JORM- 'MICROLAB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES I � I a 90 J -2- - aqo I i MICROFILMED BY 1. "'DORM--'MICR(�LAB' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I J ZLL Housing Compared to Apartments and Condominiums _ ZLL housing units are purchased with fee simple title to both the dwelling unit structure and the lot on which it is located, along with certain maintenance easements on properties adjacent to the ZLL — walls; certain restrictive covenants with respect to joint maintenance responsibilities with owner of an attached unit; and limitations on use portions of the lot on which there are maintenance — easements for an adjacent structure. j Duplexes and multi -unit apartments are purchased with fee simple title to both the entire structure and the lot on which it is located along with certain easements and covenants applicable to that lot. Maintenance easements on or for adjacent properties are usually not involved. Individual units are rented to tenants who usually share to some extent the maintenance requirements of the structure and site with the owner. Condominium duplexes and apartments are purchased with fee simple r title to the dwelling unit alone and an easement in common to the lot ( 'I and all areas of common use in structure with all other owners of dwelling units in the structure. Exterior structure maintenance, interior common area maintenance and lot area maintenance are E usually the responsibility of an owners' association, supported by a monthly or annual fee. Participation in and support of the owners' association is required by covenant. Maintenance easements on or for s adjacent properties are usually not involved. " It is important to recognize that it would be possible to have three (3) identical structures (duplexes or four-plexes for example) on _ three identical lots with identical site improvements and — landscaping, with one a rental apartment structure, one a condominium project and one being two or four attached single family - ZLL dwelling units. They could be occupied by essentially identical families with identical incomes who have simply chosen to acquire — their rights to occupancy by different means because it suited the one unique aspect of their lifestyle compared to the other families. — Alternate Forms of ZLL Housing Construction There are many alternative forms of ZLL construction. They may be grouped into the following general categories: Single family - Detached ZLL dwelling with one or more walls on a lot line. Single family attached ZLL dwelling, two units per structure with one or more walls on a common lot line. — Single family attached ZLL dwelling, four units per structure with one or more walls on a common lot line. — Single family attached ZLL dwelling, more than four units per structure with one or more walls on a common lot line. -2- - aqo I i MICROFILMED BY 1. "'DORM--'MICR(�LAB' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I J L Two family attached ZLL dwelling, four or more units per structure with one or more walls on a common lot line. _ There may well be other forms but these are the ones most likely to be applicable to Iowa City. The sketches in Figure 1 illustrate some — of the concepts that might be developed under these categories. Note that in ZLL areas, common lot lines can assume unusual, irregular alignments, lots may be wider and shallower or narrower, or triangular in shape. Other configurations are possible as well. -. Design objectives of ZLL include maximizing privacy, concentrating a majority of the usable lot area on one side of the dwelling unit, increasing southern exposure for solar benefits, minimizing land and building material consumption and increasing flexibility to adapt to _ unique site characteristics. Advantages of ZLL Housing Construction The design flexibility of ZLL construction can result in substantial advantages to the home buyer and to the community. Among the advantages most often cited are: Reduced dwelling unit cost due to the consumption of less land per unit, less building material per unit, and lower land development costs per unit. Reduction of raw land and agricultural land consumption due to higher density of development Increased energy efficiency due to reduction of exterior walls, and opportunities for increased southern exposure and minimizing of northern exposure. Reduced building and site maintenance for owner. Reduced public facilities maintenance requirements per dwelling unit for community. Smaller unit design and smaller site requirements make ZLL more suitable for infill sites. Home owners' association is not required as for a condominium, minimizing legal and financial problems with respect to site and building maintenance. Whether or not many of these advantages are valid depends considerably upon the ZLL housing regulations adopted by the community. Disadvantages of ZLL Construction Accompanying the advantages of new concepts are often certain trade- offs, or disadvantages, compared with previous or traditional approaches. Some of the potential problems with ZLL housing developments are: -3- I � i MICROFILMED BY i 1. _DORM--MICR46LA6" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES M J1 obi r-- i t ti U Q m y m \N m t MEEMEN, N 0 1 of V111A ILL _i/ -//i/ -rd N - 1m W W N 1- O W W S Z Q Q U J N LL 0 U) AW ii �L r E Y Z J W 0 Cr C1S �— r Z UJ Wm Y J W o. W U_ O LL J J N N W O W N Un~+ W G= 6 ct Q W J N LL 0 U) AW ii �L r E Y Z J W 0 Cr C1S Higher density may result in parking problems due to reduced lot frontage and driveways entering street at closer intervals. If off-street parking is inadequate, problems of streetscape The encouragement of creative, attractive functional designs is the key to the long term success of high density ZLL development concepts. For other than more conventional designs, this may best be accomplished by incorporating site plan review procedures, as for a I -4- Clio i i I4IDROEILI4ED 8Y r' _DORM MICR#L-AE§' i fj LEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES � �� clutter, street congestion and snow removal can result. Limited on site storage for boats, campers, children's toys, firewood. Reduced privacy for owners. { ; Excessive rear and side yard fencing can make access to utility easements and utility meters and emergency access more !., difficult. Parties must agree on building maintenance schedules, colors -- - and materials and contractors. Inadequate maintenance by one r' party can have a greater effect on adjacent units. (r Maintenance easement for the adjacent unit limits owner's use !., of open space. !' Higher density may require more public recreation facilities in close proximity to development. Mitigating ZLL Housing Disadvantages Most of the potential disadvantages above can be minimized of eliminated through carefully drawn ordinance provisions, restrictive covenants, creative design 'solutions, and modification of standard I procedures to adapt to the new conditions created by the ZLL concept. II' For example, occasional supplementary parking bays might be provided f� in conjunction with play lots, rear lot line utility installations might be completely eliminated, and restrictive covenants might IT. prohibit outside storage of boats, camping trailers and similar E9 items. i Good design in its entirety cannot be legislatively mandated or i' assured. As with any other development regulation, a ZLL ordinance provision can only define critical minimum standards for the concept and should provide maximum flexibility for developers and designers �a to interpret the concept. If minimum standards are set too high, if processing procedures are too complex or too time consuming, or if the definition of the concept is too rigid, it is unfortunately true that building design, site design and site amenities will be the I` first to be sacrificed to compensate for other costs imposed by such �+ regulations. Maximizing flexibility should promote greater competition on the basis of quality in the marketplace rather than !� the essentially singular and minimal realizations of ZLL that can result from unnecessarily tight design constraints. The encouragement of creative, attractive functional designs is the key to the long term success of high density ZLL development concepts. For other than more conventional designs, this may best be accomplished by incorporating site plan review procedures, as for a I -4- Clio i i I4IDROEILI4ED 8Y r' _DORM MICR#L-AE§' i fj LEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES � �� Large Scale Residential Oevelopment (LSRO) plan, in ZLL regulations. Such designs also require that the site plans, planting plans, and building design concepts be prepared by qualified design professionls. Lot Area Requirements The minimum lot area required to accommodate a ZLL unit, in practice, varies considerably. Projects described in recent publications have utilized lots ranging from 2400 square feet (30'X801) to 12,000 square feet (60'X2001) per dwelling unit. The most commonly used lot sizes are in the 4000 to 6000 square foot range. Lot sizes are influenced by location in the urban area, topography, land prices, _ proposed dwelling unit floor plan, life cycle stage of market segment to be served, life style of market segment to be served, and climate. The smaller the lot area, the more important a good building design and good site design becomes. On small lots, integration of indoor Ind outdoor spaces and efficient, functional use of the entire site is essential. On larger lots, some space could be wasted or sacrificed to inefficiency and poor design with fewer adverse consequences. r� i Common use of some open space can reduce per unit space requirements. For example, a 6000 square foot lot with all outdoor space in common use by occupants of 2 dwelling units provides more usable area than 3000 square feet allocated exclusively to each unit. Lot areas or dimensions cannot be considered simply in terms of number of square feet or feet of width and depth. They must be considered in terms of the uses and objects that must be accommodated on the site. These include the dwelling unit structure, drives and parking, entry sidewalks, patios, gardens, lawn areas, outdoor recreation activities, desirable clearances from adjacent streets and structures, accessory structures, maintenance easements for utilities and adjacent structures, slopes or retaining walls to facilitate grade changes and outdoor storage for such things as refuse containers and firewood. In 'some cases, larger accessories such as swimming pools, greenhouses, garden sheds, and gazebos may also be considerations. Finally, lot size is a factor in the ultimate cost of the dwelling unit and the continuing maintenance requirements of the unit. This must be balanced against the objectives of providing an opportunity for ZLL development and against the desired uses and objects to be accommodated on the site. ZLL Experience in the Citv of Cnratville The City of Coralville has permitted one form of ZLL since February 1978 and the opportunity to provide this type of residential development has been extensively used by developers. The Coralville ZLL ordinance provision limits ZLL construction to two (2) attached single family units (a duplex structure) on a lot in an R-2 two - Z -2 141CROFILI4ED BY 1 -DORM-MICR6LAB ' _1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES j -0 J T t. family zoning district. The Coralville ZLL provisions are reproduced in full in Figure 2. During the five years the ordinance has been in effect, 200 ZLL dwelling units (100 of 104 duplexes) have been constructed in Coralville. During this same period, 72 duplexes have been constructed in Iowa City. Table 1 presents duplex construction data for both cities, by year for the period 1978 to 1982. According to _. the office of the building official in Coralville, essentially all of the duplexes constructed since 1978 have been built for sale as ZLL dwelling units. TABLE 1 _..... Permits Issued for Construction of Duplex Structures 1978-1982 for Coralville, Iowa and Iowa City, Iowa City Year: 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982* Total CcralviIIe 16 33 23 19 13 104 Iowa City 17 8 17 20 10 72 *To November 1, 1982 Source: Building Officials' Records, Iowa City and Coralville, Iowa. While the Coralville ordinance permits ZLL units only in the R-2, two- family district, which has a minimum lot area of 6000 square feet (3000 square feet per unit), most ZLL units have been built on lots of 8000 square feet (4000 square feet per unit) or more because they have been located in new subdivisions of land and the City has required lots of 8000 square feet or more to accommodate detached single family dwellings as a condition of plat approval. Coralville requires a minimum of one (1) hour fire resistant construction for the common wall between units, from the basement floor to the attic. This is achieved in most cases by 3's" stud walls with 5/8" drywall on both sides. In some cases 3V of insulation is installed and V drywall used. Double or staggered stud walls are also used with ;" sound proofing boards in the center and V drywall on each side. In the attic space a roof truss is usually placed directly over the common wall and 5/8" drywall applied to one side. With drywall placed on one side, however, less than a one hour fire resistant construction is provided. Common wall construction in basements may be poured concrete, concrete block or one of the above mentioned forms of stud wall construction. While the city would permit utility lines (waste, sewer, sewer vent pipes) in the common wall, they cannot be in common use by both units. In most cases these utilities are not located in the common wall. Utility services from the distribution line or main to the building are Permitted to be installed as common service lines for some part of the distance, outside of the building. Common practices for the various utility services are as follows: i MICROFILMED BY 1 I - _ DORM 'MIC R�LA CEDAR RAPIDS DES140nE5 i j f I i %- J� i Electric. A single service line is run to the building, then split to two meters and service entrances. Gas. A single gas line is run to the building, then split to two meters, often with an easement or covenant provision permitting the interior gas service line to pass through one unit to service the other, depending upon where the gas service enters the building. Telephone. A single line is run from the service terminal to the building and then split at the building to serve each unit. Water. A single tap is made into the main, a line run to the property line, a wye installed with two shut-off valves and separate — services extended to each unit. Sanitary ! _ Sewer. A single tap is made into the sewer main, a single lateral extended to a point outside of the building where a wye is installed and separate services extended into each unit. — In each case where common lines are involved, appropriate easements are } provided and covenants assign joint responsibility for maintenance and repairs. Common drives, with appropriate easements, are also permitted. One off- street parking space per unit is required. Current selling prices range from $47,500 to $65,000. A few units have sold in the $70,000 to $75,000 range and during the initial period of ZLL construction 1978-79, some units sold in the $40,000-$45,000 range. The relatively lower costs, as compared to conventional single-family housing and duplexes, are to a large extent due to the smaller lot and unit sizes. Lower priced units usually provide two bedrooms, bath, kitchen, and combination living -dining area, a single garage and an unfinished lower level space for future use as a recreation or family room. Units at the upper end of the price range may have an additional bedroom, an additional bathroom, a finished family room and other features such as fireplaces, decks or patios, separate dining area, or more storage space. Quality of construction materials, fixtures, appliances and landscaping also vary from one end of the price spectrum to the other. — Overall the ZLL duplex concept has been well received by builders and home buyers in Coralville. The apparent problems to date have been related to lack of adequate off-street parking resulting in street congestion and visual clutter, lack of on-site storage space, a few conversions of rental duplexes to ZLL units without fully complying with ZLL construction and utility installation requirements, and a few examples of poor site _ planning and/or poor building design. Generally, the ZLL duplex is perceived to be a means of providing low to moderately priced housing for first time home buyers. -7- _ a9a I' J 141CROFIL14ED BY 1 --- JORM"MICRbLAB 1, (/ ' CEDAR RAAI05 • OES MO LIES j W ZERO LOT LINE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS,FIGURE CITY OF CORALVILLE, IOWA Section 1. Appendix A, Chapter 8.08, Section 8.08.2 of the Municipal Code, City of Coralville, is hereby amended by adding after Subsection C. therein the following: D. Separate or divided ownership of each single-family unit of a two-family dwelling unit subject to and conditioned upon compliance with the following requirements: (1) The lot or parcel of real estate being divided into two parcels allowing separate ownership thereof must originally meet all of the requirements for uses permitted in an R-2 District. twr will be o-family thereon lyconsistingmu f be laterally n existence o attached dwelling units with each unit having a separate access and utility service. ( shall be) h in such division h l manner soas to rese lot or ult inl et single-family dwelling unit being located on either side of the common boundary line with the common wall between the two laterally joined single-family dwelling units being on said common boundary line. or to ion ll e recorded inrlthe Johnson sCounty tRecordo two er'sc Office els eRestrre aictive and Protective Covenants providing that the owners thereof are jointly and severally liable and responsible for the maintenance and repair of the common wall as well as all other common aspects including, but not limited to, utilities, water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, easements and driveways, all to the point of division. (5) The two-family dwelling shall in all respects, other than the division thereof, be considered as any other two- family dwelling and meet all requirements pertaining thereto with express understanding that nothing herein shall be construed to allow the separate other use of one or both of the resulting two parcels of real estate in the event the laterally joined two-family dwelling unit is partially or totally damaged or destroyed. (Adopted February 13, 1978) Building Code and Utility Service Requirements in Iowa Cit Certain Building Code requirements, particularly those with respect to the common wall construction requirements, interior electrical wiring and means of egress, will vary depending upon whether each unit in a structure is included with a separate lot. Utility service requirements will also vary. The requirements for attached ZLL two family units are not yet determined because this condition is not specifically addressed in the Building Code. The requirements are illustrated in Figure 3. These requirements should be carefully compared with each other and with the ago i 141CROFILMED BY 1 --JORM - MICR(JLAB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I �� T y Vy •3 y Y 4 Y !Vi • On V _V � p ` OM VUO Cabe VYP ems` <9 Nn N^c Nn P o e Qic FN `MCn< �N VIVO O de P a q T FL c — N.� NOl g U • P A Y L ' V O d L a` — r« Q n l P [� d 28^T.��u2 �^o% Pvn'm�a gonc+ ��d:� g=L .`.RS �'"r,.Rd p'«e E�—N' `= ED&� �S a $'tea 9^� sn o �q = W Eq Ir <> L< ; L[ _ 'f _ VdN gr ON cT� yO qd — proposed objectives of a ZLL housing ordinance, to be certain that the requirements that will be enforced will be consistent with the objectives of ZLL housing development. Of particular concern should be those provisions that directly affect initial construction costs, if one of the objectives is to provide lower cost units for first time house buyers, and the safety and protection of persons and their ownership rights. Decisions Necessary to Draft a ZLL Housing Ordinance Based upon the foregoing discussion, an outline of the kinds of provisions and kinds of decisions necessary to be considered in drafting a ZLL ordinance can be prepared. In the following outline the main headings represent decisions that must be made, either with respect to key ordinance provisions or the scope and application of the ordinance. The subheadings illustrate the range of alternatives from which a choice must be made. Before considering these alternatives, the purpose or purposes, of adopting an ordinance permitting ZLL construction should be agreed upon. It is essential to be aware that all forms of ZLL do not accomplish all of the possible purposes or objectives. The nature of the regulations and standards adopted will determine which purpose can be realized. The interpretation and application of those regulations and standards by developers and builders in their project designs and building designs will determine which purposes and objectives will actually be achieved. Agreement upon one or more of the eight objectives below could provide the rationale for proceeding with a ZLL amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Provide lower first cost per dwelling unit for first time home buyers. Provide an alternate housing type for those who desire it. Encourage energy efficient design and construction in new dwelling units. Reduce consumption of natural resources used in building materials. Encourage infill of vacant lots and greater use of underdeveloped lots in developed core of city. Encourage higher density in residential areas to reduce per unit first cost and annual per unit maintenance and operating costs for public utilities and facilities. Reduce building and site maintenance requirements for potential homeowners. ZLL Ordinance Decision Outline r7� proposed objectives of a ZLL housing ordinance, to be certain that the requirements that will be enforced will be consistent with the objectives of ZLL housing development. Of particular concern should be those provisions that directly affect initial construction costs, if one of the objectives is to provide lower cost units for first time house buyers, and the safety and protection of persons and their ownership rights. Decisions Necessary to Draft a ZLL Housing Ordinance Based upon the foregoing discussion, an outline of the kinds of provisions and kinds of decisions necessary to be considered in drafting a ZLL ordinance can be prepared. In the following outline the main headings represent decisions that must be made, either with respect to key ordinance provisions or the scope and application of the ordinance. The subheadings illustrate the range of alternatives from which a choice must be made. Before considering these alternatives, the purpose or purposes, of adopting an ordinance permitting ZLL construction should be agreed upon. It is essential to be aware that all forms of ZLL do not accomplish all of the possible purposes or objectives. The nature of the regulations and standards adopted will determine which purpose can be realized. The interpretation and application of those regulations and standards by developers and builders in their project designs and building designs will determine which purposes and objectives will actually be achieved. Agreement upon one or more of the eight objectives below could provide the rationale for proceeding with a ZLL amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Provide lower first cost per dwelling unit for first time home buyers. Provide an alternate housing type for those who desire it. Encourage energy efficient design and construction in new dwelling units. Reduce consumption of natural resources used in building materials. Encourage infill of vacant lots and greater use of underdeveloped lots in developed core of city. Encourage higher density in residential areas to reduce per unit first cost and annual per unit maintenance and operating costs for public utilities and facilities. Reduce building and site maintenance requirements for potential homeowners. ZLL Ordinance Decision Outline L.I A. Type of ZLL construction to be permitted. — 1. Single family detached. j2. Single family detached, 2 units per structure. 3. Single family attached, 4 units per structure. _ 4. Single family attached, more than 4 units per structure. — 5. Two family attached, 4 or more units per structure. — 6. Other. — B. Lot lines on which zero setback should be permitted. 1. One side. 2. Both sides. 3. Rear. w 4. Front. 6J 5. Any combination. C. Required minimum lot area per unit. 1. Same as single family. 2. Same as duplex (two family). 3. Same as four-plex (four family). 4. Less than single family, more than two family. 5. Other. — D. Other required lot minimums. . 1. Lot frontage. — 2. Lot width at building line. 3. Lot depth. r 4. Non-ZLL yards. _ a. Front. b. Side. — -10- a90 i MICROFILMED BY I I 1-1 DORM -MIC R4LAB" -, CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' r-• r , C. Rear. E. Maximum structure height. 1. One story. 2. Two stories. 3. Two and one-half stories. 4. Three stories or more. F. Required off-street parking. 1. One space per unit. 2. Two spaces per unit. 3. Three spaces per unit. 4. Supplementary areas of off-street parking in excess of per-unit minimums. 5. Where permitted. G. Easements required. 1. Common drives or aisles. 2. Building maintenance. 3. Fence maintenance. 4. Utilities. '5. Drainage. 6. Solar access protection. 7. View protection. H. Covenants required. 1. Building maintenance. 2. Site maintenance. 3. Common utility maintenance. 4. Fence locations and maintenance. -11- j 141CROFILMED BY 1... DORM "MICR#LAE 111 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 0190 5. Other. I. Utility services which should be separate or combined. 1. Water. 2. Sanitary sewer. 3. Gas. 4. Electric. 5. Telephone. 6. Cable television. J. Accessory uses permitted. 1. Private garages. 2. Home occupations. 3. Gardening, recreation and/or outdoor living structures. 4. Fences. 5. Storage. 6. Keeping of small animals. 7. Other. K. Common wall of ZLL wall construction. 1. Fire rating. 2. Sound proofing. 3. Insulation. 4. Openings prohibited. 5. Utilities permitted to be located in. L. Zoning districts where ZLL permitted. 1. RIB. 2. R-2. 3. R -3A. -12- 1 j MICROFILMED BY r 1 - JORM.-MICR#LA13-- !+ CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MINES 1 -13- � I IdICAOFILRED BY i 1 11. -� - 'DORM "M IC Rf�C,4 B` CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401.VES a90 J� i 4. R-38. I 5. New R -IC district for this use. 6. All or some combination of the above. Additional Considerations + The application of the ZLL concept to existing structures must also be considered and if found desirable, appropriate requirements and checking procedures devised to assure compliance. Should existing detached _ single family units be permitted to be modified to create two ZLL single family units, either internally by ,J or building up to one or more lot lines? Should a series of existing structures be permitted to be modified both internally and by construction of connecting units to create three or more attached ZLL units? Providing for i such conversions could have some merit in encouraging reutilization of older developed areas, increasing central city density and preserving certain neighborhoods. visual qualities of older I '^ Another form of ZLL that could have potential value involves ZLL construction on small lots, - either j as attached or detached units surrounded by a common open space and serviced by common drives and some supplementary common iM off-street parking and recreational facilities. An example of this approach is shown in Figure 4. Such an approach, of course, introduces the need for the home owners' association to maintenance s iyj ,n provide of the common areas and facilities. This approach, however, is more complex than can be regulated by S conventional zoning standards. t w, li 1David y' R. Jensen/HOH Associates, Zero Lot Line Housing. Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C. 1981, p. viii, � I I � i { 4 w, i 1 I -j -13- � I IdICAOFILRED BY i 1 11. -� - 'DORM "M IC Rf�C,4 B` CEDAR RAPIDS DES t401.VES a90 J� I -_ This type cluster Interior pedestrian paths development works well in connect homes to each creating a sense of other and to recreational neighborhood building and pool , ! Average lot size — 5000 s.f. , — 20wide streets with- - houses tightly clustered _ - — ?' •`r J frees more land for open space and natural Much of the natural tree preservation /• cover was retained _ Although overall density is j ir near 4 units per acre, 36% -i • • .;_ ;�. _-" .,. � t of site is in common green i space _• ?; 4.7 parking spaces per \ _ unit are provided _ Modified building setbacks allow zero lot line on the ! front and one side yard of ! the house Minimum side distance �•� j ., �• � _ between units is 10 feet i r f Traditional single family _ �_____ `�•_�_�' large -lot development ■ All lots face public through streets ■Conventional setbacks required ■ No common open space Figure_ cussed sHyland Hills, No. 7, Beaverton, Oregon. This early 197th development employed many of the design techniques dis. cussed in this section. Houses are sited on the front and one side lot line and are clustered around' f°' cul-de-sacs. A variety of housing designs and yard setbacks arc used. Clustering these ZLL units on lots that average 5,000 square feel permitted 36 percent of the site to be put Into common space, over four parking spaces per unit, and 20 -foot wide streets. (Adapted from Planning for Housing: Development Alternatives for Better Environments, copyright 1980, National Association of Home Builders, Washington, DC 20005, page 52.) EM r 111CRONVED BY - JORM-MICReCA9` , _t CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MO NES i i City of Iowa Cit" ' MEMORANDUM Date: February3, 198 To: City Cou 7l• From: Don Schmeise Re: Staff and Commission Review of the Residential Zones Attached are submitted a marked -up copy of the proposed residential zones for the new Zoning Ordinance and a redraft incorporating the proposed changes in the residential zones. The proposed changes are those which are recommended by the City staff, including the Legal, HIS, and PPD staffs,•and the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission made very few changes to the staff's suggested changes, making only minor word alterations that were not policy issues. The most significant change made in the residential zones from the original draft of the proposed new ordinance, is in the deletion of minimum open space requirements and provisions for balconies. Both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City staff have recommended that these provisions be deleted. Basic to this recommendation by both groups are the provisions for parking, yards and landscaping that would mandate adequate provision for open space on the lot without the requirement therefor. The staff will be available to review the ordinance with the City Council at the meeting to be held on February 8. bj3/16 I t 141CROFILMED BY 11- --DORM-M1CR6LAB' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES A 0191 J� Sec. 1-/ 0 Definitions. The following definitions shall be applicable to this Chapter unless a contrary meaning is indicated by the text. Words in the present tense include the future tense. The singular number includes the plural and the plural number includes the singular. The word "shall" is alw,ys mandatory, the word "may" is permissive. Terms not herein defined shall have the meanings customarily assigned to them. (a) (1) Abut/abutting. Contiguous; having a boundary, wall or property line in common. (2) Access. The place, means or way by which pedestrians or ve- hicles shall have ingress and egress to a property or'parking area. (3) Accessory building/use. A building or use which: (1) is subordinate to and serves a principal building or use; (2) is subordinate in area, extent, or purpose to the principal building or use served; and (3) contributes to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of occupants of the principal building or use. (4) Addition. An extension or increase in floor area or height of a building or structure. (5) Aged. Any person who is eligible because of age to receive old , benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act)a,*U� cL.ycundntu+T,G 9:1Y1, V O�j U2,lucc"4_2) CLc C' (6) Aisle. An asphalt, conct4te or similar permanent dust -free surface which is connected directly to a parking or loading space and designed to permit ingress or egress of a vehicle to or from the parking or loading space. (In no case can an aisle be a drive - see definition far � "drive " co u�lanAciC ) 1/u UcW b(efV__4 (7) Alley. A public way whichA aK*P& onlyta secondary means of/, access to abutting property. (8) Alter/alteration. A structural alteration, enlargement or remodeling of a building, or the moving of a building from one location to another. o) Apartment house. nt. v� ,P 0 Auto oriente use.IIyy�''Any use intended or designed to provide a Gt�p` ��pv` vOlservice to phile they are within a motor vehicle,por �' b4✓ related to the sale, servicing or repair of vehicles, 7•Ire�nd-i•Ag��' but not limited to •M-nawith--d.Yaan )v a) faci-l-i•Giesx car washes, automobile service stations and garages, aad automobile accessory sales) UGiU4 4('uy4,,C�j 6brid+v u.n ,z C"eLulA�c tyiE dvJj cLGc�L I J u a9l 1. _.JOR�MROFILMED R -MICR40LAB it CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES I i 2 avlo Y (b) (1) Balconyipmeb. AAplatform area projecting from the wall of a (' buildinggand accessible from above grade, CL*A m caYr w (� dd (2) Basement. A portion of a building located partially under- ground, but having three -an nQ-La�lf (3h) feet or more of its floor -to -ceiling height abova e A basement is counted as a story for the purpose of heigfilzregu ations.i- e_ -a_ f _s ;c„ or- dwell4fig purposes. Q49 (3) Board of Adjustment. An administrative hearing board created by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa which is authorized to hear appeals from decisions of the Building Official and to grant variances and special exceptions. (4) Boarding house. A residential building where, in addition to lodging, meals are provided for tenants but not to the public. (5)' Build. To construct, assemble, erect, convert, enlarge, reconstruct, or structurally alter a building or structure. { olla4u (6) Buildable area. The space remaining on a lot after thee�m���i��nimum open -space requirement l yards, setbaNts� 4W been i; met. (7) Building. Any structure having a roof and designed or intended for the support, enclosure, shelter or protection of persons, animals, or property. (8) Building, detached. A building which is not connected to another building , (9) Building area. See "ground area." (10) Building coverage. The amount of land covered or permitted to be covered by a building or buildings, usually measured in terms 6 of percentage of a lot. (11) Building height. The vertical distance from the grade to the roof line. (12) Building line. ' ..- „Yr (13) Building Officio he ity emp oyee si noted to enforce this Chapter. (14) Building permit. Official certification that a proposed improvement complies with the provisions of this chapter and such other ordinances as may be applicable. Such a permit is required for new construction and for alteration or additions to existing structures prior to commencement of construction. (c) (1) Cellar. A portion of a building located partially or wholly underground and having less than thre-and-one-half (3h) feet of its floor -to -ceiling height above lade:{ A cellar is not counted as a story for the purpose of fieightvregulations. A40 f" C29/ i IAICROFILMED DY 1 'DORM-MICR6LAB � ICEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i 3 (2) Certificate of occupancy. Official certification that a premisesconforms to provisions of this Chapter and such other ordinances as may be applicable and may be used or occupied. Such a certificate is granted upon completion of new construction or for alteration or additions to existing h �J structures. ri� liE1�, I I,U D.3 (3) City. The City of Iowa City, Iowa. �lub. A meeting place of an association with restricted access Illy�1 to the general public controlled by'its members, and in which property is actually ownedor held in common for the benefit of l 1!`vr members. a fraternity or sorority houseses of this r this definition does not Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission of Iowa City, Iowa as created by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa and the City Code of Ordinances. .f 1 - Lf�(� Conversion. Any change of one principal use to another prin- cipal use. Council. The City Council of Iowa City, Iowa. C9)S� Court. A space, open and unobstructed to the sky, located at aYwe- Ms grade on a lot and bounded on three or more sides by walls. Stl& n (d) (1) Daycare center/preschool.,A acilities where temporarily lea h witff temice&attendants. (Density, grossoA The number of dwelling units per unit area of 09)rd% land (usually expressed as dwelling units per acre). 1"(' i q�Development. Any man-made change to improved or unimproved property including but not limited to buildings, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations. Developmentally disabled. Any person who has a disability attributable to,(mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism or another similar neurological condition, which disability originates before such individual attains age 18, and which constitutes a substantial impairment expected to be long -continued and of indefinite duration. Discontinuance. Whenever a nonconforming use is abandoned, ceased, or terminated Downzoning. A change in the zoning classification of land to a classification permitting development that is less intensive or dense, such as from multifamily to single-family or from commercial or industrial to residential. i MICROFILMED BY 11_ '-J0RM MICR6LArJ 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES � I all J i Cj D4✓ ($)0 Drive/driveway. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust -free surface designed to provide vehicular access to a parking area. __ w ..4 'w Gtr7 t Uv r C-i)M Dwelling. A buildin 4 IULY4� tial occupancy, d for residen- 'well 4�hi ch single f from an er s' U° }f, ertica divisio termed ommon or�lot (J sep ate entranc the single fam i ached. L q� x(10) Dwelling du 1 single fam' elling e family elli � by� p ine w s, and ►�idg ily a ling to which it 1 C�'1p ex. A dwelling containing two (2) dwelling �IR4 � l 1III 11) Dwelling, farm. LIW by_ ed (12) Dwelling, four-plex. (4) dwelling units. A multi -family dwelling containing four (13) Dwelling, high-rise multi -family. y A multi-famil exceeding three (3) stories or 45 feet in height. dwelling (14) Dwelling, multi -family. A dwelling containing three (3) or more dwelling units. (15) Dwelling, single-family. A ste containing one dwelling Unit containing 64.(:y. k7`orcEc j i 4 u llurc ,. ;y/u f t 4J .Fu,7r A (16) Dwelling, triplex. A multi -family dwelling containin three (17) (3) dwelling units,. C� � 1 . tA' ) 3"c A'AT.(uvb ChX.r Gv. 'rncie' oV.cf.`-tYt, ,71.Cta7- �I�':,.� •tiw G.�7 G.ku(s�. L(3 Dwellin unit. Any habitable room or group of adjoi habitable S� rooms located within a dwelling and forming a sin gl riunit with facilities which are used or intended to be used sleeping, cooking, and eating of meals. for living, CS) Dwelling unit, e w `W t0 c`' mal', f�ency. A dwelling unit consisting of one (-/-t)serves room,Xex0ffyiv f. bathroom, hallway,jclosets, which serves as the occupants living room, bedroom, and in some instances, the kitchen. (e) Cl) Easement. A right given by the owner of land to another person for specific limited use of that land, e.g., to allow access to another property or for utilities. (2) Elderly housing. A dwelling especial ly"designed`for , use and occupancy of any person who is agedAA handicapped within the meaning of Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, Section 1 141CROFILMED BY I - -"DORM -MIC RV[�L:AB` CEDAR RAPIDS DES t4011VES ail J 5 102(5) of the Development Disabilities Services and Facilities Construction Amendments of 1970 or Section 223 of the Social Security Actp ef�di3p}aEed-by�p� nnmont-1 - t' coral . 44 " e1-. (3) Enlargement. An increase in the volume of a building. (4) Extraction. The extraction of sand, gravel, or top soil as an industrial operation, exclusive of the process of grading a lot preparatory to the construction of a building. (f) (1) Family. One (1) person or two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption or placement by a governmental or social service agency, occupying a dwelling unit as a single. . �. housekeeping organization. •A family may..also be two (2�.tAb1i not more- than--twujpyp6#pl4"t-re4ated by blood; marria6e--or _adoption. (2) Family care facility. A government licensed or approved facility which provides resident services to six (6) or fewer r 9 s & individuals who are not related to the family household. These . individuals are developmentally disabled, -aged, or in need of adult supervision and are provided services in accordance with I a 4 ; their individual needs. T10 $a3 m' 3 1 (3) Farm. An area for which the principal use is the growing for e g r s sale of farm products such as vegetables, fruits, and grain and a 3 their storing on the land,;.•pTh rm "farmiag' includes the o = necessary accessory uses ori rea m. S4 ,r g and storing the food a.se t 1 produce. I sh�F-..n.' i..i4. E o Filling station. Any building or premises used for the b a = ��, dispensing or retail sale of motor vehicle fuel or oil. When the dispensing or sale is incidental to the operation of a • ar : commercialarae the commercial garage. Premises shall be classified as a ( Financial institution. An establishment for the receiving, keeping, lending of money, and the exchange of funds by checks or notes, including banks, savings and loans, credit unions, C and similar establishments. l yo)Floor area. The total area of a 1Vfloors of a building,�me sA ured to the outside surface of exterior walls or the centerline of walls to attached buildings. It does not. includeVporches, y1 9ara�es. at- ace i,n the basement or cellarT.�( cjcvw"-cd •(. c c,?a uw �wak �f a ��e�(.�c F� r1t1'MFAK)ie` n me Ical�va e obtained 'by d dividing the floor area within a building or buildings on a lot by the area of such lot. 141CROFIL14ED BY 1 JORM .MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'11014[S I j a91 J C($f Frate rnity/sorofity house. A building used as a residence by a chapter of a�mK4oaal._&Peek organization recognized by the University of Iowa. For purposes of this Chapter this definition does not include a rooming house.C Vw) ll��� a � CIO � Frontage. The distance along a street lineAfrdm one inter- secting street to another, or from one intersecting street to the end of a dead end street or the end of a cul-de-sac. (9) (1) Garage, commercial. Any building or premises used for equip- ping, repairing, renting, selling or'storing motor vehicles -cup pse4t, and at which automobile fuels, and supplies may be sold. Ccv (2) Garage, private. An accessory building not more than • ,�� ur (4),vehisies, 1 ton pay load eep t which is the occupants of the main building. 011,,6 a' ec'epG�.✓� T/aT7C��� r�iurt (3) Grade. The top surface elevation of lawns, rues or other improved surfaces after completion of construction or grading and landscaping. For the purposes of determiningt�3J height of a building, the grade is the average level at themep,� corners of the exterior walls of a building. ( ,. Q (4) Ground area. The area of a building within its largest outside �� f j dimensions computed on a horizontal plane at the first floor v level, exclusive of open porches, breezeways, terraces, and exterior stairways. cbc op, (5) Group care facility. A government licensed or approved facility which provides resident services in a dwelling to more than six (6) individuals, but not exceeding 15 individuals, who - ^ate These individuals are developmentally disabled, aged, undergoing rehabilitation, or in need of adult supervision and are provided services in accordance with their individual needs. Thio—eatactory iaclua^^ °n^•-- -- - =__ Home occupation. An accessory use consisting of an occupation or profession carried op b a person residing on the preT?* ses. 11 hGVTjw^vya Lei ` ct (, 6W -),O f, f9otel. A residential but ng4occupied "Id used principally as of lodginHotels may or may not provide meals and there are usually n ooking facilities in guest rooms (see "hotel, apartment"). 4iotel, apartment. A multi -family dwelling under resident supervision which maintains an interlobby through which all tenants must pass to gain access to the apartments and which may furnish services ordinarily furnished by hotels, such as a drug store, barber shop, cosmetologist, cigar stand or newsstand, when such uses are located entirely within the building with no separate entrance from the street or visible from any sidewalk, and having no sign or display visible from outside of the building indicating the existence of such services. MICROFILMED BY 1 " DORM MIC RO L'A E§ 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES J 7 .11/ (i) (1) Indoor athletic and recreational facilities. Facilities which are completely enclosed and used primarily for physical exercise or culture, including courts, gyms, swimming pools, locker and training rooms, and other related facilities. Such facilities do not including target or shooting ranges, amusement arcades, billiard halls and massage parlors. a91 i MICROULRED BY I i JORM MIC ---, � -Rd/L.4 B' L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i , t (j) (1) Junk yard. An area where waste, discarded, or salvaged mater- ials are bought, sold, exchanged, baled or packed, disassembled or assembled, stored or handled, including the dismantling or "wrecking" of automobiles or other vehicles or machinery, housewrecking yard, used lumber yards and places for storage of f salvaged building materials and structural steel materials and equipment. (1) Kennel. An establishment where small animals are bred, raised, = trained, groomed, and boarded for compensation, sale or other 3 commercial purposes. (1) Vt;).iving unit. See "dwelling unit." 3 O oil 1��� Loading space, off-street. Space logically and conveniently 9s ` located for bulk pickups and deliveries, scaled to delivery 2 ; vehicles expected to be used, and accessible to such vehicles �= when required off-street parking spaces are filled. a a L4) (rK) Lodging house. See "rooming house." 5r b. 3is E ."�yt�u� Long term care facility. See "nursing home44 Lot. A plot, tract or parcel of landA it fixed boundaries +aeesied—aWVplatted pursuant to Chapter of the Code of g409 Iowa. 0 Uxq+ 6rV ,y"W fLt�ruU ad Ic-� .t¢ececi at �u Lot, corner. A lotw located at the intersection of two (2),�d ,rte i streets. (:a)(;6 Lot, double frontage. A lot having frontage on two parallel or approximately parallel streets. Lot, interior. A lot other than a corner lot or double frontage lot and bounded by a street on only one side. f CC)(3) Lot, reversed corner. A corner lot, the rear of which abuts the side of another lot. l!�)Oe) Lot area. The total area within the lot lines of a lot ex- cluding any area located within a public or private street. Lot coverage. The percentage of the lot area covered by the building area. a91 i MICROULRED BY I i JORM MIC ---, � -Rd/L.4 B' L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i , t L- If 8 Lot depth. The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and the rear lot line, or the distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the midpoint of the rear lot line. / (A Lot frontage. They�Idth of a lot measured along the street/(.",�{ (}d) Lot line, front. A lot line separating the lot from the street. On corner lots, the front lot line is the shortest street dimension except that if the lot is square or almost square, i.e., has dimensions at the ratio of from 3:2 to 3:3, then the o 2 d m ° c o front lot line may be along either street. oC�07) Lot line, rear. The boundary opposite and most distant from the ms o �r c ° E front lot line. In the case of an irregular or triangular m 3 r 3 ° c shaped lot, it is an imaginary line within the lot, 10 feet in g y ca ca E length, and parallel to and farthest from the front lot line. 0 Cd u Lot line, side. Any lot line which meets the end of a front lot TCL°„s o« c o� r°�S line, at aR An rigqrpar, S c w d3 a m c Ll v) Lot width. The length of the fi�ron!-ya+'�line. mC = 65 V L d y = E = F a' �(my,)*XYS Motel. A residential building or buildings, usually located TIC. P4 S-- 3 9 $ S along highways, occupied and used principally as a place of 3 3 e e a lodging for transients. The term "motel" includes "motor u° v 3 m E hotel." c c s 3a °o P 5(n) (1) Non -conforming building. A building or portion thereof which does not conform to the provisions of this Chapter relative to " ° ° ° ° height or yards for the zone in which it is located by reason of o m the adoption of this Chapter or subsequent amendments thereto. w (2) Nonconforming lot. A lot which does not conform to the s of this Cha ter relative to lot frontage, width or provision r H y m e o area for the zone in which it is located by reason of the E N o'= ' M adoption of this Chapter or subsequent amendments thereto. c E 0 C o (3) Non -conforming use. Any use that is not permitted within the s C9 0: 0 zone in Zit is located breason N.fl 0 N = d -d Chapter orhich subsequent amendments thereto f the adoption of this T Cd CJS O '+.GO } m Nod z t r m (4) Nursing home. A facility operated by a proprietary or nonprofit m - ti = M a - corporation or association and licensed or regulated by a 0 0 W 00 3° W d governmental entity for the accommodation of convalescents or Em" 1 y"b i other persons who are not in need of hospital care but who Co C o g = o require skilled care and/or related services. �c z c c`m y 8 (0) (1) Open space. That portion of the lot that is not covered by �'d c Mh m >,-0 68 buildings, drives, parking spaces and aisles. ..C. 01; E U y 6,4' bb o.o o'oe C d 3:0 (2) Open space, common. Open space the use of which is shared by V ` n r all occupants of more than one dwelling unit, as distinguished d v 2 d= 'C o d from private open space. Y C� F 7� y 7 C IN �n��.7+•`eu3> n.i i MICROFILMED BY 1 f --JORM MIC ROLAO !i CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I i � I r - T 9 (3) Open space, private. Open space used by occupants of a dwelling unit. (4) Overlay zone. A set of zoning requirements that is imposed in addition to those of the underlying zone. Developments within le ove zone must conform to the requirements of both zones or, in the case of a disparity, the more restrictive Drequirements of the two. O (5) Owner. The person who holds the fee simple or equitable title to the property. CP) (1) Parking area. An off-street facility intended or designed for the parking of more than four (4) motor vehicles, including parking spaces and aisles. (2) Parking space. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust - free surface inten ed for off-street vehicular parking. C�u�t••+� .,r.R�cr.�.ra�c � (3) Patio. AAsurfaced outdoor living space at grade 1 adjaeem and accessible from e> tinea dwelIing�v"it (4) Performance standard. A minimum requirement or maximum allowable limit on the effects or characteristics of a use, written in the form of regulatory language. Performance r� standards describe allowable limits with respect to smoke, �16 odor, noise, heat, vibration, glare, and so on. 1 I,r Person. Any individual or group of individuals corporation, ,rjU' partnership, association, or any entity, including state and lyh y. y �y local governments and agencies. remises. See "lot." •N'tr'r' �j�� (�)Principal building. A building which contains the principal use. 1(11)Principal use. The primary useofland or a structure as Vdistinguished from an accessory use, e.g., a house is a 6 lid l principal use in a residential area; a garage or pool is an ' (I accessory use. 1 ,rY�I,��1� 1.k 0 (a � ?rojections (into yards). Parts of buildings such as archi- tectural features which protrude into the required yard or �a' ititi �IjI Ci J Av yards. )) Public utility. A system which is owned and operated by the njf t / City or by a licensed public utility company. (q) (1) quarry. Land used for the purpose of excavating stone or slate i as an industrial operation. (r) (1) Remodel/repair. Any improvement in a building which is not a structural alteration. a9l MICROFILMED BY L..._.� I -DORM .. MICR46LAB' J L ' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES Religious institution and rI U ) ti I i ti �,J ,lij`rlI J{� lL, kill ItJ�C"y having a religious �-ed facilities. An organization i v) lel{ meeting halls, schoolsuand tffe�facilities that are related eto their use. (3) Restaurant. A business where the d ispensing and the consump- I.tion at indoor tables of edible foodstuff and/or beverageprincipal business, including a cafeis theb; roDZZN•OGNmLteLdOmOG0 I��Ls•atA+9m'•N3Lr.OdC.Cdrap+-1 ' •.L.N.9C�0.r3Lu_;�COOyLLOE-.+• ^..9N�N>Yoo-NGCCCLQmOWG-I,.,h•^;�wC..-uL�A,d°N�d p,iO,-��,`�-, � •C � VNOCT?.ECLpo • .•'VvLY dVt�OcOyi�Oc�ydp+ , f .v Nad.I• 0•. mnM r=CL cm r- 0j S. ML= eM.0OX E00vU N UM wC1n E u zUo coffee shop,, room, tearoom, dining room, bar,o kteillounge r tavern. The total seating area located within the enclosed Portion of the premises is more than 'fifty (50) percent of the total floor area. (4) Restaurant, drive-in/carry-out. An auto oriented use whose Principal operation is the dispensing of edible foodstuff and/or beverage for consumption in automobiles, at indoor or outdoor tables, at stand-up counters or to be carried off the premises. The total seating area, if provided, is less than fifty (50) percent of the floor area. (5) Rezoning. A change in land use regulations. Rezonings can take three forms: (1) a comprehensive revision or modification of the zoning text and map; (2) a text change in zone requirements; or (3) a change in the map, i.e., the zoning designation of a particular parcel or parcels. (6) Roof. The top covering of a building constructed to shield the area beneath from the weather. The term "roof' includes the term "canopy." (7) Roof line. The highest point of the coping of a flat roof; the deck line of a mansard roof; and the midpoint between the eaves and ridge of a saddle, hip, gable, gambrel or ogee roof. I,Ij ^.GTmrr. a�ru f 8) Roomer. An occupant of a rooming houseAwho is riot a member of h Aroomer lshall talso omean ganooccupant use aOfrao dwelling unit who is not a member of the family occupying the dwelling unit.- (9) Rooming house. Any dwelling, or that part of any dwelling, containing one or more rooming units, in which space is let by the owner or operator to three (3) or more roomers. (10) Rooming unit A Op o (2) L-; r obit a un' i 9 g uP of oo s form'n a s'ri r mi h us us tl or inten ed to b u vi nd ee i g, b t t ooking r tin mea Separate tract. An abutting, ' 4w uses which share comonrofacilities which are developed parking, l.oad77'ng and ,driv ways. /�, �Jl' g'' off-street ��ti• cv Qc, •4, .CC ./��a ./.// /v' �i!..:.�•iv:( G ._. I://ia.c�':'. Ult CG:.LN/✓ G' ul!' �LCGi ... rr:Cl:... ,? Setback. The line beyond which the wall of a building or structure shall not project. MICROFILMED BY - JORM-MICR#LAG' CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOVIES X91 1 J o II � „• (3) Special exception. Abuse which is allowable when the facts and 4:' conditions specified in this Chapter as those upon which the S� exception is permitted are found to exist by the Board of Adjustment. surfacea motor (4) Stacking space. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust y foreentry to aneautoeoriented use oandelocated invsuchla w siting V access to an off-street parking space is not obstructed. hat (5) Story. The -pmt of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the u abp;urfe of the floor ext llr ove _ (6) Street. Property dedicated or intended for primary publiciL`"'� access to lots or for through traffic such as limited access'1 ' highways and thoroughfares. E (7) Street, arterial. A street whose principal function is to r provide for through traffic, and designed to carry large volumes of traffic. (B) Street, collector. A street whose principle function is for carrying traffic from local streets to arterial streets. i (9) Street, around. cul-de-sac. A local street terminating in a turn - (10) Street, local. A street used primarily for access to abutting property. i i (11) Street, private. A way, which affords principal means of access to abutting lots, and is not owned by a government entity. (12) Structure. Anything constructed or erected on the ground or which is attached to something located on the ground. Struc- tures include buildings, radio and TV towers, sheds, and permanent signs. It excludes vehicles, sidewalks, and paving. (13) Structural alteration. Any change in the configuration of the exterior walls, foundation or the roof of a building which results in an increase in the area, height or volume of the building. (14) Sub -standard lot. See (15) Substantial improvement. Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a building the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the building either, (a) before the improvement or repair is started, or (b) if the building has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For the purposes of this definition, substantial improvement is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building 1 JOR M' _MICAMO - LCEDAR RAPIDS • Mp o ,y 12 G commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external 1 wdimensions of the building. The term does not, however, include " )1either (1) any project for improvement of a building to comply (with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety code Or specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions or (2) any alteration of a building listed on the National Register of Historical Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. t) (1) Townhouse. one o hree or mo a atta ed single f ily wellings in row epara d by ertic divi ions t rmed par or of -line , d ving sepa entranc (u) (1) Upzoning. The converse of downzoning (see "downzoning"). (2) Use. The purpose or activity for which land, its buildings, or a portion thereof is designed, occupied, or maintained. (3) Use, principal. The primary use of land or buildings. (4) Use, provisional. A principal use of land or buildings for which additional standards or criteria established in this Chapter must be met. (v) (1) Vacation. The process by which the City discontinues the use of a street or alley as a public.way. (2) Variance. A 'oev#ee-++hic#t-gre a property owner relief from certain provisions of this Chapter where owing to special conditions. uliIteral enforcement of the provisions of this Chapter wres It in unnecessary hardship. The authority to grant variances is vested in the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa. (3) Vehicle. Every device in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway. (4) Vehicle, storage of. A vehicle or portion thereof., net— rt ear --as prov4ded by law,.e. which is parked in the same position for a period of 48 hours or more. f 1 (y) (1) Yard. An open-speee on the -tome lot with a bn4i�iag-arm-L•`,� —=e• ;nr unoccupied,(&6ept`f6-e" 1P projections an the specific minor uses or structures allowed L�" in such • under the provisions of this Chapter. ' (2) Yard, front. The area across a lot between the front yard line and the streets •I �;� c:',t</ Lu a�, I� MICROFILMED BY i 11. DORM MICRdLA©� CEDAR NAVIDS - DES MOINES I I aqI J i 13 ✓ (3) Yard, rear. The area from one side lot line to the other side lot line and between the rear yard Tine and the rear lot line. (4) Yard, side. The area from the front yard line to the rear yard line and from the side yard line to the side lot line. - i (5) Yard line, front. A line parallel to the street and as far back from the street as required in this Chapter. 1pe-trn�.a#t i (6) Yard line, rear. A line parallel to the rear lot line and as far from the rear lot line as required by this Chapterj/ u��C u Ciif.P.it 44LAW,; �d (7) Yard line, side. A line parallel to the side lot line and as far book from the side lot line as required by this Chapter. i (z) (1) Zone. A section of the City delineated on the zoning map in which requirements for the use of land and buildings and i development standards are prescribed in this Chapter. (2) Zoning map. The map delineating the boundaries of zones which, along with the zoning text, comprises the zoning ordinance. { ARTICLE II. t DIVISION ZONES Sec. 1--0 General Agricultural Zone (AG). i (a) Intent. It is the intent that this zone provide for the agricultural use of land within the City, which is most appropriately used for crops, orchards, and the keeping of farm animals. I i (b) Permitted uses. S11 Farms. (c) Provisional uses. zaZcr(d� uf[ afi>ra7 r✓/c�ui �irAi�,muc� G (1) Farm dwellings provided they are developed in accordance with t thediimensional rgquirements of the RR-1 zone., .vrcfubwr,J .��a) j (2) Livestock feed�ots subject % the requirekents of Sec. I- (3) Stables, kennels and veterinary establishments subject to the ("requlirements of Sec. 1-'Z'9 > (d) S ecial exceptions. i (1) AirportsV'subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-2/7c1 a9i i i MICROFILMED BY ' JORM"-MICR#LA9-- - -� 1'..... L j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES t4014E5 j I I ' 14 0 (2) Commercial recreational uses. (3) Clubs subjeet tatho req,,; r,,ppt��-- (4) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-4 (5) Extraction subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-0 p6tp•J.._- a (6y\ R.rain elevators subject to the performance standards of a.u�for I-2 uses. ,� 140 . r (7) ",pcq,,' to'Wers subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- ( ( (e) .(6) P41 hal retg" irem—e (1) Minimum lot area: 40,000 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot width: 80 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: W ft. 45 (4) Minimum yards: Front - According to the following table: Setback Street width Street classification 40 ft. 40 ft. secondary arterial 27 ft. 66 ft. secondary arterial 25 ft. 40 ft. collector or local 20 ft. 80 ft. or more secondary arterial 20 ft. 50 ft. or more collector or local -&-I;o cz) Side - f%ft. for the firstnstous 2 ft. for each additional stor Rear - 30 ft. (5) Maximum building bulk: None I (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article 1L, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: i (1) Accessory uses. See Division, page. a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 - page L2• b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1- 4, page. %V C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. page &. i i IA ICROF ILIdED BY � l" "JORM-MICR46LA13'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES II 0191 Ji �4- 4 i � J , 15 ✓o d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1- page/� e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-W-5-, page./O% f. Fence regulations. See Sec.1- page/,L (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division, page/�. (3) Nonconformities. See Division 9 , page/2� ` (4) Tree regulations. See Division page/f. j(5) Performance standards. See Division 6 , page/40 (g) Special provisions. ! () o more a two oomers ay reside in eac rm �dw llin pro 'ded Iat n add' Iona on hal ) o f- II/ st parking ce per r shall urmshed. i NOn= j Sec. 1-,_3. Rural Residential Zone (RR-1). I (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide for areas of a ruralrr isedential character within the City which may not have all utilities available, lands I (b) Permitted uses. (1)\ Detached single -family dwellings. CZ) ( . ar.�Ql. (c) r visional uses. (1) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1--r 1 (d) �p�Cia d3cce ions �' i I ��6i)-� uGiiyrr�d (1 Clubs subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-�DJ;,�,Cc �,� (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: 40,000 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot width: 80 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: �0 ft. (4) Minimum yards: ' Front - according to the tableAin aIi MICROFILMED BY ' � --DORM-�MICRO-L-A-S' l CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I L_' 16 the AG Zone. tlUb�3) Side - 6A ft. for the firsVstor�l(Ipl�us 2 ft. for each additional story Rear - 30 ft. (5) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building 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- 4'/ , page 2l• b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1- /�Z, Page• y� C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1--i13 , page 2L. A. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-�, page./O `? e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-�, page/ZZ (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page/,&. (3) Nonconformities. See Division �, page/,Z3 (4) Tree regulations. See Division, page/ (5) Performance standards. See Division page/10. (g) Special provisions. (1) Not o han t (2) ro rs ma !sidl n eaQQdws�jjlinnqbnit oded at an di ioa4 6ne-hAldf/crrbAr_ r sniklyoe furms Sec. 1- -'I:/ . Low Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS -5). (a) Intent. It is the primary purpose of this zone to provide for single-family residential development consistent with the predominate single-family residential character of Iowa City. Development within this zone is expected to have -A n_eiahhor ,�, Al% orientation; therefore, parks, schools, ohu"4as^ and neighborhood commercial facilities are expected to be located within or in close proximity to developments in this zone. Compatibility of r I 141CRONUIED BY _1 `JORM- MIC R6L-AH'_ CEDAR RAPIDS 0ES M014 ES All Ji i 17 0 development within this zone shall be encouraged and related non- residential uses and structures should be planned and designed to be in character with the scale and pattern of the residential development. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Detached single-family dwellings. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Family care facilities subject Jto the requirements of (d) Spec] exceons. 14241 dvi�ji47Xf*j (1) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-42 �e) DiZmensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area- 8,000 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot width: 60 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 35 ft. (4) Minimum yards: GZ% Front - 20 ft.� S Side - 5,e ft. for the firstytstorki,Cplus 2 ft. for each additional story. Rear - 25 ft. (5) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building Coverage - 45% Floor area ratio - none (f) General rovuT� ns. All principal and accessory uses putted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article 17 , the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (1) Accessory uses. See Division ZL, page IQZ. a. Permitted accc�essory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1- �, page 7,Z. b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1- �� , page. %Q C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-5, page 96. l i MICROFILMED BY �- -JORM--MICR6LAB-. J � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIMES A91 ._. 18 d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1- page./0,9 e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-4? , page/%f. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division page/�. (3) Nonconformi ties. See Division page/,3 . (4) Tree regulations. See Division page ai: r (5) Performance standards. See Division 6 page /-la. (9)� Special Provisions. 7» E�. (1) If a--�Era of land one acre or greater in area is subdivided into lots, it may be developed at a maximum aaaaaa gross den 1ty of five (5) dwelling units per acre with minimum lot areas of 7,200 square feet and maximum lot F areas of 15,000 square feet. 2) o more th (2) room s m y reside i ea h dwelyiRq uni pro ded th t an a tions one -h O ff- _street par i space per r shall be p ided. Sec. Medium Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS - 8). (a) Intent. It is primarily intended that this zone provide for the development of small lot single-family dwellings. This zone represents a relatively high density for single-family development, thus dwellings in this zone should be in close proximity to all city services and facilities, especially parks, schools and recreational facilities. Special attention should be given to landscaping and site development in this zone. Special provisions of this zone are designed to permit dwellings with no side yard to accommodate attached single family dwellings and to permit conversions of existing structures to duplexes,and-LP*p}exes. (b) Permitted uses. (1) -Detached 's'ingle-family dwellings. (c) Provisional uses.. i �to Gc�.initie.l (1) dwellings y subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- La uses o Wed the �developed' ccordance he dimensi nal re -12 zone ,`and qa minimum lot unit 4350 feet. 141CROFILIIED BY -'DORM-MICR6LA13' 1 L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401YES .i a9 i 19 ,0 Duplexes provided they shall be developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 Zone and that the minimum lot area per unit is 4350 square feet. (4) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of (d) Specia exce onS: Cf/� (1) Religious institutions and related facilities subject too ' the requirements of Section 1-/5,19 (2) Daycare centers and reschools subject to the uirements of Sec. 1-. j (e) 12n::: nal requirements ' W (1) Minimum lot area: 5,000 sq. ft. ( k I ) Mi u lot are r unit. 5,00 . CZ)(�f Minimum lot width: 45 ft. C3�(�tS Minimum lot frontage: 25 ft. Minimum yards: C Z) Front - 20 ft. Side - SXft. for the firstjstor��pIus 2 ft. � for each additional story; or for s4qV}e--fem+4y dwe11 s, one at 0 ft. and the other(s) at ft. Rear - 20 ft. C�11<y Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 40% Floor area ratio - none (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses perm tted 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. Per fitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 - page b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. I - page. �y , MICROFILMED BY -JORM-MICROL-A6-- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MDIYES i lid - -- 20 /D C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-4, page 2L- El. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1- page %b9 e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1- page /a, (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division .3 , page%,&. (3) Nonconformities. See Division page/33 (4) Tree regulations. See Division page (5) Performance standards. See Di 'sion (o paged. (g) Special provisions. (1) If a trac of land one acre or greater in area is .� subdivided into lots, it may be developed at a maximum gross density of eight (8) dwelling units per acre with minimum lot areas of 4,000 square feet and maximum lot areas of 7,500 square feet. Lots less than 5,000 square feet in area shall be developed with one wall of the dwelling unit having a zero side yard. ( t more tha (2) room reside ' e h dwe Bn u it prov' d tha an a tional a -h f () street pa in space per r er shall be furnished. Sec. 1-6. Low Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -12). (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide for the development of townhouse, duplex, triplex and fourplex dwellings. This zone allows a high density of single family residential development and a low density of multi -family residential development. Dwellings in this zone should have good access to all city services and facilities, especially parks and recreation facilities. It is expected that townhouse, duplex, triplex and fourplex development will mostly occur near the center of the city and in small developments near neighborhood centers and places of employment. (b) Permitted uses. 61),f2--l"yyDuplex, triplex, and fourplex dwellings. C�/L�7C (c) Provisional�use(s..�� —Jingle -family dwellings and As� mi y dwellings Wprovided they shall be developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RS -8 Zone and the requirements of Sec. 1-W11) '�'c✓._ , i I•IICROFIL14ED BY I --DORM -MICR6L AB 1 i CEDAR RAPIDS DES >101YES /� I r"6+ 21 with\tbe-requiremmz<s of Se V • ` Rooming houses provided eveod�in .00 / 5 ca KV 330 i. py . �J th •7 w71' q '*ti' h' h he rooming hnuaa Ae+ne4 CLIL � (3) iFamily care facilities subject to the requirements of deSec. ��� j ll exceptions. (1) Daycare centers and_preschools subject to thea 1l� requirement of Sec. 1-) "—o 'br,,yi� (2) subject to the requirements of (3) Religious institutions subject to the requirements of C4) 1 [�(j'/ec.��Y1,�Q , ! Mew a . 1 `q w Min. lot area: *W tol N �(2) Minimum lot area per unit: N' (3) Min. lot width: (4) Min. lot frontage: %,p) Min. yards: Z� Front - Side - ("%a ° 3000 sf Rear - (6) Max. building bulk: Height - Duplex a Tri lex Fourplex 5500 sf 8200 sf 10;900 sf 2750 sf 2725 60 ft 70 ft 35 it 40 ft 20 ft S 20 ft 20 ft 0 ft or 1 @ S ft for the firs 0 ft and the 2 ft for each add other @ 0' ft w 20 ft 30 ft 30 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 1 I MICROFILMED BY j I-JORM- MIC R46CAa l I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 2725 80 ft 45 ft 20 ft 6$ plus story 30 ft 35 ft a91 J� 22 Building coverage - 50% 50% 50% 50% Floor area ratio - None None None None (f) Generalrovisions. 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 ZI.., paged. i a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1 - page b. Accessory use nd building regulations. See Sec. 1- %a page•`/' C. . Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1--19/S, page ?K. d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-�Jr, page/0% e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-.//" , page/Z.' (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division2_, page /,&. (3) Nonconformi ties. See Division �, page/_Y3. (4) Tree regulations. See Division, page%� (5) Performance standards. See Division L page/k% (g) Special provisions. (X) NotAro-A than tww-M) roomers/flfav reside Alt each dwe.Mna .�rking specs l5er roomel-sifal l be Nrai rshed. Sec. 1-Z. Medium Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -20) (a) Intent. It is the purpose of this zone to provide for the development of medium density multifamily housing in areas suitable for this density and to serve a market demand for this type of housing. This zone is particularly well suited to locations adjacent to neighborhood activity centers and should have good access to all city services and facilities. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Multi -family dwellings. i MICROFILMED BY _JORM "MICR46LA B'- 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES X91 J� 23 / (2) Fraternity/sorority houses. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Townhouses and duplexes provided they are developed in accordant with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 Zone./l1rGc� lfl�ii>� I (2) Famil arE a fat litii essubject to the requirements of Sec. (3) Nursing homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-�, 1^.\ (4) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to _ t e reGuirements of Sec. 1-49, 1 5 I\(d) S ,tial excep ions. ' 47V (1) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of Sec. (2) Grou care facilities, fN (3) Cemeteries and mausoleums subject to the requirements of \` Sec. 1 - lm Fur<G dJ .r z2 l!!'IJYIII� rIla ` W ��ii (e) Dime_ nsgonal requirement / „J \l `") ` \\. (1) Minimum lot area: 7200 sq. ft. 1 (2) Minimum lot area Per unit:. 1,800 sq. ft. (3) Minimum lot width: 60 ft. V\ (4) Minimum lot frontage: 35 ft. �v '7 (5) Minimum yards: Q Front - y`� a\ Side - Rear - krl' T, v\ o , Sv , � •y �C 20 ft, ee- X ft. for the first,{{'r)( plus 2 ft. for each additional story 30 ft. MICROFILMED BY j 'JORM -MICRS1C49 - 1 � CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MOINES A91 r 24 Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 45% 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 0, 2. a. Pe mitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1- page. b. Accessory use nd building regulations. See Sec. 1- L, page./c'4' C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-W, page a. d. Sign regulations. See Sec. page/2z- a. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-�, page/ (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division, page/, (3) Nonconformities. See Division �, page%:•'y (4) Tree regulations. See Division•� , page/JJ.- (5) Performance standards. See Division , page/M617 (g) Special provisions. (1) 0alconies/Dorches1shai"1�1ne ce„f,#ad A')rn,.+aitiijrk. «,Cl«L micROFILMED BY —JORM MICRf6LAE3 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOM X91 0 E 25 1 1 ` p to 6 f ft. / ft. f l alc n /po c aarea ch a dit ona one ou (4 qua e ( s uare fo e ov 60 sq. () No m re than .ree 3) roome s m y res 11 I each 11i u t ovide that adds Tonal one- alf) ff-s re t p rkin spa per roo r all be fished. Sec. 1-e9. High Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -44). (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone establish areas for the development of high density multi -family dwellings and group living quarters. Within this zone a mix of uses is encouraged. Additionally, it. is intended that this zone be located near an arterial street for proper access. Due to the variety of uses permitted within the zone, careful attention to site design and development is to assure that all uses are mutually compatible. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Multi -family dwellings•. (2) Fraternity/sorority houses. 7(P1r3o)V__i;7ional 3!ues. �(c) Wile Gft (1) Townhouses provided that they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 zone. 1� 1(2) Group care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- k I }1" (3) Familcare facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. I' 1 ^ (4) Nursing homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-�. U (5) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to ' the requirements of Sec. 1-1019. � U � Daycare centers and preschools, X0,1 �• '�,�V'� i) Special exceptions. �G) � I 1 (11CROFILMED BY I '"JORM _MICR6LA8'_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES a9/ J AR41* (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: (2) Minimum lo per unit: (3) Minimum lot width: (4) Minimum lot frontage: (5) Minimum yards: Front - Side - 26 -g, Go -9q ft- WTyt>z 1,000 sq. ft. —60-0— Nc 35 ft. 20 ft. ,6 ft. for the firstistorX plus 2 ft. for each additional story zo Rear - ,ld ft. iAYIOj'nimu p space d4ng unit: Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 40% Floor area ratio - None (f) Generalrovisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted I„� within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of -Article./1L , the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (1) Accessory uses. See Division page. a. Pepmitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1- page M. b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. I- --5;,' - �, page C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. page. d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1--5;6 . page/ 141CROFILMED BY JORM'--MICR6CA9-- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES C; 91 T i 27 0 e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-,&, pages ' . (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division _.3_, page /A. (3) Nonconformities. See Division �, page /.33. (4) Tree regulations. See Division pager. (5) Performance standards. See Division , page,�V. Special provisions. lba conies/p rches ha be c Vcontri ting t e able sp requ'rith he fall wi g uses: mini um rea or balcony qua ify r bong 11 4 sq are fee . m dimensi n of a cony or p rch shat be four. to sq. one (y t mor an three ( �fu�ed �ijnef d ellin u't ovid t n an ditre arking s ac per ro er all b Sec. 1-_. High Rise Multi-FamilyResidential Zone (RM -80). (a) Intent. It is the purpose of this zone to provide for a mix of uses which are suited to a very high intensity residential environment. It is intended that this zone provide an efficient arrangement of land uses by providing convenience to its residents. While special attention to design is needed to successfully blend multiple uses into one structure or into a single neighborhood, this zone provides opportunities for activities and amenities not immediately available to most residential environments. Since this zone will have high levels of pedestrian activity, special attention must be directed to providing a pleasant, safe and efficient pedestrian environment. (b) Principal uses. (1) High-rise multi -family dwellings. i MICROFILMED BY ' -JORM MICRbLAB ' 1 ( CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES aq/ J� 0 3 (c) Provisional uses. () To ho es and/duplexes p vided they developed i corda f the dile ns' al reC14reme s of the�Rt� Zo (2) Low-rise multi -family dwellings provided they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RMA Zone. 44 (3) Fraternity/sorority houses provided they are developed in i accordance with the dimension9l requirements of the RM-1wZone'`0 s (4) Rooming houses provided e-davd� hGe/ d' �-aclr/ 330 d � 4 (5) Retail and 1 service establishments liste as permitted useuses� to the CN -1 Zone provided they are located on the ground �✓ leve or below,Qtf a high-rise multifamily dwelling. Daycare centers and s.pr-eyided they grew. 1 C(d)Special exceptions. (2) _ I (3) Clubs cub-ject to the-neQeilemen tsof 5ee— I (4) Religious institutions �d related facilities,svject_to_tbe (e) Dimensional requirements. f (1) Minimum lot area: 1.2111 q- (2) Minimum lot area per unit: 550 sq. ft. A)0 vd (3) Minimum lot width: 80 ft. (4) Minimum lot frontage: IUw&'y�l a Ft. /Ulna, the f' st st plLW ft. fo eac a iti nal s o 5�" L' o a ei ht f 35 ft 1 t ,1U G ,•/,t JIG dd'tion for ea 1 ft. bo (5) Minimum yards: Front - Side - 141CROFILI4ED BY DORM- "MICRbCA 13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M0INES aql J1 4 29 /arae Rear - Same=may ut-si-no ft. (6) Minimum open space per dwelling unit: None (7) Maximum building bulk: .1—�-� Height - 3 l�� Building coverage - None Floor area ratio - 4aO /JVW f) General Provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted �win this zonesiare subject to the General Provisions of Article the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: Accessory uses. See Division page 9Z. � a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-W/, page Y2_. b. Accessory uses and building regulations. See Sec. 1- l� page C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1- .3 page d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1--oW , page /25L. e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-_I, page/�. f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-�, page/L. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division S , page/�. 1(3) Nonconformities. See Division page/ (4) Tree regulations. See Division S, page/S (5) Performance standards. See Division (c , page/ Special provisions. (1) qot more an ree (3) roo rs ay reside n etch dv�i provid than additi al on -half (h) offcsxreet > %bate er roomer s furnishe . ing Unit ing Sec. 1- ' 1 (RMH) Zon (a) Intent. The RMH) ZI-is designed to permit the loc�on and development of mobile homes and similar residences, which would not normally comply with the building, electrical, plumbing or housing codes, within designated areas of the community. Provision is made in the RMH Zone to allow such residences to be placed within mobile fv home parks or upon individual subdivided lots. uJ vi J .r /A.,LI " a9i r � 111+ MICROFIL14ED BY —JORM "MIC R�ILA9"` -� CEDAR ROT DS DES Id018ES I /� Draft: 2-3-83 Sec. 1-1 Definitions. The following definitions shall be applicable to this Chapter unless a contrary meaning is indicated by the text. Words in the present tense include the future tense. The singular number includes the plural and the plural number includes the singular. The word "shall" is always mandatory, the word "may" is permissive. Terms not herein defined shall have the meanings customarily assigned to them. (a) (1) Abut/abutting. Contiguous; having a boundary, wall or property j line in common. (2) Access. The place', means or way by which pedestrians or ve- hicles shall have ingress and egress to a property or parking area. (3) Accessory building/use. A building or use which: (1) is I subordinate to and serves a principal building or use; (2) is '• subordinate in area, extent, or purpose to the principal i building or use served; and (3) contributes to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of occupants of the principal i building or use. t(4) Addition. An extension or increase in floor area or height of a 4 building or structure. (5) Aged. Any person who is eligible because of age to receive old age benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, any i amendments thereto, or any corresponding successor act. (6) Aisle. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust -free surface which is connected directly to a parking or loading space and designed to permit ingress or egress of a vehicle to or from the parking or loading space. (In no case can an aisle be a drive - see definition for "drive.") t (7) Alley. A public way which is intended only for use as a secondary means of vehicular access to abutting property. (8) Alter/alteration. A structural alteration, enlargement or remodeling of a building, or the moving of a building from one location to another. (9) Apartment house. See "Dwelling, multi -family." (10) Auto oriented use. Any use intended or designed to provide a service to occupants while they are within a motor vehicle, such as drive-in financial institutions, or any use related to the sale, servicing or repair of vehicles, such as but not limited to car washes, automobile service stations and garages, automobile accessory sales, drive-in restaurants, service shops, dry cleaning centers and photodeveloping drop centers. 0191 i MICROFILMED BY 1 JORM"MIC RBL"A B` 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES I401nES !� FA (b) (1) Balcony. A covered or uncovered platform area projecting from the wall of a building, enclosed by a railing, accessible from above grade, and not attached to the ground. (2) Basement. A portion of a building located partially under- ground, but having three -and -one-half (3h) feet or more of its floor -to -ceiling height above adjoining grade. A basement is counted as a story for the purpose of height and yard i regulations. f (3) Board of Adjustment. An administrative hearing board created by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa which is authorized to hear appeals from decisions of the Building Official and to grant variances and special exceptions. 1 (4) Boarding house. A residential building where, in addition to lodging, meals are provided for tenants but not to the public. (5) Build. To construct, assemble, erect, convert, enlarge, reconstruct, or structurally alter a building or structure. (6) Buildable area. The area remaining on a lot after the minimum } open -space requirement for yards has been met. (7) Building. Any structure having a roof and designed or intended for the support, enclosure, shelter or protection of persons, [ animals, or property. i f (8) Building, detached. A building which is not connected to another building. t (9) Building area. See "ground area." e (10) Building coverage. The amount of land covered or permitted to be covered by a building or buildings, usually measured in terms ' of percentage of a lot. (11) Building height. The vertical distance from the grade to the roof line. l (12) Building line. A line established parallel to the front lot i line in front of which no part of the principal building is I allowed to project. i (13) Building Official. The City employee designated to enforce this Chapter. (14) Building permit. Official certification that a proposed improvement complies with the provisions of this chapter and such other ordinances as may be applicable. Such a permit is required for new construction and for alteration or additions to existiny structures prior to commencement of construction. i i 141CROFILMED BY l" 'JORM--"MICR6LAB'- 1 -, +f CEDAR RAPIDS DES MONE5 a9i i A 0 �1 3 (c) (1) Cellar. A portion of a building located partially or wholly underground and having less than three -and -one-half (3h) feet of its floor -to -ceiling height above adjoining grade. A cellar is not counted as a story for the purpose of height and yard regulations. (2) Certificate of occupancy. Official certification that a premises conforms to provisions of this Chapter and such other ordinances as may be applicable and may be used or occupied. Such a certificate is granted upon completion of new construction or for alteration or additions to existing structures. (3) City. The City of Iowa City, Iowa. (4) Clinic. An office occupied by one or more members of a healing profession. (5) Club. A meeting place of an association with restricted access to the general public controlled by its members, and in which property is actually owned, leased or held in common for the benefit of its members. For purposes of this Chapter this definition does not include a fraternity or sorority house. (6) Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission of Iowa City, Iowa as created by Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa and the City Code of Ordinances. (7) Conversion. Any change of one principal use to another prin- cipal use. r t (8) Council. The City Council of Iowa City, Iowa. (9) Court. A space, open and unobstructed to the sky, located at grade on a lot and bounded on three or more sides by walls. (d) (1) Daycare center/preschool. State licensed facilities where children are temporarily left with attendants. (2) Deck. A covered or uncovered platform area projecting from the wall of a building, accessible at or from above grade, and attached to the ground. (3) Density, gross. The number of dwelling units per unit area of land (usually expressed as dwelling units per acre). (4) Development. Any man-made change to improved or unimproved property including but not limited to buildings, mining, dredging, filling, grading, operations. paving, excavation or drilling (5) Developmentally disabled. Any person who has a disability attributable to but not limited to mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism or another similar neurological 1 i MICROFILMED By 1' -"JORM-MICR41 LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES j A91 -J 4 condition, which disability originates before such individual attains age 18, and which constitutes a substantial impairment expected to be long -continued and of indefinite duration. (6) Discontinuance. Whenever a non -conforming use is abandoned, ceased, or terminated. (7) Downzoning. A change in the zoning classification of land to a classification permitting development that is less intensive or dense, such as from multifamily to single-family or from commercial or industrial to residential. (8) Drive/driveway. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent i dust -free surface designed to provide vehicular access to a Parking area. (9) Dwelling. A building which is wholly or partially used or intended to be used for residential occupancy. r (10) Dwelling, duplex. A dwelling containing two (2) dwelling " units. ? (11) Dwelling, farm. A dwelling located on a farm and occupied by the family which maintains and operates, owns or has a leasehold f interest in the farm on which the dwelling is located. (12) Dwelling, four-plex. A multifamily dwelling containing four (4) dwelling units. 4 (13) Dwelling, high-rise multi -family. A multi -family dwelling exceeding three (3) stories or 45 feet in height. (14) Dwelling, multifamily. A dwelling containing three (3) or more dwelling units. (15) Dwelling, single-family. A building containing one dwelling unit. This definition does not include the term "mobile home." i (16) Dwelling, tri-plex. A multi -family dwelling containing three j (3) dwelling units. (17) Dwelling, zero lot line. A single family dwelling with one or more walls located on a side lot line(s). (18) Dwelling unit. Any habitable room or group of adjoining habitable rooms located within a dwelling and forming a single unit with facilities which are used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking, and eating of meals. (19) Dwelling unit, efficiency. A dwelling unit consisting of one principal room, in addition to a bathroom, hallway, and closets, which serves as the occupant's living room, bedroom, and in some instances, the kitchen. MICROFILMED BY 1" -JORM" MICR46LA13* CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 a91 J� 5 (e) (1) Easement. A right given by the owner of land to another person for specific limited use of that land, e.g., to allow access to another property or for utilities. (2) Elderly housing. A dwelling especially designed for use and occupancy of any person who is aged or who is handicapped within the meaning of Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, Section 102(5) of the Development Disabilities Services and Facilities Construction Amendments of 1970 or Section 223 of the Social Security Act. (3) Enlargement. An increase in the volume of a building. (4) Extraction. The extraction of sand, gravel, or top soil as an i industrial operation, exclusive of the process of grading a lot preparatory to the construction of a building. r t (f) (1) Family. One (1) person or two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption or placement by a governmental or social service agency, occupying a dwelling unit as a single, housekeeping organization. A family may also be two (2), but not more than two (2) persons not related by blood, marriage or i adoption. t. (2) Family care facility. A government licensed or approved facility which provides resident services to six (6) or fewer individuals who are not related to the family household. These individuals are developmentally disabled, aged, or in need of adult supervision and are provided services in accordance with their individual needs. (3) Farm. An area for which the principal use is the growing for sale of farm products such as vegetables, fruits, and grain and their storing on the land. The term "farm" includes the necessary accessory uses and buildings for treating and storing the food produce. (4) Feedlot. A lot, yard, corral, or other area in which livestock are confined, primarily for the purposes of feeding and growth prior to slaughter. The term does not include areas which are used for the raising of crops or other vegetation and upon which livestock are allowed to graze or feed. (5) Filling station. Any building or premises used for the dispensing or retail sale of motor vehicle fuel or oil. When the dispensing or sale is incidental to the operation of a commercial garage, the premises shall be classified as a commercial garage. (6) Financial institution. An establishment for the receiving, keeping, lending of money, and the exchange of funds by checks or notes, including banks, savings and loans, credit unions, and similar establishments. X91 i I41CROFILMED BY 1 JORM MICM6LAB i CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES Ij P (7) Floor area. The total area of all floors of a building or portion thereof measured to the outside surface of exterior walls or the centerline of walls to attached buildings or uses. It does not include garages, porches, balconies, and other appurtenances. Space in the basement or cellar shall be included as floor area if used for a principal use permitted in the zone in which the building is located. (8) Floor area ratio (FAR). The numerical value obtained by dividing the floor area within a building or buildings on a lot by the area of such lot. (9) Fraternity/sorority house. A building used as a residence by a chapter of a fraternal or sororal nonprofit organization recognized by the University of Iowa. For purposes of this I Chapter this definition does not include a rooming house. (10) Frontage. The distance along a street line (right of way line) from one intersecting street to another, or from one I intersecting street to the end of a dead end street or the end i of a cul-de-sac. (g) (1) Garage, commercial. Any building or premises used for equip- ping, repairing, renting, selling or storing motor vehicles,. and at which automobile fuels, and supplies may be sold. (2) Garage, private. An accessory building containing not more than four (4) parking spaces, which is under the control and use of the occupants of the main building. Only one (1) of the parking spaces may be used for a vehicle of not more than three (3) ton pay load capacity. (3) Grade. The top surface elevation of lawns, walks, drives, or other improved surfaces after completion of construction or grading and landscaping. For the purposes of determining height of a building, the grade is the average level at the corners of the exterior walls of a building. (4) Ground area. The area of a building within its largest outside dimensions computed on a horizontal plane at the first floor level, exclusive of open porches, breezeways, terraces, and exterior stairways. (5) Group care facility. A government licensed or approved facility which provides resident services in a dwelling to more than six (6) individuals, but not exceeding 15 individuals. These individuals are developmentally disabled, aged, undergoing rehabilitation, or in need of adult supervision and are provided services in accordance with their individual needs. (h) (1) Home occupation. An accessory use consisting of an occupation or profession carried on by a person residing on the premises. aqi i MICROFILMED BY 11_--"JORM -MIC R46LAB- 1 CEDAR RAPIDS •DES 1401 YES I �� -, 7 (2) Hospital. An institution providing health services for human in-patient medical care for the sick or injured and including related facilities such as laboratories, out-patient facilities, emergency medical services, and staff offices which are an integral part of the facility. (3) Hotel. A residential building licensed by the State and occupied and used principally as lodging for transients. I Hotels may or may not provide meals and there are usually no cooking facilities in guest rooms (see "hotel, apartment"). j (4) Hotel, apartment. A multi -family dwelling under resident supervision which maintains an interlobby through which all tenants must pass to gain access to the apartments and which may furnish services ordinarily furnished by hotels, such as a drug - - store, barber shop, cosmetologist, cigar stand or newsstand, when such uses are located entirely within the building with no separate entrance from the street or visible from any sidewalk, and having no sign or display visible from outside of the i building indicating the existence of such services. (i) (1) Indoor athletic and recreational facilities. Facilities which are completely enclosed and used primarily for physical I exercise or culture, including courts, gyms, swimming pools, ! locker and training rooms, and other related facilities. Such j facilities do not including target or shooting ranges, I{ amusement arcades, billiard halls and massage parlors. (j) (1) Junk yard. An area where waste, discarded, or salvaged mater- ials are bought, sold, exchanged, baled or packed, disassembled or assembled, stored or handled, including the dismantling or 4 "wrecking" of automobiles or other vehicles or machinery, 1 housewrecking yard, used lumber yards and places for storage of salvaged building materials and structural steel materials and equipment. (k) (1) Kennel. An establishment where small animals are bred, raised, trained, groomed, and boarded for compensation, sale or other commercial purposes. j (1) (1) Livestock. Cattle, sheep, swine, poultry, and other animals or fowl, which are being produced primarily for use as food or food ! products for human consumption. (2) Living unit. See "dwelling unit." i (3) Loading space, off-street. Space logically and conveniently located for bulk pickups and deliveries, scaled to delivery vehicles expected to be used, and accessible to such vehicles when required off-street parking spaces are filled. I a9J 141CROFILMED BY 1 J'ORM-,MICR#L B -- -� L; CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 8 (4) .Lodging house. See "rooming house." (5) Long term care facility. See "nursing home." (6) Lot. A plot, tract or parcel of land in one ownership with fixed boundaries or one or more portions of lots of record in one ownership platted pursuant to Chapter 409 of the Code of Iowa. i (7) Lot, corner. A lot located at the intersection of two (2) or more streets. (8) Lot, double frontage. A lot having frontage on two parallel or approximately parallel streets. (9) Lot, interior. A lot other than a corner lot or double frontage lot and bounded by a street on only one side. (10) Lot, reversed corner. A corner lot, the rear of which abuts the side of another lot. (11) Lot area. The total area within the lot lines of a lot ex- cluding any area located within a public or private street. c E (12) Lot coverage. The percentage of the lot area covered by the �r building area. 8 (4) .Lodging house. See "rooming house." (5) Long term care facility. See "nursing home." (6) Lot. A plot, tract or parcel of land in one ownership with fixed boundaries or one or more portions of lots of record in one ownership platted pursuant to Chapter 409 of the Code of Iowa. i (7) Lot, corner. A lot located at the intersection of two (2) or more streets. (8) Lot, double frontage. A lot having frontage on two parallel or approximately parallel streets. (9) Lot, interior. A lot other than a corner lot or double frontage lot and bounded by a street on only one side. (10) Lot, reversed corner. A corner lot, the rear of which abuts the side of another lot. (11) Lot area. The total area within the lot lines of a lot ex- cluding any area located within a public or private street. c E (12) Lot coverage. The percentage of the lot area covered by the building area. (13) Lot depth. The mean horizontal distance between the front lot line and the rear lot line, or the distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the midpoint of the rear lot line. (14) Lot frontage. The continuous width of a lot measured along the street (right of way line). (15) Lot line, front. A lot line separating the lot from the street. On corner lots, the front lot line is the shortest street dimension except that if the lot is square or almost square, i.e., has dimensions at the ratio of from 3:2 to 3:3, then the i front lot line may be along either street. i (16) Lot line, rear. The boundary opposite and most distant from the front lot line. In the case of an irregular or triangular shaped lot, it is an imaginary line within the lot, 10 feet in length, and parallel to and farthest from the front lot line. (17) Lot line, side. Any lot line which meets the end of a front lot line. (87) Lot width. The length of the building line. (m) (1) Manufactured housing. Includes mobile and modular homes as herein defined. J MICROFILMED BY ! 1" "`J ORM - MICR6LA15 -t !+ CEDAR RAPIDS DES M01RE5 I Q11 J 9 (2) Manufactured housing park. A tract of land which has been planned and improved for the placement of manufactured housing on leased spaces. (3) Mobile home. A single-family dwelling unit, built on a chassis, suitable for year-round occupancy and containing water supply, waste disposal, heating and electrical conveniences excluding recreational vehicles. (4) Modular home. Any single-family dwelling unit which is i manufactured in whole or in components at a place other than the location where it is to be placed; which is assembled in whole or in components at the location where it is to be permanently located; which rests on a permanent foundation or slab; which does not have wheels or axles affixed as a part of its normal j construction; and which does not require a license by any agency as a motor vehicle, special equipment, trailer, motor home or mobile home. (5) Motel. A residential building or buildings, usually located ialong highways, occupied and used principally as a place of lodging for transients. The term "motel" includes "motor hotel." (n) (1) Non -conforming building. A building or portion thereof which k does not conform to the provisions of this Chapter relative to height or yards for the zone in which it is located by reason of the adoption of this Chapter or subsequent amendments thereto. (2) Nonconforming lot. A lot which does not conform to the provisions of this Chapter relative to tot frontage, width or area for the zone in which it is located by reason of the adoption of this Chapter or subsequent amendments thereto. (3) Non -conforming use. Any use that is not permitted within the zone in which it is located by reason of the adoption of this Chapter or subsequent amendments thereto. (4) Nursing home. A facility operated by a proprietary or nonprofit 1 corporation or association and licensed or regulated by a governmental entity for the accommodation of convalescents or other persons who are not in need of hospital care but who require skilled care and/or related services. (o) (1) Open space. That portion of the lot that is not covered by buildings, drives, parking spaces and aisles. (2) Open space, common. Open space the use of which is shared by all occupants of more than one dwelling unit, as distinguished from private open space. (3) Open space, private. Open space used by occupants of a dwelling unit. a91 .. i MICRDEILMED BY '-JORMMIC R1LA B` ' !! ( CEDAR RAPIDS • DES IOMES 10 (4) Overlay zone. A set of zoning requirements that is imposed in addition to those of the underlying zone. Developments within the overlay zone, except in the case of an OPD -H zone, must conform to the requirements of both zones or, in the case of a disparity, the more restrictive requirements of the two. (5) Owner. The person who holds the fee simple or equitable title to the property. (p) (1) Parking area. An off-street facility intended or designed for the parking of more than four (4) motor vehicles, including parking spaces and aisles. (2) Parking space. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust - free surface intended for off-street vehicular parking. (3) Patio. A covered or uncovered surfaced outdoor living area at grade abutting and accessible from a dwelling. (4) Performance standard. A minimum requirement or maximum allowable limit on the effects or characteristics of a use, written in the form of regulatory language. Performance ( standards describe allowable limits with respect to smoke, c odor, noise, heat, vibration, glare, and so on. (5) Person. Any individual or group of individuals, corporation, partnership, association, or any entity, including state and local governments and agencies. l (6) Porch. A covered entrance to a building consisting of a platform area, with open or enclosed sides, projecting from the i wall of a building. i i (7) Premises. See "lot." (8) Principal building. A building which contains the principal j use. (9) Principal use. The primary use(s) of land or a structure as distinguished from an accessory use, e.g., a house is a f principal use in a residential area; a garage or pool is an accessory use. (10) Projections (into yards). Parts of buildings such as archi- tectural features which protrude into the required yard or yards. (11) Provisional use. A use which is permitted in the zone in which it is listed subject to compliance with the specific requirements mentioned. (12) Public utility. A system which is owned and operated by the City or by a licensed public utility company. a9 MICROFILMED BY __J0 RM -MIC R4 LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES / 11 (q) (1) Quarry. Land used for the purpose of excavating stone or slate as an industrial operation. (r) (1) Remodel/repair. Any improvement in a building which is not a structural alteration. (2) Religious institution and related facilities. An organization having a religious purpose, which has been granted an exemption from federal tax as a Sec. 501(c)(3) organization under the Internal Revenue Code, including churches, rectories, meeting halls, schools and the facilities that are related to their use. (3) Replacement value. The estimated cost to replace a building in kind based on current replacement costs. (4) Restaurant. A business where the dispensing and the consump- tion at indoor tables of edible foodstuff and/or beverage is the Principal business, including a cafe, cafeteria, coffee shop, delicatessen, lunch room, tearoom, dining room, bar, cocktail lounge or tavern. The total seating area located within the enclosed portion of the premises is more than fifty (50) percent of the total floor area. (5) Restaurant, drive-in/carry-out. An auto oriented use whose principal operation is the dispensing of edible foodstuff and/or beverage for consumption in automobiles, at indoor or outdoor tables, at stand-up counters or to be carried off the premises. The total seating area, if provided, is less than fifty (50) percent of 'the floor area. (6) Rezoning. A change in land use regulations. Rezonings can take three forms: (1) a comprehensive revision or modification of the zoning text and map; (2) a text change in zone requirements; or (3) a change in the map, i.e., the zoning designation of a particular parcel or parcels. (7) Roof. The top covering of a building constructed to shield the area beneath from the weather. The term "roof" includes the term "canopy." (8) Roof line. The highest point of the coping of a flat roof; the deck line of a mansard roof; and the mid -point between the eaves and ridge of a saddle, hip, gable, gambrel or ogee roof. (9) Roomer. An occupant of a rooming house or rooming unit who is not a member of the family of the rooming house operator. A roomer shall also mean an occupant of a dwelling unit who is not a member of the family occupying the dwelling unit. (10) Rooming house. Any dwelling, or that part of any dwelling, containing one or more rooming units, in which space is let by the owner or operator to three (3) or more roomers. f� 1 1 i 141CROFILMED BY 11- "-"JORM- MICR06LA9- -� CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES all T r U1 12 (11) Rooming unit. Any habitable room or group of adjoining habitable rooms located within a dwelling and forming a single unit with facilities which are used, or intended to be used, primarily for living and sleeping. A rooming unit shall have bath and toilet facilities available for exclusive use by the occupant(s) or for communal use and, in addition, may have kitchen and dining facilities available for use by the occupant(s) therein. (s) (1) Separate tract. An abutting group of lots which are developed for a use or uses which share common facilities, e.g., off- street parking, loading and driveways. A separate tract shall be considered as a single lot in the application of the requirements of this Chapter. (2) Setback. The line beyond which the wall of a building or structure shall not project. (3) Special exception. A principal use which is allowable when the facts and conditions specified in this Chapter as those upon which the exception is permitted are found to exist by the Board of Adjustment. (4) Stacking space. An asphalt, concrete or similar permanent dust free surface designed to accommodate a motor vehicle waiting for entry to an auto oriented use and located in such a way that access to an off-street parking space is not obstructed. (5) Story. The portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the top most story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the top most floor and the ceiling or roof above. (6) Street. Property dedicated or intended for primary public vehicular access to lots or for through traffic such as limited access highways and thoroughfares. (7) Street, arterial. A street whose principal function is to provide for through traffic, and designed to carry large volumes of traffic. (B) Street, collector. A street whose principle function is for carrying traffic from local streets to arterial streets. (9) Street, cul-de-sac. A local street terminating in a turn- around. (10) Street, local. A street used primarily for access to abutting property. (11) Street, private. A way, which affords principal means of access to abutting lots, and is not owned by a government entity. I j j 141CROFIL14ED BY ,."�JOR MMIC RSCA- -i i E{CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOII a9i 0 0 Ji 13 (12) Structure. Anything constructed or erected on the ground or which is attached to something located on the ground. Struc- tures include buildings, radio and TV towers, sheds, and permanent signs. It excludes vehicles, sidewalks, and paving. (13) Structural alteration. Any change in the configuration of the exterior walls, foundation or the roof of a building which results in an increase in the area, height or volume of the building. (14) Sub -standard lot. See "non -conforming lot." (15) Substantial improvement. Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a building the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the building either, (a) before the improvement or repair is started, or (b) if the building has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For the purposes of this definition, substantial improvement is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. The term does not, however, include either (1) any project for improvement of a building to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions or (2) any alteration of a building listed on the National Register of Historical Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. (t) (1) Townhouse. A complex containing not less than three (3) nor more than six (6) abutting single family dwellings (townhouse units) and each single family dwelling being located on a separate lot. (u) (1) Upzoning. The converse of downzoning (see "downzoning"). (2) Use. The purpose or activity for which land, its buildings, or a portion thereof is designed, occupied, or maintained. (3) Use, principal. The primary use of land or buildings. (4) Use, provisional. A principal use of land or buildings for which additional standards or criteria established in this Chapter must be met. (v) (1) Vacation. The process by which the City discontinues the use of a street or alley as a public way. (2) Variance. A means of granting a property owner relief from certain provisions of this Chapter where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of this Chapter would result in unnecessary hardship. The authority to grant variances is vested in the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Chapter 414 of the Code of Iowa. a91 1 �v. i 141CROFILMED BY 1 -��-- 'DORM MICRAB L ... 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINCS 1 � 14 (3) Vehicle. Every device in, upon or by which any person or i property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway. (4) Vehicle, storage of. A vehicle or portion thereof which is parked in the same position for a period of 48 hours or more. j (y) (1) Yard. An area on a lot unoccupied by structures above grade { except for projections and the specific minor uses or structures allowed in such area under the provisions of this Chapter. I (2) Yard, front. The area across a lot between the front yard line and the street (right of way line). (3) Yard, rear. The area from one side lot line to the other side I of l i ne and between the rear yard 1 i ne and the rear l of 1 i ne. (4) Yard, side. The area from the front yard line to the rear yard line and from the side yard line to the side lot line. (5) Yard line, front. A line parallel to the street and as far back from the street as required in this Chapter. (6) Yard line, rear. A line parallel to the rear lot line and as far forward from the rear lot line as required by this Chapter (see "lot line, rear"). (7) Yard line, side. A line parallel to the side lot line and as far from the side lot line as required by this Chapter. I ! (z) (1) Zone. A section of the City delineated on the zoning map in which requirements for the use of land and buildings and development standards are prescribed in this Chapter. I i (2) Zoning map. The map delineating the boundaries of zones which, along with the zoning text, comprises the zoning ordinance. ARTICLE II. i DIVISION 1. ZONES Sec. 1-2. General Agricultural Zone (AG). i 1 (a) Intent. It is the intent that this zone provide for the agricultural use of land within the City, which is most appropriately used for crops, orchards, and the keeping of farm animals. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Farms. a91 i MICROFILMED BY I` 1- —JORM MICR6LAB._. .. LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 15 (2) Livestock and livestock operations except confinement. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Farm dwellings provided they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RR -1 zone. A maximum of two (2) roomers may reside in each farm dwelling. (2) Livestock feed lots subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (3) Stables, kennels and veterinary establishments subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Airports heliports and helistops subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (2) Commercial recreational uses. (3) Clubs. (4) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (5) Extraction subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page_. (6) Grain elevators subject to the performance standards of Sec. 1- 64, page 140 for I-2 uses. (7) Communication towers subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (8) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: 40,000 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot width: 80 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 40 ft. (4) Minimum yards: Front - According to the following table: � f MICROFILMED BY JORM-MICRd/CAB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 211 Ji Setback Street width Street classification 40 ft. 40 ft, secondary arterial 27 ft. 66 ft, secondary arterial 25 ft. 40 ft, collector or local 20 ft. 80 ft. or more secondary arterial 20 ft. 50 ft. or more collector or local � f MICROFILMED BY JORM-MICRd/CAB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 211 Ji I 16 i Side - 5 ft. for the first 2 stories plus 2 ft. for each additional story Rear - 30 ft. (5) Maximum building bulk: None i (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. E 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. 1 f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformities. See Division 4, page 133. I i (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. s (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. (g) Special provisions. None. t ( Sec. 1-3. Rural Residential Zone (RR -1). j (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide for areas of a rural 1 residential character within the City which may not have all utilities available. j(b) Permitted uses. (1) Detached single-family dwellings. (2) Farms. WJ i 141EROFILMED BY --JORM -MICR6CA8` Lf� I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / T' a9l i 141CROFILMED BY -JORM-�-MICR(�CA9_- -1 LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES r-- - - -- - i < < 17 (c) Provisional uses. (1) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40, page _. i (2) Single family dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers provided that one (1) off-street parking space per roomer shall be furnished. t i. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Clubs subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (2) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: 40,000 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot width: 80 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 45 ft. (4) Minimum yards: Front - according to the table established in ! the AG Zone. 9 Side - 5 ft. for the first 2 stories plus 2 ft. for each additional story Rear - 30 ft. j (5) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building 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 III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (1) Accessory uses. See Division 2, page 92. ji { a. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-41, page 92. j b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-42, page 94. C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-43, page 96. d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. a9l i 141CROFILMED BY -JORM-�-MICR(�CA9_- -1 LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES r-- - - -- - 1 18 I e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformi ties. See Division 4, page 133. (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. i 1 (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. { (g) Special provisions. None. Sec. 1-4. Low Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS -5). 991 MICROFIL14ED BY l JOR M" MIC ROLA B- LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES h00IAES (a) Intent. It is the primary purpose of this zone to provide for ly residential development consistent with the predominate 9!single-fam single-family residential character of Iowa City. Development within t this zone is expected to have a neighborhood orientation; therefore, parks, schools, religious institutions and neighborhood commercial facilities are expected to be located within or in close proximity to developments in this zone. Compatibility of development within this zone shall be encouraged and related non-residential uses and structures r should be planned and designed to be in character with the scale and pattern of the residential development. k (b) Permitted uses. i I (1) Detached single-family dwellings. j (c) Provisional uses. (1) Detached single family dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers provided that an additional one (1) off-street parking I space per roomer shall be furnished. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the E requirements of Sec. 1-40. i (2) Public utilities. (3) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. I- 40. 1 (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: 8,000 sq. ft. 991 MICROFIL14ED BY l JOR M" MIC ROLA B- LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES h00IAES T.: i 17/ 19 (2) Minimum lot width: 60 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 35 ft. (4) Minimum yards: Front - 20 ft. Side - 5 ft. for the first 2 stories, plus 2 ft. for each additional story. Rear - 25 ft. (5) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building Coverage - 45% Floor area ratio - none (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: i f(1) Accessory uses. See Division 2, page 92. fa. Permitted accessory uses and buildings. See Sec. 1-41, page 92. g b. Accessory use and building regulations. See Sec. 1-42, page 94. C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-43, page 96. i d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. I � j, e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. C(3) Nonconformities. See Division 4, page 133. (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. t (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. C (g) Special Provisions. i (1) If a tract of land one acre or greater in area is being subdivided or resubdivided into lots, it may be developed at a maximum gross density of five (5) dwelling units per acre with minimum lot areas of 7,200 square feet and maximum lot areas of . 15,000 square feet. Sec. 1-5. Medium Density Single -Family Residential Zone (RS -8). (a) Intent. It is primarily intended that this zone provide for the development of small lot single-family dwellings. This zone represents a relatively high density for single-family development, thus dwellings in aq i i MICROFIL:DRE :5ML0 DORM-""MIB -� % I CEDAR RAPIDS RES I !� 1 20 this zone should be in close proximity to all city services and facilities, especially parks, schools and recreational facilities. Special attention should be given to landscaping and site development in this zone. Special provisions of this zone are designed to permit dwellings with no side yard to accommodate attached single family dwellings and to permit conversions of existing structures to duplexes. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Detached single-family dwellings. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Zero lot line dwellings subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40, page _. (2) Duplexes provided they shall be developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 Zone and that the minimum lot area per unit is 4350 square feet. (3) Dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers in each dwelling unit provided that for single family dwellings one (1) additional off-street parking space per roomer shall be furnished. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the requirements of Section 1-40. (2) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (3) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40. j (4) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements (1) Minimum lot area: 5,000 sq. ft. i (2) Minimum lot area per Unit: 500 sq. ft. (3) Minimum lot width: 45 ft. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 25 ft. (4) Minimum yards: Front - 20 ft. 291 1 1 r� i MICROFILMED BY JORM_-MICFV6LA9` LCEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES t -- i i 21 Side - 5 ft. for the first 2 stories plus 2 ft. for each additional story; or for zero lot line dwellings, one at 0 ft. and the other(s) at 10 ft. Rear - 20 ft. (6) Minimum open space per dwelling unit: None (7) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 40% Floor area ratio - none (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformities. See Division 4, page 133. (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. (g) Special provisions. (1) If a tract of land one acre or greater in area is being subdivided or resubdivided into lots, it may be developed at a maximum gross density of eight (8) dwelling units per acre with minimum lot areas of 4,000 square feet and maximum lot areas of 7,500 square feet. Lots less than 5,000 square feet in area shall be developed with one wall of the dwelling unit having a zero side yard. Sec. 1-6. Low Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -12). (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone provide for the development of townhouse, duplex, triplex and fourplex dwellings. This zone allows a high density of single family residential development and a low density of i I� 9 141CROFILMED BY I 1. —JORM--"MICR46LAB__- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIIIES 1 a91 a J1 22 multi -family residential development. Dwellings in this zone should have good access to all city services and facilities, especially parks and recreation facilities. It is expected that townhouse, duplex, triplex and fourplex development will mostly occur near the center of the city and in small developments near neighborhood centers and places of employment. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Duplex, triplex, and fourplex dwellings. (2) Townhouses. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Detached single-family dwellings and zero lot line dwellings provided they shall be developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RS -8 Zone and the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page (2) Rooming houses provided that 2725 square feet of lot area is provided for each 330 square feet of total floor area in the rooming house. (3) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40, page _. (4) Dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers in each dwelling unit provided that for single family dwellings one (1) additional off-street parking space per roomer shall be furnished. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the dimensional requirements of the RS -5 zone and the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page _. (2) Funeral homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40, page (3) Religious institutions subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40, page _. (4) Public utilities. (5) Multi -family dwellings with more than (4) dwelling units, provided that a minimum lot area per unit of 2725 square feet is met. (e) Dimensional requirements. The following table of dimensional requirements shall be applicable to the uses of this zone. 1 1 i MICROFIWED BY 11.-MIVr 1 "'JOR"IC R(i�ICAB-- - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES a91 J� r� r � (1) Min. lot area: (2) Minimum lot area per unit: (3) Min. lot width: (4) Min. lot frontage: (5) Min. yards: Front - Side - 23 Townhouse unit Duplex Triplex Fourplex 3000 sf 5500 sf 8200 sf 10,900 sf 3000 sf 2750 sf 2725 2725 20 ft 50 ft 70 ft 80 ft 20 ft 35 ft 40 ft 45 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 0 ft or 1 @ 5 ft for the first 2 stories 0 ft and the plus 2 ft for each additional other @ 10 ft story Rear - 20 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft (6) Max. building bulk: Height - 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft Building coverage - 50% 50% 50% 50% Floor area ratio - None None None None j (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the j divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. 4 e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformities. See Division 4, page 133. 141 CROFILMED BY 11' JORM-MICR#L"AB* CEDAR RAPIDS DES I40I1ES I� 0191 ri 0 24 (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. (g) Special provisions. None. Sec. 1-7. Medium Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -20) (a) Intent. It is the purpose of this zone to provide for the development of medium density multi -family housing in areas suitable for this density and to serve a market demand for this type of housing. This zone is particularly well suited to locations adjacent to neighborhood activity centers and should have good access to all city services and facilities. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Multi -family dwellings. (2) Fraternity/sorority houses. (c) Provisional uses. (1)• Townhouses and duplexes provided they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 Zone and have a minimum lot area per unit of 1800 square feet. (2) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40. (3) Nursing homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (4) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (5) Single family dwellings, except zero lot line dwellings, subject to the dimensional requirements of the zone. (6) Rooming houses provided that 1,800 square feet of lot area is provided for each 330 square feet of total floor area in the rooming house. (7) Dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers in each dwelling unit provided that for single family dwellings one (1) additional off-street parking space per roomer shall be furnished. (d) Special exceptions. (1) Daycare centers and preschools subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. j MICROFILMED BY JORM - MIC R6LAB-' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1I 1 Q91 JI 25 (2) Group care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (3) Cemeteries and mausoleums subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (4) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: 7200 sq. ft. (2) Minimum lot area per unit: 1,800 sq. ft. (3) Minimum lot width: 60 ft. (4) Minimum lot frontage: 35 ft. (5) Minimum yards: Front - 20 ft. Side - 5 ft. for the first 2 stories plus 2 ft. for each additional story Rear - 30 ft. (6) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 45% Floor area ratio - None (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within h s zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. 1 ' f MICROFILMED BY ! I l 'NORM"�"MICR fjILA B�- CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES a9i Jj 26 d. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformities. 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. 1-8. High Density Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -44). (a) Intent. It is intended that this zone establish areas for the development of high density multifamily dwellings and group living quarters. Within this zone a mix of uses is encouraged. Additionally, it is intended that this zone be located near an arterial street for proper access. Due to the variety of uses permitted within the zone, careful attention to site design aid development is expected to assure that all uses are mutually compatible. (b) Permitted uses. (1) Multifamily dwellings. (2) Fraternity/sorority houses. (3) Dwellings with a maximum of two (2) roomers residing in each dwelling unit. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Townhouses provided that they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -12 zone. (2) Group care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (3) Family care facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1- 40. (4) Nursing homes subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (5) Religious institutions and related facilities subject to the requirements of Sec. 1-40. (6) Rooming houses provided that 1000 square feet of lot area shall be provided for each 330 square feet of total floor area in the rooming house. 1 MICROFIL14ED DY (1- --JORM--MICR(L'AB-- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIMES Q91 T, —I 0 27 (d) Special exceptions. (1) Daycare centers and preschools. (2) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: (2) Minimum lot area per unit: (3) Minimum lot width: (4) Minimum lot frontage: (5) Minimum yards: Front - Side - None. 1,000 sq. ft. None. 35 ft. 20 ft. 5 ft for the first 2 stories plus 2 ft. for each additional story Rear - 20 ft. (6) Maximum building bulk: Height - 35 ft. Building coverage - 40% Floor area ratio - None (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted withiT�s zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. C i MICROFILMED BY I1 DORM -MIC RdLA9- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES / 28 e. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. (3) Nonconformities. See Division 4, page 133. i (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. (g) Special provisions. I ' None. i Sec. 1-9. High Rise Multi -Family Residential Zone (RM -80). i (a) Intent. It is the purpose of this zone to provide for a mix of uses which are suited to a very high intensity residential environment. It is +J intended that this zone provide an efficient arrangement of land uses by providing convenience to its residents. While special attention to design is needed to successfully blend multiple uses into one structure or into a single neighborhood, this zone provides opportunities for activities and amenities not immediately available to most residential environments. Since this zone will have high levels of pedestrian activity, special I attention must be directed to providing a pleasant, safe and efficient pedestrian environment. (b) Principal uses. I (1) High-rise multi -family dwellings. (c) Provisional uses. (1) Low-rise multi -family dwellings provided they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -44 Zone. i (2) Fraternity/sorority houses provided they are developed in accordance with the dimensional requirements of the RM -44 Zone. (3) Rooming houses provided that 1000 square feet of lot area shall { be provided for each 330 square feet of total lot area in the rooming house. f (4) Retail and service establishments listed as permitted uses (1) 1 through (4) in the CN -1 Zone provided they are located on the ground level or below in a high-rise multi -family dwelling. i (d) Special exceptions. (1) Restaurants. I � I j MICROFILMED BY �I_... 1. -"JORM - MICR6LAg_. � Ij I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES l F MICROFILMED BY "JORM "'MIC R4ICAB- -� (i ( CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES '� / 29 (2) Daycare centers and preschools. (3) Clubs. (4) Religious institutions and related facilities. (5) Public utilities. (e) Dimensional requirements. (1) Minimum lot area: None. (2) Minimum lot area i per unit: 550 sq. ft. p( !' (3) Minimum lot width: None. i (4) Minimum lot frontage: None. I (5) Minimum yards: Front - None. Side - 0 feet for walls without windows ! facing the side yard or 5 feet for the first two stories plus 1 foot for each additional story. j Rear - None. F E (6) Minimum open space per dwelling unit: None. F (7) Maximum building bulk: I Height - None. i Building coverage - None. Floor area ratio - None. 1 (f) General provisions. All principal and accessory uses permitted within this zone are subject to the General Provisions of Article III, the i divisions and sections of which are indicated as follows: (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. MICROFILMED BY "JORM "'MIC R4ICAB- -� (i ( CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES '� / r 30 C. Off-street parking requirements. See Sec. 1-43, page 96. I d. Off-street loading requirements. See Sec. 1-44, page 108. t e. Sign regulations. See Sec. 1-45, page 109. j f. Fence regulations. See Sec. 1-49, page 127. (2) Dimensional requirements. See Division 3, page 129. I (3) Nonconfarmities. See Division 4, page 133. i I (4) Tree regulations. See Division 5, page 135. 7 .. _.-.. .._.. h( (5) Performance standards. See Division 6, page 140. I s (g) Special provisions. (1) Except along boundaries where abutting zones permit buildings higher than 35 feet, no portion of any building in the RM -80 zone shall project through an imaginary plane leaning inward from 35 feet above zone boundaries at an angle representing an increase of one (1) foot of height for each foot of horizontal distance perpendicular to the boundary. Where existing land in abutting zones is developed with open spaces at the boundary, such as street right-of-way, the open space may be included in meeting the horizontal distance requirement. i 1 j r i i I i I i f ' I I �9I I r". I r MICROFILMED BY JORM-MICR#CA9'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES r _ 1 i City of Iowa CIty MEMORANDUM Date: February 2, 1983 To: Conference Board Members From: Anne Carroll, Director of Human Relations I Re: City Assessor Performance Evaluation Criteria I At the time that the City Assessor, Dan Hudson, was hired to fill the unexpired term of retiring Assessor Vic Belger, the Conference Board decided that it wished to evaluate the performance of the Assessor, if this was legally permissible, prior to making a decision to reappoint Mr. Hudson to a new six year term. It was decided that the criteria upon which the evaluation was to be based should be established in advance for Mr. Hudson's information. After having received a favorable legal opinion, the Conference Board subcommittee members who had previously been ( involved in assisting with the selection of the Assessor (Kate Dickson, i Dorsey Phelps, Don Sehr) reviewed proposed performance evaluation criteria submitted by Mr. Hudson and myself. The attached criteria were j unanimously approved with the direction that future inclusion of goals to continue improvement of the administration and efficiency of the Assessor's office as well as other management related goals was to be encouraged. The goals were established using the City's management by objectives format. The appropriateness of these goals may be discussed by the Conference 1 1 Board -at your next meeting on February 14. The actual evaluation of the + Assessor should be scheduled to be completed prior to October 1, 1983, to ' i comply with the statutory 90 -day notice requirement prior to the end of Mr. Hudson's term, December 31, 1983. Prior to the evaluation Dan will prepare a written report for the Conferenece. Board detailing the j accomplishment of these goals. f Please contact Mr. Hudson at 338-2231 if you have any questions regarding tthe specifics of these goals. bj3/20 +� l i i a9ZL l � i MICRUILMED BY ` 1 1 -""JORM MIC R(JC,4B- - 1 LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES , e MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES ' City Assessors Office Fiscal Year 183 7/1/82 - 6/3.0/83 I. Daily Duties A. Receive calls and inquiries and dispense information to realtors, insurance agents, appraisers, lenders, other government offices, and the general public, efficiently and on a timely basis. B. Make ownership changes on all property record cards and maps from the deeds, contracts, and change of _ titles, on a daily basis. C. Fill out declaration of value sheets on a daily basis and send them to the State Department of Revenue monthly. D. When available, attend meetings and schools to meet the continuing education requirements. II. New Construction A. By January 1, 1983,* review in field all new construc- tion and demolitions for 1982 and any 1981 construction that wasn't completed by January 11 1982. Homestead and Military Credit Forms. A. Design and order new forms and set up a new system for filing applications to comply with the new one time signing law. B. By December 31, 1982, prepare all the forms for signing. C. By May 15, 1983, send post card reminders to people who have not yet signed. During the last few days of June telephone the remainder of the homeowners who have not signed. IV. Other Annual Forms A. By their statutory dates, get all other annual forms signed, making sure all are in compliance with all laws and rules. V. 1983 Re -appraisal A. Commercial and Industrial Re -appraisal. Coordinate and work with Vanguard Appraisal on the re -appraisals. Review and check property record cards from Vanguard, as received. By January 21, 1983, our personnel must put the new values on the computer. i 171CROEILRED BY - '-JORM'MIC RbLA O` CEDAR RAPIDS •DES ROIYES t 4. By February 1, 1983, mail out assessment rolls.. S. February 14, to February 18, 1983, hold open house with Vanguard to explain their values to property owners. 6. February 21, to April 15, 1983,* the assessor can hear informal protests from taxpayers. B. Residential and Agricultrual Re -appraisal I 1. By September 1, 1982, using sales data, establish s 'the manual level for 1983. This will update the manual prices to current local values. 2. By September 1, 1982, develop new residential land values from sales ratios and neighborhood data. r 3. By September 1, 1982, using sales data, age of i homes, and neighborhood areas, develop a new residential depreciation -guide for the 1983 value.. This is needed to equalize the values between t older and newer homes. 4. By March 1, 1983, completely revalue all the residential property and review and check calcu- lations. 4 5. By March 15, 1983, our personnel must put the new values on the computer.. 6. By April 1, 1983, mail out assessment rolls. IE 7. April 1, to April 15, 1983,* the assessor can hear informal protest from taxpayers. VI. Annual Board of Review Session j A. April 16, to May 5, 1983,* accept formal written protests for the Board of Review. B. Coordinate the Board of Review meeting during the month of May*. VII. Annual Duties A. By March 15, 19839* hold preliminary meetings and public hearing to adopt the annual budget. B. By 'July 1, 1983*, prepare and submit abstract -to the County Auditor and State Department of Revenue. e Dates set by the ,State Code. i MICROFI...ED DY f .-DORM --MICRO L_A9 _ CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES NA I;L9I Ji City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: January 31, 1983 TO: Chuck Schmadeke, Public Works Director FROM: Bud Stockman, Supt. of Streets/Sanitation RE: Cost Comparison For Snow Removal, 1980-1983 1980-81: December & January - Salt & sand mix 408 ton @ $8.00 Overtime labor 64.75 hr. @ $10.00 December & January Sub -Total February & March - Salt & sand mix 701 ton.@ $8.00 Straight salt 26 ton @ $28.00 Overtime labor 241.75 hr. @ $10.00 Rented endluaders (2) February & March Sub -Total Total Year Cost 1980-81 1981-82: December & January - Salt & sand mix 2845 ton @ $8.00 Straight salt 124 ton @ $25.00 Overtime labor 1064.75 hr. @ $11.00 Hired trucks 615.50 hr. @ $30.00 December & January Sub -Total February & March - Salt & sand mix 1202 ton @ $8.00 Overtime labor 98.5 hr. @ $11.00 February & March Sub -Total April - Salt & sand mix 283 ton @ $8.00 Overtime labor 34.75 hr. @ $11.00 Straight salt 64 ton @ $25.00 Rented endloaders (2) April Sub -Total Total Year Cost 1981-82 1982-83: December & January - Salt & sand mix 1102 ton @ $8.00 Straight salt 38 ton @ $22.00 Overtime labor 194.25 hr. @ $12.00 Rented endloaders (2) Total Year -To -Date Cost 1982-83 $ 3,264 _ 648 3,912 $ 5,608 728 2,418 8,000 16,754 $22,760 3,100 11,712 18,465 56,037 $ 9,616 _11084 10,700 2,264 382 1,600 _8,000 12,246 $ 8,816 836 2,331 8,000 19,983 _i j 141LROFILI4ED BY 1_ -JOFZIM--MICR4LAB- CEDAR RAFIOS • DES I401NES i $20,666 $78,983 $19,983 M3 J� i ` I j City of Iowa Citi MEMORANDUM Date: January 31, 1983 lrt y To: Charles Schmadeke, Director of Public Works From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer Re: Burlington Street Signal System (J The City Council has expressed an interest in the Burlington Street signal system and the Traffic Engineering's effort to model the present signal i mosystem. Traffic lg delto pt mize the signaltimings for this signsing a computer al system. To summarize what has transpired, I was proposing that a traffic simula- tion model TRANSYT - 7F be used to simulate traffic along Burlington Street. The initial implementation revealed unsatisfactory results, i.e. the model was predicting very poor progression along Burlington Street with optimized signal timings (this models the real world very closely). In the last few weeks the FHWA has announced an enhanced version of TRANSYT-7F which it is making available to agencies which request it. I requested a copy of this version, TRANSYT-7F Mod 3, be sent to me so that it can be loaded into the WEEG Center Computers. The Planning Department has a part-time employee - Michael Kyte - who will be implementing various test schemes into the TRANSYT-7F Mod 3 package to test the following: 1. Increased pedestrian north -south times. j 2. Reduced pededstrian north -south times. 3. Increased north -south vehicular green times. 4. Increased east -west left turn times. 5. Progression optimization with existing likely timings. 6. Progression optimization with leading eastbound left turn/lagging westbound left turn. I 7. Progression optimization with protected east -west left turns eliminated. The results of these test runs and other test runs will be reported as they become finalized, tpl/9 jI I 019 J4 MICROFILMED BY , JORM-MICR6LA© J I CEDAR RANDS DES t101ME5lid C � C • parks & recreation MEMO department to: Neal Berlin and City Council from. Dennis E. Showalter re. Additional Capital Outlay for date: January 28, 1983 Forestry/Horticulture Division Expanded Service Level Request The original expanded service level request asks for $34,741 for a one - ton dump truck with an aerial lift, and a brush/limb chipper. Since then, I have found out that the Parks and Recreation Department two -ton flatbed truck, which has been used November through March for Public Works snow removal, will not be needed after March 1983, so I would like to try to operate for one year with existing vehicles to see how it works. The piece of additional equipment that we need the most is a chipper at $10,500. A chipper will save a lot of time now spent stacking and com- pressing brush on a truck, save time and mileage now spent in driving to the landfill, and save landfill charges. We estimate that the above will save $3,642 per year. Maintenance costs on the chipper will be approxi- mately $500 the first year and $1,000 the second year. At the present time, the only supplier of wood chips in the area is Iowa - Illinois. They do supply us with some chips, but not nearly as many as we need. We use chips on trails, for mulching, and as a ground cover to prevent erosion and suppress weed growth. A chipper would more than supply us with what we need, and the balance could be deposited in Sturgis Ferry Park (or other parks) for citizens to use, or possibly sold. The Forestry Department is concentrating on trimming small- and medium- sized street trees at present. We need to cover the entire city. Very little of this type of work has been done in the past, so there is a sub- stantial backlog. You can save a lot of time and money if you can do corrective pruning, such as removing narrow -angled branches, weak branches, and crossing and rubbing branches when the trees are small, instead of wait- ing until they are large and doing it as branches break and fall. A chipper will substantially speed up this process. city of iowa city 1 i 141CROFILMED BY I 1 `DORM - MICR46LA6` CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES Q95 J r City of Iowa Cf ` MEMORANDUM CATE1 Feb, 1, 1983 To: Iowa City Council FROM: Senior Center Commission RE: Approval of Senior Center By -Laws The Senior Center Commission approved the amended by-laws (herein enclosed) at their Dec, 2, 1982 regular meeting, As is stated in Sect, 1, Article VI, "Amendments shall be approved by the Council and (Board'of) Supervisors to become effective;" The Commission would appreciate your consideration of approval of these by-laws in order for them to become effective, Thank you. 1 I MICROFILMED BY JORM-"-MICR#LAB` - -� I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVES C196 PIM JI J Original IAFT PROPOSED BY-LAWS )WA CITY SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION t RTICLE I. ? MEETINGS. Section 1. Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of this Commission shall be held on the first Thursday of each month and informal meetings shall be held as necessary. Section 2. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the members may be called by the Chair and shall be called by the Chair or by the Vice -Chair at the request of three or more members of the Commission. Section 3. Place of Meetings. Regular meetings shall be held in the City Manager's Conference Room at the Civic Center until the completion of the Senior Center at which time meetings will be held at the Senior Center. Section 4. Notice of Meetings. Notice of regular and special meetings shall be required. Included in this notice shall be: J BY-LAWS - AMENDED Dec, 2, 1982 IOWA CITY SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION ARTICLE I. MEETINGS. Section 1, Regular Meetinas. Regular meetings of this Commission shall be held each month. Section 2, Special Meetinas. Special meetings of the members may be called by the Chair, and shall be called by the Chair or by the Vice -Chair at the request of three or more members of the Commission. Section 3. Place of Meetings. Regular meetings shall be held at the Senior Center. Section 4. Notice of Meetings. Notice of regular and special meetings shall be required. Included in this notice shall be: 1 MICROFILMED BY l -JORM -MICR46LA8__ l CEDAR RAPIDS DES 110151S f M, JI 2 Original time, date, place of meeting and tentative agenda. Notice shall be sent to all Commission members as well as posted in a permanent place in the building of the government agency. Meetings may be called upon notice by telephone not less than 24 hours before the meetings and three days if a written notice of a special meeting is given, unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical. In such cases such notice as is reasonable shall be provided. News agencies who have filed requests for such notices shall be informed by the staff in a similar fashion. Section 5. Quorum. A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum at any meeting. A majority (but not less than four) of votes cast at any meeting at which a quorum is present shall be decisive for any motion or election. Section 6. Proxies. There shall be no vote by proxy. Section 7. Public Discussion. Time shall be made available during all regular formal meetings for open public discussion. 2 Amended time, date, place of meeting and tentative agenda. Notice shall be sent to all Commission members as well as posted in a permanent place in the building of the government agency. Meetings may be called upon notice by telephone not less than 24 hours before the meetings 'and three days if a written notice of •a special meeting is given, unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical. In such cases such notice as is reasonable shall . be provided. News agencies who have filed requests for such notices shall be informed by the staff,in a similar fashion. Section 5. Quorum. A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum at any meeting. A majority of votes cast at any meeting shall be decisive for any motion or election. Section 6. Proxies. There shall be no vote by proxy. Section 7• Public Discussion. Time shall be made i available during all regular formal .meetings for open public discussion. 'r, I JJJJ I i MICROFILIIED BY -JORM-- MICRd1LAB - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ;L9b 0 �1 i 3 original ARTICLE 11. MEMBERSHIP. Section 1• Qualifications. The Senior Center Commission' shall consist of seven members. These members shall be appointed as follows: A. The City Council of Iowa City and the Board of Supervisors of Johnson County shall seek recommendations for membership on the Commission. Among the groups consulted should be those particularly concerned with the elderly community such as: the Council of Elders, the organization of agencies which provides services in the Senior Center, the University of Iowa Gerontology Center. B. Final appointment to the Commission shall be subject to approval by majority vote of both the City Council of Iowa City and the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. All members of the Commission shall be qualified electors of Johnson County, Iowa. a 3 Amended ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP. Section 1 Qualifications. According to Ordinance No. 79-2956, adopted June 6, 1977, by the City of Iowa City, the Senior Center Commission shall consist of seven members. All members of the Commission shall be qualified electors of Johnson County, Iowa. J MICROFILMED BY 11I I 1 ......_7 . -JOR M' -'MIC R6C-.4 B" ttl' r CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 a96 4 it Original Section 2• Term of Office. y Initial appointments shall be made for terms of one to three years duration in the following manner: { Johnson County Board of Supervisors, one member appointed for three years and one member for one I year. i t City Council of Iowa City, two members appointed for three years, two members r for two years, and one member for one year. Thereafter all appointments shall be for a period of three years. Section 3. Compensation. Commissioners shall serve j without compensation but {I may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for travel outside of Johnson I County on designated Commission business. Such expenses must have prior approval by the City Manager of Iowa City upon the request of the Senior Center Coordinator. Receipts for all such expenses must be stipulated to the City I Manager of Iowa City through the'Senior Center Coordinator prior to reimbursement for such expenses. Section 4• Orientation for New Commissioners. !O. ,V40 Emended Section Term of Office. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors shall appoint 2 members. The City Council of Iowa City shall appoint 5 members. Appointments shall be for a period of three years. Section 3 Compensation and Expenses. Commissioners shall serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for travel outside of Johnson County on designated Commission business. Such expenses must have prior approval by the City Manager of Iowa City upon the request of the Senior Center Coordinator. Receipts for all such expenses must be stipulated to the City Manager of Iowa City through the Senior Center Coordinator prior to reimbursement for such expenses. Section 4 Orientation for New Commissioners. 2. a96 I I n I _ 1 .. 141CROFILMED BY ( - � ( 'JORM-MIC REICAO� Ll % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES I / Ad -- — 1 1 i / 1 5 y Original Amended j Prior to the first regular Prior to the first regular meeting following their meeting following their appointment, new appointment, new Commissioners shall be Commissioners shall be provided with copies of provided with copies of the By -Laws, and other the By -Laws, and other documentation that would documentation that would be useful to Commission be useful to Commission members in carrying out members in carrying out their duties. They may their duties. They may also be given an also be given an --. .- i orientation briefing by orientation briefing by members of the staff, the members• of the staff, the Commission and others as Commission and others as . may be deemed appropriate. may be deemed appropriate. j Section 5. Absences. Section 5. Absences. s Three consecutive Three consecutive unexplained absences of a unexplained absences of a Commission' member from Commission member from regular meetings may regular meetings may result in a recommendation- result in a recommendation to the appropriate body to the appropriate body from the Commission to from the Commission to discharge said member and discharge said member and I appoint a new appoint a new Commissioner. Commissioner. , Section 6. Vacancies. Section 6. Vacancies. t Any vacancy on the Any vacancy on the 1 Commission because of Commission shall be filled death, resignation, long- by the appropriate term illness, governing body. disqualification or removal'shall be filled by the appropriate governing j body or agency after at least thirty days notice has been given by announcement of said j vacancy to the news media and by recording the; minutes of the appropriate governing body or agency. Section 7. Resignations. Section 7. Resignations. Resignations should be Resignations should be submitted in writing to submitted in writing to the appropriate governing body. FMTIWE a -m - MICROFILMED BY ,....� I. 1.-JORM- MI C R;LA B... LI CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES T � I 6 j Original trended the appropriate governing body or agency at least sixty days prior to the date of intended departure. For example, in the case of a City i s appointee the resignation should be submitted in writing to the Mayor with a copy to the City Manager and Senior Center r Coordinator. ARTICLE III. ARTICLE III. _ OFFICERS. C OFFICERS. Section 1. Number. Section 1. Number. The officers of this i The officers this Commission shall be a f; Commission shalll be a Chairperson, Vice- ± Chairperson, Vice- Chairperson, and j Chairperson, and Secretary, each of whom I r Secretary, each of whom shall be elected by the 6 shall be elected by the members of the Commission. members of the Commission. i r` Section p, Section 2. Election and Term of Office. Election and Term of Office. Officers of the Commission Officers of the Commission 1 shall be elected annually shall be elected annually at the regular January at the regular January meeting each year; if the meeting each year; if the _ election of officers shall election of officers shall not be held at such not be held at such meeting, such election ( meeting, such election shall be held as soon shall be held as soon thereafter as is thereafter as is I convenient. convenient. Section 3. Vacancies. Section 3. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office A vacancy in any office because of death, shall be filled by the resignation, removal, Commissioners for the disqualification or other unexpired portion of the cause shall be filled by term. the Commissioners for the unexpired portion of the term. I • i MICROFILdBY _JORM._MIR6 A B CEDAR RAPIDS MOIY i Original • 1 Amended Section 4. Chair. Section 4. Chair. The Chair shall, when The Chair shall, when present, preside at all present, preside at all meetings, appoint meetings, appoint committees, call special committees, call special meetings and in general meetings and in general perform all duties perform all duties incident to the office of incident to the office of the Chair, and such other the Chair, and such other r duties as miy be duties as may be prescribed by the members prescribed by the members ' from time to time. `^rm ti-- to time. -- ?' Section 5. Vice -Chair. Section 5. Vice -Chair. r In the absence of the In the absence of the Chair, or in the event of Chair, the Vice -Chair death, inability or shall perform the duties refusal to act, the Vice- of the Chair and when so F Chair shall perform the acting shall have all the duties of the Chair and powers of and be subject to when so acting shall have all restrictions upon the all the powers of and be - Chair. subject to all restrictions upon the Chair. Section 6. Secretary. Section 6. Secretary. The Secretary shall have The Secretary shall have 7 the responsibility of the responsibility of insuring that the insuring .that the II FCommission's minutes are Commissions minutes are f accurate and circulated as accurate and circulated as prescribed. prescribed. ARTICLE IV. ARTICLE IV. DUTIES. DUTIES. Section 1. Section 1. The Commission shall have The Commission shall have the following the following responsibilities: responsibilities: A. Serve primarily as an A. Serve primarily as an advisory body to the advisory body to the City Council of Iowa City Council of Iowa City and the Johnson City and the Johnson 174 141CROFILMED BY 'JORM--MICR411L-AB'-- LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / ..1 ti l � ' r r Original Amended County Board of County Board ofSupervisors. Supervisors. B. Ensure that Senior 8. Ensure that Senior Center objectives are Center objectives are carried out through a carried out through a review of program review of program statistics and statistics and reports supplied by reports supplied by staff, as well as r staff, as well as • general questioning general questioning concerning Center concerning Center activities. s activities. C. Consider and act on C. Consider and act on recommendations from recommendations from the Council of Elders the Council of Elders and other relevant and other relevant committees and t committees and volunteers as to f. volunteers as to establishing or Er establishing or changing Senior f changing Senior Center policies and f Center policies and programs. programs. D. Ensure that the 0. Ensure that theSenior Center is Senior Center is effectively effectively integrated into the integrated into the community and with f community and with other related { other related organizations by organizations by assisting inpublic assisting in public relations functions. relations functions. E. Cooperate closely E. Cooperate closely with the staff and with the staff and other relevant other relevant persons in supporting persons in supporting attempts to secure attempts to secure adequate financial adequate financial resources for the resources for the operation of the operation of the i Senior Center. Senior Center. Provide to the Senior F. Provide to the Senior F. Center the full Center the full support, prestige, support, prestige, suand community and community leadership of the leadership of the Cnmmission itself and Commission itself and i f C19 I I`....� 1•.,,.` 1_ Id ICROFILI4ED DY —.DORM_MI D;: LA3- CSt40 CEDAR A4'1DS iI )1 i .9 Original Amended of its individual members. of its individual members. G. To serve in an G. 7o serve in an advocacy role toward @ meeting the needs of advocacy dvocadvocac acy role toward the needs of all elderly in meeting Johnson County. all elderly in Johnson County. t Section 2. •Powers. Section 2. Powers. The Commission shall have the following powers: The. Commission shall have the following powers: A. Review and recommend g action on regular and A. Review and recommend permanent use of action on use of ' space in the Senior space in the Senior Center by various Center by various agencies and agencies and organizations. organizations. e B. Recommend and review B. Recommend and review acquisition and acquisition and disposition of gifts disposition of gifts and donations. and donations. i Recommend and review C. Recommend and review C. policies, rules policies, rules, , regulations, regulations, ordinances and ordinances and budgets relating to budgets relating to the Senior Center the Senior Center 7: services and services and programs. programs. i O. Prepare an annual D. Prepare an annual y report of Senior report of Senior Center activities and Center activities and accomplishments. accomplishments. Section 3. Coordination and Cooperation with Section 3. Other Government Entities. Coordination and Cooperation with The Commission shall Other Government Entities coordinate. and cooperate, The Commission shall where applicable, with coordinate and cooperate, other City and County where applicable, with advisory bodies and other City and County governmental entities on advisory bodies and matters of mutual concern. governmental entities on matters of mutual concern. a96 r'- _ MICROFILMED BY --JORM-"MICR6LAB-' J L 11 � CEDAR RAI'105 • DES :401:1E5 � 10' Original Section 4. Grant Review. All applicable grant applications which would affect the operation of the Senior Center shall be submitted to the Commission for its recommendations. ARTICLE V. ORGANIZATION BUSINESS. OF COMMISSION Section 1. Committees. Establish the Committees of the Commission including composition, duties, and terms. Section 2. Secretary A. A Secretary will be a Commission member and shall be in attendance for all regular and special meetings. Section 3. Agenda. The Chair, or a designated representative, together with staff assistance shall prepare an agenda for all regular Commission meetings. Agendas are 'to be sent to Commission members and the media where appropriate at least three days prior to regular meetings. Section 4, Minutes. Minutes of all regular meetings are to be prepared and distributed to all Commission members, Amended Section 4. Grant Review. All applicable grant applications which would affect the operation of the Senior Center shall be submitted to the Commission for its recommendations. ARTICLE V. ORGANIZATION OF COMMISSION BUSINESS. Section 1. Committees. Establish the Committees of the Commission including composition, duties, and terms. Section 2. Secretary A. A Secretary will be a Commission member and shall be in attendance for all regular and special meetings. Section 3. Agenda. The Chair, or a designated representative, together with staff assistance shall prepare an agenda for all regular Commission meetings. Agendas are to be sent to Commission members and the media where appropriate at least three days prior • to regular meetings. Section 4. Minutes. Minutes of all regular meetings are to be prepared and distributed to all Commission members, 0196 1 I MICROFILME:RA / I' 1. -, 'DORM 'MIC 9'LEDAR NARIDS •NES r 11 Original the Johnson County Board of Supervisors and the City Council of Iowa City at least three days prior to the next scheduled meeting. Minutes shall include: date, time, place of meeting, members present, and action taken. They shall also include results of votes taken and the vote of each member present. Specific recommendations requiring action of any governing body are to be set off from the main body of the minutes and appropriately identified. Section 5. Attendance at Commission Meetings. The Commission Chair or designated representatives may be requested to be in attendance at any City Council or County Board of Supervisors meetings including informal sessions at which matters pertaining to the Commission's responsibilities are to be discussed or action taken. The Commission Chair is to receive Council and Supervisors agendas prior to each Council or Supervisors meeting and is to be otherwise notified of meetings involving Commission business. ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENTS. raw Amended the Johnson County Board ' of Supervisors and the City Council of Iowa City at least three days prior to the next scheduled meeting. Minutes shall include: date, time, place of meeting, members present; and action taken. Specific recommendations requiring action of any governing body are to be set off from the main body of the minutes and appropriately identified. Section 5, Attendance at Commission Meetings. The Commission Chair or designated representatives may be requested to be in attendance at any City Council or County Board of Supervisors meetings including informal sessions at which matters pertaining to the Commission's responsibilities are to be discussed or action taken. ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENTS. 0 a9 6 _i i 141CROFIL14ED BY DORM -MIC RI�CAB- - CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MO ROES l I / .) 'r r-, 12 Original Section 1. These By -Laws may be altered, amended or repealed by affirmative vote of at least five Commission members and new By -Laws adopted by the Commission at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose. The proposed changes in the By -Laws shall be submitted to the members of the Commission, the City Council, and the County Board or Supervisors, at least 14 days prior to consideration by the Commission. Such changes shall require an affirmative vote by at least five members of the Commission. Amendments shall be approved by the Council and Supervisors -to become effective. Amended Section 1. These By -Laws may be amended or repealed by at least five Commission members and new By -Laws adopted by the Commission at any regular meeting. The proposed changes in the adopted or amended By - Laws shall be submitted to the members of the Commission 14 days prior to consideration, within 14 days of adoption. Such changes shall require an affirmative vote by at least five members of the Commission. Amendments shall be approved by the Council and Supervisors to become effective. aqb 8 MICROFILMED BY_l DORM- - MICR#L j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES / 7 n POLICE DEPARTMENT Monthly Report January, 1983 Total requests for police services (complaints) were substan- tially higher in the first month of 1983 as compared to the number received during the same month in 1982. Some 2448 complaints were received by the Department this January as com- pared to 2228 in January, 1982. A ten percent increase is sign- ificant. However, the offense categories in which an increase may be noted are so varied as to make any speculation as to cause, meaningless. Offered below is a comparison, by offense categories, indicating increased reporting over that of a year ago. OFFENSE January, 1982 January, 1983 Criminal Homicide 1 Rape 1 3 Robbery - 3 Assault 7 10 Larceny/Theft 73 134 Motor Vehicle Thefts 7 10 Forgery/Counterfeiting 1 5 Stolen Property (possession) 1 Vandalism S7 99 Controlled Substance 2 6 Family/Child Offenses 25 38 OMVUI (182) O1VI (183) 15 50 Liquor Law Violations 1 11 Disorderly Conduct 119 215 Vagrancy 2 s All Other Non -traffic 32 37 Juvenile 12 15 Mental 4 8 Suicide 4 6 Assist/Service 490 519 Fire 20 24 Gunshots 1 6 Miscellaneous Complaints 7 19 Lost/Found Property 63 78 Recovered Stolen Property 3 9 )j 141CROFILMED BY 1 JORM-MICR46L'AB_ 1 � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES f OFFENSE Animal - Domestic Livestock Deer Kills Hazardous Road Traffic Violations January, 1982 35 11 45 January, 1983 s0 6 1 12 55 It is interesting, at least from a law enforcement perspective, to speculate as to how much of the increase in the categories above could be attributed to consumption of alcoholic beverages The nature of the complaints gives a strong indication of al- coholic beverage consumption. The number of criminal arrests also increased significantly in January, 1983 when compared to January, 1982, from sixty-one criminal arrests plus five juvenile in January, 1982 to one hundred forty-nine criminal and eighteen juvenile arrests in January, 1983. Conversely, traffic tickets and citations dropped somewhat in January, 183 (3509) as compared to the same month in 182. (4096). The difference probably reflects the milder weather and lack of snowfall in January, 1983. Requests for service in the Animal Control Division reflected a similar trend as police complaints in January. Activity levels were significantly higher in January, 183 as compared to 182. In addition, revenues for January, 183, were nearly $1900 higher than for the same period one year ago. The computer based lic- ensing program by Animal Control personnel is the basis for this revenue increase. Investigative Division activities started the year at a slow pace but picked up substantially in the last two weeks of the month. Statistical abstracts are appended. 141CROFIL14ED BY j -DORM-MICR#LAO- - j CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES fj If .- I a91 9 n F � t E r: Iowa City Board of Adjustment FEB 3 1983 J Case No. V-8233 �""�" 41 41" CITY CLERK; Findings and Conclusions 8'3oa .,yr. oe: Application of Iowa -Illinois Gas d Electric Company for Special Exception :cwa-Ill inois Gas d Electric Company (Applicant) filed an application for a special exception, as required by City Code Sec. 8.10.28.H.2, to :onstruct a 161,000 volt transmission line along the right-of-way of the Chicago, Rock Island d Pacific Railroad, from approximately Gilbert Street to Spruce Street. Hearing on the application was held or. Jandary 12. 1982. The anplication was opposed by several neighbors and the Iowa ;i[y Ratepayers association. After hearing from the applicant, those opposing the application, and all other persons wishing to make comments or to question any of the witnesses .no appeared at the hearing, the following motion was duly made and aocanded: To permit construction and installation of a 161,000 volt transmis- sion line which will run approximately from Gilbert Street to Spruce Street along the south right-of-way line of the Chicago, Rock Island d Pacific Railroad in such a manner so that the construction of the poles does not obstruct the drainage in the ditch along the railroad. The motion was approved by a vote of three in favor (Barker, Slager, Vanderhof) and one opposed (Vandervelde). Rased upon the evidence presented at that hearing, the majority of the Ppdrd makes the following findings: I. The proposed line will cost approximately $497,000 and is to be installed as part of applicant's overall upgrading of facilities in the Iowa City service area, to increase capacity by 250% between 1980 and 1988, and to Increase reliability. i i MICROFILMED BY —� I-)- - JORM"--MICR#L'lAB-_ CEDAR RAPIDS x DES M0114ES e e h n r' i J ry c , N 2. The line will be from 00 to 100 feet high, with six lines strung on 23 Poles for a distance of approximately 1.17 miles. The height is mandated by the National Electrical Safety Code, which applies to the r applicant's Iowa City operations under the terms of its franchise i (City Code Sec. 14-3). ( i J. Without the line, there is a possibility that electrical service to most of Iowa City east of Governor Street could be lost because there is no backup line serving applicant's Substation E at Sycamore Street k and Lower Muscatine Road. r�• Applicant studied alternative routes for the line, but all of them are along residential streets and would adversely affect more people 'V f than the proposed line. n F g S. If the applicant were to place the line underground, it would not s follow the railroad right-of-way because construction there would p4 require extensive shoring of the trenches, which is vary expensive. An alternative route for undergreunding was studied, which would G generally follow city streets and, it is estimated, would cost C approximately $2,197,000. e 5. The 69,000 KV lines furnishing current to Substation E are presently L at capacity and the proposed line would provide the additional t capacity needed to serve applicant's customers until the mid -1990's. The majority of the Board believes that applicant has, therefore, demonstrated the necessity for this line. 7, In addition to applicant's evidence, neighborhood objectors (and the r City's staff) pointed out to the Board that there is a severe L j. drainage problem along the railroad right-of-way in the area between Kirkwood Avenue (if extended east to the right-of-way) and the area where the proposed line would leave the right-of-way and run to Substation _. i 8. Construction of the line, and placement of the poles, must therefore i he en_e,•taken In such a manro:r as not to increase the drainage ;rcolaa,. I ' 141CROFILMED BY I-- ,JORM CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYE9 ,J r 3 j 3. The main impact of the lines and poles an the neighborhood will be vSsual, but there is no market value appraisal testimony in the I, f record that such impact will affect the value of neighboring r i properties. i t ' 1 i Applicant's evidence has demonstrated a need for the proposed line and, as proposed, in its application it appears the route is the i it leas: objectionable alternative of those studied by the applicant. ` v I J c:.. The Board heard testimony and arguments from the objectors, o especially the argument that applicant had not furnished sufficient { i j; specific data relating to the necessity for the line. After i. N considering those matters, the majority of the Board believes that r i applicant has provided sufficient evidence and that the proposed line is necessary. 12. The application for a special exception to construct the line as F proposed is granted, subject to the condition that neither the - construction, nor the placement of the poles, shall obstruct any r r drains or sewers along the railroad right-of-way. G P n r. r 1 t � {r 1 F � 5. a98 i -J J 141CAOFILI4ED BY � , i '-JORM--MICR# AE?I` ' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ! I I First Session, Bulletin 2 January 28, 1983 GOVERNOR'S BUDGET MESSAGE • Governor Branstad delivered his first budget messaRe to the legislature on ' January 21. It was divided into budgetary and non -budgetary recommendations. As expected, lie called for a maintenance of effort in many appropriations affecting titles. Specifically, his budget recommendations included continuation of municipal assistance for the 1983-84 and 1984-85 budget years at the same amount - $14.65 million, continuation of the state's 52 commitment for sewage works conscructiun ' ". revenue amounting to $2 million each year of the biennium and holding the line on transit assistance to $1.9 million each year of the biennium. This was $5 million less than the departmental request. " By requesting a lc increase in the sales and use tax, an additional $17.5 mil - 1 lion will go to the Road Use Tax Fund. As of this bulletin, it's our understand- ing that this revenue will be allocated according to current percentage formula - �� with titles' share being 182 or $3.1 million. Finally, the Governor called for a $10 million loan program to supplement ' community development revenue from the federal government. The specifics of this program have not been developed and all we know at this time is that the money will be interest free. I' In the non -budgetary area, the Governor called for programs to "foster a part- nership with local government". These proposals included "FAIR PLAY", LOCAL OP- TION TAXES, AND COUNTY FINANCE REFORM". All of these bills are in draft farm and 1. are awaiting debate in subcommittees. LEAGUE PRIORITY BILL$ TO COIdMITTEE i Draft legislation for several League priority issues have now been submitted to Senate and House committees for debate. The following is a listing of those , bills, the committees and subcommittees. �- AS always, letters and calla for support for these Issues should be directed to subcommittee members now. SENATE FILE 12 - FAIR PLAY: Senate State Government, subcommittee of Sen(a) Carr (D -Dubuque) Chr., Lura (R -Marshalltown) and Bruner (D -Ames). SENATE FILE 46 - TORT LIABILITY: Senate Local Government, subcommittee of s Sen(S) wells (D -Cedar Raplde) Chr., Stiles (R -Corning) and Brown (D -Montezuma). HOUSE FILE 73 - FAIR PLAY: Haute Local Government Committee, subcommittee of Rep(s) Spear (D -Burlington) Chr., Renken (R-Aplington), Cooper (D -Russell), ' Torrence (R-Atalieea) and Renaud (D -Altoona). HOUSE STUDY BILL 79 - LOCAL OPTION TAXES: Hauge Local Goverment Committee, Subcommittee of RepZ87 Jean Lloyd -Jones (D -Iowa City) Chr., O'Xane (D -Sioux City), Connors (D -Des Moines), Royer (R -Essex) and Swearingen (R-Sigourney). OPEN SEASON ON COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LAW . It's apparent that this year will see a well -coordinated attempt by various employee groups to change the Public Employment Relations Act, Chapter 20, Code of Iowa. Included in those changes will be bills to strike the list of negotiable items in Section 20.9 and to eliminate management rights. Two bills have already been introduced on the House side. They are HF 34 by Jochum of Dubuque and HF 77 by Connors of Dee Moines. Bath of [hese bills Strike the list of negotiable items and call for "open scope". (over) a99 MICROFILMED BY I �- '-DORM - MICR41LAB-- -� CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES /� I N:Dt . 1 5533 LEGISLATIVE 9aa aw MwSo.= Dn W�. low Sella S6SMI 8ULLETIN 15151 3859981 First Session, Bulletin 2 January 28, 1983 GOVERNOR'S BUDGET MESSAGE • Governor Branstad delivered his first budget messaRe to the legislature on ' January 21. It was divided into budgetary and non -budgetary recommendations. As expected, lie called for a maintenance of effort in many appropriations affecting titles. Specifically, his budget recommendations included continuation of municipal assistance for the 1983-84 and 1984-85 budget years at the same amount - $14.65 million, continuation of the state's 52 commitment for sewage works conscructiun ' ". revenue amounting to $2 million each year of the biennium and holding the line on transit assistance to $1.9 million each year of the biennium. This was $5 million less than the departmental request. " By requesting a lc increase in the sales and use tax, an additional $17.5 mil - 1 lion will go to the Road Use Tax Fund. As of this bulletin, it's our understand- ing that this revenue will be allocated according to current percentage formula - �� with titles' share being 182 or $3.1 million. Finally, the Governor called for a $10 million loan program to supplement ' community development revenue from the federal government. The specifics of this program have not been developed and all we know at this time is that the money will be interest free. I' In the non -budgetary area, the Governor called for programs to "foster a part- nership with local government". These proposals included "FAIR PLAY", LOCAL OP- TION TAXES, AND COUNTY FINANCE REFORM". All of these bills are in draft farm and 1. are awaiting debate in subcommittees. LEAGUE PRIORITY BILL$ TO COIdMITTEE i Draft legislation for several League priority issues have now been submitted to Senate and House committees for debate. The following is a listing of those , bills, the committees and subcommittees. �- AS always, letters and calla for support for these Issues should be directed to subcommittee members now. SENATE FILE 12 - FAIR PLAY: Senate State Government, subcommittee of Sen(a) Carr (D -Dubuque) Chr., Lura (R -Marshalltown) and Bruner (D -Ames). SENATE FILE 46 - TORT LIABILITY: Senate Local Government, subcommittee of s Sen(S) wells (D -Cedar Raplde) Chr., Stiles (R -Corning) and Brown (D -Montezuma). HOUSE FILE 73 - FAIR PLAY: Haute Local Government Committee, subcommittee of Rep(s) Spear (D -Burlington) Chr., Renken (R-Aplington), Cooper (D -Russell), ' Torrence (R-Atalieea) and Renaud (D -Altoona). HOUSE STUDY BILL 79 - LOCAL OPTION TAXES: Hauge Local Goverment Committee, Subcommittee of RepZ87 Jean Lloyd -Jones (D -Iowa City) Chr., O'Xane (D -Sioux City), Connors (D -Des Moines), Royer (R -Essex) and Swearingen (R-Sigourney). OPEN SEASON ON COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LAW . It's apparent that this year will see a well -coordinated attempt by various employee groups to change the Public Employment Relations Act, Chapter 20, Code of Iowa. Included in those changes will be bills to strike the list of negotiable items in Section 20.9 and to eliminate management rights. Two bills have already been introduced on the House side. They are HF 34 by Jochum of Dubuque and HF 77 by Connors of Dee Moines. Bath of [hese bills Strike the list of negotiable items and call for "open scope". (over) a99 MICROFILMED BY I �- '-DORM - MICR41LAB-- -� CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES /� Such legislation, if enacted, would mean that all issues which have previous- ly been determined to be permissive subjects would now become mandatory. These could include such items as retirement and manning of police cars and fire trucks. If scope is opened, cities could effectively lose all fiscal and administra- tive responsibility for budget priorities because when combined with final bind - Ing arbitration ultimate spending decisions will be made by outside arbitrators. The League has previously opposed final binding arbitration under collective bargaining and will also oppose "open scope". BILLS TO WATCH Last year several bills were introduced which could have had a negative lm - pact on city zoning authority. These included the placement of Manufactured Maus - Ing and amortization of advertising devices. One of those bills has been redrafted and introduced in study bill form again this session. It is SF 57 dealing with manufactured housing. It has beenassigned to a House Local. Government Subcommittee of Jean Lloyd -Jones (D -Iowa City) Chr., Connors (D -Des Moines) and Torrence (R-Atallssa). The new bill amends Chupaer 414 by adding the following new section: "A city shall not adopt or enforce a zoning regulation or other ordinances which determine whether or not the plans and specifications of a proposed residential dwelling are acceptable solely because the proposed structure is manufactured housing." If you have comments or concerns about chis issue, please contact the League office. NEW BILLS OF INTEREST SENATE SENATE FILE 50. HILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT (Holden) Excludes mileage expense relmburse- I t rates from the scope of negotiations under Chapter 20. (U) SENATE FILE 55, ELECTION DATES (Priebe) Establishes three regularly -scheduled elecclon daces. Those dates are the present dates for the primary, general and city elections. 8111 requires that all elections be held on those days. School elections are combined -with city elections. Cicy runoff and primary elections are ellmlw ted. (U) SENATE FILE 57. 911 -EMERGENCY (Priebe) Provides funding for the establishment by counties and cities of emergency telephone systems that enable callers to obtain emergency service by dialing 911. Funding is obtained by a fee from telephone subscribers. (U) SENATE FILE 89. IPERS (Schwengels) Provides for payment of a .1255 surcharge on roverrd wages paid by an employee and .25% surchar^a on covered wages paid by the employer under iPERS to pay fot post-retirement benefit increase, that are granted by the General Assembly. (U) SENATE PILE 109, LEAVES OF ABSENCE (Carr) Provides that a person who 1s a candi- date fur election to the Iowa General Assembly shall, upon request, receive a leave of absence from the candidate's employer without loss of position, status or benefits. The employee -on leave may return to regular employment before the period of absence expires. The leave of absence begins from the time of thie can- didate's announcement. Such provisions shall apply except where prohibited by federal law. (U) SENATE FILE IIA, CIVIL SERVICE PROMOTIONS (Wells) Allows certified eligible lists of fire fighter; to hold preference for promution for three years upon approval of the civil service commission (A) SENATE FILE IIB, LAW ENFORCFNENT DISTRICTS (Vanda Hoof) Provides for the dlscon- clnuatlun of a tax lavy for a unified lav enforcement district by reverse referen- dum. (U) SENATE FILE 119, SHARED FACILITIES (Wells) Provide, that before proceeding to construct or purchase a facility, a public agency shall inquire of other public i MICROFIL14ED BY JORM-MICR4ILA1T_ CEDAR RAI'105 • DES MOINES a.99 Jj dD agencies having facilities in the same geographic area whether the facilities are available for rent or sharing. (U) SENATE FILE 1^^-0, HASE OF COAL (Die lemon, at al) Provides that any city pur- chasing coal outsidePURCState of Iowa shall not have a contract for such purchase exceeding one ,year. (U) SENATE FILE 129, HAZARDOUS HASTE (Anderson) Provides for technical assistance co cities an hazardous waste Issues and requires a facility that is granted a site license to pay a sum equal to one percent of the facility's gross receipts to the city in which the facility is located. (U) G SENATE FILE 133, CITY ZONING (Bruner, et al) Prohibits city zoning practices of AF and discriminating against community-based residential homes (family I homes) which provideroom and board for not more than eight developmentally -dis- abled persons. Bill requires that family homes be considered permitted uses in all residential zones or districts, including single family or residential zones or districts. (U) SENATE FILE 134, COLLECTIVE BARGAINING (Taylor) Provides for the certification of a bargaining representative of an employee bargaining unit by the public em- ployment relations board without an election. (U) IF,E FILE 135, GOVERNME7TAL IMMUNITY (Holden) Creates immunity for governmental MNand non-profit corporations from tortious acts done by or sustained bycrlmi- ,^. nal defendants performing unpaid community service. The Same immunity would apply to juveniles given public works assignments in delinquency proceedings and speci- fically states that a person performing community service or public work ... Ian- went is not an employee of a city for any purpose and excludes worker from defi-nition of public employee under workers' compensation chapter: (F) HOUSE t HOUSE FILE 32, WORKERS' COMP. (Jochum) Allows an employee to choose the employee's own practitioner for medical services as the result of an injury which is job -re - 4 lated. Status: House Labor Subcommittee of Running (D -Cedar Rapids) Chr., Sher- zan (D -Des Moines) and Corey (R -Horning Sun) HOUSE FILE 34. OPEN SCOPE (Jochum) Strikes the list of negotiable Items in sec- tion 20.9 and instead specifies wages, hours and other terms and conditions of !' employment as mandatory subjects of bargaining. (A) Statue: House Labor Sub- committee: Connors (D -Des Moines) Chr., 011ie (D -Clinton), Miller (D -Sioux City), Halvorson (R -Manisa), Grandla (R -Pella). HOUSE FILE 37, POLYGRAPH LYAHS (Jochum) Prohibits an employer from requiring a polygraph exam as a condition of employment or as a condition of continued employ- ment. (U) Status: House Labor Subcommittee: Poncy (D -Ottumwa) Chr., Brammer is (D -Cedar Rapids), Branstad (R-Thompeod) HOUSE FILE 43, BONDS (O'KANE) Authorizes a city to certify taxes to be levied to pay the cost of an essential corporate purpose bond. The certifying of this cax is in lieu of issuing general obligations bonds for the as= year in which the tax is collected. Levy limit is .25 per SI,000 of assessed value. (U) HOUSE FILE 55, LOCAL INCOME TAX (Bennett) Permits voters of a city or school dis- trict to impose an income tax on the state tax .liability of its residents and to pledge the proceeds of the tax to the payment of bonds issued or to be pledged by that city. (U) HOUSE FILE 73. FAIR PLAY (dieter, at al) Provides for reimbursement by the state of the cost of implementing certain new state mandates imposed an cities. (F) HOUSE FILE 76. FARM -RESIDENTIAL VALUATION (Schnekloth) Strikes the limitation that if one class of property falls to Increase by four percent, the valuation of the other class of property shall be held to the same percentage Increase. (U) HOUSE FILE 77. OPEN SCOPE (Connors) See House File 34. Status: House Labor Sub- committee: Connors D-Oea Moines) Chr., remainder of subcommittee same as HF 14. (A) HOUSE FILE 92, VACATING STREETS (O'KANE) Authorizes a city council to vacate a street, alley or other public land which has been dedicated by plat for at least ten years and not open to vehicular traffic. (U) (over) 1 r I i 141CROFILIIED BY --JORM' MICR/�CAB-',� CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M011([S j /� HOUSE FILE 93, WORKERS' COMP. (Sturgeon) See House File 32. es he est penal- cy chargedILE on delinquent propeENT rty cesSEzomooneJpercencgcoscvotpercencrper mooch NOUS£ FILE 108, CITY ZONING (Jochum at al) Be. Senate File 133, Status: House Local Government Subcommittee: Conners (D -Des Moines) Chr., Torrence (R as) and Buhr (D -Des Moines). - LOCAL OPTION TO SENATE WAYS AND MEANS Unlike the House, the Senate has decided to begin work on the local option ' tax bill in the Ways and Means Committee. This action bypasses the Senate Local Government Committee and reduces the time required to get the 6111 to the floor li for debate. We expect a subcommittee to be named by the firer week in February. As soon as that information is available, it will be so noted in this bulletin. In the meantime, all members of the Senate Ways and Means Committee should be contacted and urged.to support the local option tax bill. .Members of that committee are: William Palmer (D -Des Moines) Chairman Emil Husak (D -Toledo) Vice Chair Ed Holden (R -Davenport) Ranking Member Joe Brown (D -Montezuma) Robert Carr (D -Dubuque) Patrick Deluhery (D -Davenport) William Dieleman (D -Pella) Arthur Cretins (R -Nora Springs) Jack Hueter (R -Honey Creek) Lea Halt (R -Spencer) Mick Lura (R -Marshalltown) David Readinger (R -Urbandale) Norman Rodgers (D -Adel) i Art Small (D-Iova City) Base Van Gilst (D -Oskaloosa) All members of the committee can be contacted by writing c/o Statehouse, Des Moines, Iowa 50319 or calling (515)281-3371 ( SMALL -CITY POLICE OFFICE TRAINING BILL its House File WO, a bill relating to the minimum basic training requirements of police officers. has been introduced and assigned to the House Local Government Committee. The bill, which has received strong bipartisan support, provides that' police officers and marshals employed by cities with populations of leas than 1,000 are subject to the same minimum basic training requirements, including weapons train- ing. as reserve peace officers. Presently, police officers in smaller cities moat complete ten weeks of trainiger this quiredntoacompletev30Lhours ofccourse ement Awork and 30dhours ofbweapons ill ywould be re training. 0 9 9 0 all I i 141CROEILMED BY �.. -J- ORM��MIC R�LA6* CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i / MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING February 2, 1983 Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetings of January 31 i and February 2 were distributed for review and discussion (copy attached). I Items for the agenda of February 15 will include: P Public hearing on transit facility The bid opening for Lower Ralston Creek Project will be on Friday, February 4. This item may be ready for the agenda of February 15. The City Manager requested that the Public Works Director check with Frank i' Farmer and Ed McGinnis to -make sure they review the transit facility plans in a timely manner. If there are problems, they are to contact Larry McGonagle. a The Assistant City Manager requested that the department heads submit quarterly p reports of all divisions at one time rather than submitting each separately. F te, Y Prepared by: c Lorraine Saeger 1. F 141CROFILMED BY L Ij I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIRES �f 306 I i term. i MICROERMED BY '—J0RMMIC RlSLA6 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES i 7 READ TO our OOAAMENTS/STATUS SUBJECTDATE $Assistant Schedule public hearing for City Assessor's Budget ty Mana r February 14, 1983, at 4:30 P.M. Board of Review Advertise position.Wa Council Absence 1-31 Information Kate Dickson gone on February 14-15. Explore scheduling alternatives Linn Street - CBD 1-31 Public Work splitting up the project. Memo to Council re. advantages or 1-31 Finance disadvantages of Revenue vs. G.O. Airport T -Hangars Bonds retired with revenues. 1) Space Needs - police/fire/office space - staged construction. C.I.P. Pending List 1-31 Finance 2) Parking Needs in CBD - expansle, of Dubuque Street Ram 3) Iowa Avenue restoration project. Underground Parking Study 1-31 POD Resurrect study and send to Council. Letter and certificate of apprecia- tion to Sandy Eskin. Letter Broadband Telecommunications Commission 1-31 Assistant C- y Manag include explanation of Councto it il polic; ranar ,nn reannoin men o it term. i MICROERMED BY '—J0RMMIC RlSLA6 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES i 7 Regular Council Meeting February 1, 1983 DEPARTMENT REFERRALS SUBJECT°ATE REFERRED JJ°ATE 0 -- 11 Will REC'D To DUE I F Rezoning S.E. quadrant of Burlington and Gilbert Special Council Meeting Letters of Appreciation Tree Removal - R.R. ROW Water Plant Agenda changes or additions Board/Commission Vacancies Bus Shelters Iowa R.R. ROW 2-1 II P&PD 2-1 1Information / Lorraine 2-1 II P&PD 2-1 9 City Mana 2-1 II Public Wo 2-1 II All 2-1 Lorraine/ 11 City Clerk 2-1 II Transit 2-1 Il Public Work COMMENTS/STATUS First consideration waived. Passed second consideration. February 2 at 4:00 P.M. to set public hearing on Manville Height�s'"j re. rezoning. Lorraine call all ^ovnL Ft„ Draft letter from Mayor to James Harris (Board of Adjustment) and ,lanet Took and Sandr for et (CC Letter from Mayor to Iowa R.R. regarding removal of trees from ROW. Why did it shut down? Required to be posted 24 hours in advance of Tuesday night meeting � I When announced - indicate name and tenure of those who served only part of an unexpired term. Memo to Council re, projected schedule for purchase of bus Shelters and placement - specifically Letter to Iowa R.R. re. property line for Brookland Park. raye c DATE REVD REFERRED To DATE DUE F C(AAMENTS/STATUS SUBJECT Civic Projects 2-1 All Depar and Assistant nts ty Manag r Assemble list of possible projects for civic groups, etc. (Example: bus shelters, park and recreation Water Billing Procedures 2-1 Finance When will additional material k73 be ready? Central Junior High Armstrong's Deposit 2-1 2-1 Legal/City P&PD/Legal anager Material to Council in Friday packet. Manager draft memo. Schedule for discussion on Monday, Memo to Council regarding if City can require them to pay more for architectural fees, etc. 1 f MICROFILMED BY 'DORM-MICR6LA8" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES If ... - _.. _. ..I A Study of Local Elderly Needs Prepared by David E. Munson, Planner, HIS for The Congregate Housing Task Force & The Iowa City Housing Commission a 1983 A W For sale by the Housing and Inspection Services Department, City of Iowa City, Iowa: 410 E. Washington Street,$52240 (319)356-5269 Supplemental Appendix available on loan basis from HIS I i MICROFILMED BY I DES DORM DEM NES 1 CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MOIYES r r,, February 2, 1983 THE IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION and THE CONGREGATE HOUSING TASK FORCE IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 i To all concerned with the welfare of the elderly: ,— Ij I �I Over the last seven months, we have had the privilege of devoting considerable time to the issue of housing for older citizens. Specifically, we have dealt in great length with the concept of congregate housing -- an intermingling of private shelter and supportive services designed to expand the time frame in which elderly individuals can reside in an independent or semi-independent environment and thus, prevent premature or needless institutionalization. After reviewing initial research, it became apparent that specific information as to the local elderly population would be required. In light of this, our task became one of information gathering. Thus; we requested that the staff of the Housing and Inspection Services Department: 1. Formulate and conduct a random sample survey, designed to enumerate the characteristics and needs of Johnson County's elderly population; 2. Analyze the survey results employing proper statistical methodologies; and 3. Compile a report outlining the survey, the results, and any information relevant to the concept of congregate housing at the local level. Contained in this document is the requested report, entitled, "Congregate Housing: A Study of Local Elderly Needs." Based on the survey results contained herein, we, as advisory bodies of the City of Iowa City, have collectively formulated recommendations and included them as a chapter within this report. J. i MICROFIL14ED BY �. 1.. JORM'-MICRdLAeI_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES j MWiM 3 oOa, r �J If carried out, we believe that our recommendations will result in major improvements in the circumstances of the elderly of Johnson County and — specifically, the elderly population of Iowa City. Though our program is still in the growing stages, we feel we have the necessary nucleus in which a fine _ program can be built, and we all share in the conviction that local circumstances require significant improvement. Sincerely, �c" Richard Barl Haendel use I ✓� /1Fre i Branson ,M,ichael Farr J 4L'p�- F licia Hope Car i Karst n Alvin';Loga ; J Waverl rmond i ; O -Z Lioonard:Vna derzee HousinoUmmission Task Force RGoldene Haendel, Chairperson • Richard Barkalow, Chairperson Michael Farren Fredine Branson "Carol Karstens Felicia Hope Fred Krause 'Waverly Ormond Alvin Logan Beth Ringgenberg Reverend Leonard Venderzee "Also serves on Congregate Housing Task Force j' II l MICROFILI4ED BY -' JORM-'MICR46CAB-- 111... CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES � I i - I ..y i li r'1 CONTENTS PREFACE . ............................ ................................ CHAPTER I -- INTRODUCTION ........................................... 1 A) Why Local Level Analysis is Necessary ........................ 1 B) Some Definitions ............................................. 2 a) Elderly .................................................. 2 b) Congregate Housing ........................ c) Support Services ......................................... 4 d) Needs Analysis ........................................... 5 C) Summary of Study Goals, Objectives and Parameters............ 6 a) Goals .................................................... 6 b) Objectives ............................................... 7 C) Parameters ............................................... 9 CHAPTER II -- SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ............................10 A) Recommendation 1: Establishment of Congregate Housing Facilities...........................................10 B) Recommendation 2: Development of a Large Retirement Residence 11 C) Recommendation 3: Establishment of Minimal Supportive Services for Tenants of a Congregate Housing Facility ........ 11 D) Recommendation 4: Development of a Congregate Housing Facility Located Downtown Iowa City .......................... 12 E) Recommendation 5: Emphasize a "Good Mix" of Elderly Tenants for a Congregate Housing Facility....................12 F) Recommendation 6: Utilize Input from Local Professionals as well as Current, Published Information for the Design of a Congregate Housing Facility .............................13 G) Recommendation 7: Further Study of Congregate Housing and Supportive Services and their Impact on the.Elderly of Johnson County ................. .. ....13 MICROFILMED RY f DORM-'-MICR#LA13- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 306a- i L CHAPTER III -- METHODOLOGY..........................................14 M A) Selection of a Sampling Procedure ............................14 8) The Systematic Selection Procedure ...........................15 C) Procurement of a Population List .............................17 D) Determination of a Sample Size...............................18 E) Survey Formulation...........................................20 a) Survey Dimensions........................................20 1) Demographic Characteristics .........................21 2) Social Resources ..................................... 21 3) Economic Resources..................................22 4) Mental Health.......................................22 — 5) Physical Health ...... .............................23 6) Activities of Daily Living ..........................23 7) Knowledge and Utilization of Existing Support Services............................................24 8) Willingness to Participate in a Congregate ` Lifestyle.................................... .....24 F) Survey Sources...............................................25 i a) Use of Existing Studies..................................25 b) Input from Local Professionals ...........................26 G) The "Confidential Questionnaire" .............................26 H) Selecting a Sample Population................................28 I) Advertising........:.........................................28 _ J) Survey Distribution..........................................29 -• CHAPTER IV -- SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS..................................31 A) Response Rate................................................31 B) Random Error_ Estimate........................................31 C) Statistical Analysis.........................................32 — D) Selected Data................................................33 i t r 1 III 141CROFILMED BY j 'JOR M --MIC RICA O�� j! t CEDAR RAPIDS DES MONIES I ! i i r- i i 1 i i. CHAPTER V -- DISCUSSION.............................................50 A) Documentation of Need........................................50 B) Site Consideration...........................................51 C) The City of Iowa City - A Catalyst?..........................52 D) Public Awareness Program........... E) Clearinghouse for Elderly Housing/Services...................54 F) The -Philosophy of Congregate Housing .........................56 CHAPTER VI -- CONCLUSION........... ENDNOTES............ A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ................... 66 APPENDIX A - The Sampling Error Equation ............................69 APPENDIX B - The Confidential Questionnaire ............. APPENDIX C - Selected Data.................................................89 SUPPLEMENTAL APPENDIX - Available through: City of Iowa City Housing and Inspection Services Department c/o David E. Munson 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 356-5269 MICROFILMED BY ..-�.l L-' r F RM-MICRCA9_ AR RAPIDS DES MOINES 3obow i r, I PREFACE I This report has been compiled in order to formally present the findings of a mailed, random sample survey of Johnson County's elder population conducted during the week of August 2, 1982. The general focus of the survey was to discover and to document the congregate housing and support service needs of those Johnson County citizens 55 years of age or older. iIt should be noted at the outset, that the "market determination" survey represents only the first phase in establishing congregate living units and/or a congregate housing policy at the local level. Other areas which must be addressed are: -- j 1) Site location and acquisition for new congregate housing; 2) Exterior and interior design features for congregate housing; kf 3) The rehabilitation of existing housing stock for congregate housing; 4) Support service packages for congregate housing; r � 5) A close, working relationship with private developers, contractors, architects, etc.; i 6) A close, working relationship with potential sponsors of new congre- gate housing; i 7) A program for managing a new congregate housing facility; 8) A sound financial planning program for congregate housing; 9) The development of congregate housing lifestyles other than those sponsored by government/private, for-profit/non-profit sources; and 10) Development of a program designed to educate the public and local, state and federal administrators and officials as to the I I _ 3o0a, l I_ : MICROFILMED BY I` DORM - MIC R(;1L A 8 l•...., CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1101.IES i I 11 availability, benefits, costs, etc. of congregate housing and — support services. The above list is by no means all-encompassing nor mutually exclusive. Because the concept of congregate housing is relatively new, no formal set of procedures has been developed at the local level. As the process continues, a new phase may be added or a proposed phase deleted. Regard- less, the process should be well documented for future reference. The basic objective of the initial survey phase is to compile relevant, up-to-date data on our elder population in such a way that local, state and federal governments charged with maintaining and improving the M quality of life of our elder population can accurately plan for, and `I create, the housing and support service needs which will help maintain an independent lifestyle in a safe, dignified and fulfilling manner. Many thanks are offered to the numerous individuals who contributed to the M i compilation, distribution and analysis of this survey. Input from many ilocal professionals in varied disciplines was essential to the success of this study. Professionals in the fields of medical health, mental health, housing, social work, housing assistance, elderly services, survey research and statistical analysis were all instrumental in the compilation and analysis of this survey. A special thanks is offered to Michael E. Kucharzak, Director of the i Housing and Inspection Services Department of the City of Iowa City; Dr. Woodrow W. Morris, Associate Dean of the University of Iowa's College of Medicine; and Jim Grifhorst, Social Science Research Specialist for the University of Iowa's Laboratory for Political Research. Their combined expertise offered as well as their enthusiasm shown for this study proved not only invaluable but contagious. A very special thanks goes to the members of the. Iowa City Housing Commission and the Congregate Housing Task Force of the Housing Commission who originated and encouraged the concept and development of a congregate housing program for Iowa City. It has been through their efforts in an 1 Ii 141CROFILMED BY I_, 1 ""DORM-MICR /L�AB'- L(1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES f advisory capacity to the City Council which made possible the $4,000 of r CDBG monies necessary for this study. _ The most important contributors to this study, however, have been the elderly citizens of Johnson County. Without their time, energies, cooperation and interest this report would have ended right here...... 1 _I I I t I 1 7, ; I 4 i 77 .. i rt i J i MICROFILMED DY JORIVI-MICR6L'A9 �/ CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOlYES r) I CHAPTER I -- INTRODUCTION A) Why Local Level Analysis Is Necessary The key variable used to determine the housing and support service needs of the elderly is functional disability. One's inability to cope with various daily activities, in turn, suggests a need for particular services and/or specially designed housing. A problem arises in obtaining data -on the functional disability of elder citizens at the local level. For years, local planners have simply multiplied their local elderly population obtained from census data by the 14% of the elderly found in one popular national study (Shanas, et al.) to be in need of. assistance due to various functional limitations.1 This would give planners a crude estimate of the size of the local elderly population needing assistance. Some may find this estimate adequate in planning for policies geared toward the elderly. However, this would hold true only if the characteristics of the local elderly population happen to match the characteristics of those elderly sampled in one national survey taken in 1968. There is no evidence which suggests that this assumption is true. The main reason these indirect measures have been used by local planners is the lack -of any viable alternative. Most local sample surveys are cost prohibitive and where they have been attempted, they have failed due to lack of survey experience.2 An additional reason for conducting a local sample survey can be found in the fact that increasingly, local governments are being asked to certify local demand for support service funds. This aspect will increase in significance as governmental functions become further decentralized, that is, as aspects of the "new federalism" are implemented. A further advantage of conducting a local survey is that the characteristics of the elder population can be measured over time. i 141CROFILMED BY 1_ "DORM-'MICR#LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES i i JI 1- f 2 Using the same basic survey format, at minimal cost, periodic samples can be obtained in order to gauge any change in characteristics of — the elderly. This is particularly important because of the dynamic nature of the variables contributing to the need for support services — and/or specially designed housing (the most obvious being the state of physical health). B) Some Definitions It has already been mentioned that the formal concept of congregate housing in the United States is still in the development stage. Specifically, the Congregate Housing Program at the federal level was enacted in 1970 as part of the Housing and Urban Development Act. Further, statutory authority was not established until the passage of the 1974 Housing and Community Development Act (Title II, Section 201 [A][71). Various "key words and phrases" have been developed to describe this concept — "congregate housing" and "support services" are two good _ examples. For a sound understanding of what congregate housing entails and thus, the purpose and direction of the survey, any• ambiguities in terms must be cleared up. a) Elderly For the purpose of this study, the term "elderly" indicates those Johnson County citizens 55 years of age and older. Though most federal, state and local guidelines indicate an age of 60 and older as "elderly", those younger than 60 can still benefit from and have access to a congregate lifestyle. Thus, the sample population used in this survey will also reflect the characteristics and needs of those Johnson County citizens who are 55 to 59 years of age. It is important to remember that there is no rigid age limit regarding who would or would not benefit from or have access to a congregate lifestyle. !� MICROFILMED BY --JORM ' MICR46LA6._ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES 3 That is, the occurrence and repercussions of various problems we all face (decline in physical health, economic problems, _ social inactiveness, etc.), and which are reasons often given for choosing a congregate lifestyle, have no age limit. b) Congregate e�ng The term "congregate housing" can refer to either a concept or a specific physical structure. For this study, the former will aPP1Y• Specific physical structures may be alluded to, however, it will be in the context of congregate housing as a concept. To make things clearer, an example of how a local planner might define congregate housing may be helpful: A planned dwelling containing one or more dwelling units wherein two or more elderly persons reside in order to maintain a degree of independent or semi-independent living in an environment which will provide access to such support services as transportation, limited health care, nutritional meals, heavy housekeeping, lawn maintenance and grocery home delivery, all of which will prevent the over -institutionalization of our functionally impaired or socially deprived but not chronically ill elderly. Since local planners must cover all the possible alternatives Of congregate living, their definitions must necesssarily be long and general in nature. For this study, the following shorter definition will suffice: An assisted independent ment which offers' the oppo�tY for roincreased up gsocial geinteraction and provides minimum services that include on-site meals served in a common dining room, plus one or more of such services as on-site medical/nursing services, personal care and housekeeping. Conre ate Housing does not refer to nurs{ng hoes. 1' i MICROFILMED BY 11. `D _1 ORM- MIC R�L4 B�- � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i .J 3ac au Ji m u C) Support Services The above definitions of congregate housing may indicate to one what is meant by the term "support services", that is, both definitions refer to support services and give examples of what they are. Though, for the purpose of this study, the term "support services" will refer to any and all services available to and/or utilized by those individuals residing in a congregate housing facility, an important distinction must be made as to the types of services available. Maintenance services are those which allerp sons require, regardless of their functional ability level. They include the need for living quarters, the need for transportation and the need for food stuffs (i.e., groceries). There is never a question as to whether these services are to be offered, but rather, who will offer them and how readily accessible they are. sportive services are those which are provided to individuals and which in themselves do not improve the basic functional capacity, but rather, help to maintain functioning. They include meal preparation, personal care services, checking/continuous supervision services, homemaker -household services and administrative, legal and protective services. Thus, in this class are included those services which are not inherently required by individuals residing in a congregate facility, but rather, services which may be offered in order to enhance one's quality of daily living. Rehabilitative services are those which can (or at least are designed to) improve the basic functioning level of individuals. They would include social/recreational services, nursing care, medical services, financial assistance, employment services, and coordination, information and referral services. Though most individuals in a congregate facility may need only a few of the above mentioned services, they should f i ...By .—DORM MIC R#LAB � CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES j f I � 0 J I 5 have access to all of the support services (either located in the facility itself or provided by the surrounding community). It is important to remember that the key objective of congregate housing (and hence, support services) is to promote independence for the elderly. The way to promote independence is not by "pushing" services onto our elder population, but rather, to provide them with choices. It is very reassuring to know that services are available if needed. d) Needs Analysis It was stated in the preface that the focus of the survey is to "...document the congregate housing and support service needs of those Johnson County citizens 55 years of age and older." An important distinction must be made between "need" and "functional ability level". "Need" is a second -order construct, that is, a judgment made by certain individuals evaluating what is considered the first -order construct - "functional ability level". Since evaluating need is a complex judgment, it is not wise to casually interchange functional ability and need. Acting on a need implies social intervention. Social interven- tion, in turn, implies the gauging of social preferences - this survey alone will neither suggest social intervention nor will it gauge social preferences. Though this distinction between need and functional ability may seem like a lesson in semantics, it is an important concept to remember. A policy analyst or resource allocator must be the one to determine need. Given that some impairment is inevitable, the resource allocator (elected officials) must determine what level is acceptable and what level requires social intervention. If a preferred level is identified, then the survey will be of help. It should be clear that the determination of social intervention and hence, the -need to --- - ._..- .--_...,.- 1�� I i MICROFILMED BY JORM"-MICR6LAB` CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I .300 a. 0 Ji � j J gauge social preferences involves political and economic considerations. This survey will aid decision -makers in their political and economic deliberations but it will not lead them. This survey is designed to provide relevant information without prejudging what the social preferences should be. Hence, for the purpose of this study, the term "needs analysis" will refer to the specific information obtained by the survey which will, in turn, aid decision -makers in gauging social preferences. C) Summary of Study Goals, Objectives and -Parameters a) Goals In relation to the overall study of congregate housing in Johnson County, there are two basic goals. The first is to provide information via the survey results as to need. If one assumes that the survey will indeed show a need (though we have not presupposed a need in formulating the survey - this assumption is made in order to outline the basic goal after need has been determined), the goal then, is to provide an environment which will satisfy this need. In general, the -goal of this survey is to provide decision - makers with relevant, up-to-date information as to the current characteristics and needs of Johnson County's elder population. If the decision -makers determine that public intervention is necessary, the next step is to decide what course of action should be taken to correct current and/or future perceived inadequacies. It is hoped that this survey will also provide information which will help in the decision-making process. Once need has been determined, the goal of congregate housing becomes action -oriented. Marie McGuire Thompson, one of the pioneers in the field of congregate housing, best explains this 141caoru14t0 BY � -'JO RIVI-'MICR�CAB- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 1 ii, 7 goal, referring to assisted residential living (i.e., congregate housing): The broad goal of assisted residential living for the elderly is to provide a physical and social environment that will extend the time span during which older people can live independently in comfort and security, with sustained interest in life.3 These, then, are the two broad goals of the study and indeed, of the very concept of congregate housing. More specific goals can be related in terms of objectives. b) Objectives The specific objectives of the random sample survey are four- fold: 1) Identifying persons who suffer from various functional impairments; 2) Defining the universe of housing, financial, environmental and support service needs; 3) Enumerating this identified population in order to better plan for their needs; and 4) Enumerating this identified population's willingness to participate in a congregate lifestyle. Though these objectives should easily be obtained via the survey, there are other "side objectives" which may or may not be satisfied by this particular study. For example, information on characteristics and needs of the elderly are useful not only to elected decision -makers, but 1 I i 141CROFILIIED BY _ I JORM'--'MICRLA9` 111 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES SO D 4J also to those involved in providing housing and/or services to this population. Developers and sponsors who want to enter these areas or want to improve their current services need to know: 1) How many elderly in the local market area fit the assisted independent living category which applies to a particular sponsor's/developer's/service provider's situation? fl M 2) How many elderly can afford new housing or services _ without subsidization? How many are eligible for various subsidized programs? _ 3) Does the demand or need for a new housing type vary if the — fixed amount and quality of support services to existing housing varies? If the housing and service markets are interrelated, can one identify and coordinate the combined i need? — 4) Is a given demand or need concentrated in a subarea of the larger market? What is the best location for a new — congregate housing facility? 5) What is the highest priority need among the various support services -- a new type of service, a larger staff, or in the improvement of existing services? It is hoped that the survey results and ensuing data analysis will address some, if not all, of the above "side objectives." In addition to aiding sponsors and developers, the survey results may also aid various agencies whose clientele includes — the elderly. More specifically, planning departments, housing departments, and senior services departments may find the survey results useful in gauging the effectiveness of their _ programs, areas which need improvement, the need for expansion (including funding), etc. _ 11 i i MICROFILMED BY -JORM-�MICR46LA6-- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES j I 3O0a� 0 J� \ I , 9 Also, the survey results may indicate the comprehension of the local elderly population as to a concept of congregate housing and how it relates to them. It is hoped that the survey itself, will act as an "educator" to those unfamiliar with the subject. Regardless, the survey may indicate if there is a need for an "awareness program" and/or an outreach service designed to disseminate information to the elder population as well as the community at -large. i Finally, a side objective which may be fulfilled by this survey is that it may provide a basis for future studies. This is particularly important because of the dynamic nature of those factors which give rise to the need for specially designed housing and/or support services (as mentioned before, the most obvious being the state of one's physical health). c) Parameters The parameters of this survey are basically, the same parameters considered when selecting a sampling procedure. The parameters for this study were: 1) A cost constraint of $4,000; t I 2) A time constraint of approximately four months for formu- lation, distribution, statistical analysis and write-up; 3) An estimate of the accuracy of 4) Survey bias should be minimize 5) Random error should be minimiz 1 J 141CROFILMED BY �'--- JOR M -MICR#CA9 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES 10 CHAPTER II -- SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS In light of the information obtained via the survey results as well as input received at numerous public meetings, the Iowa City Housing Commission and the Congregate Housing Task Force have collectively formulated seven recommendations. If carried out, it is believed that these recommendations will significantly improve the circumstances of Johnson County's elderly population. Further, there is a real possibility that the implementation of these recommendations will result in the "freeing -up" of existing housing stock in downtown Iowa City. Additional considerations concerning congregate housing have been included in Chapter V - "Discussion." These considerations relate directly or indirectly to the following recommendations and also•provide a means of airing the "collective views" of the Housing Commission and Congregate Housing Task Force. A) Recommendation 1: Establishment of Congregate Housing Facilities The results of the survey have shown, beyond a doubt, that the current housing options available to Johnson County's elderly are inadequate - both in type and in number. This is not meant to suggest that the existing elderly facilities are in themselves, inadequate, or not needed - indeed they are. But rather, that additional housing options in the form of congregate housing will provide a complimentary choice currently unavailable in Iowa City. The survey dimension covering the "Willingness to Participate in a Congregate Lifestyle" enumerated a substantially large elderly demand for congregate housing in Iowa City - a demand which indicates the need for several congregate housing facilities. We, therefore, recommend that the City of Iowa City along with other public and private entities of Johnson County actively work towards the immediate establishment of congregate housing facilities for the elderly. �I MICROFILMED BY r l JORM MICR6L AB i CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I SeoCW J� -'1 11 B) Recommendation 2: Development of a Large Retirement Residence ^ The reason for recommending a large congregate facility is based on the responses gathered from question number 50 of the survey and the cross -tabulations compiled using those responses. The results indicate that all types of congregate housing arrangements would attract a sufficient clientele. For immediate development, however, the clear preference of those surveyed is a large retirement residence which would include minimal supportive services. 1 i There are two additional reasons why the immediate development of a ` large retirement residence would be desirable. First, this type of facility would benefit the largest number of elderly who currently desire a congregate lifestyle. Secondly, efficiencies in supportive service costs are gained when larger numbers are contributing to the ` system. ` I We, therefore, recommend that the development of a congregate housing facility designed to meet the immediate need of the Johnson County elderly population be a large retirement residence comprised of 100-150 independent living units. We further recommend that additional retirement residences as well - as other forms of congregate housing be considered for both ` short and long-term development. C) Recommendation 3: Establishment of Minimal Supportive Services for Tenants of a Congregate Housing Facility ` i What separates congregate housing from independent living _ environments is the inclusion of various services offered to its tenants. A delicate balance must be maintained when providing in- house support services; that is, it is essential to provide adequate services to maintain an independent environment, yet over -provision of services can be counterproductive to independent living. What is required is the provision of an adequate choice among the services offered within a congregate facility as well as provided by the _ surrounding community. � 1 i MICROFILMED BY �_.....�... 1. _ JCRM __. MICR6LAB*- 1 Li'...., I CEDAR RAPIDS • DIS'1401,11S I ! 12 We, therefore, recommend that the establishment of congregate housing facilities be planned in conjunction with the provision of minimal supportive services for the tenants of such a facility. We further recommend that such minimal supportive services should include, but not be restricted to: nutritional meals, minimal health care, safety and security, housekeeping, and social and recreational services. D) Recommendation 4: Development of a Congregate Housing Facility Located Downtown Iowa City Survey question number 51 relates to the locational preference of congregate housing in Johnson County. Clearly, the choice of the elder citizens surveyed is the Iowa City area - either downtown or in a residential neighborhood thereof. The first choice of those citizens identified as the "current market" for congregate housing is downtown Iowa City. These findings are presented in various cross -tabulations found in Appendix C. We, therefore, recommend that the development of a congregate housing facility designed to meet the immediate need of the Johnson County elderly population be located in the downtown Iowa City area. We further recommend' that any additional facilities developed should be concentrated in downtown Iowa City and/or a residential neighborhood thereof. E) Recommendation 5: Emphasize a "Good Mix" of Elderly Tenants for a Congregate Housing Facility Although we realize that the characteristics of the elderly outlined in this study will relate to the general "make-up" of the tenants of a congregate housing facility, care should be taken in planning for the specific population to be served. Care in planning for the lifespan of a facility is an area much overlooked by most planners in congregate housing (primarily due to the limited information available on this subject). The key considerations when planning for a constant population is, of course, the mental and physical health of the tenants. Without careful screening of perspective tenants, a facility could easily find itself lacking in needed support services five to ten years down the road. MICROFIL14ED BY 11. -"DORM MIC R�LAa CEDAR RAPIDS DES M0NE5 I I I 300ad J 13 In order to create a community atmosphere, a "good mix" of tenants should be strived for. This would include all income groups, male, female and couples, of varied age groups. We, therefore, recommend that minimal restrictions or guidelines be imposed on perspective tenants with the _ exceptions of mental and physical health considerations. We further recommend that a minimum age limit of 50 be imposed on perspective tenants and that selection should focus on the _ .. "well elderly" of Johnson County. F) Recommendation 6• Utilize Input from Local Professionals as well as Current Published Information for the Design of a - Congregate Housing Facility -- I i -- Careful planning of the design aspects of congregate housing can enhance the independence of the elderly. Most of these design considerations do not involve large expenditures but can add tremendous benefits to a facility. Investigating design options — early in the planning process is an important ingredient for the efficient operations of a congregate housing facility. _ We, therefore, recommend that specially designed physical features of potential sites and buildings be explored and planned utilizing input from local professionals as well as current literature on the subject. G) Recommendation 7• Further Study of Congregate Housing and Supportive Services and their Impact on the Elderly of Johnson Count For the effective development of a congregate housing facility and/or program, the multiple aspects of its development should be continually documented and studied. This is particularly relevant for a relatively new field such as congregate housing. We, therefore, recommend that further study be encouraged and _ conducted by the City of Iowa City as well as by independent departments/agencies of Johnson County and the University of Iowa as to the local impact of congregate housing and supportive services on the elderly as well as the community at -large. — i IIICROFIL14ED BY �- -`JORM-MICR6LA8 1 CEDAR RAPIDS - DES 11018ES I 300 JI 14 CHAPTER III-- METHODOLOGY A) Selection of a Sampling Procedure Since the nature of the study implicitly indicated the population to be surveyed (the only specification necessary was the age cut-off of 55 years), the first phase in formulating the methodology was the selection of a sampling technique. The trade-offs inherent to the various sampling techniques made the selection of a specific technique very important. The basic trade- offs for the various methods are cost constraints, time constraints, the ability or non -ability to estimate accuracy, various degrees of bias and various degrees of random error. In the last section, these trade-offs were expressed in terms of parameters. Basically, there are seven options in selecting a survey technique. Unfortunately, a description of the various methods is beyond the scope of this report. However, one can obtain information on these methods from various statistics and/or survey research reference materials. The seven options are: 1) Haphazard Sample; 2) Quota Sample; 3) Simple Random Sample; 4) Systematic Sample; 5) Stratified Sample; 6) Cluster Sample; and 7) Multi -Stage Sample.5 For various reasons related to the parameters of the study outlined in the previous section, it was decided that either the simple random sample or the systematic selection procedure would be the most appropriate technique. Basically, the systematic selection procedure is a 'variant of the simple random sample. The major difference in these two methods is the way in which a sample population is drawn. A simple random sample is the most direct form of probability sampling. Typically, a survey firm would obtain a list of the population to be studied, and give each person an equal chance of r ; 1 MICROFIL14ED BY 1- -DORM--MICR#LAB_- - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MDIRES 300 4-J 15 being selected. In principle, this could be done by putting all of the names in a hat and then drawing out the desired number to be sampled. In practice, this procedure is usually done by using computer capabilities. The systematic selection procedure differs from the simple random method in that only one random number need be drawn and there is no heed for computer capabilities. Hence, time and money savings are realized when using the systematic selection procedure. So, the decision was made to conduct the survey using this method. The only remaining variable to decide was the choice of an interview- ing procedure, that is, whether to conduct a mail interview, a phone interview or a personal interview. Mainly because of expense and time factors, personal and phone interviews were ruled out. Though a mail survey was selected, there are some potential problem areas which should be mentioned. First of all, the response rate is typically low for mailed surveys (a popular national figure is 35 percent). Thus, there is a chance that those who respond have different views than those who don't respond. Also, for an adequate response rate (approximately 50 percent for a mailed survey), the surveys generally have to be short in length (no more than a couple of pages). In addition, if personal questions are included (income, health, etc.), the response rate may be further affected. This survey attempted to "fight the odds." That is, because of the nature of the study topic, a personal, in-depth and lengthy survey was required. 8) The Systematic Selection Procedure As mentioned before, the systematic selection procedure is a useful variant of the simple random sample. The first requirement of this procedure is to procure a.list of everyone in the population to be I i "'C....EI�ED B. j 1" -DORM "MIC BYLCiB- CEDAR RAPIDS DES 6f01NES f J� 16 studied (list procurement will be discussed in section C of this -- chapter). A random number is drawn to begin the selection procedure, - and then a certain predetermined number of names are skipped in order to arrive at the next person, and so on. As an illustrative example, suppose that you were sampling students of a university with a total enrollment of 20,000 and you desired a sample of 400 (i.e., a 1 -in -50 sample). Using a random number table, you would generate a random number between 1 and 50. If you picked — the random number 30, you would sample the 30th person and every 50th person thereafter until you obtained the desired sample of 400. So,. you would sample the 30th,the 80th, the 130th, the 180th, and so on. rl When using the systematic selection procedure, there are two areas of concern which may affect the validity of the survey. The first is a requirement of a listing of the entire population of interest so that a systematic selection can be made. The second is the possibility of there being some periodicity in the list. The above areas of concern Jmay cause bias -and/or the inability to generalize to the targeted population. The first potential problem area will be discussed in section C - - "Procurement of a Population List." The second potential problem area, some periodicity in a population list, can be illustrated by looking at an example of a housing sample survey. If, for example, you were taking a sample of the first and fifteenth house down a street, you might accidentally obtain a sample of every corner house, which is usually more expensive than those in the middle of the street. It is plain to see that this method would bias your survey results towards the more affluent households. The list procured of elderly citizens in Johnson County is compiled alphabetically and hence, there is nothing which suggests the presence of periodicity. MICROEILI4ED BY - 1 11. -JORM"MICRI6LAB- 1 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES IA01`IES I� 306 cu i JI 17 C) Procurement of a Population List — The list most commonly used by national pollsters is the voter registration list. However, this list is available only for - -- I politically motivated purposes, so an alternate list was required. i The list used for this survey was obtained from The Heritage Agency — on Aging (Area 10, based at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids) in conjunction with the Iowa City Senior Center. — Specifically, the mailing list was acquired from the Senior Center _ i with approval from The Heritage Agency. r - This list was compiled using a variety of sources. It has been iupdated as to additions and deletions by volunteers at the Senior — I Center.. This updating is obtained from a variety of sources -- _ obituaries, alumni lists, church organizations, social/recreational I - clubs, word-of-mouth, etc. In addition, changes of address are accounted for by a class 2 mailing arrangement between the Heritage Agency and the Post Office. The list was updated as of July, 1982. I The list includes those persons 55 years of age and older. In addition, the list includes agencies/persons who regularly come in contact with Johnson County's elderly population. To obtain a true elderly sample, deletions from the.list had to be made. — The list was compiled in relation to households in Johnson County. ` Because this list contains households (in which at least one member of a household is 55 years or older) there are actually more elderly individuals on the list than there are addresses. In fact, Heritage Agency statistics show that an average of 1.4 elderly persons reside in any given household. Hence, the population number used for this survey was determined by — taking the total number of households on the mailing list (4,533), subtracting households due to lack of address or known non-elderly — status (745) and multiplying the resultant by 1.4. This procedure 300. It 1 - i 141CROFILMED BY ' I-VORM L 1 I "MIC R�OL CEDAR RAPIDS • DESM translates into a beginning population number of 5,443 Johnson County elderly citizens. Thus, when generalizations are made to the overall population, they will be made to the mailing list population of 5,443. So, since the list used for this survey does not contain everyone in the population, the characteristics and needs of the sample population cannot be generalized to the entire population. However, the sample will fairly represent all of the list population. For the purposes of this study, this is an adequate population list. D) Determination of a Sample Size The most important ingredient in determining the sampling error for the systematic selection procedure is the sample size. In general, the larger the sample size is, the smaller the random error will be. However, one must also consider the costs involved when selecting a sample size. Obviously, there is a point where added precision is not worth the extra cost. The sample size was determined based on the most important factor in survey sampling --the maximum sampling error for samples of various sizes. That is, instead of having a sample size given and then estimating the maximum random error, it was decided that an acceptable maximum random error figure would first be defined and then the process would be reversed in order to determine the sample size. This procedure required an estimate of the rate of return on the survey. It was decided that a maximum random error when representing the list population of five percent to seven percent was acceptable for this study. In order to obtain this range, approximately 300 randomly selected citizens had to respond to the survey. Assuming a rate of return of 50 percent (an optimistic assumption, indeed), 600 surveys would be required. It was determined that if the response rate was significantly lower than 50 percent, a second mailing would be required. i i I , I-0ICAOF ILMED BY � 11_ JORM MICR46L-AB -� CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES 36 D a+ A �l 19 Converting a sample size of 300 into a maximum random error range of five percent to seven percent can be accomplished in several ways. One is to compare sample sizes and random error figures with the findings of established firms and/or research centers. Table 2.2 presents such comparisons: TABLE 2.2 Maximum Samplinq Error for SamDles of Various Sizes iSample Size Simple Random Ga 1Up Survey Research Center 2000 2.2 - 3 1500 2.6 3 - 1000 3.2 4 4 750 3.6 4 - 700 3.8 - 5 600 4.1 5 500 4.5 - 6 400 5.0 6 - 300 5.8 - 8 200 7.2 9 - 100 10.3 - 14 This table would give an estimate of the maximum random error for a sample size of 300 of between 5.8% and 8%. In order to better express the maximum random error for a sample size of 300, a sampling error equation can be used. The presentation and explanation of this equation is presented in Appendix A. As it turns out, the maximum random error for a sample size of 300 is about six percent. In this way, it was determined that the survey would constitute a sampling of 300 Johnson County elderly citizens (600 surveys to be mailed), which would translate into a maximum random error of approximately six percent. The next step in the study process was to formulate the survey. i I 111CROFILMED BY ' 1_ 'JORM ""MICR(-LA9 1� CEDAR RAPIDS • DES td01nE5 3DO4— t J� 20 E) Survey Formulation The formulation of a meaningful, multi -faceted survey was, by far, the most important aspect of the study. A survey had to be formulated which would cover the wide variety of elderly characteristics as well as their housing and support service needs and desires. Further, .it had to be formulated and compiled in such a way that an adequate response rate would be received. In order to relate the responses to the goals and objectives outlined for the study, a lengthy, multi -faceted survey had to be formulated. As mentioned before, the length and deeply personal questions required would work against obtaining an adequate response rate (50 percent). Because of this, a cover letter accompanying the survey was designed to explain the purpose of the study. In addition, the survey had to be formulated in such a way as to make it as easy as possible for respondents to complete. a) Survey Dimensions The final draft of the survey contained eight major sections or dimensions relating to the elderly population, congregate housing and associated support services. The eight dimensions dealt with questions pertaining to: 1) Demographic characteristics; 2) Social resources; 3) Economic resources; 4) Mental health; .r 5) Physical health; r MICROFILMED BY ` --JOR M- "MIC: CEDAR RAPIDS • DESS MON MOI4ES t - -�-_--- / ZI � � `- 6] Activities ofdaily living (ADLl: ^- aa) Mobility, � ' - ^ bb) Self -Care; L _ 7) Knowledge and utilization of existing support services; � and ^ ^` ! � 8) Willingness huparticipate inacongregate lifestyle. -^ | '` Though some inthe field ofmeasuring thefunctional abilities | ofthe elderly would argue thatthedimensions(especially- ,- | number«2through 6)are far from independent, aDuke University ! Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development study showed ! that the intercurrelatiunsamong the dime i r - with / withthehighestcurrelationbeingbetweenmentalhealthand ^~ ADL (+,55)and between those two dimensions and phvs�calheal�h / (+.55 and +.54, respectively). 6 ' ' | '- l)! � Delc characteristic questions include. information `^ astoage, sex, marital status and resident companionship (that is, who lives with yuu?), The purpose ufthese ! demographic questions is to obtain basic information which �^ � may then be related to other dimensions ofthe survey (one [- i ofthemostobvYousbeingagerelatedtophysical ormental | health). In addition, inclusionof thesequestions will ' | afford obase for comparison with studies which may he / � conducted inthe future. Indeed, it is hoped that future, ^- � periodic surveys will be conducted on the subject of � congregate housing results � parer�su s overtime, ^` 2} Social resource questions are designed toobtain informa- tion astothequantityandqualityofrp7ationshipswith friends and family. It is important to identify an individual 'shuman resources; that is, the availability of ^- ' _ � ! / � 1``-~-'- .1 ~~~-��r-�- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MO ' | 1__-ORM | / � j / r i. rx/ 22 i quality care in time of need. These questions would again include marital status and resident companionship. Also j included are questions pertaining to worship service attendance, number of persons one visits within their -• homes, number of persons trusted, number of persons to help if sick or disabled and who these persons are. Ideally, the responses to these questions should be _ converted to an index to rate one's overall social _ resources. Unfortunately, this would take more time and i money than this study can afford. In addition, this scaling should be conducted by professionals in the human services field. Again, it is hoped that further analysis _ of the survey responses will be conducted by professionals �) in related disciplines, (perhaps, various research depart- - ments of the University of Iowa). 3) Economic resource questions are designed to gauge the —1 adequacy of one's income and resources. This, in turn, may indicate the extent to -which financial assistance is needed in order to procure a congregate lifestyle if j desired. In addition, these questions may identify the extent to which there is a market for congregate housing 1 which does not require various forms of public subsidiza- tion. These questions require both objective and jsubjective evaluations of one's economic resources. These questions include employment status, homeowner versus renter status, yearly income, sources of income, yi information as to monthly housing and utility expenses and subjective questions gauging the adequacy of one's future economic resources. I i 4) Mental health questions are intended to gauge the extent i of one's mental and emotional well-being. The questions on mental health were obtained from the "Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire" (SPMSQ).7 Also, questions were included relating to the.subjective assessment of Ii { .306 ad l r 1 ' i 141CROFILMED DY JORM- .MICRdLAB._ LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / � 1 23 . present mental status and change in the past five years. Mental health assessment of residents is an important aspect relating to the make-up of a congregate community. The mental condition of one's peers in a congregate community can have a significant impact on others in that I setting. 5) Physical health questions are obviously important factors in determining the appropriateness of elderly placement into a congregate lifestyle. These questions are designed to obtain information on the presence of physical disorders and the extent to which they affect one's , activities of daily living. Also, the extent of one's ' participation in various physical activities is an — important factor. Questions in the area of physical - health included number of days sick in the past six months, physician visits on a regular basis, medicines taken in _ the past month, the extent to which various diseases affect ADL, the use of various prosthetic aids, existence of drinking problems, participation in physical activities and subjective questions pertaining to present physical - status and change in the past five years. Professionals in the field of medicine should play an integral part in the evaluation of perspective tenants for congregate housing. As in the case with mental health considerations, the physical health of individuals plays an important role in the make-up of a congregate community. 6) Activities of daily living ADL questions are designed to identify the capacity of individuals to perform various instrumental and physical (or bodily care) tasks which permit the continuance of an independent or semi- independent lifestyle. This section can roughly be _ divided into two areas: mobility and self-care. Questions on mobility include the ability or non -ability _ to use stairs, go outdoors, do shopping, perform housework 141CROFILMED BY _JORM-MICR6LA8- .t LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i � � 1 i za chores, and get in and out of bed. Also, if some intermit- tent help is required in these areas, who provides that help? Questions pertaining to self-care include the ability or non -ability to prepare meals, procure transpor- tation, eat, use the phone, take medication, dress and undress, take a bath or shower, use toilet facilities and �! take care of one's appearance (for example, combing hair and shaving). It is obvious that the extent of one's ability to cope with various ADL will have a direct impact r on the appropriateness of a congregate housing placement. i 7) Knowledge and utilization of existing support service questions were designed to enumerate that population which E ! has been exposed to the various support service programs i _ throughout Johnson County. The questions regarding service knowledge and utilization include the use, non-use and potential use of various support servicerp ograms f - currently available to Johnson County residents as well as E the use, non-use and potential use of existing agencies in y Johnson County. It was hoped that these questions would address the current performance of established agencies and programs and show if there is a need for additional outreach services to educate and publicize the existing J support service options for the elderly. f_ 8) Willingness to participate in a congregate lifestyle I questions were designed to identify those who not only are aware of congregate housing and support service options, `. but also, those who are currently participating in or would like to participate in these options. It was hoped that these questions would identify the potential market for additional congregate housing units in Johnson County. _ A brief definition of congregate housing was presented along with short descriptions of possible congregate housing "types" available. Following the descriptions were questions including present congregate housing living 3G4�ru 141CROFILMED BY ! ,,,_ ".• � - -JOR MMICR --�EIL AHV LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MONES 25 status, the desire to participate in congregate housing now and in six months to a year, identifying those who would never want congregate housing, housing type preference, locational preference, willingness to sell home and consideration of a congregate lifestyle before the occurrence of a health problem. F) Survey Sources A variety of sources were referred to before the survey compilation began. These sources ranged from developed, multi -dimensional functional assessment questionnaires to general reference materials on housing choices for the elderly. a) Use of Existing Studies By far, the most referred to reference material used in formulating this survey was Duke University's Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development's, "Multi -dimensional Functional Assessment: The OARS Methodology," second edition. In fact, most of the other reference materials contained some or all portions of the questionnaire developed by this thorough study. So, in the development of this survey, the majority of questions were taken in whole or in part from this "model questionnaire." Additional information on question formulation was obtained from a study by Leonard F. Heumann of the Housing Research and Development Department of the University of Illinois, entitled, "Identifying the Housing and Support Service Needs of the Semi- independent Elderly: Toward a Descriptive Planning Model for Area Agencies on Aging in Illinois." There were two dimensions previously referred to which had to be developed exclusively for this survey: Knowledge and Utilization of Existing Support Services and Willingness to I 141CROFILMED BY 1 "'DORM-"MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 0 J� 26 Participate in a Congregate Lifestyle. There was no survey information available pertaining exclusively to Johnson County for these two dimensions. These questions were formulated with reference to various local level agencies in Johnson County whose clientele is largely made up of elderly citizens. The various studies and/or reference materials used in the formulation of this survey are indicated by an asterisk in, "A Selected Bibliography." b) mut from Local Professionals After the initial rough draft of the survey was formulated, local professionals in varied disciplines were invited to critique the survey and make suggestions. This occurred both in individual and group settings. The local professionals who provided input as to the survey content represented those in the fields of medical health, mental health, housing, social work, housing assistance, elderly services, survey research and statistical analysis. In addition, a group discussion was held on the content of the survey in The Congregate Housing Task Force meeting of July 21, 1982. In addition to obtaining suggestions on survey content, local level input was offered in other areas. These included, ways of obtaining an adequate response rate, advertising the survey and second mailing considerations. G) The "Confidential Questionnaire" The final product obtained through the efforts of many, contained a cover letter, an instruction sheet and 14 pages of questions covering the eight dimensions previously outlined. To enhance the response rate, the survey emphasized the fact that responses would be held in 1 li MICROFIL14EO BY i 11. JORM-'M ICRALA B- CEDAR RAPIDS .DES ?401, ,3 C d Q,,, T f. J 27 strict confidence. Hence, the survey was entitled, "Confidential Questionnaire." The entire questionnaire as well as the cover letter and the instruction sheet are presented in Appendix B of this report. Though the length and personal questions contained in the survey were working against an adequate response rate, it was hoped that the elderly sample population would carefully consider some key points when deciding whether or not to participate in the survey. First, confidentiality was stressed in the cover letter as well as implied by the title itself. Further, names were not requested in the questionnaire in hopes of assuring anonymity (however, the surveys were coded in case a second mailing was required). Secondly, it was emphasized that the participant's responses would be representing all of the elderly citizens of Johnson County. Finally, it was hoped that the sample population would realize that this was their chance to have some direct input as to the future decisions which would affect themselves as well as their peers. The whole "make-up" of the survey (that is, cover letter, instructions, wording, etc.) was geared towards obtaining an adequate response rate by emphasizing these key considerations. As was' mentioned in the last paragraph, though specific names were not requested, a means of identifying the participants was required in case a second mailing became necessary. This was accomplished by simply assigning each questionnaire a coded number between 1 and 600. Each number on the questionnaire was then referenced to the population list as each participant was selected. In this way, we would know which numbers (and hence, which names on the population list) represented non -respondents. If the initial response rate was inadequate for statistical analysis, a second mailing to all non - respondents would be required. Once the survey had been finalized and coding of the survey completed, the task became one of selecting a sample population. E I j r r" 1 H) Selecting a Sample Population In Chapter II, Section 6, "The Systematic Selection Procedure," an example was presented showing how a sample population is drawn using this sampling technique. The required figures for selecting a sample population are, the size of the population list and the size of the desired sample population. In addition, a random number table is required in order to procure a random selection of participants. The starting random number was drawn by using random number tables published in, "Statistical Methods," fifth edition, by G.W. Snedecor.8 This reference contained four tables of 10,000 randomly assorted digits. The selection of a table was accomplished by flipping a coin twice (example: H, H = Table 1, T, T = Table 2, etc.). In addition, the table selected was divided into quadrants and the process repeated. To make the final selection, a pointer was randomly placed in the selected quadrant of the selected table. This process produced the random number between one and six of one (a 1 in 6 sample was determined by dividing the total number of elderly households by the number of surveys to be sent; i.e., 3,788 r 600 = 6.3). Thus, the first household on the population list was selected and every sixth household thereafter until a desired sample population of 600 was obtained. I) Advertising g The final decision to make before beginning the process of distribu- tion was whether or not to advertise the survey and if so, to what extent. The main concerns regarding advertising were two -fold. First, it was felt that advertising was required because of the nature of the history of congregate housing, that is, a relatively new concept in elderly housing. In addition, there had been little previous information on congregate housing disseminated to the elderly. The second concern dealt with the possibility of biasing the survey I 141CROHLI4ED BY - -"DORM -"MIC RICA O- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 300 J1 29 responses toward a pro -congregate housing position by "hard -sell" advertising. Because of the first concern, it was decided that advertising the survey would be appropriate. Because of the second concern, "soft - sell" advertising was employed. This entailed advertising the facts of the survey (when, to whom, sponsorship, etc.) and t'he general purpose of the survey (to document the characteristics and needs of the elderly). In addition to advertising the mere basics of the survey, advertising was conducted for only a week's time. The advertising was produced in a public service announcement format and disseminated by three media -- newspaper, radio and ,cable access channel 29. Because — advertising was conducted in a public service information format, — there were no expenses incurred. In this way, it was felt that the potential sample population would .be ready for the survey (and hence, more likely to respond) and at the same time, potential biasing of responses would be avoided. L J) Survey Distribution Special considerations were given to the typing of the final survey draft to be sent to the sample population. The final draft was typed in all capital letters using an orator type. This type was also used on the cover letter and instruction sheet. This was done mainly to aid the participants in reading ease due to the length of the survey. To add "legitimacy" to the survey, the cover letter was typed on Iowa City letterhead paper and was signed by the Chairperson of the Iowa City Housing Commission. — The final product mailed to the 600 sample recipients included the questionnaire, cover letter, an instruction sheet and a stamped, _ addressed envelope. It was felt that the response would be greater i MICROFILMED DY _JORM.._MICR46L'AB'. ( CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES I ! L 177 30 1 if pre -stamped envelopes were included. To avoid incurring mailing costs for non -respondents, a business reply envelope was used. In this way the City was not charged for those who obtained a stamped envelope, yet chose not to respond. Addressing the envelopes to the 600 sample recipients was done by hand. This would have been an extremely long and tedious task if it were not for elderly volunteers who donated a morning of their time i to address envelopes. A potentially tedious chore was transformed i into a delightful morning of work, discussion, and socializing - courtesy of Johnson County elderly citizens. i The 600 questionnaires were mailed out on Tuesday, August 3, 1982. In the cover letter the wish to receive returns by Tuesday, August 10 was expressed, though a permanent deadline was not set. While j waiting for the survey returns to come in, preparations were made for i data analysis. j MICROFIL14ED BY 1'- - JORM--- MICR46CA6'_. 111 CEDAR RAPIDS DES IdDIRES ,306060 31 CHAPTER IV -- SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS A) Response Rate The returns began to come in on Thursday, August 5, and did not stop until the end of August. Since the survey was conducted during a time when many families are taking their yearly vacations, it was assumed that survey responses would continue to arrive throughout the month and hence, analysis did not begin until September. The total number of questionnaires received was 295 which translated into a rate of return of 49.2 percent (295 divided by 600). Of the 295 responses received, 11 were deemed inappropriate for analysis purposes. There were two major reasons why these 11 responses were not 'included in the analysis -- they were either incompleted returns (entire pages not answered) or the responses were received after coding and data entry had begun. A total of 284 responses were used for data analysis which translated into a rate of return of 47.3 percent (284 divided by 600). Because of this excellent response rate, there was no need for a second mailing to non -respondents. B) Random Error Estimate Estimating random error when generalizing to a given population was discussed in Chapter II, Section D, "Determination of a Sample Size" and a random error equation is presented and explained in "Appendix A -- The Sampling Error Equation. Now that the responses were in, the specific random error estimate could be determined. It should be noted that a six percent random error estimate was deemed adequate for the purposes of this study. Using the equation outlined in Appendix A, the random error estimate for a sample of 284 is 5.94% or t6%. It should be remembered that the t6% figure does not relate to the responses of the sample population, that is, any numbers or percent- ages presented relating to the 284 respondents represents true 1 MICROFILMED BY (1" -JORM-"MICRo6LAB � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES I I I J� 32 figures with no need for adjustment. Only when numbers are presented in relation to the target population of 5,443 is the random error estimate of ± 6% applicable (the target population figure was discussed in Chapter II, Section C, "Procurement of a Population List"). C) Statistical Analysis The statistical analysis of the questionnaire was procured with the aid of the University of Iowa's IBM 370 Computer. The software program used for compiling statistics was the SPSS Package (Statistical Programming for the Social Sciences). A consultant with the University of Iowa's Political Science Research Laboratories, Jim Grifhorst, was engaged to aid in coding, programming and to suggest various statistical methods. •In addition, data entry and verification of the 284 responses was done by the University of Iowa's WEEG Center, Data Entry Department. The aid of these profesionals was invaluable in time savings as well as in assuring proper statistical methodologies. After coding and data entry were completed, variable labels and value labels were assigned and entered into the data file. Variable labels were included to identify each question. Value labels were included to identify each response possibility. Only when these processes were completed could the data analysis begin. In order to answer the main objectives of this study (to enumerate a potential congregate housing population as well as their character- istics), two types of statistics were employed --frequency distribu- tions and cross -tabulations. Frequency distributions were obtained for each possible questionnaire response (based on the coding technique employed). In all, 233 frequency distributions were obtained from the responses. In addition to providing valuable information, the frequency distributions also indicated areas where further analysis would be helpful. I ` � t 141CROFILMED BY I- 1. -JORM"MIC R�CA'El CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ` 3ooa - �l 33 Specifically, the frequency distributions revealed various cross - tabulations which proved to be useful in evaluating the responses. In all, 53 cross-tabluations were run comparing various responses. Cross-tabluations or bi-variate frequency distributions are helpful in identifying two -variable relationships. Because of the length of the questionnaire and hence, the statistics associated therewith, a listing of the entire set of frequency distributions and cross - tabulations in this report is prohibitive. However, these statistics will be available in "Congregate Housing: A Study of Local Elderly Needs --A Supplemental Appendix." Though a listing of all of the statistics obtained is not possible, Appendix C -- "Selected Data" presents 35 distribution tables which were deemed most relevant to this study. These statistics were chosen because they either directly relate to the main objectives of the study or they demonstrate the multiple, potential future uses of the questionnaire. The remainder of this chapter will be devoted to presenting and explaining these selected data. D) Selected Data The tables presented in Appendix C are referenced by the appendix number given at the bottom of each page. For example, geographical location responses are presented in Appendix C, page 1, hence, AC -1. Likewise, age distributions are presented in Appendix C, page 2 (AC - 2) and so on. The data in Appendix C is presented in two forms - frequency distri- bution tables and cross -tabulation tables. AC -1 presents the frequency distribution table relating to the geographical location of the respondents. Using this table as an. example, the columns are made up of various frequency distributions in number or percent, while the rows consist of the choices '.he respondents had in answer- ing the question. This format will hold true for each frequency distribution table presented. 1 II 1 MICROFILMED BY i I l' -DORM_ MICR(�LAE3 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MO 1. ES i 366CL, J I 34 An example of a cross -tabulation table is given in Appendix C, page 9 (AC -9). This table presented the distributions of two questions - — housing situation and whether or not the respondent lives alone. The box in the table referring to those who own their homes (Row 2) and _ live alone (Column 2) contains the numbers 68, 37.8, 57.1 and 23.9 - (this box has three stars and the number 1). The first figure - 68 - refers to the number of respondents who indicated that they both own their home and live alone. The 37.8 figure represents the row percentaae; that is, of all those who own their homes, 37.8% live alone. The 57.1 figure represents the column percentage; that is, of all those who live alone, 57.1% own their homes. The 23.9 figure representsthe total percentage; that is; 23.9% of all of the respondents both own their homes and live alone. All of the cross - tabulation tables presented in Appendix C are read in this way. I• j Throughout the tables in Appendix C you will find stars next to some figures as well as population frequency distributions given. The stars indicate findings of interest in relation to the purpose of the study. The population frequency figures represent various key responses when generalizing from the sample population to the target Population. Remember, the population frequency numbers are accurate to within ±6%. — Appendix C-1 (AC -1) presents the frequency distributions relating to _ the geographical location of the sample respondents. As can be seen, a full two -thirds --76.1 percent --were sampled from the Iowa City _ area. This translated into a population frequency of 4,412. This percentage of Iowa City residents closely relates to 1980 census data which found roughly 74 percent of Johnson County's elderly residing in Iowa City. It• should be remembered that though the RtKELntage figures of the sample closely relate to actual percentages found in _ census data, the population fi ures will not --these figures are less than actual census data. This is because the population figures used in the sample relate to the beginning population list used and not census data figures. These figures (sample percentages) are used in order to draw proper statistical relationships from a sample i i 141CROFILIIED BY 1" --JORM- --MICRO LAB - l CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIYES i 0 J I �( 4 I i \ f 35 population to a larger population --but not the entire population j (this procedure was discussed in Chapter II, Section C, "Procurement of a Population List"). AC -2 presents the age distributions of the respondents. As can be seen, the last four categories of ages contain roughly equal numbers. Further, each of these categories contains over 1,000 individuals when translating to the target population. When comparing these — figures to census data, it was found that the upper age groups were slightly over -represented and the lower age groups slightly under- ( — represented. Regardless, all of the age groups from 60 years old and older contain substantial numbers. i AC -3 shows the sex distributions of the respondents. The ratio of female to male is approximately 1.5 to 1. This corresponds to data r obtained in the 1980 census. However, as age increases, the ratio . !� becomes more dramatic in favor of females. For example, of those in the age group of 75-80; the ratio of female to male becomes two to f one. Further, of those over 80 years old, there are three females for every one male.9 This would indicate that a "typical" congregate housing unit would be made up largely of female residents. This distinction between age and sex is corroborated by the cross - tabulation of the sample responses presented in AC -4 and AC -5. As stars in the cross-tabluation indicate, there are less males and more females as age increases. Specifically, percentage figures for males in the last four age categories go from 50.9% to 48.5% to 35.8% to 29.3%. Conversely, female percentage figures for the same age groups go from 47.4% to 51.5% to 64.2% to 69%. Marital status distributions are presented AC -6. 46.8% of the respondents or 2,547 are married while 39.8% or 2,166 are widowed, 7.7% or 415 are single and 4.5% or 267 are divorced. The latter — figures would have the biggest impact on congregate lifestyle considerations. That is, chances are that the majority of those widowed, single and divorced are living alone and hence, would be in 3604 . J I f _ t MICR0EILRED BY "DORM-MICR#LAO_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOI YES / II ,i i 36 the most need of the benefits offered by a congregate lifestyle. — Congregate housing provides an opportunity for increased social interaction as well as needed support services. Married couples _ often turn to their spouses for such needs while persons living alone must seek to fulfill these needs through outside organizations, agencies and indivdivals. That is not to say that married couples _ should not be included or would not benefit from a congregate — lifestyle. Indeed, congregate living has definite advantages for couples as well as providing a "good mix" in a congregate setting. AC -7 shows dramatically the number of individuals who live alone. Specifically, 41.9% or 2,281 indicate that they live alone. These figures indicate that the majority of widowed Johnson.County elderly "' I citizens do indeed live alone. They are joined by those who are - single, divorced or separated. The death of a spouse can have a j severe impact on a survivor's ability to continue functioning independently and/or semi -independently. Often, the mental and physical health of a surviving spouse is affected by the death of a loved one and hence, the ability to continue activities of daily living are affected. This population is in the greatest need of social interaction, the provision of support services and in general, a "community setting," all of which are offered in a congregate lifestyle. This is, indeed, a significant population bolstered by the realization that four of every ten elderly citizens of Johnson County live alone. The present housing situation of Johnson County elderly citizens is another important factor in relation to a congregate housing alternative. AC -8 shows that 63.4% or 3,451 of all the elderly own their homes outright. This has implications dealing both with financial status as well as needed support services. Those who own their homes have an established piece of capital in the value of their homes. Chances are that many have lived in their homes for years and have become "attached" to them, making a potential move very I threatening. In addition, as the homes age, more repair work is _ ` necessary for proper upkeep at a time when many physical abilities of ...... . 141CROFILMED BY JORM -MICR6LA6- CEDAR RA P IDS DES MOINES r 37 the elderly begin to decline. Further, a lack of funds makes contracting out for repair work prohibitive (income distributions are presented in AC -10). The remaining noteworthy figures in AC -8 — are the 16.5% who are renting an apartment and the 9.5% who are making monthly payments on their homes. The monthly housing payments of these groups coupled with low to moderate incomes would indicate a population who would qualify for and benefit from various housing subsidies. AC -9 presents a cross- tabulation between the type of present housing situation by those who live alone. The most dramatic finding is located between those who own their homes outright and those living alone. 37.8% of all those who own their home are living alone. Conversely, 57.1% of all those living alone own their own home. The most dramatic figure, however; is the 23.9% or 1,301 who both own their own homes and live alone. Since it has already been established that the majority of those who live alone are widowed, it stands to reason that the majority of homeowners who live alone are widowed. This has dramatic implications as to the ability of these individuals to maintain their respective homes as well as the need for various supportive services. This figure cannot be stressed enough -- approximately one in every four individuals in the target population both own their home and live alone. The other figure worth notice is the 12.3% or 669 individuals who are renting an apartment and live alone. This group will encounter somewhat less need for support services (no outside maintenance required), however, the financial implications may be more dramatic. Yearly income distributions are presented in AC -10. The income group of $7,500-$13,499 contain the largest percentage at 29.2% or 1,589. $13,500 is the approximate income ceiling for those eligible for HUD housing subsidies. Those included in this potential subsidy group constitute 50.3% or 2,738 individuals. It is interesting to note that 18.3% or 996 indicated that they have yearly incomes of $25,000 or more. This would indicate that there is a substantial number of those who can afford to pay for congregate housing and/or supportive i MICROFILMED BY lJ--JOFqMt I "MIC FR(�L AE! � CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ' I 360 av JI Rn services, There is also a substantial number of those who would not qualify for federal subsidies and, in addition, would have a difficult time in paying the full amount for congregate housing and/or supportive services. This group of 23.2% or 1,263 can roughly be related to the "middle-class" who, unfortunately, have very few present options in the areas of congregate housing and/or supportive services. AC -11 presents a cross -tabulation between yearly income and the number of individuals supported by that income. As is indicated by the stars, the vast majority of respondents live alohe or with one other person (this was also shown in the distributions by marital status and living arrangement). This would indicate that very few of Johnson County's elderly reside in an extended family. As the Population figures show, there are hundreds of individuals in each group outlined. It is interesting to note that the lower two income groups indicate, for the most part, one person supported by the respective incomes. The income group of $7,500-$13,499 is roughly even in supporting one and two persons (49.4% and 45.8%, respectively), while the upper three groups support mostly two persons.(62.2%, 55.2% and 63.5%, respectively). The cross -tabulation between present housing situation and yearly income is presented in AC -12. The most significant relationships are presented in target population terms. That is, -the largest numbers are among those who own their homes and have incomes of $5,000 a year or more, those making payments on their homes with a yearly income of $7,500-$13,499, and those renting an apartment with annual income of between 0 and $13,499. These groups are presented in the population frequency figures of one through five, six, and seven through nine, respectively. A key finding here is that a substantial number of those in the "middle income" groups ($13,500-$24,999) also own their homes outright. Specifically, 16.5% or 898 are contained in this group. This would indicate a possible option for those in the "middle-class" who would desire a congregate lifestyle. That is, though neither their income nor housing situation alone would J i 141CROFILMED BY 11. "JORM--MICR6LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS DES '401, ES J J ,3400&_ J 39 suffice for the financial needs required, a combination of the two may allow for some possibilities. The final point to make regarding this cross -tabulation is that the majority of those who make monthly housing payments (either on a home or an apartment) are located in the lower three income categories. This group would constitute those in definite need of financial support via subsidization. I To further gauge the need for congregate housing, support services and financial aid, AC -13, a cross -tabulation between yearly income and those living alone was compiled. Again, this table shows that f; 7 the majority of those living alone would be candidates for a fI congregate lifestyle. Specifically, approximately 75% of those who live alone have yearly incomes of $20,000 or less, with the majority, 31.1% or 708, having an income of between $7,500 and $13,499. AC -14 presents the frequency distributions relating to worship service attendance. These data have been included in this appendix for reasons other than determining specific congregate housing/support service needs. That is, the questionnaire was designed to investigate varied dimensions relating to the elderly. 'I Information as to tenant selection and admission, congregate housing design considerations and potential outreach sources are just a few -� of the areas which the questionnaire covers. Worship service — attendance indicates a possible outreach source. As is indicated in j AC -14, 63% or 3,429 attend worship services of which 42.6% or 2,319 attend at least once a week. This would indicate that the local _ churches, synagogues, etc.—are an excellent source in which to contact Johnson County's elderly population. It should be mentioned that a solid one-third indicated that they do not attend worship services. This population must be reached through other means. AC -15 is another example of the questionnaire exploring other areas related to congregate housing. This frequency distribution indicates those who take medications -- specifically, high blood pressure medicine. This information is useful in gauging the type of medical attention and facilities which would be needed in a rte- _.__-_.... ...... ... ___..: .-._...�. i MICROFILMED BY _JORM MICR6LA19 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I congregate facility. As the distributions show, 38% or 2,068 indicated that they take high blood pressure medicine. This would indicate that a support service provider such as CAHHSA (Community and Home Health Services Aides) would be appropriate in a congregate setting in order to maintain independent living. Other areas such as the dispensing of medication and nutritional requirements are also important considerations. Of course, professionals in the field of medicine should be consulted to identify any needs required of those who are on various medications. AC -16 is yet another example of how identification of the elderly's physical characteristics can have an impact on specially designed congregate facilities and/or support services. This distribution identifies those who have problems with sight impairment and to what degree this impairment affects their activities of daily living (ADL). As the stars indicate; 22.9% experience a little effect from sight impairment on their ADL, while 4.9% experience a great deal of effect because of sight impairment. The important figure here is that 27.8% or 1,513 are in some way affected by sight impairment. This characteristic has implications as to various interior design features of a congregate facility. For example, the various colors used in hallways (carpeting, walls, etc.) can either enhance or detract from one's depth perception capabilities. When combining the problems of sight impairment with a set of stairs, one can easily see the importance of carefully planned interior design features. Again, specialists in this area should be consulted in the planning stages of a congregate facility. AC -17 presents those who use the aid of a cane in walking. The frequency distribution shows that 9.5% or 517 currently use the aid of a cane. One may think that this represents such a small percent- age of the population that any design implications would be ignored or, at best, given minimal consideration. However, when combining this statistic with statistics of those who indicated that they use a walker or a wheelchair, the figures become 11.3% or 615. The use of these aids provides an indirect indication as to the relative 3400 i llli MICROFILMED BY i -, '-DORM--MIC R6L AB� IJl I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 40 congregate facility. As the distributions show, 38% or 2,068 indicated that they take high blood pressure medicine. This would indicate that a support service provider such as CAHHSA (Community and Home Health Services Aides) would be appropriate in a congregate setting in order to maintain independent living. Other areas such as the dispensing of medication and nutritional requirements are also important considerations. Of course, professionals in the field of medicine should be consulted to identify any needs required of those who are on various medications. AC -16 is yet another example of how identification of the elderly's physical characteristics can have an impact on specially designed congregate facilities and/or support services. This distribution identifies those who have problems with sight impairment and to what degree this impairment affects their activities of daily living (ADL). As the stars indicate; 22.9% experience a little effect from sight impairment on their ADL, while 4.9% experience a great deal of effect because of sight impairment. The important figure here is that 27.8% or 1,513 are in some way affected by sight impairment. This characteristic has implications as to various interior design features of a congregate facility. For example, the various colors used in hallways (carpeting, walls, etc.) can either enhance or detract from one's depth perception capabilities. When combining the problems of sight impairment with a set of stairs, one can easily see the importance of carefully planned interior design features. Again, specialists in this area should be consulted in the planning stages of a congregate facility. AC -17 presents those who use the aid of a cane in walking. The frequency distribution shows that 9.5% or 517 currently use the aid of a cane. One may think that this represents such a small percent- age of the population that any design implications would be ignored or, at best, given minimal consideration. However, when combining this statistic with statistics of those who indicated that they use a walker or a wheelchair, the figures become 11.3% or 615. The use of these aids provides an indirect indication as to the relative 3400 i llli MICROFILMED BY i -, '-DORM--MIC R6L AB� IJl I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 41 mobility of Johnson County's elderly population. Again, these statistics carry direct implications as to exterior and interior _ design features of a congregate facility. Examples of these consid- erations would include the need for an elevator(s), certain widths -• for corridors and doorways, the height of threshholds, placement of i _ various unit appliances, switches, outlets and support rails, and the necessity for curb cuts and accessible entryways. j AC -18 presents one final example of how the questionnaire addresses congregate housing/support service considerations. This distribution shows what percentage of the population needs some assistance in housekeeping and also the percentage of those unable to _ do housework at all. 9.5% or 517 occupied the former category, while 5.6% or 305 are in the latter. Together, 15.1% of the population or 822 are in need of some assistance in regards to housekeeping. This would indicate the need for an existing support service such as Johnson County's Homemaker and Health Aide Program, or the inclusion of in-house staff personnai to assist in housekeeping chores. Regardless of the type of service provider opted for,.the important factor is that the availability of a choice for the elderly in j regards to housekeeping as well as other support services will greatly enhance their chances of maintaining an independent or semi- independent life style and hence, preventing a premature or needless placement into a formal institution. AC -19 presents the distributions of those who presently reside in a congregate housing facility. 3.2 percent or 174 indicated that they currently live in a congregate housing facility. This figure points out two important factors concerning congregate housing. First, that there is some confusion as to what type of facility constitutes congregate housing. That is, according to the definition previously outlined, the Oaknoll Retirement Residence would be the only local facility considered to be truly congregate housing. However, the numbers indicate that some respondents viewed their living arrangement as congregate outside of the Oaknoll community. In the questionnaire a short definition of congregate housing was presented: i MICROFILMID BY 11" "JORM... M I C R� LA B CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIUS i 3004, J 42 "Congregate housing" is an assisted independent group living — arrangement which offers the opportunity for increased social interaction and provides minimum services that include some on- site meals served in a common diningroom, plus one or more of such services as on-site medical/nursing services, personal care or housekeeping. Congregate housing does not refer to nursing homes. Possibly, some of the respondents indicating affirmatively to this question were from Autumn Park, Ecumenical Towers, Capitol House, etc. and felt that these facilities constituted a congregate community. Secondly, the figures point out the extremely limited options of the elderly in the area of local, congregate housing. This is particularly true, not only because of the small number of units available in Johnson County, but also because of the costs associated with our only true congregate housing facility--Oaknoll Retirement Residence. What turned out to be one of the most important findings of this M study is outlined in AC -20. That is, how many elderly would want to move into congregate housing in six months to a year, if units were readily available. 9.9 percent or 539 responded affirmatively to this question. It should be noted that another question dealing with the willingness to move into congregate housing immediately was also asked. The results of. this question was 4.6 percent or 250 who answered affirmatively. Because of responding to a mail — questionnaire rather than a personal interviewer, there was a chance that those who responded affirmatively to one would do so on the other and thus, give an inaccurate figure as to those wanting congregate housing in 6 to 12 months. However, when cross -tabulating the two questions it was found that only half of the respondents checked both responses and hence, cancelled each other out. Thus, the figure of 9.9 percent does not include any double counting and can be used to show the true figures concerning the willingness to participate in a congregate lifestyle. With roughly ten percent of _ the target population or 539 indicating that they would move into 1 MICROFILMED BY -DORM -"MIC R;L-A B- - A � ' CEDAR RA IDS • DES HONES I r +. 43 congregate housing in the near future, it appears that there is an adequate market for additional congregate housing units in Johnson County. Indeed, this information along with other data yet to be presented, would indicate that filling congregate housing units in Johnson County could be accomplished immediately. AC -21 presents the results of a question which attempted to accomplish two things. First, the question was formulated to find out how many respondents would consider a congregate lifestyle even if they did not want it immediately or in the near future. Secondly, the wording was put in such a manner that an answer of "no" would indicate a positive response regarding congregate housing as an alternative. This technique is often used in surveys to make sure that respondents are carefully 'reading the questions and not just checking what appears to be correct. That is, the previous three questions would be answered "yes" by those favoring or desiring congregate housing. This question, however, would require a "no" answer if one favored or desired congregate housing. As the stars indicate, 51.4 percent or 2,798 responded that they would indeed consider congregate housing as a viable alternative to their present living arrangement. Though this figure cannot be associated with a market for congregate housing, it does indicate that there is'wide interest concerning its future potential. It should also be noted that 30 percent indicated that they would never consider congregate housing as an alternative. This population could still be served, however, through expanded in-home support services or congregate housing variations such as share -a -home arrangements.10 AC -22 presents the frequency distributions regarding which type of congregate housing would be preferred by the elderly. The alterna- tives presented in the questionnaire were family homes, group homes, "mini -complexes" and retirement residences. A short definition was given for each alternative. These definitions are presented in Appendix B - "The Confidential Questionnaire," pages 14 and 15 (AB - 14, 15). The results were that 40.8 percent or 2,221 indicated that a retirement -residence was their preference. An additional 15.8 1 IAICROFILMED BY i 1 -DORM "MICR6CAB_ 1 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES C 300 a. J 44 percent or 860 indicated a "mini -complex" as their preference. This survey cannot interpret the reasons for the various preferences; however, when looking at the definitions, one can make some suggestions regarding types of congregate housing. One possible explanation for the large numbers preferring a retirement residence and "mini -complex" could be that these definitions indicated that a live-in manager might be present and would arrange for support services for the tenants. Another possible explanation is that the majority of elderly would prefer a complex which included a large number of their peers. A retirement residence would best fit this criterion. Regardless of the reasons for overwhelmingly selecting one housing type over another, the important fact remains that 40.8 percent of the respondents or 2,221 of the target population would prefer a large retirement residence. Locational preference of congregate housing is presented in AC -23. As is indicated by the stars, a locational preference of downtown Iowa City and a residential neighborhood of Iowa City attracted 66.5 percent of the respondents.- Specifically, 33.8 percent or 1,840 indicated downtown Iowa City as their locational preference. In addition, 32.7 percent or 1,780 indicated a preference for a residential neighborhood of Iowa City. There are two factors which probably give rise to an Iowa City preference. First, a full two- thirds of the elderly population are already residing within Iowa City. One could assume that if a move was necessary and/or desired, that Iowa City residents would opt for an Iowa City location. Secondly, downtown Iowa City may be desired because of its geographical location in relation to major bus routes (which provides access to shopping, social/recreational activities, etc.), and the Senior Center, as well as other essential services and community -related agencies and activities. Those prefering a residential neighborhood of Iowa City may feel the downtown benefits are still within their reach in this location yet prefer the aesthetic qualities of "suburban type" living. i 141CROFILMED BY 11" -"JORM-MICR6L-AM_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES t40I8E5 I �l 1� I 45 AC -24 was included as a means of gauging the degree of seriousness of those who indicated a desire for congregate housing. That is, of all homeowners who indicated they would consider or desired a congregate lifestyle, we asked if they would be willing to sell their homes in order to move into a congregate housing unit. The result was that 44 ^ percent or 2,395 of all homeowners did indeed indicate that they j would be willing to sell their homes in order to procure a congregate j housing unit. This statistic is quite significant when one realizes that many of the homeowners have probably lived in their homes for a 1 long time, possibly, all their lives, and hence, are quite attached 7 to their present environment. Further, the fact that many would move I out of a relatively safe and well-known environment into a completely new one indicates that many are very serious regarding a congregate housing alternative. It should also be noted that 28.2 percent or 1,535 indicated that they would not be willing to sell their homes. The final frequency distribution in Appendix C is presented on AC -25. This distribution indicates those who would consider congregate housing before suffering a health problem. That is, congregate housing is not designed exclusively for those with health-related problems (though these individuals would surely benefit by being j — placed in congregate units), but rather, it is an excellent environ- ment for those who are relatively healthy and desire to remain as I independent as their particular situation will allow. The stars indicate that 33.8 percent or 1,840 would consider congregate housing before the advent of a health-related problem. Further, 49.3 i percent or 2,683 indicated that it would take the occurrence of a health problem before they would consider congregate housing. This — attitude may have something to do with the perception of what congregate housing actually is. Although the survey made it clear _ that congregate housing does not refer to nursing homes, some may perceive it to be exclusively for those with moderate health problems. If this perception does indeed exist, further information as to the multi-purpose aspects of congregate housing should be disseminated throughout the elderly community. 3 DOa_� i MICROFIL14ED B1' 1 --JORM_MIC R(�C-AB-_ CEDAR RM 105 DES M01"HS j !� 46 The remainder of the statistics presented in this Appendix are cross - tabulations relating to the demand for congregate housing. AC -26 Presents a cross -tabulation between those who would consider congregate housing as a realistic alternative to their present - living arrangement by the type of congregate housing preferred. As the stars indicate, the relevant figures are contained in the categories between those who would consider congregate housing and the preference of a "mini -complex" and retirement residence,• respec- tively. Specifically, 21.2% and 55.5% of those who would consider ` congregate housing would prefer a "mini -complex" and retirement " residence, respectively. The key statistics in this cross - tabulation are 10.9% and 28.5% in those same categories. That is, 10.9% or 593 would both consider a congregate unit and prefer a "mini -complex," while 28.5% or 1,551 would both consider a congregate unit and prefer a retirement residence. As 'the population figures indicate (denoted by 1 and 2), there is a large market j contained in both of these categories. AC -27 presents a similar cross -tabulation except that it presents those who would consider congregate housing by locational preference — rather than by type. The two key categories are again highlighted by stars as well as population figures. 45:2% and 37% of those who would consider congregate housing indicated a locational preference of downtown Iowa City and a residential neighborhood of Iowa City, — respectively. Again, the most important figure has been highlighted by stars as well as presented in population terms. That is, 23.2% or 1,263 would both consider congregate housing and prefer a downtown location, while 19% or 1,034 would both consider congregate housing and prefer a residential neighborhood location. Again, there are — significant numbers in both categories which would suggest definite characteristics for both short-term and long-term congregate placement considerations. The remaining eight cross -tabulations presented in Appendix C all relate to the potential short-term market for congregate housing, that is, all those who indicated that they would want to move into — t RICRDEILI11D RY _JORM__MICR6 LAB.- CEDAR . _.Z J RAPIDS DES MDIIJES j f jar i i ■ "-T 47 congregate housing within six months to a year. This is the most relevant population found through this survey relating to the original intent of the study and the remaining statistics attempt to better explore and characterize this population. In addition, these 1 i MICROFILIdED BY 1_ —JORM _MICROCAEf CEDAR ROIDS DES tool J statistics will provide information as to the specific character- istics of the congregate facility itself. AC -28 presents the cross -tabulation between the market for congregate housing and their living arrangement. Specifically, this table shows that 64.3% of all those wanting congregate housing in six to twelve months live alone. Conversely, 15.1% of all those j currently living alone (42% of the population)- want congregate housing in six to twelve months. Finally, 6.3% or 343 both live alone and want congregate housing in six to twelve months. A "I population of 343 is quite significant for a short-term market for congregate housing and the fact that this population lives alone would indicate specific supportive service options which would benefit these individuals. AC -29 attempted to give a rough picture of the relative health of the elderly population and how health problems, if any, relate to their - abilities to perform their activities of daily living. It should be stressed that these statistics do not constitute health evaluations. Medical professionals on a one-to-one basis are needed to diagnose health-related aspects and how they might affect one's activities of daily living capabilities. Though a great amount of importance — should not be associated with statistics relating to health, they do, nonetheless, contribute information as to the overall — characteristics of the elderly and their needs. This particular table relates those who want congregate housing to those who have been so sick in the past six months as to have it affect their ADL. As the figures show, 50% of those who indicated that they want congregate housing in the short-term also indicated that they had not — been so sick as to have it affect their daily activities. The overall frequency percentage and population figure for this group is — 4.9% or 267. This population can roughly be equated with the "well - 1 i MICROFILIdED BY 1_ —JORM _MICROCAEf CEDAR ROIDS DES tool J J 48 - elderly" demand for congregate housing. One could also argue that — those indicating one week or less would also be included in this category and hence, a percentage and population figure would be 6.3% _ or 343. - AC -30 presents the cross -tabulation between the present market for congregate housing by those who would consider congregate housing before suffering a health problem. 75% of the present congregate housing market indicated that they would consider congregate housing before suffering a health problem. The most telling figure in this table is that 7.4% or 403 responded affirmatively to both questions. M Again, this would indicate a large market of "well -elderly" for any congregate housing facility established in the near future. i AC -31 shows that a good sized market exists of home owners and renters in relation to a congregate housing market. Specifically, 67% of the present market for congregate housing own their homes .- outright while 25% are renting an apartment. These figures translate T into percentages and population figures of 6.7% or 365 and 2.5% or 136 for home owners and renters, respectively. An even more interesting finding concerning the congregate housing market is presented in AC -32. That is, of all those desiring a congregate housing unit in six to twelve months, 67.9% would be willing to sell their homes if necessary. Conversely, 15.2% of all home owners indicated they would want congregate housing in the short term (that is, represent the present congregate housing market). These figures translate into a percentage number of 6.7% or 365. As mentioned before, this represents a fairly large market of those actually willing to sell their homes in order to procure congregate _ housing. AC -33 identifies the financial position of those wanting congregate ` housing in the short-term. As can be seen, the majority of this market is located in the lower three income categories. _ Specifically, 14.3% have yearly incomes of between zero and $4,999, Sov ot v r ` MICROFILMED BY •�. DORM MIC R4LAEl lIj ' CEDAR RAI'105 DES MOl iES II 49 17.9% have yearly incomes between $5,000 and $7,499, and 39.3% have yearly incomes between $7,500 and $13,499. The total percentages and population figures are also presented in this table. Specifically, 7.2% or 386 individuals both want congregate housing in the near future and are among low to moderate income groups (that is, zero to $13,499). AC -34 and 35 present the preferences of the congregate housing market in relation to housing type and location, respectively. As is the case with the frequency distributions as well as other cross - tabulations, this population would prefer a retirement residence or "mini -complex" located either downtown Iowa City or in a residential neighborhood. The largest numbers are found in a retirement residence (4.2% or 229) located in downtown Iowa City (5.6% or 305). As is the case with the other cross -tabulations relating to the current congregate housing market for Johnson County, there is a sufficient market as to type and location whereby a congregate facility of this type could be filled. r M n� J i H �r f I 49 17.9% have yearly incomes between $5,000 and $7,499, and 39.3% have yearly incomes between $7,500 and $13,499. The total percentages and population figures are also presented in this table. Specifically, 7.2% or 386 individuals both want congregate housing in the near future and are among low to moderate income groups (that is, zero to $13,499). AC -34 and 35 present the preferences of the congregate housing market in relation to housing type and location, respectively. As is the case with the frequency distributions as well as other cross - tabulations, this population would prefer a retirement residence or "mini -complex" located either downtown Iowa City or in a residential neighborhood. The largest numbers are found in a retirement residence (4.2% or 229) located in downtown Iowa City (5.6% or 305). As is the case with the other cross -tabulations relating to the current congregate housing market for Johnson County, there is a sufficient market as to type and location whereby a congregate facility of this type could be filled. r; 90 CHAPTER V -- DISCUSSION The material covered in this chapter is intended to supplement the basic _ recommendations made by the Housing Commission and Congregate Housing `r Task Force. That is, the material presented here, in general, cannot be related as recommendations based on the survey results, however, some of the ideas may suggest certain actions to be taken in the future. The discussions presented in this chapter have, at one time or another, been introduced and debated by either the Housing Commission or the Congregate Housing Task Force. r �- A) Documentation of Need - The original intent of this study was to enumerate the demand or need for local congregate housing in Johnson County. Market analyses i conducted to determine the need for a particular good (whether the " good be public or private) traditionally connotes a matching of demand and supply in economic terms. For example, a housing market '— analysis of demand 'may include considerations as to emigration _ patterns, newly formed and existing households by size, age of head of household and income. Supply of housing would typically include such factors as new construction and standing stock of housing units by size and price, value, or rent. A traditional study of this type has not been attempted here for two main reasons. First, there was neither the time nor the funds necessary for such a study. Secondly, f� demand for a given housing type or community service not expressed in economic terms does not necessarily mean that a need for such housing or services does not exist. This circumstance applies directly to j the independent and semi-independent elderly population of Johnson i County. Instead of a traditional market study, we have attempted to let the elderly "speak for themselves" via a survey in order to express their needs for congregate housing/support services. The statistics presented in this study are bolstered by the opinions of local Professionals in the fields of elderly servcies who through personal contacts have perceived a need for many years. 300 dLW 1i MICROFILMED BY ' I- 1.--1 1 "'JORMMICROL.AB- -i !r I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES i ! a 51 It would not be very difficult to attempt to document need through the compilation of case studies of various individuals in Johnson County. We have been exposed to countless stories from elderly referral agencies, hospitals, nursing homes and elderly individuals concerning the suffering of the aged in Johnson County. Everyone seems to know of an elderly individual who has had a terrible accident in their home, suffered physical pain due to extreme heat or cold under inadequate housing conditions, or been placed in a nursing home environment when only minimal assistance was required. Indeed, a compilation of such tragedies could be dramatized and presented to local officials, charity organizations and private philanthropists which would break even the coldest heart - however, that is not our intention. Rather, we believe that the gathering of factual information at the local level along with a "common sense" approach will best serve the elderly of Johnson County. 0 B) Site Consideration Availability of prospective sites is, of course, the most important r consideration for a downtown facility. Currently, investigations are being made concerning the downtown square block site where M Central Junior High School is located. This is presently the most ideal site in Iowa City for the development of congregate housing. In addition to being a downtown location, this site is adjacent to Mercy Hospital. Being located next door to such a fine facility as Mercy would offer the elderly "peace of mind" in relation to any medical emergency which might arise. Beyond this, being a large medical institution, Mercy Hospital has the potential of being a ^ contracted service provider in such support service areas a meals, -housekeeping, minimal nursing services and physical therapy. This is not to say that administering support services in this way would — be the most economical, especially since there are established service providers in the area. However, common sense would indicate _ that economic savings may be obtained from such an arrangement and hence, this possibility should not be overlooked. — •3A0 ate- . r 141CROFILMED BY 1 -DORM "MICR46LAE3 l � CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MONES I /� >Y — 52 i The Central Junior High site is by far the most ideal site for congregate housing in Iowa City. Therefore, regardless of who owns this site, it is hoped that its use for congregate housing will be given serious consideration. C) The City of Iowa City - A Catalyst? -- The City of Iowa City as an institution concerned with the "public interest" of the elderly, has, in this study, taken the first step in I — the creation of congregate housing for Johnson County's elderly _ population. The City's role in a congregate housing program has been envisioned -� as a catalyst to foster interest, communication, and action among the , parties necessary for a successful program. The private market supplies the vast majority of housing in Iowa. However, while the i private market has been successful in meeting the bulk of our elderly Population needs, many needs still go unmet. It is believed that the f private market can and should continue to provide the bulk of the j housing and support services for our elderly citizens and should be — encouraged and supported by local government efforts in the gathering and disseminating of information, planning and I I coordination. A possible role for the City would be to monitor the private market and recommend programs that assist in providing congregate housing which meets a greater variety of needs of the elderly than is now :I present in Johnson County. Only when the private market cannot or will not provide adequate housing and support services for the _ elderly should the City consider stepping in as a substitute developer. For the City to play such a role, it must be willing to provide basic information, in effect, be the spokesperson for the elderly's needs and desires. To accomplish this, the City must answer some basic questions asked by private developers and sponsors as to the 30 0 •." 1 ; MICROFILMED BY - 1 JORM MICR#LA9 " �l L (J I NES CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI 53 provision of congregate housing/support services. Some of these questions have already been posed in Chapter I of this report. In addition, many of the answers have already been obtained through the survey. Basically, the City would have to demonstrate to the elderly, the public, potential sponsors and potential developers that: (a) Any shortage of a specific housing type (including barrier -free congregate housing) that can be profitably built by a private contractor or developer will be built once the private investor is made aware of the demand/need. Where the profit margin is unknown because the proposed housing is *a new type and the demand/need cannot be '.'absolutely" demonstrated and/or construction costs cannot be accurately predicted, the private builder/developer/manager will still be the best resource although the public sector may have to share in the initial financial risks to encourage development. (b) The changes and actions of elderly in the housing market will be similar to that for younger households but with several important differences: a vacancy rate of decent housing ready for occupancy is necessary to allow elderly consumers a reason- able choice and mobility within their markets. This vacancy rate might be slightly lower than for younger households due to a lower elderly turnover rate. This lower rate should,•in turn, allow a surer profit to developers/owners to encourage greater competition and creativity in the specialized elderly housing markets. While new construction tends to filter from one owner to another, usually of lower income, and eventually helps eliminate sub -standard housing, the process is normally very slow and perhaps should not be depended upon at all for semi- independent elderly with fixed incomes and special needs. Stated another way, semi-independent elderly housing needs should not be expected to decrease as a result of increased conventional housing starts at the middle income level and above, whether or not those starts are. aided by public subsidy.11 � I ' l MICROFILMED By I 'JORM- -MIC ROLA B'- (/ I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES hID IAES 'I . J L.I 54 D) Public Awareness Program A program to enhance public awareness concerning congregate housing has been discussed by the Commission and Task Force and would include disseminating information through radio, TV, City pamphlets, newspapers, cable access channels, etc. (radio, print and cable have already been used). In addition, a special cable program. could be created and produced in order to visually show the public what is meant by congregate housing and support services. Too often City programs are related to the public in terms of professional jargon and when combined with a relatively new field such as congregate housing, one- can appreciate the need to visually explain this concept. _ s believed that a quality program can be produced to air on various cable stations as well as the public broadcasting system. In addition, a shortened version of the program could be sent to HUD. Hopefully, this would show Federal officials just how serious Iowa City is concerning the provision of housing and services to its elderly population. This is not meant to suggest that congregate housing projects should look exclusively to HUD to procure financing. On the contrary, other avenues of financing possibilities should be thoroughly explored. F) Clearinghouse for Elderly Housing/Services Another discussion item concerns the creation of a City department and/or a City staff position created to act as a clearinghouse for elderly related housing and support services information. This department/position would become involved with all aspects of assessing, creating and evaluating current and future projects relating to congregate housing/support services for the elderly. This would involve working closely with established City and County departments as well as with private professionals in the fields of architecture, finance, real estate, geriatrics, medicine, housing and social services. 1 i 111CROFILMED DY 1 - -'JORM -'MICR#LAB 1 .� CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I 300 '&-'; 7 r 0 J� 55 Some may argue that the development of such a department/position would merely constitute a duplication of existing services and hence, more "red tape." On the contrary, development of such a department/position would decrease the amount of "red tape" currently faced by Johnson County's elderly population. Further, there is no single agency/position equipped to handle the housing/support service needs of a specialized user group such as independent and semi-independent elderly. The reasons for considering such a department/position are based on the very nature of the existing programs/agencies and their specific rules in relation to serving elderly clientele. That is, local governments have traditionally separated support service agencies from housing authorities/agencies so that there is no single source for which an elderly individual can go to find help. Housing agencies have the knowledge and ability to identify, collect, and analyze data pertaining to housing but know very little about service analysis. The same is true, in reverse, concerning support service agency knowledge and abilities. In addition, there are numerous support service agencies, all of which concentrate on different services. As the present system is now set up, an elderly individual wishing information concerning both housing and support services will be referred to no less than a dozen depart- ments/agencies/programs. The provision of one single source which an elderly individual could refer to in order to obtain information on congregate housing/ support services would greatly simplify the process for an elderly citizen. The most compelling argument for considering such a department/posi- tion is that it would allow for a mechanism in which research and knowledge currently available through the University of Iowa could be drawn together into the existing governmental, financial, archi- tectural, construction and service provider professions which are being called upon to build and manage a congregate housing complex. There is in existence much information pertaining to such areas as service provision, staffing, and selection and termination 141CROFILnED 9Y 11" -"JORM-M1CR6L_A9_ 1 J CEDAR RAPIDS DES 14DIAES J� ;� 56 procedures, however, the information is diffused among various University disciplines, public departments and private businesses. A City department/position would provide a vehicle in which all relevant information as to congregate housing/support services could " be compiled. _ F) The Philosophy of Congregate Housing A very important consideration, although one which does not fit neatly into any specific category, involves -the way congregate housing is perceived by local officials, planners, architects, the general public and the elderly; that is, the psychology or philosophy. of the purpose of congregate housing. Basically, housing for the elderly in the United States has taken three forms: the single-family home or apartment (self-sufficient elderly or services provided by an extended family); public housing (with or without support services); and nursing homes. The first option is preferred by most individuals, unfortunately, there comes a time when self-sufficiency is unrealistic and in today's society, an extended family situation is rare. Nursing homes, for the most part, have been patterned after hospitals (tiled floors, antiseptic surroundings, etc.). The stigmas and perceptions related to nursing homes are overwhelmingly dismal. We in society view these institu- tions as the last stopping place before death. Public housing complexes for the elderly are usually developed with nursing home features in mind and hence, carry many of the same stigmas. In addition, we view the elderly in these situations as not only unhealthy individuals, but also impoverished - unable to take care of themselves financially as well as physically. These stigmas attached to elderly environments do nothing to advance these individual's feelings of self-worth and dignity. Indeed, in situations as just described, independence and, consequently, the quality of life are often diminished. � MICROFILMED BY 11" __DORM- -MICMf LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I i 3400.0 a M r-, 57 But how can a local government help to overcome these perceptions which undoubtedly, in part, will be associated with any new project in Iowa City? In effect, one would be attempting to correct the perceptions of those who would most support such a project. That is, most supporters base their decision to take action, in part, because there is extreme hardship and need faced by the elderly - we feel sorry for them - they need our help - they are to be coddled and taken care of. This is not the perception which congregate housing should be based on! The answer to this dil.emma is at the same time simple to comprehend and difficult to accomplish. After all, we are seeking to change perceptions regarding the elderly and their housing environments which have been with us for hundreds of years. What has to be done is that we must base each stage in the develop- ment of congregate housing on the true psychology or philosophy of elderly housing. That is, we are developing a housing environment for individuals who'.lust happen to be elderly. These individuals will have the same hopes, dreams and aspirations as you and me. Some will be in perfect health, some will need minimal health care and some'may need more extensive health care. They will be rich, middle- income and poor. They will be active and lethargic. They will be everything that you and I are at any given point in time. What are the implications of perceiving the elderly and their housing environments in this way? And how can anything the City do help to accomplish such a change? Both questions are answered by the way we explore, plan for, finance, design and administer a congregate program as well as specific facilities. That is, at each stage of the process for the development of congregate housing, we must take into account their hopes, dreams and aspirations which, in turn, are not very dissimilar from our own hopes, dreams and aspirations. When disseminating information to the public, we must not base need entirely on economic and health factors or the perception will be one of housing for the poor and sickly - we will then want to help them I FIICROFILMED BY 1 _I I -DORM CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES •-I ii. J� 58 because we feel sorry for them. When exploring the various support services for congregate housing, we must place emphasis on what the elderly can do for themselves or for each other, not on what programs will do for them. When considering design features, we must not overly emphasize nursing home -type features, but ask the elderly what amenities would make their environment more "inviting." When considering tenant selection we must not turn away healthy and financially well-off individuals because they are not "needy" enough. When administering a facility, we must not attempt to organize and manipulate their activities - they are grown adults capable of running their own lives. The list of such considerations can go on and on. In short, everything considered when designing a congregate program/complex should be geared towards allowing the elderly to promote their own independence - not dependence. Of course, mechanisms must be in placed to offer services/programs for those in a semi-independent state; however, it should be.their option as to what is required and how much is needed. It has already been mentioned that this consideration would be difficult to implement. And even if it were to be attempted, we would not be able to see progress being made, it would have to be "felt" over the years. The first step towards a realization of this philosophy is for City and community leaders who are concerned with or involved with congregate housing to perceive the problem, and then relate the true philosophy of congregate housing to their areas of expertise as well as to the public. _ This consideration is not based on statistics - it cannot be put into number form or analyzed. However, it is the Commission's and Task Force's hope that regardless of the outcome of this study and any actions taken, that this philosophy will be considered, strived for and accomplished no matter how "unvisually" satisfying it may be. v MICROFILMED BY -1 1- JORM--MICR#L_A9'" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES fII 3ooa J� 59 ' CHAPTER VI -- CONCLUSION - The original intent of this study was envisioned as one of documenting local level need for congregate housing by the elderly. Anyone who has taken the time and patience required to sift through this study must realize that the final product has been concerned with a wide variety of _ characteristics and topics relating to the elderly and congregate housing/support services. Indeed, the volume of information gathered in the last four months could fill a series of reports. Basically, this study has attempted to give an overview of the steps which were taken in order to compile this report and hence, to document the congregate housing/support service needs of Johnson County's elderly population. !j Any areas covered throughout this report not directly relating to the documentation of need have been included in order to help the reader's i overall understanding of the concepts, philosophy and benefits associated with a congregate housing/support service program or facility. In general, this report has: -Discussed the importance of local level analysis; s -Presented pertinent definitions; e -Presented goals, objectives and parameters; -Presented the statistical methodologies employed in conducting a random sample survey; -Presented the procedures and guidelines followed in preparing the survey; -Presented all relevant statistical relationship found through the survey i responses; -Attempted to analyze the statistical findings in relation to the overall purpose of the study; and -Presented recommendations based on the survey results as well as general information gathered over the last four months. Although congregate housing/support services provide for a wide variation in elderly housing development, technique and implementation, there is a ` l t J t _ i MICROFILMED BY JORM -MICR46L AB_ % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MO NES 1 60 common foundation found within each aspect. This foundation is built on the very concept or philosophy of congregate housing as it has been developed over the years. This report has attempted to accomplish the task locally with this philosophy in mind. It is hoped that this philosophy, at least in part, has been transmitted to the reader who, in turn, will pass it on to others. In concluding this report, two quotations by professionals in the field of congregate housing will be presented. The first quote is by. Robert D. Chellis and James F. Seagle, Jr. and was taken from "Congregate Housing for Older People." The second quote presented is by Dr. Alexander Comfort, taken from his address to the Council of State Government's National Symposium on Suggested State Legislation for the Elderly. By Robert D. Chellis and James F. Seagle, Jr.: "Society's response to the perceived needs of older people has too often been to establish institutional services, which may or may not meet their real needs. Independence and, consequently, quality of I life are often diminished. Public policy influencing housing designed specifically for impaired elderly has assumed a heavy service orientation, and designs have been based on the nursing-home model without consideration to its appropriateness. (The nursing home, in its turn, has been far to heavily modeled on hospital prototypes.) Many elders do, indeed, need supportive services, but there is a wide variation in individual needs and in type and degree of service required. Typically, initial residents of new housing need relatively few services, but they will need progressively more over the years, as the original group ages. Congregate housing can be the flexible alternative to the current extremes of custodial care versus complete self-sufficiency. Congregate housing can provide for changing needs and varied popula- tions in ways that reduce isolation and stress while encouraging independence. 300- MICROFILMED BY l„•I,- 1 - JORM -MICROL'AB-_'li I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ! /� 61 The philosophical base for congregate housing should be the assump- tion that even the very frail elderly should remain an integral part of the community and not be shunted aside as a faction or subset best served in isolation. They should remain as individuals within many small groups, and as a part of the community at large. Any effort to plan or provide services or facilities must assert the normality of aging and the integrated place elders should have in society. Close bonds and identification among all members of a community might actually increase the opportunity for health and happiness in that community. It is demonstrable, without venturing too far into social theory, that all people need to feel some control over their lives and environment. Older people find opportunities to exercise control diminishing rapidly as, in a grim progression, they lose roles as workers, parents, or spouses, and find that income and physical abilities are also diminishing. We should not presume to know what is best for them, but rather, listen carefully to their requests and demands. All older people should be encouraged to remain active - physically, intellectually, politically, sexually, and in every other way - and as independent of outside support as possible. 7 Societies have been plagued by misapprehensions of their aging populations. To be old in our society is to be considered increasingly helpless, childlike, sick, or mentally deteriorated. _ Efforts to deal with the often -overstated needs of this group have resulted in self -fulfilled prophecies and a system that leaves few choices. The system fosters dependence. Incentives are for iproviders to care for sick people, not to help people stay well. Among the elderly themselves, that may account for as much functional - disability as any of the pathologies accompanying aging. Older people hold the same biases and values as does the rest of society. The notion that they will rapidly physically decline is, in some respects, reality for them. They are confronted by service - providers who are paid to serve functionally disabled elders, but not 141CROFILMED BY 1" DORM"-MICR6LAE3 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 300 V-0 1 62 W necessarily to rehabilitate them.. Both in institutions and in the community, this interface weighs against a healthy outcome. Older people, providers, and the community at large must be apprised of the facts, starting with the providers. A more positive view and true understanding of the aging process must be made available. New concepts are absorbed more easily by new sponsors or by managers moving into new fields than by those involved with entrenched existing services. _ .. Most communities now have a fairly broad range of services and _ facilities for older residents but they are not always the most — appropriate ones. To be effective and efficient they should be planned and managed under a philosopy that recognizes the dangers — inherent in the over provision of care. The only healthy dependency is one that the older individual chooses for himself. Even tender loving care may, in overdoses, stifle or smother the recipient's. efforts at self-sufficiency: Congregate housing is a practical way to achieve a balance between dependence and independence. A broad definition of congregate housing must include references to private living space, with the types and intensities of shared services varying in response to specific resident and community needs, staff limitations, and financial considerations."12 _ By Or. Alexander Comfort: "If we insist that there is a group of people who, on a fixed calendar basis, becomes unintelligent, asexual, unemployable, and crazy, the people so designated will be under pressure to be unintel- ligent, asexual, unemployable and crazy. The fact that no person — becomes any one of those things by virtue of age alone is beside the point. The fact that many if not most older people obstinately fail _ to be as we describe them is beside the point. As they are well known to be unemployable we don't let them work; as they are known to be asexual, and it is embarrassing if they are not, we can herd them I 3uc� i 141CROFIL14ED BY I' 1. -JOR M-�MIC RbLAB L% CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 14ofNE5 1 S 63 _ into institutions which deny them elementary privacy; as they are known to be liable to go crazy, symptoms due to infection or overmedication or simple exasperation with a society which demeans _ I • the older citizen are interpreted as senility. In fact fewer old " people are crazy than at earlier ages: about nine per thousand over f r 65 need psychiatric hospitalization, and that includes chronic brain .. f disease, alcoholism, the whole lot. Old people become crazy for three reasons - because they were crazy when they were young, because they have an illness, or because we ' F j drive them crazy. Prejudice not only has a bad effect on its victims; in this case it corrupts us all. Other victims of vulgar I� prejudice suffer from it life-long, but we all become old. One wonders what Archie Bunker would feel about immigrants if he knew that on his 65th birthday he would turn into a Puerto Rican. White I I racists don't turn black, black racists don't become white, male chauvinists don't become women, anti-semites don't wake up and find l F i themselves Jewish - but we have a lifetime of indoctrination with the idea of the difference and inferiority of the old, and on roaching _ I i old age we may be prejudiced against ourselves. Most of our institutions are unwittingly geared to age prejudice a;;d f sex prejudice. In determining needs and abilities, age is quite as irrelevant as is race. The old have earned entitlements, certainly - the right to a pension which doesn't require idleness as a condition - of payment is one of them. Administratively the right way to handle _. the "old" is to stop treating them as a problem, when they are in fact a resource, and begin treating them as people, the same people they were, and which they now are. The only relevant administrative feature of oldness is the increased risk of ill health and decreased j mobility which goes with it. However, ill health is, after all, not confined to age, and the needs of an old sick person do not differ _ from those of a young person who is equally sick. It would be both scientifically and politically sound to strike age out of the reckoning, except for purposes of earned entitlements, and to concentrate on needs."13 300n� MICROFILMED BY 11" J04M PAICRbL'A®- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I I J� 64 ENDNOTES 1 E. Shanas, P. Townsend, D. Wedderburn, H. Friis, P. Milhj, and S. Shehouwer, Old People in Three Industrial Societies (Atherton Press, New York, 1968). 2 Leonard F. Neumann, Identifying the Housing and Support Service Needs of the Semi -Independent Elderly: Toward a Descriptive Planning Model for Area Agencies on Aging in Illinois (The Board of Trustees fo the University of Illinois, 1977), p. 3. 3 Marie M. Thompson, Assisted Residential Living for Older People (International Center for Social Gerontology, Washington, D.C., 1978), p. 4. 4 1980 Census Report of Population (United States Bureau of the Census, 1980). 5 Herbert F. Weisberg, and Bruce D. Bowen, An Introduction to Survey Research and Data Analysis (W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1977), p. 41. 6 Multidimensional Functional Assessment: The OARS Methodology (Duke University for the Study of Aging and Human Development, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, 1978), p. 6. 7 OARS, p. 13. 8 G. W. Snedecor, Statistical Methods, 5th Ed., (Iowa State College Press, Inc., 1956), pp. 512-15. 9 1980 Census Report of Population and Housing for Johnson County, Iowa (Cooperative Extension Services, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 1981). •300x. w MICROFIL14ED BY - l - I` —J0RM--MICR#LA9'- - 1 f/ ' CEDAR RAPIDS DES M0NES ! / i 1 !l I.r i j 1 a.. j -- I 64 ENDNOTES 1 E. Shanas, P. Townsend, D. Wedderburn, H. Friis, P. Milhj, and S. Shehouwer, Old People in Three Industrial Societies (Atherton Press, New York, 1968). 2 Leonard F. Neumann, Identifying the Housing and Support Service Needs of the Semi -Independent Elderly: Toward a Descriptive Planning Model for Area Agencies on Aging in Illinois (The Board of Trustees fo the University of Illinois, 1977), p. 3. 3 Marie M. Thompson, Assisted Residential Living for Older People (International Center for Social Gerontology, Washington, D.C., 1978), p. 4. 4 1980 Census Report of Population (United States Bureau of the Census, 1980). 5 Herbert F. Weisberg, and Bruce D. Bowen, An Introduction to Survey Research and Data Analysis (W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1977), p. 41. 6 Multidimensional Functional Assessment: The OARS Methodology (Duke University for the Study of Aging and Human Development, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, 1978), p. 6. 7 OARS, p. 13. 8 G. W. Snedecor, Statistical Methods, 5th Ed., (Iowa State College Press, Inc., 1956), pp. 512-15. 9 1980 Census Report of Population and Housing for Johnson County, Iowa (Cooperative Extension Services, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 1981). •300x. w MICROFIL14ED BY - l - I` —J0RM--MICR#LA9'- - 1 f/ ' CEDAR RAPIDS DES M0NES ! / 10 T. Robinson, R. Martin, and M. Shafto, Annual Report: Share -A -Home (The McKnight Foundation, Minneapolis, Minn., 1981). 11 Heumann, p. 36. 12 Robert D. Chellis, James F. Seagle, and Barbara M. Seagle, Congregate Housin for Older People (Lexington Books, 0. C. Heath and Co., Lexington, Mass., 1982), pp. IX -X. 13 Dr. Alexander Comfort, Address to the Council of State Government's National Symposium an Suggested State Legislation for the Elderly (Washington D.C. , February 26, 1976), pp. 94-95. 65 10 T. Robinson, R. Martin, and M. Shafto, Annual Report: Share -A -Home (The McKnight Foundation, Minneapolis, Minn., 1981). 11 Heumann, p. 36. 12 Robert D. Chellis, James F. Seagle, and Barbara M. Seagle, Congregate Housin for Older People (Lexington Books, 0. C. Heath and Co., Lexington, Mass., 1982), pp. IX -X. 13 Dr. Alexander Comfort, Address to the Council of State Government's National Symposium an Suggested State Legislation for the Elderly (Washington D.C. , February 26, 1976), pp. 94-95. 66 A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Brody, Elaine M. Community Housing for the Elderly. Budnick, Frank S., Richard Mojena, and Thomas E. Volman. Principles of Operations Research for Management. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1977. Chellis, James D., James F. Seagle, and Barbara M. Seagle. Cohgregate Housing for Older People. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath and Co., 1982. Comfort, Alexander. Address for the National Symposium on Suggested Legislation for the Elderly. Washington, D.C.: Council of State Governments, 1976. Cooperative Extension Service. 1980 Census Report of Population and Housing for Johnson County, Iowa. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, 1981. Department of Community Development. Housing Assistance Plan. 1917. "Duke University Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development. Multidimensional Functional Assessment: The OARS Methodology. 2nd ed., Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Medical Center, 1978. *Fillenbaum, Gerda G., and Michael A. Smyer. The Development, Validity, and Reliability of the OARS Multidimensional Functional Assessment Questionnaire. Journal of Gerontology, Vol. 36, No. 4, 428-434, 1981. Fitzgerald, Pat. Government Assisted Housing for the Elderly. Farmer's Home Administration, 1981. "Heumann, Leonard F. Identifying the Housing and Support Services Needs of the Semi -Independent Elderly: Toward a Descriptive Plannin Model for Area 1J ' 141CROFILI4ED BY 1 I DORM__'MICR#LAS— 111 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i i J� 67 Agencies on Aging in Illinois. Urbana, Ill.: The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, 1976. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, Minnesota. Congregate Housing. Duluth, Minn.: 1980. *Iowa Gerontology Project. Iowa Comprehensive Assessment Profile. Iowa City, Iowa: Oakdale Hospital, University of Iowa, 1979. *The Johnson County Regional Planning Commission. In -Home Support Services. Iowa City, Iowa: 1979. Protection of the Elderly from Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation. Iowa City, Iowa: 1977. Kucharzak, Michael E., Ed. A Report on the Congregate Housing Workshop. Iowa City, Iowa: 1981. Lawton, M. P. Congregate Housing Choices for Older Americans. New York: Springer Publishing Co., 1978. *Mendenhall, William, and Lyman Ott. Understanding Statistics. 2nd ed. North Scituate, Mass.: Duxbury Press, 1976. *A Multidimensional Functional Assessment Questionnaire. I i Newsweek. New York: Newsweek, Inc., November 1, 1982. Robinson, Timothy, Richard Martin, and Michael Shafto. Annual Report: Share -A - Home Program. Minneapolis, Minn.: The McKnight Foundation, 1981. Shanas, E., P. Townsend, D. Wedderburn, H. Friis, P. Milhj, and S. Stehouwer. Old People in Three Industrial Societies. New York: Atherton Press, 1968. *Snedecor, G. W. Statistical Methods. 5th ed. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press, 1956. 1 i 141CROFILVED BY r 1 JORM--MICR46LAB- - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MO1NES i 3eoa- Ji , r� W Thompson, Marie M. Congregate Housing for Older Adults. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Assisted Residential Living for Older Adults. Washington, D.C.: International Center for Gerontology, 1978. *Tuft, Edward R. Data Analysis for Politics and Policy. Englewood Cliffs, N J.: Prentice -Hall, Inc., 1974. Turner, Lloyd, Thomas Walz, Martha Pressler, and Thomas McArdle. Review of Policies Affecting the Housing Decisions of Older Americans. Iowa City, Iowa:, The Institute of Urban and Regional Research, 1981. Urban Systems Research and Engineering. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Congregate Housing for the Elderly. Cambridge, Mass.: Urban Systems Research and Engineering, Inc. ,.1976. *Weisberg, Herbert F., and Bruce D. Brown. Introduction to Survey Research and Data Analysis. San Francisco, Ca.: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1977. *Wu, Margaret S. Introduction to Compute Data Processing. New York: Harcourt, Bruce, Jovanovich, Inc., 1979. *Indicates those reference materials used for survey formulation. MICROFILMED BY DORM""MIC RbLA B'" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' 3004, '-LJORM�"-MICR LAB-�EDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES f 70 Appendix A - The Sampling Error Equation. The sampling error equation was given in Chapter III as: tt P(I-p)(N-1) 1-f where, t approaches 1.96 for the 95 percent confidence interval with large samples; i f is the sampling fraction (sample size divided by. population size); i p is the sample proportion; and N is the sample size. I The term N is straight- forward - a 300 sample size. The term p is the'sample proportion and is assumed to be .5 which in all cases will yield the maximum sampling error.. The term f is the sampling fraction. The sampling error depends on sample size, sample fraction (f - if it is large) and the amount of variation in the variable being measured. It is assumed that there is some variation and that there is some variation in the variable. That is, if there was no variation, everyone sampled would respond identically and hence, random error would be 0. Obviously, social science surveys deal with considerable variation, thus, while the sample size is always important, the sampling fraction typically, is not. So, for this equation, the term ` f is ignored. The term t is a "standard" term which approaches 1.96 for the 95 percent confidence interval with large samples. Conversely, the t term is larger for smaller samples. For example, the t term for a sample size of 50 is 2.09. The t term used for this equation with a sample size of 300 will be 2. .3,004- - v 141CROFIL14ED BY �„•,� —JOR M" -"MIC R�C-A B` (r r CEDAR RAPIDS DES Id0111ES ' / MICROFILMED By L-.� -ORMMICR# LAW- F_�EDARAPIDS • DES MOINES 70M JORM_.-MICRf?LAd CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOHES i i . r" 73 CITY OF IOWA CITY -= CVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 - DEAR FRIEND: THE IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION IS PRESENTLY CONDUCTING A SURVEY IN JOHNSON COUNTY TO DETERMINE THE HOUSING AND SUPPORT SERVICE NEEDS OF OLDER PERSONS. j - YOU HAVE BEEN CHOSEN TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS SURVEY BY A SCIENTIFIC SAMPLING - METHOD. BECAUSE YOU WERE CHOSEN, YOU NOW REPRESENT MANY OTHER OLDER RESIDENTS OF JOHNSON COUNTY. FOR THIS REASON IT IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT TO RECEIVE YOUR - RESPONSE. i WE BELIEVE THE INFORMATION WE GAIN FROM THIS SURVEY WILL HELP PROVIDE SENIOR - I CITIZENS WITH A CHOICE IN THE AREAS OF HOUSING AND SUPPORT SERVICES. IT IS HOPED THAT BY PROVIDING SUCH CHOICES, ELDERLY PERSONS WILL BE LESS LIKELY TO BE FORCED - INTO FORMAL INSTITUTIONAL LIVING ARRANGEMENTS SUCH AS NURSING HOMES UNLESS AND -� UNTIL THEIR HEALTH NEEDS MAKE IT NECESSARY. TO OBTAIN THIS KIND OF INFORMATION WE NEED YOUR HELP AND COOPERATION. WE HOPE YOU WILL TAKE A FEW MOMENTS OF YOUR TIME TO GIVE US THE INFORMATION REQUESTED IN THE ENCLOSED CONFIDENTIAL.QUESTIONNAIRE, WOULD YOU PLEASE FILL OUT THE ENCLOSED CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE, MAKING SURE YOU ANSWER EVERY QUESTION THAT APPLIES TO YOU. THEN PUT IT IN THE - STAMPED, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE ENCLOSED, SEAL IT AND RETURN IT TO US BY AUGUST lO, j - THANKING YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR HELP, I AM SINCERELY GOLDENE HAENDEL CHAIRPERSON, IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION P.S. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT YOU NAME IS NOT REQUESTED. THIS IS ONE WAY IN WHICH WE CAN ASSURE YOU THAT YOUR RESPONSES WILL BE HELD IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENCE. AB -1 - 300 I i MICROFILMED BY 1- 'JORM--MICR6L'AB_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOVIES 1I !� 74 INSTRUCTIONS WE HAVE TRIED TO MAKE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AS EASY AS POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO COMPLETE. MOST OF THE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED BY SIMPLY PLACING A CHECK MARK (-/) IN THE SPACE PROVIDED IN FRONT OF EACH ITEM. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, YOU SHOULD CHECK ONLY ONE CHOICE FOR EACH QUESTION. IN FOUR CASES, ITEMS 1, 13, 15 AND 21, PLEASE FILL IN A NUMBER OR DOLLAR AMOUNT AS YOUR ANSWER. THIS SURVEY IS QUITE COMPREHENSIVE. BECAUSE WE TRY TO COVER A WIDE VARIETY OF CHARACTERISTICS, SOME QUESTIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. PLEASE ANSWER EVERY QUESTION WHICH APPLIES TO YOU. REMEMBER, YOUR RESPONSES WILL BE HELD IN STRICT CONFIDENCE. IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS OR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS SURVEY, PLEASE CALL THE CIVIC CENTER AT 356-5267 AND WE WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR INQUIRIES. AB -2 MICROFILI4ED BY j--U0RM--MlCR6Lj:Aff- ,CEDAR RAPIDS DESM t 3olD 0-.� 75 "CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE" 1) AGE; 2) SEX: --MALE-FEMALE 3) MARITAL STATUS: 1 _SINGLE, NEVER MARRIED 2 --MARRIED 3 WIDOWED 4 _pIVORCED 5 _SEPARATED 4) WHO LIVES WITH YOU? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 _I LIVE ALONE 2�IUSBAND OR WIFE 3 _CHILDREN 4 _GRANDCHILDREN 5 _PARENTS 6 ROTHERS AND/OR SISTERS 7 _OTHER RELATIVES 8 -FRIENDS 9 -OTHER (SPECIFY) 5) HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THE JOHNSON COUNTY ARFJA DO YOU KNOW WELL ENOUGH TO VISIT WITH IN THEIR HOMES. _5 OR MORE _ To 4 ---,lTo2 _NONE 6) IS THERE SOMEONE IN ;HE JOHNSON COUNTY AREA YOU CAN TRUST AND CONFIDE IN. _YES _NO AB -3 MICROFILI4ED BY ~ f JORIVI �"M IC RbLA B'- - CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES J SEE OTHER SIDE 30G a., CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE TWO 7) IF THERE IS SOMEONE YOU CAN TRUST AND CONFIDE IN, WHO IS IT? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 _SPOUSE 2_OTHER FAMILY MEMBER 3J4 FRIEND 4_A DOCTOR 5--A MINISTER, RABBI, PRIEST, ETC. 6 -OTHER (SPECIFY) (NO NAMES) S) IS THERE SOMEONE WHO WOULD GIVE YOU ANY HELP AT ALL IF YOU WERE SICK OR DISABLED? _YES _NO 9) IF YES, WHO IS IT? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 _SPOUSE 2 OTHER FAMILY MEMBER 3___A FRIEND 4_q DOCTOR 5_A MINISTER, RABBI, PRIEST, ETC, 6 OTHER (SPECIFY) - (NO NAMES) 10) HOW OFTEN DO YOU ATTEND THE SERVISES OF A CHURCH, SYNAGOGUE OR MOSQUE DURING AN AVERAGE MONTH. DO NOT ATTEND ANY SUCH SERVICES _I ATTEND ONCE A WEEK OR MORE _I ATTEND 2 TO 3 TIMES A MONTH _I ATTEND ABOUT ONCE A MONTH 11) WHAT IS YOUR PRESENT EMPLOYMENT STATUS? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1_I AM EMPLOYED FULL-TIME 2_I AM EMPLOYED PART-TIME 3_I AM SELF-EMPLOYED 4_I AM RETIRED 5_I AM RETIRED ON DISABILITY 6_I AM NOT EMPLOYED, BUT WOULD LIKE TO WORK 7_1 AM A STUDENT (PART-TIME OR FULL-TIME) AB -4 3ooa - i 141CROFILMED BY 1. _ 111 -, •,`-JORMMIC )r ( CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES ! 77 r-) CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE THREE 12) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HOUSING SITUATIONS APPLY TO YOU? 1__I OWN MY HOME OUTRIGHT 2 _1 MAKE MONTHLY PAYMENTS ON MY HOME 3 _I AM RENTING A ROOM IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME 4 _1 AM RENTING AN APARTMENT 5 _I LIVE WITH FAMILY AND MAKE NO MONTHLY PAYMENTS 6 _OTHER (SPECIFY) 13) IF YOU RENT OR MAKE MORTGAGE PAYMENTS, WHAT IS YOUR MONTHLY PAYMENT? $MONTH - RENT PAYMENT $ /MONTH - MORTGAGE PAYMENT 14) WHAT UTILITIES DO YOU PAY? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 NONE 2 -GAS 3 -WATER 4 -ELECTRICITY 5 -OTHER (SPECIFY) 6_OTHER (SPECIFY) - 15) ON AN AVERAGE, WHAT ARE YOUR MONTHLY UTILITY PAYMENTS? 1$ /MONTH FOR GAS 2$ /MONTH FOR WATER 3$ MONTH FOR ELECTRICITY 4$ /MONTH FOR OTHER (SPECIFY) 5$ /MONTH FOR OTHER (SPECIFY) 16) ARE YOUR MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES(RENT, UTILITIES, FOOD, GAS, ETC.) SO HEAVY THAT YOU CANNOT MEET YOUR PAYMENTS, OR CAN YOU BARELY MEE; YOUR PAYMENTS, OR ARE YOUR PAYMENTS NO PROBLEM TO YOU. _I CANNOT MEET PAYMENTS -1 CAN BARELY MEET PAYMENTS _PAYMENTS ARE NO PROBLEM 17) ARE YOUR MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS (RENT OR MORTGAGE AND TAXES NOT INCLUDING UTILITIES) MORE THAN ONE-FOURTH OF YOUR MONTHLY INCOME? _YES _NO AB -5 SEE OTHER SIDE t i 1 141CROf IL14ED BY j I ` -'JORM -MICRbLAB* CEDAR RAPIDS - DES'MOINES, t i j I i i t j t i � I' r 77 r-) CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE THREE 12) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING HOUSING SITUATIONS APPLY TO YOU? 1__I OWN MY HOME OUTRIGHT 2 _1 MAKE MONTHLY PAYMENTS ON MY HOME 3 _I AM RENTING A ROOM IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME 4 _1 AM RENTING AN APARTMENT 5 _I LIVE WITH FAMILY AND MAKE NO MONTHLY PAYMENTS 6 _OTHER (SPECIFY) 13) IF YOU RENT OR MAKE MORTGAGE PAYMENTS, WHAT IS YOUR MONTHLY PAYMENT? $MONTH - RENT PAYMENT $ /MONTH - MORTGAGE PAYMENT 14) WHAT UTILITIES DO YOU PAY? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 NONE 2 -GAS 3 -WATER 4 -ELECTRICITY 5 -OTHER (SPECIFY) 6_OTHER (SPECIFY) - 15) ON AN AVERAGE, WHAT ARE YOUR MONTHLY UTILITY PAYMENTS? 1$ /MONTH FOR GAS 2$ /MONTH FOR WATER 3$ MONTH FOR ELECTRICITY 4$ /MONTH FOR OTHER (SPECIFY) 5$ /MONTH FOR OTHER (SPECIFY) 16) ARE YOUR MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES(RENT, UTILITIES, FOOD, GAS, ETC.) SO HEAVY THAT YOU CANNOT MEET YOUR PAYMENTS, OR CAN YOU BARELY MEE; YOUR PAYMENTS, OR ARE YOUR PAYMENTS NO PROBLEM TO YOU. _I CANNOT MEET PAYMENTS -1 CAN BARELY MEET PAYMENTS _PAYMENTS ARE NO PROBLEM 17) ARE YOUR MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS (RENT OR MORTGAGE AND TAXES NOT INCLUDING UTILITIES) MORE THAN ONE-FOURTH OF YOUR MONTHLY INCOME? _YES _NO AB -5 SEE OTHER SIDE t i 1 141CROf IL14ED BY j I ` -'JORM -MICRbLAB* CEDAR RAPIDS - DES'MOINES, 78 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE FOUR 18) HOW ARE YOUR FOOD EXPENSES PAID? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) _I PAY FOR ALL OF MY OWN FOOD _I PAY FOR MOST OF MY OWN FOOD _I RECEIVE HELP FROM FAMILY AND/OR FRIENDS i _I RECEIVE FOOD STAMPS 19) WHAT.TYPES OF HEALTH OR MEDICAL INSURANCE DO YOU HAVE? t (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 _I HAVE NO HEALTH OR MEDICAL INSURANCE 2-1 HAVE TITLE X:IX MEDICAL CARD (MEDICAID) 3 _I HAVE MEDICARE PLAN A (HOSPITALIZATION) 4 _I HAVE MEDICARE PLAN B (HOSPITALIZATION AND DOCTOR BILLS) 5 _OTHER (SPECIFY) 20) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR YEARLY INCOME? 10 - $4,999/YEAR 2-$5,000 - $7,499/YEAR 3-$7,500 - $13,499/YEAR 4_$13,50D - 19,499/YEAR 5$19,500 - $24,999 6--$25,000/YEAR OR MORE 21) ALTOGETHER, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTED BY THIS INCOME? _NUMBER OF PEOPLE am - Eii 141CROFIL14ED BY - 1 1--joRM-"MIC R(i1L-A :4B�� 1 f CEDAR RAPIDS DES NOISES f � _ t 141CROFIL14ED BY - 1 1--joRM-"MIC R(i1L-A :4B�� 1 f CEDAR RAPIDS DES NOISES f � ,.j 79 CONFIDENTIAL'QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE FIVE 22) BELOWST OF NCOME SOURCES, APPLIES TOPYOUREPLACE A CHECK SI UATION 1 _EARNINGS FROM EMPLOYMENT 2 —INCOME FROM INVESTMENT INTEREST (TS)ST, ANNUITIES, PAYMENTS FROM CE AND 3 _SOCIAL SECURITY (NOT INCLUDING SSI) 4_ V.A. BENEFITS SUCH AS G.I. BILL AND DISABILITY PAYMENTS 5 _,DISABILITY PAYMENTS NOT COVERED BY SOCIAL SECURITY, SSI OR VA 6 _UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 7__—RETIREMENT PENSION FROM JOB 8 _ALIMONY 0 CHILD SUPPORT 9 _REGULAR ASSISTANCE FROM FAMILY MEMBERS 10 _SSI PAYMENTS (YELLOW GOVERNMENT CHECK) 11 _REGULAR FINANCIAL AID FORM PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS AND/OR CHURCHES. 12 WELFARE PAYMENTS OR AID FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN 13 _OTHER (SPECIFY) 23) DO Y04 BELIEVE YOU WILL HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR YOUR FUTURE NEEDS. _YES _NO 24) TAKINETHING TCINSATISFIED ARE YOU WITHLIFEINGENERALATTHEPRESENTTIME? _I AM QUITE SATISFIED _I AM FAIRLY SATISFIED _I AM NOT VERY SATISFIED 25) PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WHICH PERTAIN TO YOU: 1 _I WAKE UP FRESH AND RESTED MOST MORNINGS 2 MY DAILY LIFE IS FULL OF THINGS THAT KEEP ME INTERESTED 3__—SOMETIMES IT SEEMS LIKE NO ONE UNDERSTANDS ME 4-1 A14 TROUBLED BY ACHES AND PAINS 5 _SOMETIMES I HAVE TROUBLE REMEMBERING THINGS 6 _I AM TROUBLED BY MY HEART POUNDING AND SHORTNESS OF BREATH 7 _SOMETIMES EVEN WHEN I AM WITH PEOPLE, I FEEL LONELY 8_I FEEL VERY MUCH ALONE AB -7 SEE OTHER SIDE V 141CROFILIIED BY 1_ _"JORM MICR6LA I ,t CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 1j I 300 dL., e 1-j 80 - r.ONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE SIX 26) PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING LIFESTYLE CHANGES WHICH -YOU -HAVE - EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST YEAR OR SO AND WHICH HAVE CAUSED YOU GREAT DISCOMFORT: 1 DEATH OF A SPOUSE 2 _CHANGE IN YOUR HEALTH 3 _DEATH OF A CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER OR FRIEND _ 4 _TROUBLE WITH FAMILY MEMBERS 5 _f1ARITAL PROBLEMS 6 _CHANGE IN SLEEPING HABITS 7 _CHANGE IN EATING HABITS ` 8 _RETIREMENT - 9 _CHANGE 1N RESIDENCE 10 _CHANGE IN YOUR FINANCIAL STATUS _ . 11 _CHANGE IN YOUR SOCIAL ACTIVITIES 12 -CHANGE IN CHURCH ACTIVITIES 13 _SON OR DAUGHTER LEAVING HOME 27) HOW WOULD YOV RATE YOUR MENTAL OR EMOTIONAL HEALTH AT THE PRESENT TIME. ;EXCELLENT _GOOD _FAIR POOR 28) HOW DOES YOUR MENTAL �R EMOTIONAL HEALTH NOW COMPARE TO HOW IT WAS FIVE YEARS AGO. SETTER NOW _BOUT THE SAME _ _WORSE NOW 29) DURING THE PAST SIX MONTHS, ABOUT HOW LONG, IF EVER, WERE YOU SO SICK THAT YOU WERE UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR USUAL ` DAILY ACTIVITIES? 1 _I HAVE NOT BEEN THAT SICK 2 _-1 WEEK OR LESS 3 ----MORE THAN A WEEK, BUT LESS THAN A MONTH 4 --1 TO 3 MONTHS ` 5 _4 TO 6 MONTHS n 141CROFILMEU BY DORM--MICR6t:A9-- " CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES /� a.. CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE SEVEN 30) IS THERE A PHYSICIAN YOU SEE ON A REGULAR BASIS? (AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR) YES _JPO 31) DO YOU FEEL YOU NEED MEDICAL CARE OR TREATMENT BEYOND WHAT YOU ARE RECEIVING AT THIS TIME. YES _NO 32) BELOW IS A LIST OF COMMON MEDICINES PEOPLE TAKE, PLEASE CHECK ALL THE MEDICINES YOU'VE TAKEN IN THE PSI MITH, 1 _ARTHRITIS MEDICINE 2 _PRESCRIPTION PAIN KILLER 3 _HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE MEDICINE 4 _WATER PILLS 5 _DIGITALIS PILLS FOR THE HEART 6 _NITROGLYCERIN PILLS FOR CHEST PAIN 7 CRUGS TO IMPROVE CIRCULATION 8 FOOD THINNER MEDICINE 9 _MEDICINE FOR DIABETES 10_ PRESCRIPTION ULCER MEDICINE 11 SEIZURE MEDICATIONS (LIKE DILANTIN) 12 _THYROID PILLS 13 CORTIZONE PILLS OR INJECTIONS 14 ---ANTIBIOTICS 15 TRANQUILIZERS OR NERVE MEDICINE 16 _PRESCRIPTION SLEEPING PILLS (ONCE A WEEK OR MORE) 17 OTHER (SPECIFY). 18 OTHER (SPECIFY) AB -9 1 1 141CROFILI•IED BY 11" 'JORM"MICR46L-AB' CEDAR RARIDS • DES MOINES SEE OTHER SIDE r� 82 CONFIDENTIAL a1ESTIONNAIRE i PAGE EIGHT I 75) BELOW IS A LIST OF ILLNESSESS. FOR EACH ILLNESS THAT YOU HAVE, PLEASE CHECK MiE HER IT AFFECTS YOUR USUAL DAILY ACTIVITIES A LITTLE, A GREAT DEAL OR NOT AT ALL, ALITTLE A GREAT DEAL NOT AT ALL 1 ARTHRITIS OR RHEUMATISM 3 HIC+f BLOOD PRESSURE 4 HEART TROUBLE 5 _ , CIRCULATION TROUBLE 6 _ . EFFECTS OF A STROKE 7 ASTHMA 8 EMPHYSEMA OR CHRONIC BRONCHITIS 9 TUBERCUTASIS 10 PARKINSON IS DISEASE 11 EPILEPSY 12 CEREBRAL PALSY 13 MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS 14 SPEECH IMPEDIMENT 15 DIABETES 16 ULCERS 17 LIVER DISEASE 18 KIDNEY DISEASE 19 CANCER OR LEUKEMIA 20 ANEMIA 21 SKIN DISORDERS 22 HEARING IMPAIRMENT 23 SIGHT IMPAIRMENT 24 COLITIS 25 . OTHER (SPECIFY) 26 OTHER (SPECIFY) AB -10 1 i MICROFILMED BY -JORM" MIC R46L"AB- 1 % CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES ! I. I i h� I -I ti I i 1. j i J j ;I 1, M � 1 1j !� I r 83 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE NINE 34) BELOW IS A LIST OF COMMON AIDS PEOPLE MAY USE, PLEASE CHECK ALL AIDS WHICH YOU USE, 1 _CANE (INCLUDING TRIPOD CANE) 2 _WALKER 3 _WHEELCHAIR 4 _LEG BRACE 5 _ARTIFICIAL LIMB 6 _BACK BRACE 7 _HEARING AID 8 _COLOSTOMY EQUIPMENT 9 _CATHETER 10_KIDNEY DIALYSIS MACHINE 11 -PACEMAKER 12 -OTHER (SPECIFY) 35) DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR HEALTH BECAUSE OF DRINKING OR HAS YOUR PHYSICIAN ADVISED YOU TO CUT DOWN ON DRINKING? _YES _NO 36) DO YOU REGULARLY PARTICIPATE IN ANY VIGOROUS SPORTS ACTIVITY MH AS HIKING, JOGGING, TENNIS, BIKING OR SWIMMING, LEAST TWICE A WEEK) _YES _NO 37) HOW IS YOUR PHYSICAL HEALTH NOW COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO? _BETTER NOW _ABOUT THE SAME _WORSE NOW AB -11 SEE OTHER SIDE 3 dDuw I _ v MICROFILMED BY JORM"-MICR61:AB'_ LCEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES �- - - 0 i MICROFILMED BY DORM "MIC R#C-A H'- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' I� 84 1 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE TEN 38) BELOW IS A LIST OF DAILY ACTIVITIES. PLEASE CHECK WHETHER YOU ARE ABLE TO DO THESE ACTIVITES WITHOUT HELP, WITH SOME ASSISTANCE OR NOT AT ALL- . . • • I . . UNABLE TO WITHOUT HELP WITH SOME HELP DO AT ALL _ 1 , , . . . _ . . . . . WALKING UP AND DOWNSTAIRS - 2 , , ,, _ . . . . . GOING OUTDOORS - g _ , SHOPPING FOR GROCERIES OR CLOTHES - --- - --- 4 HOUSEWORK (INCLUING - pp - SCRUBBING FLOORS) 5 _ , PREPARING MEALS 6 EATING - . . USING THE PHONE 8 _ _ . .,TAKING MEDICATION - y _ , , , , , _ , . , _ . DRESSING AND UNDRESSING - 10 - . • • • • . • • • • • . GETTING IN AND OUT OF BED 11 - , TAKING A BATH OR SHOWER 12 USING TOILET FACILITES 13 • . . . . - . . TAKING CARE OF YOUR _ APPEARANCE(FOR EXAMPLE, COMBING HAIR AND SHAVING) 39) IS THERE SOMEONE WHO HELPS YOU WITH SUCH THINGS AS SHOPPING, yOUSEWORK, BATHING, DQESSING AND GETTING AROUND? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)) 1 _NO 2_YES, A FAMILY MEMBER OF FRIEND 3 -YES, I HIRE SOMEONE 4 AN AGENCY PERSON -YES, 5 -YES, OTHER(SPECIFY) (NO NAMES) 40) WHO PROVIDES YOUR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 --MYSELF 2 -FAMILY OR FRIENDS 3_S.E.A.T.S. - 4_PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 5 -OTHER (SPECIFY). (NO NAMES) 41) DO YOU FEEL YOU NEED TRANSPORTATION MORE OFTEN THAN IT IS AVAILABLE TO YOU NOW? _YES - AB -12 NO 300,E - i MICROFILMED BY DORM "MIC R#C-A H'- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' I� r i i I s J `1 3 F W r 85 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE ELEVEN 42) WHO PREPARES YOUR MEALS? (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 1 _I PREPARE ALL OF MY MEALS 21 PREPARE MOST OF MY MEALS 3_A FAMILY MEMBER OR FRIEND 41 EAT MOST OF MY MEALS AT RESTAURANTS 5_I EAT A FEW MEALS AT RESTAURANTS 6_I EAT AT CONGREGATE MEALS I TO 3 TIMES A WEEK 7_I EAT AT CONGREGATE MEALS 4 TO 7 TIMES A WEEK B ---MY LUNCHES ARE DELIVERED TO ME BY It MEALS ON WHEELS" 43) DO YOU FEEL YOU NEED MORE HELP IN PROVIDING MEALS THAN IS NOW AVAILABLE TO YOU? _YES _NO 44) &ELOW IS A LIST OF SERVICES AVAILABLE TO JOHNSON COUNTY RESIDENTS, YPLEASE CHECK'WHETHER OR NOT YOU UTILIZE THE SERVICE, OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) DO -NOT -USE WOULD LIKE TO USE SERVICE SERVICE USE SERVICE 1 • • • • . • SOCIAL OR RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS (SENIOR CENTER REC, CENTER, CHURCH GROUPS, ETC,) 2 • ' • • ' ' ' • _ ' • ' COUNSELING FOR PERSONAL OR FAMILY PROBLEMS 3 — PERSONAL CARE SERVICES (BATHING, DRESSING, ETC,) 4 _ . . II,IFE LINE SERVICES (EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICE 5 • • • • • • • •REASSURANCE SERVICES (PHONE CALLS, PERSONAL VISITS, ETC,) 6' — • • • • MEAL PREPARATION T(CONGREGAR MEALS, MEALS ON WHEELS 7 — EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 8 — • • • • — • • . . TRANSPORTATION SERVICES(OTS) 9 — • • _ • • • HOMEMAKER SERVICES AB -13 SEE OTHER SIDE 1 i 141CROFILMED BY ICEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I1 3o6a.j J / 1 I. I 86 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE - PAGE TWELVE 45) HAVE YOU EVER USED OR CONggIDERED USING ANY OF THE FOLLOWING SERVICES AND/OR AGENCIEVCHECK ALL THAT APPLY) I NOW I MIGHT I PROBABLY USE OR CONSIDER USING WOULD HAVE USED IN THE FUTURE NEVER USE 1 . . . . SENIOR CENTER 2 SEATS (TRANSPORTATION) 3 ••• ESA (ELDERLY SERVICES AGENCY) 4 CAHHSA (COMMUNITY ANDHpME HEALTH ~ SERVICES AGENCY) - I 5 _ HACAP (ENERGY ASSISTANCE) - 6 CONGREGATE MEALS/MEALS ON WHEELS • DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES ~ I 8 _ • • • • HERITAGE AGENCY ON AGING 9 _ AMERICAN ASSOC, OF RETIRED PERSONS- 10_ . . . . JOHNSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT 11_ . . . . . . . . . HAWKEYE LEGAL SERVICES I 12_ . . . . • • • • . IOWA CITY HOUSING REHABILITATION 13_ _ • • • • • SECTION S HOUSING ASSISTANCE 14_ • HOMEMAKER HEALTH AIDE SERVICES j "CONGREGATE HOUSING" IS AN ASSISTED INDEPENDENT GROUP LIVING ARRANGEMENT WHICH OFFERS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR INCREASED SOCIAL INTERACTION AND PROVIDES MINIMUM SERVICES THAT INCLUDE SOME ON-SITE MEALS SERVED IN A COMMON DINING ROOM, PLUS ONE OR MORE OF SUCH SERVICES AS ON-SITE MEDICAL/NURSING SERVICES, PERSONAL CARE OR HOUSEKEEPING, CONGREGATE HOUSING D= 9M REFER L4 NURSING HOMES, _ THESE LIVING ARRANGEMENTS TAE MANY FORMS, j�NCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, GROUP HOMES, MINI-COMPLEXES AND RETIREMENT RESIDENCES. - SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, LIVING ARRANGEMENTS FOR TWO OR MORE UNRELATED OLDER PEOPLE WHO SHARE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLD AND SHARE THE EXPENSES. - GROUP HOMES, A HOME-LIKE SETT NG IN WHICH FOOD, SHELTER AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED FOR USUALLY 6 TO 10 PERSONS, AB-14 I 3Ooa — i MICROFILMED BY I'. _JORM "MICR6LAB` CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVES I i I i 87 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE THIRTEEN 'MiNI-COMPLEXES", 2 TO lO INDEPENDENT APARTMENTS WITH SOME COMMON LIVING AREAS, SUPPORT SERVICES ARE ARRANGED FOR BY A LIVE-IN MANAGER OR BY THE RESIDENTS THEMSELVES, j RETIREMENT RESIDENCES, MULTIPLE APARTMENTS DESIGNED FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING IN WHICH MEALS AND HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES AS WELL AS OTHER SUPPORT SERVICES ARE ARRANGED FOR BETWEEN THE RESIDENT AND THE MANAGER, 46) DO YOU PRESENTLY LIVE IN A CONGREGATE HOUSING ARRANGEMENT? 1 i _YES _NO 47) WOULD YOU LIKE TO LIVE IN A CONGREGATE HOUSING UNIT NX? ^ _YES -NO 1 M 48) IF YOU ANSWERED "NO" TO ITEM #47, WOULD YOU LIKE TO LIVE IN A CONGREGATE HOUSING UNIT IN THE NEAR FUTURE, SAY IN SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR. _YES -NO ! 49) IF YOU ANSWERED "NO" TO ITEM #46, WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU ( WOUL9 PROBABLY NEVER WANT TO LIVE IN A CONGREGATE HOUSING +� UNIT. i _YES I �^ _NO -, 50) IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER LIVING IN A CONGREGATE HOUSING UNIT, WHICH TYPE WOULD YOU MOST PREFER? (SEE DESCRIPTIONS ON PAGES 12,13) -, I _A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE 2 _A GROUP HOME 3 _A "MINI -COMPLEX" 1 q _-A RETIREMENT RESIDENCE 5 -OTHER (SPECIFY) I � . AB -15 SEE OTHER SIDE - 300.E I j 141CROFILMED BY -DORM"MIC R6LA9- % CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ! i.�l. 88 , CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE PAGE FOURTEEN 51) IF WHEREUWOULDDYOUNMOSTRPREFERGIN A TO HAVE ITREGATE USING UNIT, LOCATED. _DOWNTOWN IOWA CITY _IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OF IOWA CITY _OUTSIDE OF IOWA CITY _OTHER(SPECI.FY) 52) IF YOU A HOMEj E WILLING TO SELL IT IF NECESSARYNIN ORDER TOULIVEOINBA CONGREGATE HOUSING UNIT? _YES _NO 53) MOST PEOPLE CHOOSE CONGREGATE HOUSING AFTER SUFFERING SOME HEALTH PROBLEM SUCH AS A STROKE, LOSS OF EYESIGHT, ETC. WOULD YOU CONSIDER A CONGREGATE HOU�ING ARRANGEMENT BEFORE YOU SUFFERED SUCH HEALTH PROBLEMS. _YES _NO 54) IF ANOTHER SURVEY CONCERNING CONGREGATE HOUSING AND SUPPORT SERVICES IS FORMULATED IN THE FUTURE, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE? _YES _NO AB -16 3vaa I•MICRUILIIED RY - �- - 'DORM-MICR6L AI3- -J - ' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES NOISES / IMICAOFILIdED BY _1 -JOFIM -MICR#LAB'- Mol 1, .4Eq CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES J PA 'SS BATCH SYSTEM 90 1 41/14/62 FILE NONA&E CREATED 10/14/82 IDA PAGE 2 Cut! POP, FBEC FRIER RELATIVE ADJUSTED —LTEGORY 76. 1 *%tj ABSOLUTE FBFQ FREQ LABEL d7 8 CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) IOWA CITY 100.0 1 216 *76.1 76.1 —)RALVILLE 2. 19 6.7 6.7 r-IHTH LIBERTY 3. 12 4.2 4.2 iXFORD 5. 11 3:9 3.9 7) LO N 6. 10 3.5 3.5 JNKNOWN 9. 16 5.6 5.6 TUTAL ------ 284 ------ ------ 100.0 100.0 � AN 1.933 STD Hall 0.126 MEDIAN DE 1.000 STD DEV 2.118 VARIANCE KUBTOSIS 4.620 SKEWNESS 2.425 RANGE - TNIZIUR 1.000 MAXIdIU3 9.000 111) CASES 284 MISSING CASES 0 PAGE 2 Cut! POP, FBEC FRIER (PCT) 76. 1 *%tj 82.7 87.0 d7 8 90.8 94.4 100.0 305 1. 157 4. 487 3. 000 AC -1 :3 00 a , t MICROFILMED BY _-JOFVM--mi R L-A CEDAR RAPIDS DE 0 A14 Es� J I \,_1 I I ;PSS EATCH SYSTES 91 _ EAGE 3 10/14/82 FILE - NONABE - CREATED 10/14/82 )ECKA4 AGE OF RESPONDENT RELATIVE ADJUSTED CUN FOP. ABSOLUTE FREQ FBEQ FREQ FREQ -ATEGORY LABEL CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) (ECT) 90 ANSWER 0. 2 0.7 0.7 0.7 34 50-57 1. 12 4.2 4.2 4.9 ad9 r` id,59; 2. 7 2.5 2.5 7.4 1 3lo L 50-64 3. 27 V.5 9.5 16.9 511 55-69 4. 57 7F 20.1 20.1 37.0 * 110q N 70-74 5. 68 1423.9 23.9 60.9 * 11301 h 75-79 6. 53 *18.7 18.7 79.6 m 11018 90 AND OVER 7. 58*20.4 20.4 IUO.0 *1, 110 I TOTAL 2E4 100.0 100.0 FjL143 HA.N 4.926 STD ER3 0.097 MEDIAN 5.044 RODE 5.000 STD DEV 1.632 VARIANCE 2.662 KURTOSIS 0.074 SKEWNESS -0.652 RANGE 7.000 !lINIBUN 0.0 NAYISUH 7.000 I VALID CA5ES 284 tlISSING CASES 0 - L I. I AC -2 14ICROEILI4ED BY � JORM TAICR46LA8- / CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / J I41CROFILMED BY —1 - �- JORM--MICR#LA8" 111 (( CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI4FS 300 T 92 ;PSS BATCH SYSTEM EAGE 4 /14/82 FILE - NONAIE - CREATED 10/14/82 :CKA6 SEX OF RESEONDENT — RELA'TIVE ADJUSTED GUM POP, ABSOLUTE FREQ FBEQ FBEQ PA154 7ATEGOBY LABEL CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) (PCI) —1 ANSMS 0. 3 1.1 1.1 1. 1 (j0 IA LE 1. 114 40.1 40.1 41.2 7,1193 :MALE y 2. 167 X58.8 5d.8 100.0 +t 3/0100 TOTAL 284 1000 100.0 5)443 EAN 1.577 STD ERd 0.031 MEDIAN 1.650 ( 2.000 STD DEV 0.516 VARIANCE 0.266 �JPDE RTOSIS -1.167 SK.'.WMESS -0.548 RANGE 2.000 [-.-INIMUM 0.0 MALIJUM 2.000 M LID CASES 284 MISSING CASES 0 J I41CROFILMED BY —1 - �- JORM--MICR#LA8" 111 (( CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOI4FS 300 T AC -4 3ceQ - i MICROFILMED BY DORM "-MIC R46LAB' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I 93 JP SS EAiCH SY5TE: FILE NCNA9L (CEEATI•J.1 CA r = 1U/13/Ei) s s r• s s r t r r s•• s r♦ «• C E C :; ;; .._. . A OECKA4 AUE OE EESFCNU3VT u U L A i 1 0 N C r •♦• .+ r r r • ♦ s ► • • s s • • s • s • r BE ► r • • s r ► • ♦ r • r0• tD•C••1• s «Srx.►O• CECKAE CCUNT I ROW P(-'! INL) AJ;;4E AAL,, ELAALE CCL P�'I If:; TOT Pot 1 2.1 OlA L i0'i� - . DcCKA4 --------l-------- i U. ! 1 ; U I 1 1 NO A\sMEB I SU.0 _ 0.0 i 50.0 I 1 33.3 U.0 I 0.6 1 0.7 i I U.4 1 U.0 I 0.4 1 50-`_7 1• I U 1 5 1 7 1 I 0.G I2 ; i 41.7 I 08.,f I 4. I U.0 i 4.4 I 4.2 I I O.0 i 1.8 I 2.5 I �- 50,59 1 O.0 ° I 4 1 7 i � 42 . 57.1 5 I 0.0 I L.( i 2.4 I r 1 J.0 C I. I i 1.14 I 6U -C4 J. I U i d I 19 I I O.0 27 1 29.6 i 70.4 I 9.5 I 0.0 I 7.J 1 11.4 I " I U.0 _ 4.d I 6.7 I 65-69 4• i 1 I 29 I 27 i 57 I I.d I 1450.9 1 *47.4 I 20.1 1 33.3 i 25.4 1 16.2 I 0.4 1 IU.2 i 9.5 ------I--------I--------I _ 70- i4 J3 I 35 1 b6 I 0.0 1 *4d.5 1 *, 1 .5 1 23.1 I U.0 I 26.9 I 21.0 I -" 1 0.0 I 11.6 1 12.3 I 75-79 C 1 19 I 34 I 53 I 3.0 I *35.d 1 *64.2 I 16.7 I 0.0 I 10.7 1 ZU.4 I -- I 0.0 1 6.7 1 12.0 I CCLUMI J 114 167 204 ICTAL 1.1 40.1 5U.8 IOG.0 (CO hTINUEC) AC -4 3ceQ - i MICROFILMED BY DORM "-MIC R46LAB' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES -iPSz; EAICE ZYSTi;.; 94 ILE NC b Ad E (UhATV..) CATS = 10/13/b2) C I A 3 U L A i 1 o N 0 F DLCKA4 AGE CE RESECAJEll by ])!-*CXA6 SEX OF RES. DECKAE CCUNT I FOi PLT INU AASWE AALe I- hMAU: EUS CCL P%:T 1"j IO'!nL TGT PCI 1 0.1 l.i SECKA4 -------- I -------- I -------- 7. 1 1- 17 1 40 80 ANL; OVF.t 1 1.7 -1 j 1 2054 1 33.3 1 14.9 1 14.0 I 0.4 1 U.0 1 14.1 COLLI Ili J 114 167 :d4 lGrAL 1.1 40.1 5d.8 lu(;.0 AC -5 MICROFILMED BY —JORM---mic R#A CEDAR RAPIDS •DES I�ILOINES 3o6a-d rx 95 .PSS BATCH SYSTEM 10/14/82 FILE — NOdAYE — CREATED 10/14/81 )ECEA7 MARITAL STATUS :ATEGORY LABEL i ;INGLE TARRIED 4ICOW ED )IVORCED SEPARATED LEAN IODE CURTOSIS AININDN VALID CASES 2.423 2.000 0.316 0.0 264 MISSING CASES 0 AC -6 4 MICROFILMED BY -� I—JORM--MICR#L"A B' - CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES PAGE 5 can POP. RELATIVE ADJUSTED FREG FREQ ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. 1 0.4 0.4 1. 22 7.7 7.7 2. 133 X 46.8 46.8 113 X 39':8 39.8 4. 14 4.9 4.9 5. ----,— 0.4 ------ TOTAL 284 --0-4— 100.0 100.0 STD ERR 0.044 MEDIAN STD DEV 0.736 VARIANCE SKZWNESS 0.056 RANGE SA%ISUM 5.000 MISSING CASES 0 AC -6 4 MICROFILMED BY -� I—JORM--MICR#L"A B' - CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 300. PAGE 5 can POP. FREG FREQ ( PCT) 0.4 >d 8.1 y19 54.9 * x1541 ui i...._.._.. _ .-. . 9 4. 7 7f .1)1(IU • I j� 99.6 a(Al 100.0 az 5)yy3 I W 2.395 0.542 5.000 r' i i 300. 1 96 3PSS RA:CH SYSTEM FACE 6 1/14/82 FILE - NONANE - CREATED 10/14/82 .�CKAB LIVE ALONE? i _ RELATIVE ADJUSTED CUtl POP. ABSOLUTE FREQ FHE9 FREQ r-REQ _ATEGORY LABEL "'OCE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) (PCT) _ i 7 ANSNEiiS 0. 165 58.1 58.1 58.1 311 tea j YES 1. 119 7►41.9 41.9 100.0a1�81 .. TJTAL 2E4 100.0 100.0 —iAN 0.419 STD ERR 0.029 MEDIAN 0.361 )DE 0.0 STD DEV 0.494 VARIANCE 0.244 I KURTOSIS -1.905 SKEWNESS 0.330 RANGE 1.000 J.INI30U 0.0 dA%INDH 1.000 t I ':ALID CASES 284 IISHING CASES 0 I (1; AC-7 I I i CROF1LME0 BY ��\.�-L"...._ JORM.-_MICR46CA9._ CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ! SPSS EATCH SYSTEM I U/ 14/ 82 DECKA40 i 97 FILE - NCAAME - CREATED 10/14/E2 WHAT IS YOUR HOUSI.IG SITUATICN? CATEGORY LABEL NO ANSWERS OWN HCHE PAYMENTS .ON HO&E RENTING A ROOM RENTING AN APARTMENT LIVE WITE FAMILY OTHER 'MEAN 1.930 i7ODE 1.000 KUBTOSIS 0.339 ! MINIMUM 0.0 VALID CASES 284 MISSING CASES 0 FAGL• 38 i EELATIVE ADJUSTED POP. ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ COVE FREQ (FCT) (FCT) 0. 7 2.5 2.5 1. IRO 7t 63.4 63.4 2. 27 9.5 9.5 3. 1 0.4 0.4 4. 47 * 16.5 16.5 5. 9 3.2 3.2 6. 13 4.6 4.6 ------ TOTAL ------ 2E4 ------ 100.0 100.0 STD EBR 0.092 MEDIAN STD DEV 1.555 VARIANCE SKE/NE» 1.287 RANGE MAYIMUI 6.000 MISSING CASES 0 FAGL• 38 i cUM POP. FREQ P -REQ - (ECT) 65.8 ysr�,4$I 75.4 5ll 75.7 2� 92.3 !$g8 95.4 I7y 100.0 a5o' 54413 ;_ 1.250 2. 419 6. 000 va4 x Jr;.•�q U} r r' � ;PSS EATCH SYSTEM 98 ILE NCNAil E (CREATION DATE = 10/14/62) y••••+• r r s r s r y s s s s C R C S S T A D U r s r s • r r• L A T I 0 NDECKA40 WHO P s TCATIOH? r a r r r a m s* r r r r • r r r y r r r rOr r0* ** r *-F * rLIVELytly` w - DECKAE CCUNT I - ROW PCT INO ANSWE YES ROW COL PCT IRS TOTAL 7 TOT PCT I 0.I 1.I V ECKA40 ------ I-------- I --------I 0. I 5 I 2 I 7 _ NO ANSWERS 1 71.4 I 2d.6 1 2.5 j I 3.0 I 1.7 I I 1.8 I 0.7 1 ,,,I OWN HCME 1. I 112 Z 68 I I 62.2 I *37.8 I 160 63.4 1 67.9 I *57.1 I I 39.4 L *13.9 1 I 1. I 23 I 4 I 27 PAYMENTS ON HOME I 85.2 1 14.6 I 9.5 I 13.9 1 3.4 1 HENTING A ROOM..I 100.0 1 J.0 I 0.4 I 0.6 I J.0 I I 0.4 i 0.0 i ri 'I_ ---__--I_-------1 L" 4. I 12 i 35 I 47 RENTING AN.LPART 1 25.5 I *74.5 1 16.5 y Z 7.3 t *19.4 I I 4.2 I *12.3;ti 5. Z 6 I 3 I 9 LIVE WITH PAMIL I 66.7 I 33.3 I 3.2 I 3.6 L 2.5 I i 6. I 6 1 7 I 13 - OTHER I 46.2 1 53.8 I 4.6 I 3.6 1 5.9 i I 2.1 i COLUMN 165 119 284 !i TOTAL 58.1 41.9 100.0 I I AC -9 PO P, r --Req 1 = 1,901 a = U129 3ooav ` NICROEILI4ED BY L JORM-MICR#L"A8 !` I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M01NES / 99 $PSS BATCH SYSTEM 10/14/82 FILE - HONAdE - CREATED 10/14/82 DECKA76 YEARLY INCCAE ATEGCRY LABEL NO ANSWERS i )-$4,999 S5,000 -s-1,499 $7,500-113,499 $13,500-119,499 $19,500-124,999 $25,000 CR MORE MEAN MODE KURTOSIS IIBIMUM VALID CASES 3.352 3.000 -0.812 0.0 264 STD ERR 0.107 STD DEV 1.802 SKEWNESS -0.068 MAXIMUM 6.000 MISSING CASES 0 AC -10 MEDIAN VARIANCE RANGE GDM For. RELATIVE ADJUSTED ( PCT) ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. 23 6.1 8.1 1. 22 7.7 7.7 2. 38 13.0 13.4 3. 63. *29':2 29.2 4. 37 13.0 13.0 5. 29 10.2 10.2 6. 52 * 16.3 18.3 'DOTAL 284 100.0 100.0 STD ERR 0.107 STD DEV 1.802 SKEWNESS -0.068 MAXIMUM 6.000 MISSING CASES 0 AC -10 MEDIAN VARIANCE RANGE GDM For. FRED FAEQ -. ( PCT) _ I e. 1 441 I 15.8 . 41q 29.2 laq 56.5 *1,5 -sq 71.5 los - 81.7 5 55 j I: 100.0 * 9 9 U _ s,y3� iJ w 3.211 3. 247 6. 00 0 3ooa - MICROFILMED BY / -DORM-MICR#CAO' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ! 100 SPSS EATCH SYSTEM ILE NCNASE (CREATION LATE = 10/14/82) ►••••• r• r a• s a•••• a C R 0 5 S T A 0 U L A T Z 0 N O F •••• DECKA76 YEARLY 1NCCME BY DECKA77 HOW MANY S( r r • • • • r ♦ • • • .• • a • a r a • • • r µoul �y 5uppor}edaBy =I1tpt�C? • i • • DECKA77 COUNT I ROW PCT INO ANS4E ONS TWO THREE FOUR PIPE OR COL PCT IRS NCHE TOT PCT -I O.I 1.I 2.I 3.I 4.I 5.I 6•I 1I--------I--------I ECKA76--------I--------I--------I--------I---------------- 1 I I I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0. I 15 I 6 1 NO AtiSWERS 1 65.2 I 26.1 I 4.3 I 4.3 1 3.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 1 62.5 I 4.8 1 U.8 1 11.1 1 U.0 I J.0 I 0.0 I 1 5.3 I 2.1 I 0.4 I 0.4 I 0.0 I 0.0. I 0.0 I - 1. I 4 I 17 i 1 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I. 0-541955 Z 18.2 I *77.3 I 4.5 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I I 16.7 I 13.6 I 0.8 I 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I I 1.4 I* 6.0 1 1 0.4 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I _I 2• I 2 1 28 1 8 I U I 0 1 0 1 0 I _ $5,000-27,499, 1 5.3 I *73.7 I *21.1 I U.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 I I 8.3 I 22.4' I 6:7 I O.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I I 0.7 1*9.9Al 2.8 I 0-0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I I_ -------I-------- I --------I -------- 1 ! 3. I 2 1 41 I 38 I 1 1 1 I O I O I n $7,500-513,499 I 2.4 I *149.4 I *45.8 I 1.2 I 1.2 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 Z 8.3 I 32.8 I 31.7 Z 11.1 1 25.0 1 0.0 Z 0:0' I I 0.7 L *14.431 *13.441 0.4 1 0.4 L 0.0 1 0.0 1 4. Z 0 Z 13 I 23 1 1 I 0 I O I O I $13,500-$19,499 I 0.0 I *10.4 1 35.1 1 *19.2 1 11. 1 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I I 0.0 I *4.651 * 8.101 0.4 I 0.0 Z 0.0 I 0.0 I 5. I 0 Z 10 2 16 I 3 I 0 I 0 I 0 I 319,800-824,999 I 0.0 1 #38.0 I4.5 1# 13.3 I *33.3 1 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I I 0.0 i*3.511# 5.651 1.1 1 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 1 -1--------I--------I-- -----I___--__-I----- --I--------I---__---Z 6. I 1 I 10 I 33 I 3 I 3 I J 525,OOC OR MORE I 1.9 I *19.2 1 *63.5 I * 5.8 1 *5.8 1 1.9 I 1.9 I 4.2 I 6.0 1 27.5 I I 33.3 1 75.0 1 1U0.0 Z 100.0 I 0.4 1 *3.591*11.6101 1.1 I 1.1 I 0.4 I 0.4 I ,_I-_--_-_-I--_-----I--_-__--I--------I--------I--------I--------I j- COLUMN 24 125 120 9 4 1 1 TOTAL 8.5 44.0 42.3 3.2 1.4 0.4 0.4 I= 3A7 s: 0150 9= 190 �, 5pr9 is 441 10= b31 3.394 l- 190 AC-li' 4,0150 B: 305 - 30 o atm i 141CROFILIIED BY I- I- - _..JORM -MICR#LAB.. -� L CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES ! I -- - - 0 iPSS EATCH SYSTEM ` 101 - MILE NCNAME (CREALIOV LAVE = 10/14/62) •• i•♦♦♦♦ r• i f•• f•♦! C H 0 S S 'I A d U L A '1 I O N O F • r•• DECKA40 WHAT IS YOUR HOUSING SITGATICN7 8Y DELKA76 ��YEARLY IN4. • { i i { r t i i { i i ! • ♦ ! ♦ ♦ f ! k • ! ! ♦ i s ! r ♦ i t f ♦ ♦ ♦16♦ t • ♦ r a_. yEnf lV r►tL mp DECKA76 CCUNT I ROW PCT INO ANSWE 0-$4,999 $5,000-5 87,500-5 513,500- 519,500- $25,000 CCL PCT IRS 7,499 13,494 i19,499 124,999 OR .MORE TOT PCT I O.1 1.1 2.I 3.I 4.I- 5.1 6.i DECKA40-------- I -------- 1--------I--------I-------- T --------I-------- I--------_ 0. I 3 I 1 I 0 I U I 1 I 1 I 2 I NO ANSWERS 1 42.9 I 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 14.3 I 14.3 i 18.6 I 13.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I O.0 I 2.7 1 3.4 I 3.8 I 1.1 I U.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.4 I 0.4 1. 0.7 I I. I 11 I IU I 27 I 53 I 27 I 20 I 32 OWN HCME I 6.1 I 5.6 I X1'15.0 I X29.4 1* 15.0 1 '911.1 I *'17.8 1 47.8 I *45.5 1 *71.1 I *63. 9 I *73.0 I *69.0 I *61.5 I I 3.9 1 3.5 I>R9.51I*18.741!t9.53I *7.04I*11.367- 2. I 1 1 1 1 2 I b 1 3 I 4 I 10 I PAYCFNTS ON HONE 1 3.7 1 3.7 I 7.4 I *12.2 I 11.1 I 14.8 1 37.0 I_ I 4.3 1 4.5 1 5.3 I Y9 7.Z I 8.1 I 13.8 1 19.2 I 0. 4' I 0.4 I U.7 I* 2. 1 LP I 1. 1 I 1.4 I 3.5 3. I 1 L U I 0 I U I 0 I O I 0 HENTING A ROOM I 100.0 i 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 ' I 4.3 I 0.0 I 0.0 I U.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 i I 0.4 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I_ 4. I 6 I 7 1 6 I 16 I 3 I 4 1 5 RENTING AN APART I 12.6 I *•14.9 I *12.8 1 *34.0 I 6.4 I 8.5 I *'10.6 1 I 26. 1 I *31.8 I *15.8 I *19.3 I 8.1 I 13.8 I 9.6 I 2.1 I *2.57I *2.11I 115.691 1.1 I 1.4 I 1.8 5. I O I 3 I 2 I 3 I 0 I 0 I 1 I_ LIVE WITH FAMIL 1 0.0 I 33.3 1 22.2 I 33.3 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 11.1 . I 0.0 1 13.6 1 5.3 I 3.6 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 1.9 I O.0 I 1.1 I 0.7 I 1.1 I 0.0 I U.0 1 0.4 I 6. I l I 1 I 1 I i I 3 I 0 I 2 OTHER I 7.7 1 7.7 I 7.7 I 36.5 I 23.1 I 0.0 I 15.4 I - Z 4.3 I 4.5 1 2.6 1 6.0 I 8.1 1 0.0 I 3.8 I. I 0.4 I 0.4 I 0.4 1 1.8 I 1. 1 I '0.0 I 0.7 COLUMN 23 22 38 83 37 29 52 TOTAL 8.1 7.7 13.4 29.2 13.0 10.2 18.3 Po FREQ 1/014 7 = 131n AC -12 3: 511 %: 11y 4: 311 9: 305 5: (old �CO cZ i i 141CROFIL14ED BY I I. --JORM-MIC RIi•L-AB-- -� CEDAR RAI'105 DES M01"IES 1 T f, J 102 ;PSS EAiCH SY5Tli!: ELE NCNABE GRE A'TIC`I LAi3 r• r♦♦♦ s s r• s a a a s a•• C h 0 1 9 I A J 0 L h J r r a r• DICKA76 YEARLY INCOME dY DECNA9 LIVE ALONE: ,_I• r•♦••• r r a• a♦ a• a• r•••• s a r r r• r r r•• a• r s r• - LECKAd CCJNY I -' W% PCT INJ A3da.: Yc3 i3Oe COL PCE 12S 141AL Tei BC'I 1 C.L I.i _hCKA7E --------I--------1--------1 0. I IO : I1 i 13 NJ AlibAhtl$ 1 43.5 ju.1 i Ij.I L 6.1 L IJ.7 1 1. 1 t 1 IL i 24 0-54,959 I 27.3 *71.7 1 7.7 1 2. 1 # 5. o I I 2. 1 12 c6 i 3u � x5,000-17,499 I 31.t i Rud.4 I 13.0 I I 7.3 L *21.d 1 m I 4.❑ L * i.2Ai J. i 46 1 37 1 E3 .0,500-113,499 1 55.4 I *44.6 1 29.1 I 27.5 L *J 1. I I 1 16.2 L x13.03 I la +. 1 27 1 10 1 37 S13,'OC-;19,499 I 73.J I *27.0 I 13.0 I 16.4 1 * o.4 'I I 1 I 9.5 5. 1 20 I 1i i 29 "1 S19,EUC-S24,999 I 69.0 1 *31.0 I 10.2 j 1 12.1 I 7-b I II I 7.0 . 2 i 6. I 44 I a 1 52 525,CCC OR MJRE I 64.6 , 15.4 1 ld.� 1 26.7 i 6.7 I 1 15.9 1 2_ 8 1 I CCLC:fN 165 119 2E4 TCTAL 5b.1 41.9 100.0 AC -13 Po P. FRCQ I , I � - 141CROFIL14ED BY JORM---MICR#L-AB'- CEDAR RAPIDS •DES NOIYES 1 ! ........ .. t - - �- ;PSS 2A'1CH SYSTEM 103 10/14/62 PILE - NOJA7E - CREATED 10/14/82 DECKA32 WORSHIP SERVICE ATTENJENCE CATEGORY LABEL DO NO2 ATTEND ATTEND ONCE A WEEK 2 TO 3 TIMES A MONTH ATTEND CNCE A MONTH MEAN 1.880 MODE 2.000 KURTOSIS -0.007 >1INIMUM 0.0 VALID CASES 284 RELATIVE ADJUSTED AC -14 1 i 141CROFIL14ED BY - - 1- JORM-MICRILAB-. CEDAR RAPIDS DES I40IIES PAGE ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. 12 4.2 4.2 1. 93 X 32.7 32.7 2. 121 42.6 42.6 3. 33 * 11':6 11.6 4. 25. st 8.8 8.8 TOTAL 284 100.0 100.0 STD ERR 0.05d MEDIAN STD DEV 0.977 VARIAdCE SKEWNESS 0.540 RANGL j MAXIMUM 4.000 y J fi - I i •- I I' I � MISSING CASES U AC -14 1 i 141CROFIL14ED BY - - 1- JORM-MICRILAB-. CEDAR RAPIDS DES I40IIES PAGE 30 i CU 11 POP FREQ FREQ (PCT) 4.2 .Zaq _ 37.0 * 11l 90 �: ! 79.6 * d,31q i 91.2. ! .(A3I 100.0 471 1.806 1. 954 1.000 j y J fi - I i •- I I' I � MICROFILMED BY DORM--- MICR#C"!I0' --) CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / I. 1 104 SPSS EAI(H SYSTEM PAGE 106 0/14/82 FILE - NCNAME - CREATED 10/14/82 "ECKB47 TAKEN HIGH BLOOE P2ES5JRE :^.EEECINE? RELATIVE ADJUSTED CUM Pop ABSOLUTE FBEQ FBEQ FBEQ FREOL _ATEGCRY LABEL CODE FBEQ (PCT) (PCT) (PCT) -10 Amspkbs 0. 176 62.0 62.0 62.0 31315 TES 1. 108 *38.0 38.0 100.0 ou$ i i TOTAL ------ 284 ------ ------ 100.0 100.0 ---__ 61�1'i3 , SEAN 0.380 STD ERR 0.029 MEDIAN 0.307 ;ODE 0.0 STD DEV G.4Bb VARIANCE 0.237 KURTOSIS -1.767 SKEYNEJS 0.456 RANGE 1.000 ( dINIMUH 0.0 MAXIMUM 1.000 LIALID CASES I) 284 MISSING CASES 0 i i i I� 4 I l ~ i I I ;u i_ I i , —i AC -15 3oOc� MICROFILMED BY DORM--- MICR#C"!I0' --) CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES / I. 1 105 ;PSS EATCH SYSTED 10/ 14/62 FILE - NCNAAE - CREATEE 10/14/82 )ECKC26 AFFECTS OF SlUdT I.IPAIRdENT CN ADL :ATEGCBY LABEL i0 ANSUEBS 1 LITTLE 1 GREAT'CHI, IOT AT ALL i _ :LEAN 1008 W ITOSIS AININUM 7ALID CASES 0.581 0.0 1.448 0.0 284 NISSING CASES 0 AC -16 i MICROFILMED BY l 1 I DORM �-MICRISL'A O -- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I RELATIVE ADJUSTED FAGE 147 ABSOLUTE FREQ FEE() CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. 181 63.7 63.7 1. 65 22.9 22.9 2. 14 * 4.9 4.9 3. 24 8'.5 8.5 TOTAL 2E4 100.0 100.0 STD E88 0.055 MEDIAN STD DEV 0.923 VARIANCE SKEYNES.i 1.579 RANGE mAYlmU9 3.000 0. 2d5 NISSING CASES 0 AC -16 i MICROFILMED BY l 1 I DORM �-MICRISL'A O -- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I 30o4t - FAGE 147 cum POP. F EEC FREQ (FCT) ti 63.7* 314(ti i 86.6 »I1A4b - 91.5 * Abl 100.0 4b3 5,N43 0. 2d5 _ 0.852 3.000 i I r 30o4t - 106 ._PSS BATCH SYSTEU j-L0/14/E2 FILE - NONAah - CREATED 10/14/82 II JECKC30 USE A CANE? u RELATIVE ADJUSTED MICROFILMED BY L�.._ 'JORM--MICR6L/CEf CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES PAGE 151 cull i- F6EG FREQ ABSCLUTE FREQ FREQ 90.5 "ATEGCBY LABEL COLE P'BEG (PCT) (PCT) 5,443 NO ANS➢EBS U. 257 90.5 90.5 S 1. 27 A 9.5 9.5 -, I TOTAL 264 100.0 100.0 LEAN 0.095 STD EBB 0.017 MEDIAN, iODE 0.0 STD DEV 0.294 VARIANCE KURTOSIS 5.745 SKEaNESS 2.776 BANGS 37NINUM 0.0 MAXIMU7 1.000 �ALID CASES 284 MISSING CASES 0 ) S � tF� E f i I 1 _ f I I — AC -17 MICROFILMED BY L�.._ 'JORM--MICR6L/CEf CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES PAGE 151 cull POP F6EG FREQ (PCT) 90.5 4,iiao 100.0 * 511 5,443 0.053 0.086 1. 000 107 ;PSS EAICH SYSPEM w/ 14/E2 FILE - HOME - CREATED 10/14/82 )ECKC48 CAN YOU DO HOUSEWORK? ;LTEGCRY LABEL 90 ANSWEFS .IIHOU7 EELP JiITH SONE HELP UNABLE TC DO AT ALL SEAN 1.021 .LODE 1.000 KURTOSIS 1.545 MINIMUM 0.0 VALID CASES 284 mIs3ING CASES 0 AC -18 1 MICROFIUdED BY �l. JORM--MICR#LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES PAGE RELATIVE ADJUSTED cum ABSOLUTE FRE(1 FREQ CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. 53 18.7 18.7 1. IE8 66.2 66.2 2. 27 it 9.5 9.5 3. 16 t 5':6 5.6 TOTAL 2E4 100.0 100.0 STD ERR 0.042 MEDIAN STD DEV 0.713 VARIANCE SKEWNESS 0.912 RANGE MAXImU.i 3.000 mIs3ING CASES 0 AC -18 1 MICROFIUdED BY �l. JORM--MICR#LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES PAGE 169 cum POP — F REQ FRE4 (PCT) ` 16. 7 1101 3 84.9 3,v03 94.4 $1I 100.0 1► 305 SoLN3 U. 573 0. 502 3.000 L r 1 i I 30vQ - i 108 I -;PSS EAICB SYSTEM PAGE 225 j )/14/82 FILE - NCUAME - CRENrED 10/14/82 1 °-?CKD27 PRESENTLY LIVE IN CONGREGATE SOUSING? i RELATIVE ADJUSTED CUY POP ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ F REQ PAM( �%TEGCBY LABEL CODE FBEQ (PCT) (PCI) (ECT) `9 ANSWE6S 0. 21 7.4 7.4 7.4 403 9 S 1. 9 3. 2 3.2 1 0. 6 * 174 —1 2. 254 89.4 89.4 100.0 y 9b(a TOTAL 2E4 100':0 100.0 514113 1E AN 1.820 STD ESR 0.032 UDIAN 1.941 !ODE 2.000 SID DEV 0.544 VA5IANCE 0.296 URTOSIS 6.630 SKEWNESS -2.873 RANGE 2.000 _CNIMUA 0.0 . MAIIMUd 2.000 'ACID CASES 284 MISSING OASLS U j t L� i jj. f i fE r AC -19 I I — NICROFILME0 BY -� CEDAR RAPIDS c ES R46 R•OLA'IES SPSS EATCB SYSTEM 10/14/82 FILE - NONASE - CREATEL 10/14/82 )ECKD29 YANT CONGBEGATE HOUSING LN 6-12 MONTHS? :ATEGCBY LABEL 10 ANSAEES !ES 10 IRAN LODE (URTOSIS lI11INUE 7ALID CA5E5 1.535 2.000 -0.183 0.0 284 AC -20 MICROFILMED BY •-!.-�� i --� 7 "JORM:-"MICR#CA8---- I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIIES 4 RELATIVE ADJUSTED ABSOLUTE EREQ EREt1 CODE FEEQ (PCT) (PCT) 0. E2 18.3 td.3 1. 26. 'A 9.9 9.9 2. 2C4 71.8 71.8 TJTAL 2E4 1000 100.0 STD ERR 0.047 BEDIAN STD DEV 0.786 VARIANCE SKEWNESS -1.262 RANGE EAYLlUf 2.000 EISSING BASES 0 AC -20 MICROFILMED BY •-!.-�� i --� 7 "JORM:-"MICR#CA8---- I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIIES 4 100.0 31904 FELL Q FREQ e' (ECT) I 2. 000 18.3 49b til Y J I I r� 28.2 )I 100.0 31904 51443 W I 1.804 0.617 I 2. 000 I I r� I. Y ;PSS EATCH SYSTe110 .4 D/14/82 FILE - NCNAME - CHEATED 10/14/62 I ECKD30 NEVER WANT TO LIVE IE CUNGREGATE HOUSING? i iRELATIVE ADJUSTED -CATEGORY LABEL CODE AbFREQTE FRET FREQ 18.7 1j018 48.6 (PCT) (PCT) + ij ANSWERS 0, 53 18.7 18.7 YES 1. E5 29.9 29.9 1 } 0 _ 2. 14b X51.4 51.4 TOTAL 2E4 100:0 100.0 1 ARAN 1.327 STD ERB 0.046 MEDIAN " DE 2.000 STD DEV 0.772 VANIANCE OF.TOSIS -1,044 SKEWNESS -0.639 RANGE + NIMUM 0.0 MAXIM 2,000 1 FALID CASES a 284 EISSZNG CASES 0 i A f I-, 1 li l I.i 9 ' { !1 .i ti i AC -21 1 MICROFILMED BY 1. J._� ORIVI-MICRbLAH'- j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES PAGE 228 CUM POP FHEQ FReQ ( PCT) 18.7 1j018 48.6 I1ull 100.0 *aj79t 51443 1. 527 0.596 2.000 moi. T i iPSS BATCH SYSTEM 10/14/82 FILE - NO W E - CREATED 10/14/82 DECKD31 WHICH CONGBEGAIE dJUSIIIG TYPE PREFERED? CATEGCRY LABEL NO ANShE6S SINGLE FAMILY HOME A GROUP bOME A "MINI-CCMPLEX" RETIREMENT RESIDENCE OTHER MEAN MODE KURTOSIS MINIMUM VALID CASES 2.451 4.000 -1.516 0.0 284 MISSING CASES 0 AC -22 4 MICROFILMED BY 1....... 777 JORM�'"MIC R�JA CEDAR RAPIDS DES RELATIVE ADJUSTED 219 _ 1 ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ CODE FBEQ (PCT) (PCP) 0. 74 26.1 26.1 1. 28 9.9 9.9 2. 12 4.2 4.2 3. 45 x 15':8 15.8 4. 116 X40.8 40.8 5. 9 3.2 3.2 TOTAL 2E4 100.0 100.0 STD EBR 0.103 MEDIAN STD DEV 1.739 VARIANCE SKEWNESS -0.397 RANGE EAXI3U1 5.000 MISSING CASES 0 AC -22 4 MICROFILMED BY 1....... 777 JORM�'"MIC R�JA CEDAR RAPIDS DES 3004, - PAGE 219 _ 1 CDN POP - FREQ FREQ (ECT) 26.1 IF4dl 35.9 539 40.1 1a9 56.0 1t 440 I 96.8 112Al 100.0 �- _114 slyyy ' 3. 122 3.026 5. 000 3004, - L --?SS EATCH SYSTEM s FAGS 230 L --?SS EATCH SYSTEM 112 FAGS 230 PILE - NCHAME - CRPATED 10/14/82 DECKD32 LOCATIONAL PREFERENCE OF CGNG11EGATE HOUS - RELATIVE ADJUSTED CUM POP I 1TEGCRY LABEL — CODE ABSOLUTE EREQ F'REQ FREQ FREQ FREQ (PCT) (PCT) (ECT) NO ANEWERS 0. 66 23.2 23.2 23.2 Ifdlo3 -JWHTGWN IOWA CITY 1. S6 33.8 33.8 57.0 * (,840 -EZGHECIIECOD GF I.C. 2 53 OUTSIDE. * 32.7 32.7 89.8 11780 CF IOWA CITY 3. 22 7':7 7.7 97.5 411 •.FHER 4• __ _7_ 2.5 2.5 100.0 1311 TOTAL 264 100.0 100.0 5,438 :LEAN 1.324 "DE 1.000 STD EF.R S1D DEV 0.059 MEDIAN i.i92 J ORTOSIS -0.249 lNIMUM SKEWHES3 0.995 0.397 VARIANCE 0.990 wO•o EsxlMoa 4.000 RANGE 4.000 1{ iEID CASES 284 MISSING CASES 0 C iE -I J I 1 I- 1 I AC -23 30Da� +1 1 i 141CROFILMED BY JORM...-MICR46 A8'- i f CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 113 SPSS BATCH SYSTEM 10/14/82 PILE - NCNANE - CREATEC 10/14/82 DECKD33 KILLING TC SELL 110ME iJ LIVE IN CONG. HO CATEGCRY LABEL • NO ANSWER YES NO :SEAN 1 !LODE KURTOSIS eI•NINUe VALID CASES ABSOLUTE COLE FRED 0. 79 1. 125 2. ---e0- T'JTAL 2E4 RELATIVE ADJUSTED FRED FRED (PCT) (PCT) 27.6 27.8 7144.0 44.0 ( PCT) -28.2 - 100':0 -28-2- 100.0 1.004 STD EBR 0.044 1.000 STD DEV C.750 -1.214 SKEaNES3 -0.006 0.0 CA[INUA 2.000 284 eIsSING CASES . 0 AC -24 eEDIAN VARIANCE RANGE 141CROFILMED BY IDORM'MICR#C"A B'" CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES EAGE 231 cue PDP — F BEC FREQ ( PCT) 27.8 11513 _ iL 71.8 14 a;j�5 100.0 IY535 S,y33 i 1.004 ~ 0. 562 2. COO t i i I _ i 114 s i i I I I j )PSS BATCH SYSTEM EAGE 232 )/14/82 FILE - N0J&3E - CREATED 10/14/82 ":CRU34 CONSIDER CONE. BOOS. BEFURE EkALTU PROW RELATIVE ADJUSTED CU:! POP _ ABSOLUTE FREQ FREQ FSE; PREa _ATEGCBY LABEL CODE FREQ (PCT) (PCT) (PCT) �O ANSYEBS 0. 48 to.9 16.9 16.9 9d0 I TES 1. S6 *33.8 33.8 5U.7 111" -73 2. 140 49.3 49.3 100.0 41($43 TOTAL 2E4 1000 100.0 MEAN I 1.324 STD ERR 0.044 MEDIAN 1.479 10DE 2.000 SID DEV 0.748 VARIANCE 0.559 URTOSIS -0.979 SKEWNESS -0.6C8 RANGE 2.000 wINIMUM 0.0 MALIMUI 2.000 r.ALID CASES 284 MISSIAG CASES 0 �u u !'' i u i I _ I I _ s i i I I I j ' 115 SPSS EATCH SYSTEM FILE MCNAME (CREA'TIOA DATE = 10/14/62) • r r•• r r r• a•• a••• r C R O S S 'T A D EICKE3O NEVER HA NTA LIVE IN CONGREGATE HOUSIN • r r • r • s r • • • • • • • • a a s • s • a s ► s r _. ..t. Ll L T I O N O F • r• �- 6Y DECKD31 WHICH CON( • r • r • r 4 •14 s ► • • * no Tune- Prefer A CECKC31 CCUNT I HOU PCT INO A9SRE SINGLE F A GRCUP A ^MINI- RETIREME ODER RON CCL PCT IRS AMILY HO MIE CUMFLER'I IIT RESID TOTAL TOT PCT I C.I 1.I 2.I--7:I-Ti,-I 5.I JECKD30I --------I-------- I -------- I-------- I--------I--------I 0. I 29 I 3 I 1 I 3 I 14 I 3 I 53 NO ANSLERS I 54.7 1 3.7 I 1.9 I 5.7 L 26.4 I 5.7 I 18.7 I 39.2 I 10.7 I 8.3 I 6.7 I 12.1 I 33.3 I I 10.2 I 1.1 I 0.4 I 1.1 I 4.9 I 1.1 I 1. I 31 I 16 I 3 I 11 I 21 I 3 I RS I 36.5 1 18.8 I 3.5 I 12.9 I 24.7 I 3.5 I 29.9 d I 41.9 I 57.1 I 25.0 I 24.4 I 18.1 I 33.3 I I 10.9 I 5.6 I 1.1 I 3.9 I 7.4 I 1.1 2. I 14 1 9 I 8 I 31 • 1 81 I 3 I 146 I 9.6 I 6.2 I 5.5 I *21.2 L *55.5 I 2.1 1 51.4 1 18.9 I 32.1 I 66.7 I *68.9 I *69.8 I 33.3 L !' I 4.9 I i.2 I 2.8 I *10.9 1 I *28.5 2 I COLUMN 74 28 12 45 116 9 284 `-' TCTAL 26.1 9.9 4.2 15.8 40.8 3.2 100.0 L POP. FREQ " I=593 1551 AC -26 _ 14ICROFIL14ED BY 1. - .` I 'JORMP" MICRCA B'" " �' CEDAR RAPIDS DESSMOIYES 116 r) - I-. :SS EATCH SYSTE3 -[LE NCNAll (CREATION DATE = 10/14/82) it d {M r'• « t••••••••• r«••• C R 0 S S T A d U L A T I 0 N O F • r•• _ DICKD30 NEVER WANT TO LIVE IN CONGREGATE HOUSING! BY DECKD32 LOCATIONAL s - Locw+conal Preference o$ neer er+e goustiM CECKC32 fM i CCONT I M v ROW PCT INO ANSWE DOWNTOWN NEIGHBOR OUTSIDE OTHER BCW COL PCT IRS IJW& CI HCOD OF CF IOWA TOTAL r TOT PCT I O.I--�I� .1 3.I 4.I 1.. I:CKD30--------I--------I--------I--------I--------I--------I 1 i 0. I 20 I 12 I 11 I 10 I 0 I 53 NO ANSYERS I 37.7 1 22.6 I 20.8 I 18.9 I 0.0 I 18.7 1 30.3 I 12.5 I 11.6 I 45.5 I 0.0 I I 7.0 1 4.2 I. 3.9 I. 3.5 I 0.0 I 7. YES I.: s it d {M s E i. fM M 1 1 1r � i I 1.. 1 L 1. 1 32 Z 18 I 28 I b I l I 85 I 37.6 I 21.2 I 32.9 I 7.1 I 1.2 I 29.9 I 46.5 Z 18.8 I 30.1 I 27.3 I 14.3 I I 11.3 I 6.3 I 9.9 I 2.1 I 0.4 I 2. I 14 I bb I 54 I 6 I 6 I 146 Z 9.6 Z *45.2 I *37.0 I 4.1 I 4. 1 I 51.4 I 21.2 I *6d.d Z *58.1 I 27.3 I 85.7 I I 4.9 1*23:21I*19.0AI 2.1 I 2.1 I COLUEM 66 96 53 22 7 284 TOTAL 23.2 33.8 32.7 7.7 2.5 100.0 pop. FREVOL I= 1,x1o3 .1- 1103q AC -27 MICROFILMED BY _. JORIVI-""'MIC R(0C"A B` _ r CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 30o r 117 SPSS EATCH SYSTEK — PILE NCHANE CREATION DATE = 10/14/82) •••••• s s••• s••••• a C R 0 S S T A B U L A T I 0 5 O P • s• DECKA8 LIVE ALONE? BY DEC KD 29 AANT CONO:.. • s • • • s • TiTTa • • • • a s • s • • • • a s • • a a a •I • •V• a • • • �q{ /�• Comromale 1S ADUSI11A Ih (0 -Id O'1o14k- LECKD29 CCUNT I NOV PCT I30 ANSWE YES NO ROW CCL PCT IRS TOTAL FoP. TOT PCT I 0.1 1.I 2.1 FREQ DECKA8--------I--------I--------I--------I 0. I 29 I 10 I 126 i 165 1= 343 r NO ANS%ERS I 17.6 I 6.1 I 76.4 I 56.1 I 55.8 I 35.7 I 61.8 I R I 10.2 L 3.5 I 44.4 I _ 1. I 23 I 18 I 78 I 119 YES I 19.3 I *15. 1 I 65.5 I 41.9 I 44.2 I 1164.3 I 38.2 I I 8. 1 I el 6.3 1 I .27.5 I ; COLUSK 52 28 204 2B4 TOTAL _ 18.3 9.9 71.8 j 100.0 j AC -28 MICROFILI4ED BY DORM"""-MICR�ACB'- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES'MOINES / 118 !LE 3 c 14 A 117- (CREAZIC.'i U :i I A 0 F DICKL29 WANT C2:1 Gfi E tiro N - N b-12 DECK642 HOS UNG S: rECKE42 tlnW wlc �5? ccuij,, � 1 P now C 130 A -3:;4Z AUX uEEN A WEEK C A WiEX 11 10 3 4 4 IC 6 d sow E !i j 1%.U14i Ua'ills ?,'![is TUTAI TOI PCT I C. I J. 4.I). _ZCKD2'j ------ - - - - - - u NO .3 i 1 2 1 52 ANZ:4ERF 1 15.4 1 5/.7 1 11.5 1 b.d 7.d i 3-6 1 18.3 I CIO. 0 15.6 1 21.4 1 11. I 1 17.6 1 JJ.3 u I 2.1 1 1 0.7 -71--------!'----'--1--------I--------- --------I-------- :.-------I'------- ----- - -------- 1. 14 4 4 1 1 1 2' YEj 1 14.3 1 14.3 J.6 6 3.6 9.9 1 25.0 1 tt 7.4 1 *14.3 1 14.6 1 5-9 1 16.7 1-4 It 4.9 1 i 1.4 1 1.4 1 U.4 1 0.14 G. 1 4 i 146 1 16 2u 1 13 1 3 1 204 NO 1 c.0 1 71.b i 8 t' S.1 1 U.4 1 1-5 1 71.e 1 25.0 1 7b. d 1 64.j 1 74. 1 1 76.5 1 50.0 1 1 1.4 1 51.4 1 b.j 1 7.J CCLU.'iN 16 190 28 27 17 6 284 ICTAL 5 u6 9 9.9 9.5 b.0 c. 1 100.0 POP ii AC -29 141CROFILMED BY _-JORM __MlCR6L_AB__ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES 300 6 a. lis �i'5S Exiltt SYS'1.:9 j F11E "4CNA'i$ (CREAT N CA,E = IU/I /b2) * ♦ * ♦ ♦ * * a ► * * * • ♦ * ♦ * s C R .0 S S 'i A D U L A T i U N C F • • • DICKE29 WANT CGUGREGA• i; EJUSI,I,; I:"+ 6-12 S0N185? BY DECKD34 CONSIDER :- * ♦ * s ♦ * * * * * * * * ♦ * s * * * * * s * * s * a * * a s,,114* * * s * p♦ Cokil -c LtIrricA II* poU511V. �C4 A lleA�1� n PrAle1v .. �. L'ECKC34 CUTRI T I ' - HUM PCI ING ANSWz YES Dv" RCw CGL PCI 1"r..i iCYAL Q ;01 VCT L 0.1 1. I t.I �........._.............._:. UECKJ29-------- I--------L-------- I -------- I U. 1 27 17 I u 1 52 j UJ IINSMIRS I 51.5 = J.:.7 1 15 I 1d.J 1 56.3 i 17.7 I 5.7 1 L 9.5 L t. 0 1 2.8 L ,r - 5 I 2b -- YES 17. 1 1 *75.0 I 17.9 I 9.9 I 0. 7 I* 7. 4 1 1 1.8 i, f 2. I 19 1 Jo 1 '127 1 204 I 9.J i 2b.4 1 02.3 I 71.b ,NU I 39.0 1 ou.4 1 9U.7 I - L 6.7 1 2u.4 I 44.7 I CCLUA.1 48 9t 140 264 'ICTAL 16.9 J3.8 4y.3 10C.0 -• 1 120 ?SS LATCH SYSTL.1 -LLE NC BASE (CHEATICN LATE = 10/14/82) i••••• t i i• a•♦♦ r♦•• C R O S S T A B U L A T 1 0 N 0 P +••• DECKAYO WHAT IS YO JR HJUSiuliSITUATION? BY DEC X1129 WANT CONGRF i t••• r t t t i••• i• i • f t i r• i r i f t• f•♦; ;• t� i♦♦ i• _ 1a1a1} CnP�iouslnA m (a-I� Mon�l.s? cacKD29 - COUNT I i 6. I _ ROW PCT IND ANSWE YES I NC 1 HOW POP COL PCT IFS - t GTHER I 23.1 I TOTAL F0.EQ TOT PCT I 0.1 1.1 4.6 2.I 5.8 1 ECKA40--------I--------I--------I--------I I 4.4 I I_365 0. I 5 I 0 I 2 I 7 az 13U NO ANSWERS I 71.4 I U.0 I 28.6 I 2.5 I 9.6 I J. 0 I 1.0 I 18 I 1.8 I 0.0 I 0.7 I 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 1. I 25 1 19 I 136 I 180 CWN HCEE I 13.9 I *10.6 I 75.6 I 63. 4 I 48.1 I *b7.9 I 66.7 L I 8.8 I of 6.7 1 I 47.9 I 2. I 1 I 1 I 25 I 27 PAYBEN25 ON HONE I 3.7 I 3.7 I 92.6 I 9.5 I 1.9 I 3.6 I 12.3 I I 0.4 1 U.4 I 8.6 I -I---_---I-------- I -------- I 3. I 1 1 0 I 0 I 1 RENTING A BOON I 100.0 I 0.0 I 0.0 I 0.4 LI I 1.5 I U.0 I 0.0 I I 0.4 1 0.0 I 0.0 I 4. I 14 I 7 I 16 I 47 RENTIBG AN APART I 29.8 1 *14.9 I 55.3 L 16.5 I 26.5 I it25.0 I 12.7 I `I I 4.9 1 x1.5.1L 9.2 I r 5. I 3 I 0 I b I 9 LIVE WITH FAIIL 1 33.3 1 U.0 I 66.7 I 3.2 I 5.8 I O.O I 2.9 I - I 1.1 I 0.0 I 2.1 I AC -31 MICROFILMED BY -l' JORM--MICR6LA9'- CEDAP. RAPIDS DES MOIYES ,300a. I i 6. I 3 I 1 1 9 I 13 t GTHER I 23.1 I 7.7 I 69.2 I 4.6 I 5.8 1 3.6 I 4.4 I I 1.1 I U.4 I 3.2 I COLUMN 52 18 204 284 i TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 AC -31 MICROFILMED BY -l' JORM--MICR6LA9'- CEDAP. RAPIDS DES MOIYES ,300a. I 1 121 ;PSS EA'ICB SYSTEM 'LLE NC NAME (CHEATICB DATE _ 10/14/62) - r♦•• s• s•••••♦• s• t• C R C S S T A 8 U L A T I 0 N O F ••• r DECKU33 WILLISG TO SELL HOME TO LIVE IN LONG. HO BY DECKD29 WANT CONG! • ♦ • ♦ • • • a • • • • • • t a • • t''II • • • s a s • a a�• a • • i I• y) V% n&4rp46JP_ Housing In 6-I.1 Menik ? - DECKC29 COUNT L ROW PCT ISO ANSWE YES NO HOW POP. 4 COL PCT IRS -- TOTAL FREQ _ ' TOT PCT I 0.I 1.I 2.I 1= 31x5 DECKD33 --------I--------I--------I--------I 0. I 28 I d 1 43 1 7y NO AHS+ER I 35.4 i 10.1 I 54.4 I 27.d I 53.8 1 20.6 I 21.1 I - I 9.9 I 2.8 I 15.1 I 1. I 17 I 19 I 89 I 125 YES I 13.6 I *15.2 I 71.2 I 44.0 - I 32.7 I *67.9 I 43.6 I I 6.0 I 6.7 1 I 31.3 I 2. I 7 I 1 I 72 I 80 NO 1 8.8. I 1.3 I 90.0 I 28.2 - I 13.5 I 3.6 I 35.3 I I 2.5 1 U.4 1 25.4 I COLUMN :2 28 204 284 ICTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 -- j P I 6.3 I* 3.93 I 19.0 I I -I- ------ I -------- I --------I 4. I 3 I 2 I 32 I 37 $13,500-$19,499 I 8.1 I 5.4 I 86.5 I 13.0 I 5.8 I 7.1 I 15.7 I "i I 1.1 I 0.7 I 11.3 I t 5. I 4 I 2 I 23 I 29 i $19,50C-$24,999 I 13.8 I 6.9 I 79.3 I 10.2 I 7.7 I 7.1 I 11.3 I I- I 1.4 I 0.7 I 8.1 I -� 6. I 8 I 1 I 43 I 52 $25,00C OR MORE I 15.4 I 1.9 I 82.7 I 18.3 I 15.4 I 3.6 I 21.1 I I 2.8 10.4 I 15.1 I COLUMN 52 28 204 284 TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 i AC -33 300 a i ' MICROFILMED BY ! i JORM-MICR46LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES ( � ?SS EATCH SYSTEM 122 2. I 7 'ILE NCNAME (CE FATICoR DATE = 10/14/82) 5 I 26 I •• i• s s s s••♦♦ t• t t i r C R C S S T A B U L A T I O N 0 t««• I - DFCKA76 YEARLY INCCCt • ♦ i • • i iii Tj I F• BY DEC KD 29 WANT w A CONGRF t i t t :k ♦ • 1�� •4L♦ -• t i t s •,1 ♦ t t • t i ♦ • ♦ i • AL DECKD25 S6ALCDn4PGaAtt 13.5 2.5 IIt nuslnG n (� hF 1.1 Men�hs 7 - CCUNT I I I _ NOW PCT ING ANSWE YES NC RCW POP CCL PCT INS TOIAL F REQ 3. TOT PCT I G.I 1.I 2.I 18 I 11 I 3CKA76--------I--------I--------I--------I I 83 - 0. I 8 I 3 I 12 I NO ANSUERS I 34.8 I 13.0 1 52.2 I 23 6.1 d, 98 I I 15.4 I 1 U. 7 1 5.9 I 65.1 3-. 2,1.1 29.2 _ I 2.8 I 1. 1 I 4.2 I I 34.6 I *39.3 I 26.5 I 1. I 4 I 4 I 14 I ^IO -L4,959 I 18.2 I *18.2 I 63.6 I 22 7.7 I 7.7 I *14.J I 6.9 I I 1.4 I t 1.41 I 4.9 I P I 6.3 I* 3.93 I 19.0 I I -I- ------ I -------- I --------I 4. I 3 I 2 I 32 I 37 $13,500-$19,499 I 8.1 I 5.4 I 86.5 I 13.0 I 5.8 I 7.1 I 15.7 I "i I 1.1 I 0.7 I 11.3 I t 5. I 4 I 2 I 23 I 29 i $19,50C-$24,999 I 13.8 I 6.9 I 79.3 I 10.2 I 7.7 I 7.1 I 11.3 I I- I 1.4 I 0.7 I 8.1 I -� 6. I 8 I 1 I 43 I 52 $25,00C OR MORE I 15.4 I 1.9 I 82.7 I 18.3 I 15.4 I 3.6 I 21.1 I I 2.8 10.4 I 15.1 I COLUMN 52 28 204 284 TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 i AC -33 300 a i ' MICROFILMED BY ! i JORM-MICR46LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES ( � " 2. I 7 I 5 I 26 I 38 $5,000-$7,499 I 18.4 I *13.2 I 68.4 I 13.4 I I 13.5 2.5 !.*17.9 I I * 1.82.I 12.7 9.2 I I 3. I 18 I 11 I 54 I 83 $7,500-$13,499 I 21.7 I *13.3 I 65.1 I 29.2 I 34.6 I *39.3 I 26.5 I P I 6.3 I* 3.93 I 19.0 I I -I- ------ I -------- I --------I 4. I 3 I 2 I 32 I 37 $13,500-$19,499 I 8.1 I 5.4 I 86.5 I 13.0 I 5.8 I 7.1 I 15.7 I "i I 1.1 I 0.7 I 11.3 I t 5. I 4 I 2 I 23 I 29 i $19,50C-$24,999 I 13.8 I 6.9 I 79.3 I 10.2 I 7.7 I 7.1 I 11.3 I I- I 1.4 I 0.7 I 8.1 I -� 6. I 8 I 1 I 43 I 52 $25,00C OR MORE I 15.4 I 1.9 I 82.7 I 18.3 I 15.4 I 3.6 I 21.1 I I 2.8 10.4 I 15.1 I COLUMN 52 28 204 284 TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 i AC -33 300 a i ' MICROFILMED BY ! i JORM-MICR46LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS DES'MOINES ( � i 123 iPSS EATCH SYSTEM ?ILE NCNAHE (CBEATICN LATE = 10/14/82) r s•• W•••••• W W•• W W W C R 0 S S T A D U L A T I 0 N O F r • DECKE3• • WHICH WOW`WEWAWEWHOUSINGHTYPE PHEFEHED•Ia s aBa sDHCKD29 WANT • •ONG: EECKD29 CCUNT I HOW PCT INO ANSWE YES NO HCW POR CCL PCT ISS TOTAL FREq - TOT PCT I G.I 1.I 2.I IECKD31--------I--------I--------I--------Z 0. I 23 I 2 I 49 I 74 Ie ISH NO ANSIEHS I 31.1 I 2.7 I 66.2 I 26.1 �° �3•�I I 44.2 I 7.1 i 24.0 I Z 8.1 I 0.7 I 17.3 I I. I 2 I 1 I 25 I 28. i SINGLE FAMILY d0 I 7.1 I 3.V I 89.3 Z 9.9 I 3.8 I 3.6 I 12.3 I I 0.7 Z 0.4 I 8.8 Z " 2. I 1 I 3 1 8 I 12 A G&CUE HOME I 8.3 I 25.0 I 66.7 I 4.2 I 1.9 I 10.7 I 3.9 I i I 0.4 I 1. 1 I 2.8 I 3. I 3 I 8 Z 34 I 45 A "MIN 3. I 6.7 I *17.8 I 75.6 I 15.8 I 5.8 I #28.6 I 16.7 I tt2.811 12.0 I 4. I 21 I 12 I 83 I 116 SETIHEMENT SESID I 18.1 I *10.3 I 71.6 I 40.8 I 40.4 I *42.9 Z 40.7 I ` I 7.4 1 * 4. 2,1 I 29.2 I 5. I 2 I 2 I S I 9 OTHER 1 22.2 I 22.2 I 55.6 I 3.2 I 3.8 I 7.1 I 2.5 I - I 0.7 I 0.7 2 1.8 I -I--------I--------I--------I L. COLUMN :2 28 204 284 TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 AC -34 'j 3 00 Mei - MECROFILMEO BY r1`, -� DORM -MICRbL4:B- LCEDAR RAI'1D5 •DES MOI4ES 'c AC -35 j141CROFILME�-MIClR�I 01. Er I CEDAR RAPIDS • OES MOIRES 30oo. 0 124 :iPSS EATCH SYSTEM LLE NCHANE (CREATION DATE = tU/14/62) •• s s s s s• s s•••• r s r• C R D S S T A d U L A T I O N O F s s s• i BECKL32 LOCATIONAL PBEFEBENCE OF CONGREGATE NOUS BY DECKD29 WANT CONGH; ' ��0�_ CAf�CGG�P �tOVSIM In L -la Mon�Fls 7 - DECKC29 CCUNT I - ROW PCT IND AHSWE YES NC BCW Pop. _ COL PCT IES TOTAL FRM TOT PCT I 0.1 1.I _ECKD32 --------I--------I--------I ): 305 0. I td I U I 46 I 66 a= Iq0 1 NO ANShERS I 27.3 1 U.0 I 72.7 I 23.1 I 34.6 I U.0 I 13.5 I - I 6.3 L 0.0 I 16.9 I t - 1. I 13 I 16 I 67 I 96 �DCWNTOAN IOWA Cl I 13.5 1 *16.7 I 69.8 I 3.3.8 I 25.0 I *57.1 I 32.8 I .I 4.6 I p 5.6 1 I 23.6 I 2. I 10 1 10 I 73 I 93 j NEIGHBCEHOOD OF I 10.8 L *10.8 I 78.5 I 32.7 I 19.2 I #33.7 I 35.8 I 3.5 I * 3.5.1 I 25.7 I 3. I 8 1 2 I 12 I 22 OUTSIDE OF IOWA I 36.4 I 9.1 I 54.5 I 7.7, 1 I '15.4 I 7.1 I 5.9 I I 2.8 I 0.7 I 4.2 I {„+ 4. I 3 1 0 I 4 I 7 OTHER I, 42.9 I 0.0 I 57.1 I 2.5 L I 5.8 Z 0.0 I 2.0 I I 0.0 I 1.4 I COLUAN E2 28 204 284 "1 TOTAL 18.3 9.9 71.8 100.0 AC -35 j141CROFILME�-MIClR�I 01. Er I CEDAR RAPIDS • OES MOIRES 30oo. 0 I it � I City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM DATE: February 11, 1983 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Material in Friday's Packet J Letter from City Assessor and agenda for public hearing. -lot Copy of letter from Mayor Neuhauser to the president of the Chamber of Commerce regarding the new zoning ordinance. . i Copy of letter from the City Manager to bidders for the redevelopment parcels located in Lower Ralston Creek Area. 6 Memorandum from the Assistant City Manager regarding policy on communication between the City Council and boards and commissions. Memoranda from the Finance Director: a. Changes to the FY 84 proposed budget 3el b. Bond financing for the Airport T -Hangars &Z iMemorandum from the Airport Manager regarding CIP/T-Hangars. Memorandum from the Parks and Recreation Director regarding mandatory j parkland dedication material. oP i Memorandum from the Department of Planning and Program Development regarding Manville Heights rezoning. Memorandum from Assistant City Attorney Boyle regarding appeal of Casey Mahon - Opening of Streets and Alleys. —� Memoranda from the Department of Public Works: a. Melrose Court Neighborhood Meeting b. Westminster Street Water Problem .71.21 c. FAUS Funding for Dubuque Street Improvements, Proposed FY 84 CIP .7/.3 Memorandum from Assistant City Attorney Brown regarding Systems Unlimited, Inc. :3 Memorandum from the Department of Housing and Inspection Services regarding report on Congregate Housing. 3/S Article: Women Firefighters still Spark Resentment in Strongly Macho Job YZKI Legislative Bulletin, February 10 ' Ltr. from Senior Building Inspector to Atty. Cruise re 365 Ellis Avenue (Manville Heights area) MICROFILMED BY i l 1_ -JORM MIC R({/CCiB1 LCEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES J% I i DAN L HUDSON. ASSESOR DENNIS J. BALDRIOGE. DCPUTY OFFICE OF 31obia Citp Citp 255e5or COURTHOUSE P.O. BOX 1546 IOWA CITY. IA 52244 February 9, 1983 Dear Conference Board Member: Enclosed is the agenda for the Public Hearing on the Iowa City Assessors FY 84 proposed budget to be held at the Iowa City Civic Center on Monday, February 14, 1983, at 4:30 P.M. I feel I need to explain more fully the total cost of the proposed residential reappraisal. It was in my notes to be brought up, but I failed to explain at the last meeting that the total cost would be $160,000 based on 10,000 improved parcels at $16 each. Of this $160,000 I have levied $100,000 for FY 84 and the remaining $60,000 will be levied in FY 85, as the completion date for the work will be January 1, 1985. This is the statutory date for our next revaluation. The maximum amount that could be levied during FY 84 for the Special Appraisers Fund is $301,780. As you can see this is almost double that re- quired for the total job that I have proposed to spread over two years. CAROLYN R, BURHE. DEPUTY i February 9, 1983 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Iowa City Conference Board will meet at 4:30 P.M. on Monday, February 14, 1983, at the Iowa City Civic Center. The purpose of the meeting is to hold a public hearing on the Iowa City Assessor's proposed budget for FY 184. AGENDA: 1. Call meeting to order by chairperson. 2. Public hearing on budget. 3. Adopt budget. 4. Discussion on residential reappraisal. 5. Set date for meeting to fill vacancy on the Board of Review. 6. Other business. 7. Adjourn. February 10, 1983 i Mr. Lester Batterman, President Iowa City Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 2358 - Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Dear Mr. Batterman: The Chamber comparing the fold mand cthe unew tp proposed zoning ested that the tordinances resent Puspecifically tion changes. The new Zoning Ordinance is intended to replace the present Zoning Ordinance which has antiquated standards and requirements adopted in 1962. Consequently, there are a significant number of changes made in existing f regulations. A comparison of all of these would require a very lengthy report. i The City believes it would be preferable to schedule a series of informational I meetings and lectures to explain the provisions of the proposed new Zoning Ordinance. In particular, three public hearings on the new Zoning Ordinance are i proposed before the Planning and Zoning Commission and two public hearings are proposed before the City Council. As was done in 1962, when the present ordinance was adopted, one or several of the public hearings either before the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or the City Council may be reserved to provide adequate explanation to the public of the provisions of the ordinance i and to solicit adequate public input. In addition, the staff will develop a series of programs for the local cablevision network. These programs will detail the provisions of the ordinance in comparison with those of the present i ordinance. Finally, a number of copies of the new ordinance and present ordinance will be placed on reserve at the public library for review by those interested in comparing the two ordinances. As always, the staff will also be r available to speak to groups and individuals with an interest in the ordinances. i If you have any questions in regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me or Don Schmeiser, Director of the Planning and Program Development E Department. jSincerely j y yours, Mary C. Neuhauser Mayor cc: City Council John Hughes Acting City Clerk i MICROFILM BY -I-DORM-MICR(CAB'- CEOAN 9..'IMS OES MDIYES 3Od, 0 J� CIT Y OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASHIN G T ON ST. IOWA CIN, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-50W Same letter to: James J. Croker February 9, 1983 Mark Donnelly M. N. Braverman Bruce R. Glasgow Leroy E. Muller 315 First Street #1 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Muller: The City of Iowa Cityreceived bids on February 4, 1983, for five redevelopment parcels located in the Lower Ralston Creek Area. A copy of the bid tabulation is enclosed for your information. During the next few weeks, a review committee comprised of City staff members will be examining the materials submitted by you and the other parties who bid on the Lower Ralston Creek properties. If we require additional information or clarification; we will contact You. You will be advised of the date and time when the City Council will consider awarding bids for the purchase of these properties. Sinc rely rs, Neal G. Berlin City Manager cc: City Council Enc. bj/sp T � I m.CROFIL..ED DY JORM#LA6-' CEDAR RAPIDS VIDS • DE DE5 I401NES J. Croker 0.00 5.00 15.00 ;w w i RICROf ILP JORM _"MI CEDAR RAPIDS C' City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 7, 1983 / To: City Council From: Dale Hell ing, Assistant City Manager Re: Policy on Communication Between the City Council and Boards or Commissions Attached please find a draft of a revised policy on communication between the City Council and Boards or Commissions. This redraft incorporates concerns which have been discussed by Council over the past several months. I have underlined those portions of the draft which differ from the existing formal policy approved by the Council Rules Committee on June 20, 1975. A copy of that document is also attached for your information. Council may wish to refer this draft to the Rules Committee for a recommendation. Therefore, I have included this item on that Committee's agenda of February 14, 1983. At such time as this document is finalized, staff will prepare the appropriate motion for formal Council action. Please contact me if you have any other questions. tpl/9 3 MICROFILMED BY -DORM-"MICR#LA W-. 111 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 30j B n DRAFT 2/4 POLICY ON COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS i 1. Boards and Commissions should use an identical format for minutes. The following is recommended: I • � a. Members present. 1 b. Members absent. � C. Staff present. t d. Recommendations to the City Council. t e. Requests to the City Manager for information and staff assistance. f. List of matters pending Commission/Council disposition. € g. Summary of discussion and formal action(s) taken. 2. Items recommended to the City Council by Boards and Commissions should be v listed as separate Council agenda items to distinguish them from the formal receipt and filing of minutes. Staff will insure that each recommendation includes a statement indicating if and when formal Council action or i i p l informal consideration should be given to any specific recommendation. i' 3. Recommendations from Boards and Commission should be accompanied by the appropriate staff report(s). Information pertaining to any alternatives that i were considered and the rationale for the recommendation should be ; r included where appropriate. i 4. At such time as the City Council takes any formal action or gives informal consideration to any such recommendation, staff will insure that the i 36 � 1 MICROFILMED BY I -_l4•,`.` I - -JOR M -MIC Rl�CI10� .. L I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES DRAFT 2/4 appropriate Board or Commission is notified of the results of that action or consideration, or of any decision by Council to either defer or give no further consideration to that recommendation. Such notification will include an appropriate item on the agenda for the next meeting of that Board or Commission. 5. When items come to the City Council for which there is a designated Board or Commission those items may be referred to that Board or Commission for consideration and report or comment to the City Council. j iI I FA hules Committee Minutes June 20, x975 The Rules Conmittee met on June 20, 1975, to discuss certain matters relating t, all Boards and Commissions. The Rules Committee recommends the followirl,� items: I1• Boards and Commissions should use an identical format for minutes. The following is recommended: a. Members present. b. Members absent. C. Staff present. d. Recommendations to the City Council. e. Requests to the City Manager for information and staff assistance. f. List of matters pending Commission -Council disposition. g. Summary of discussion and formal action(s) taken. i). Items recamnended to the City Council by Boards and Commissions should be listed as separate agenda items to distinguish thein from the formal receipt and filing of minutes. 3). Recommendations from Boards and Commissions should be accompanied by the appropriate staff report(s). Information pertaining to any alternatives that were considered and the rationale for the recommendation should be included where appropriate. 4). When items come to the City Council for which there is a designated Board or Commission those items should be referred to that Board or Commission for consideration and report or comment to the City Council. RULES COMMITTEE Caro W. a rosse Penny K. Davidsen 1 i P11 "o ....... .. 1" JORM--"MICRbL'AE -- i CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES i i 3001 � r I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: January 11, 1983 To: City Council From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance Re: Changes to the FY84 Proposed Budget The attached shows budget changes to the General Fund which will be made as a result of your decisions on the FY84 Proposed Budget. 1. Salary costs in the proposed budget were computed based upon an estimated wage increase percentage. Since the proposed budget was prepared, the AFSCME contract has been settled at a percentage increase which exceeded the amount used in the proposed budget. Therefore, the budgeted salary amounts will need to be increased. A contingency amount was provided in the proposed budget in the year-end fund balance to cover any such excess salary increases. 2. The $2 parking ticket will not be increased to $3 as proposed. This will result in reducing budgeted receipts by $70,000. 3. The budget will include a $20,000 payback from the Parking Revenue Fund to the General Fund to start the reimbursement for the Recreation Center Parking Lot acquisition costs. 4. The Forestry budget will be increased to include $10,500 which will provide funding for the purchase of a chipper. 5. The Police Patrol budget will be increased $44,752 to fund the cost of adding two additional police officers. This does assume that the pension costs (of $7,880) for the two additional officers will be funded from the Trust & Agency levy. With this change, the FY84 Budget will show a total increase of four police officers. 6. The proposed budget included a fee increase for Housing Inspection fees which generated $10,000 in revenue. Since the Council has decided that the housing inspection fees will not be increased in FY84, the receipt budget will be decreased by $10,000. 7. Funding from CDBG ($28,800) for the housing inspection program was computed based upon 25% of all salary costs for that program, including a representative portion of the HIS Director's salary. In addition, funding for $2,500 of the HIS Director's salary will be provided from the Assisted Housing federal monies. l 141CROF1 LIdED BY � I "—-� 1 JOR M --'MIC R(�CAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 1401NE5 I J 'r 2 8. The Aid to Agencies funding approved by Council exceeded the proposed budget amount by $3,814. This will result in an increase to both the expenditure budget and to the transfer -in from General Revenue Sharing. j Therefore, total receipts will decrease by $24,886 and total expenditures will increase by $136,117, resulting in a total net change (decrease) of $161,003 to the fund balance. Since the estimated year-end balance in the proposed budget was $822,195, the funding of this total net change from the fund balance would leave an adjusted fund balance at year-end of $661,192. This should be sufficient, since it is close to the $700,000 year-end fund balance that we typically have attempted to maintain. By adding the pension costs for the two additional police officers to the Trust & Agency levy ($7,880), that levy will increase from $1.680 to $1.691 resulting in a net increase in the total City levy of 1.1 cents per $1,000 assessed valuation. Therefore, the total City levy will increase from $11.897 to $11.908. The changes as listed above will be used to prepare the final proposed budget which will be presented to the citizens for review at the public hearing scheduled for March 1, 1983. bc4/3 ��- 171CRDFI EIAED BY I -DORM""MIC ROC.4 B` t CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 305 I 'r GENERAL FUND FY84 BUDGET CHANGES ------INCREASE OR (DECREASE)------ -RECEIPTS-EXPENDITURES -------------------- b $ 77,051 1. Salary Costs 2. Do Not Increase $2 Tickets (70,000) 3. Parking Payback to General Fund 20,000 4. Chipper for Forestry 5. Additional Police Officers (2) 6. Do Not Increase Housing Inspection Fees (10,000) 7. CDBG Funding for H.I.S. 28,800 Assisted Housing Funding for H.I.S. 2,500 8. Aid to Agencies Funding 3,814 (24,886) TOTAL NET CHANGE 161,003 I41CROFILMED BY _1 �- JORM--MICR6LIES CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MO 10,500 44,752 3,814 136,117 3 05 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 10, 1983 To: City Council From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance I"" Re: Bond Financing for the Airport T -Hangars During last Monday's review•of the Capital Improvement Program, the use of general obligation bonds for financing the construction of Airport T - Hangars was questioned. In 1981, the Council approved the use of general obligation bonds to fund the construction of the T -Hangars built at that time. This approval was based upon two factors. First, the Airport Commission was to obtain lease commitments for the T -Hangars prior to construction. Second, rental income from the T -Hangars would be used to pay all principle and interest on the bonds instead of using property taxes. The sale of revenue bonds has been suggested as an alternative to using general obligation bonds. However, it would be difficult if not impossible to sell revenue bonds because a financial feasibility study would. need to be done which would show potential bond purchasers that there would be sufficient future revenues. These studies typically must show that future operating revenue would be sufficient to cover operating expenses plus one and one-half times the annual principle and interest costs on the bond. Since the Airport operating budget currently must be subsidized with property taxes which are appropriated on an annual basis, there would be no way to guarantee bond holders that future revenues would be sufficient. In addition, the interest rate for revenue bonds would be approximately 2% higher than general obligation bonds and the cost of marketing a bond issue of this size ($120,000) would be prohibitive. These two items alone could increase the total financing cost by up to $15,000. Therefore, if the Council approves the T -Hangar construction and the use of bonds for financing, it would be best to use general obligation bonds instead of revenue bonds. There is a long-term benefit to be derived from this project in that once the bonds are paid off, the rental income would then be available to fund Airport operating costs. This should reduce the amount of property taxes necessary to annually subsidize those operating costs. bj4/8 r� i MICROFILMED BY _-JORM MICR6LA9 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES j 366 J X n City of Iowa City f - MEMORANDUM Date: February 11, 1983 To: City Council From: Fred Zehr, Airport Manager / Re: CIP/T-Hangars The Iowa City Airport Commission recently ran an ad in the Iowa City Press -Citizen seeking response to T -Hangar demand. There were responses from ten (10) individuals indicating that they would be willing to enter into at least a five-year lease at a rate of $70-$90 per month for the hangars. The cost of the T -hangars is estimated around $120,000. I think a general obligation bond would be the most efficient way to fund this project. The interest rates are lower and there would be no burden upon the tax payers of Iowa City because the hangar will generate its own revenue to amortize the bonds. The Airport Commission is still investigating the demand for T -hangars to . determine the appropriate hangar size to consider. bj5/3. 1 MICROFILMED BY DORM --MIC RICA B�- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 307 rd parks & recreation MEMO department to: City Manager and City Council from: i Dennis E. Showalter re: Mandatory Parkland Dedication date: February 10, 1983 ` Material i I i I I � Attached are four papers relating to mandatory parkland dedication: 1. Parkland acquisition for Iowa City, February 1982, which you reviewed chanearly gelintsizerof Scott. nPly arkafromor c8aacresitoe5tacreshis was written is the 2. The proposed ordinance from Planning and Program Development. 3. Memo to you re implementation of the ordinance, with formulas, figures, and maps. I propose to go through this formula for Foster Road Park at the February 14 meeting. 4. Legal opinion from Richard Boyle re mandatory parkland dedication. The ordinance has been reviewed and unanimously approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Planning and Zoning Conmission also has reviewed the ordinance but has submitted no formal recommendation. If the Council wishes to pursue this matter, the ordinance should be referred to Planning I and Zoning Commission for its recommendation. i yyi i i y city of iowa city j 308 i 141CROFIL14ED BY _1 111 L '"JORM��-MICRf�LlI B-` CEDAR RAPIDS DES M01MES�f' I JORM--MICF?4?LAe CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES PRIORITIES At the present time, Iowa City has 29 parks - 524 acres - under its control. 26 parks are owned, three are under lease. For the purposes of this report, I have divided the parks into three broad categories: city-wide parks, community parks, and neighborhood parks. The city-wide parks are: 1. City Park 105.2 acres 2. Hickory Hill Park 97.5 acres 3. Mesquakie Park 64.0 acres 4. Sturgis Ferry Park 37:9 acres 5. West Landfill Park 30.0 acres Total 334.6 acres The community parks are: 1. Mercer Park 27.1 acres 2. Willow Creek Park 27.2 acres 3. Napoleon Park 26.0 acres 4. Terrill Mill Park 17.6 acres Total 97.9 acres According to National Recreation and Park Association standards of ! ten acres of parkland per 1,000 population, we have enough parks. The Iowa Conservation Commission standard for municipalities is fifteen acres per 1,000 population. The Comprehensive Plan calls for seven acres per 1,000 population of city-wide and community parks, or 350 acres (we now have 432 acres), plus five acres per 1,000 population of neighborhood parks, for a total of twelve acres per 1,000 population. Although it is true that the utilization of standards assists in determinimg park acreage requirements, there are many reasons to exercise caution when interpreting the results of these calculations. Specific numbers derived should not be given too much weight because: 1. Standards based on population do not take into consideration either the quality or the location of parkland. Only two of our city - 1 E i MICROFILI4ED BY -_~ , `.• �'-JORM--MICR#LA9 CEDAR RAPIDS DES M018ES !� IJ wide parks, City and Hickory Hill, are truly functional city-wide parks. They are both, unfortunately, located in the north part of the city. The other three all have severe limitations: Mesquakie is an old land- fill, and at present is undeveloped open space; Sturgis Ferry is an old landfill, and basically open space; West Landfill is approximately three miles west of the city, and is being used for specific active recreation programs: the Aerohawks model airplane club and BMX bicycle racing programs. 2. General standards do not take into account the unique popula- tion characteristics of an area. Iowa City has an unusually large proportion of its population in the 13-30 age group due to the presence of the University of Iowa. This means that we need a much higher than average number of acres that can be devoted to the activities and facil- ities that this age group enjoys, such as many kinds of outdoor games, bicycling, and picnicking. 3. Standards do not take into consideration other parkland and open spaces, both public and private, that are in the same area. We are fortunate to be close to regional parks such as the Coralville Reservoir and Kent Park, and adjacent to the open spaces and recrea- tion facilities at the University of Iowa. We do not at the present need any more city-wide or community parks. We still need access to some additional relatively flat land for fields for active sports such as soccer and slow pitch softball. I had hoped to use the south portion of the proposed sewage treatment plant for this. Perhaps we should use some of the city -owned level land northeast of the South Ralston Creek dam, which is presently seeded to alfalfa and leased to a farmer, for soccer fields. In years of aver - E 141CROFILMED BY r- l-- `JORM"-MICR46LAB 111 CEDAR RAPIDS DES FIDIWES J� age rainfall, they would probably be very usable. We would need to s^ make a curb cut and some type of parking off of new Scott Boulevard. Also, two of the proposed neighborhood parks, Aber and Scott, could be used for soccer fields until we get other fields, and enough close residential development to justify using the whole park as a neighbor- hood park. What we do need is a better way to get people to some of the existing city-wide and community parks. There is no bus service to Napoleon Park. The closest bus service to North Hickory Hill is more than a quarter mile away. If any more city-wide or community parks are added, they should be located so that they can be served by mass transit. The area that needs attention in parkland acquisition is in neigh- borhood parks. We now have eighteen of these parks: 1. Wetherby Park 14.0 acres 2. Court Hill Park 8.6 acres 3. Villa Park 6.5 acres 4. Crandic Park (leased) 5.2 acres 5. Fairmeadows Park 4.9 acres 6. Brookland Park 3.8 acres 7. Happy Hollow Park 3.3 acres 8. Pheasant Hill Park 3.3 acres 9. College Green Park 2.4 acres 10. Creekside Park 2.3 acres 11. Oak Grove Park 1.6 acres 12. North Market Square Park 1.5 acres 13. Elm Grove Park 1.4 acres 14. Reno Street Park 1.0 acre 15. Black Springs Circle Park .9 acre 16. Glendale Park .8 acre 17. Highland Park .4 acre 18. Tower Park _4 acre Total 62.3 acres I have not included two leased parks, Camp Cardinal (23 acres) and I-80 (6.5 acres), an unused strip of grass and trees approximately 1/4 mile east of ACT between I-80 and the county road. The Comprehensive Plan recommends five acres of neighborhood park - 3 1 14ICROFILIIED BY l JORM"--MICR6L:AB` CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES land per 1,000 population. If we use 50,000 as the population figure, we should have 250 acres in neighborhood parkland. We have only 62.3 acres, or approximately 25% of what we should have. Perhaps the Comprehensive Plan is too utopian in the recommendation of five acres per 1,000 for neighborhood parkland. A much more practical approach would be to use National Recreation and Park Association stan- dards which call for ten acres of parks per 1,000 population, with 1/2 being city-wide parks, 1/4 community parks, and 1/4 -neighborhood parks. If we adopt this standard, we would have approximately 50% of the neigh- borhood parkland that we should have. METHODS OF ACQUIRING Many large areas of the city do not have a neighborhood park, or tt only a very small one. The area bounded by Kirkwood, Sycamore, Highway L 6, and Gilbert has only one tiny park, Highland Park, which is .4 acres. Twain School (ten acres) is in the southeast corner of this area and serves as a neighborhood park to a limited degree, and could be utilized more effectively. There is only one small park, Glendale Park (.9 acre), in the large area bounded by Rochester, Seventh Avenue, the Rock Island tracks, and Governor. Longfellow School (ten acres) is in the south part of this area, and serves.as a neighborhood park to a limited degree, and could be utilized more effectively. There is only one small park, Glendale Park (.9 acre), in the large area bounded by Rochester, Seventh Avenue, the Rock Island tracks, and Governor. Longfellow School (ten acres) is in the south part of this area, and serves as a neighborhood park to a limited degree. By acquiring neighborhood parks in advance of residential develop - 4 J MICROFILMED BY -JORM MICR46LA8__ -- - - � CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 30? T 19' meat, we can keep this from happening in the future. In the Parks and Recreation Plan 1981-1985, which you have approved, I made the following recommendations on the acquisition of neighborhood parks. These were made after a series of meetings with the Planning and Program Development Department, and were designed to implement the Comprehensive Plan regarding parkland acquisition. 1. Aber Park: a ten acre, level, triangular-shaped piece of ground, in the flood plain east of where Aber Avenue stops, in southwest Iowa City. This could be used initially for two soccer fields; later some or all could be turned into a neighborhood park. This piece of ground is close to Willow Creek Park, which was designed as a nature -oriented park, and not designed for active league -type competitive sports activi- ties. By transferring some of the soccer fields to Aber, Willow Creek would better serve its intended function. There are no school grounds close to Aber; the closest, Horn (eight acres), is more than one mile (by roads) away. Probable acquisition cost: $55,000-$60,000. 2. Miller Park: eight acres, west of Miller Avenue between Highway 1 and Benton Street. Some of this site has existing trees, and is easily adaptable to parkland. Some of the site is tillable ground, easily adapt- able to play fields. Roosevelt School (six acres) is close, and is used as a neighborhood park to a limited degree. There is no neighborhood park to serve the high density residential area west of Roosevelt, south of the Rock Island tracks, north of Benton, and east of George except Tower Park (.4 acre) on the west edge of the area. The Comprehensive Plan shows high density housing west of Miller, some at 8-16 dwelling units per acre, some at 16-24 dwelling units per acre. There is a definite need for both the open space at Roosevelt 5 {1 r i MICROFILMED BY 1"- I_JORMMICR46LJA13'_CEDAR RAPIDS DESM P I 0 I School and the proposed park. Probable acquisition cost: $80,000-$100,000. 3. Prairie du Chien Park: ten acres, east of Caroline Court and 1 1/2 blocks east of Prairie du Chien Road. There is no park in this area at present. The closest school, Shimek, is more than 1/2 mile away. The site is mostly wooded and is an excellent wildlife habitat; an ex- cellent nature trail could be developed here. A small area of the park should be devoted to a playground and the balance preserved for its ecolo- gical significance. Probable acquisition cost: $70,000. 4. Scott Park: eight acres, west of Scott Boulevard and approxi- mately 1,100 feet north of the railroad tracks. The area is level and adjacent to the proposed Village Green South storm water detention area, which lies between the site and the railroad tracks. This site is approx- imately 5/8 mile from Mercer Park, 3/4 mile from South East Junior High; I t" and more than one mile from the nearest elementary school. Mercer Park, i which is really more of a sports complex than a park, is over -used. The site initially could be used for soccer fields. Later, if sufficient I soccer fields were available, some or all of the site could be developed as a quiet, shaded, passive park, away from the cars, noise, and over- crowding of Mercer Park. Probable acquisition cost:. $80,000. 5. Foster Road Park: eight acres, north of the proposed Foster Road extension, south of Interstate 80, and west of Prairie du Chien Road. There is no park in this area now. The closest school ground is approximately 1/2 mile away. This site has some existing shade and is suited for a neighborhood park containing some play fields. Probable acquisition cost: $70,000-$80,000. The Parks and Recreation Commission, at their April 5, 1980 meeting, recommended unanimously to the Council that the money derived from the 0 FM. MICROFILMED BY j DORM" -MIC R4�LA8'- - 1 1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES / I sale of Elm Grove Park be used for the specific purpose of parkland acqui- sition. If and when this park is sold, I think we should acquire Aber and/or Miller Park. Another good use for the money from Elm Grove Park would be to start a revolving fund for land purchase through mandatory park dedication, which I will detail later. Another possible source of revenue, approximately $4,500 per year for the next five years, is the proceeds from the sale of dying and declining walnut trees in the parks. We recently sold twelve trees for $8,639. At the present there are no matching federal funds for parkland acquisition. This program has been off and on in the past; there are efforts now to revive it, but realistically no change is probable until the economy revives. There are always possibilities of donation of usable land for park purposes. The Johnson County Heritage Trust is ready, willing, and able to assist us, but do not have any possible projects close to Iowa City at present. It appears that the best method of systematically obtaining neigh- borhood parkland in developing areas is mandatory park dedication. Dedi- cation is a technique which allows land to be set aside for public use. It is the transfer of land for a public purpose such as streets, utility rights-of-way, or parks, and dedication allows local governments to re- ceive these lands without having to purchase them. Compelling arguments may be advanced in favor of or against the man- datory dedication requirement. They may be summarized as follows. 7 1 MICROFILMED BY DORM--MICRbL"A0*- --1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 309 T Local Government I i i Benefits: 1. Permits appropriate parkland location at the time streets are laid out. 2. Facilitates the possible cooperative planning efforts for park and school sites. 3. Assures that park and open space requirements are met at the time raw land is platted. 4. Shields the community from land value inflation, including the payment of improved land values for raw land. 5. The costs of neighborhood parkland are borne by those who bene- fit from it. Liabilities: 1. Requires the community to allocate funds to develop and main- tain the park prior to the full ripening of the subdivision's tax base, leading to a possible increase in existing property taxes. 2. Encourages communities to rely on dedication as the sole method of acquiring additional parkland. j f 3. Increases the cost of development which may be passed through ! 1. to the future residents of the subdivision, thus increasing the fj initial cost of a lot and house. 1 `! Developer f Benefits: i 1. Ensures the availability of strategically -located neighborhood parks which enhance the marketability of lots within the sub- division. 2. Encourages development by the city of density bonus incentives for dedications in excess of the minimum requirements. 3. Provides a way to use some nondevelopable land as part of the open space requirement. 4. Reduces development costs when using clustering and other inno- vative development techniques. Liabilities: 1. Would reduce the number of development lots in a conventional subdivision, thus requiring a higher sale price or lower margin of profit per lot to offset the cash loss of the dedicated parkland. H _ 141CROFILMED BY 11. �,.-•, 1-Uor.?M --M1C REICAB` - -! CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M0NES r ' af' Resident Benefits: character, and environmental integrity to the 1. Adds diversity, times nondevel- neighborhood. Park/open space lands are many land forms, opable wooded areas, floodplains, hilly or rugged itical ecological ao creases, all of which or serve to protect cr may serve to enhance the livability o 2. May increase property value of homes adjacent to or close by parks and open space lands. kland with fewer funds 3. Permits the community to develop the par involved than if a costly land purchase was as opposed toionly ensures that there wil tbofanoeconvenientrneighborhood park. raw land or the prospec Liabilities: 1. nt If the lama�become avneiighborhoodeloped for eeyesoreeasswelleasaaahazard- propertyy ous area for small children. l 2. May result in higher property taxes in order to finance park development and maintenance. Iowa City has discussed mandatory park dedication at various times � starting in 1974. Former city attorney John Hayek, in a memo dated March 5, 1974, stated the opinion that the city does have the power o r fees in lieu of dedication if the follow - require mandatory dedication o ing standards are met: 111. The park required must be included in our comprehensive or general plan. 2. The subdivision exaction must be considered reasonable, with regard to the subdivision in question. 3. The requirements must be attributable to the specific needs of the subdivision in question. 4. The advantage gained from the requirement must be used to the direct benefit of the people in that subdivision." Since the Hayek memo was written, the city has adopted the Compre- d parks. The dedication hensive Plan, which shows locations of propose procedure should be part of the subdivision platting process which, in s land use and the planning conjunction with the zoning ordinance, govern 9 3 08' I � 1 j MICROFILMED BY -� - JORM-MIC R4ILA B` / r J L % CEDAR RAI'I DS • DES MOIYES V -- L.4 r design and development of raw land into a residential subdivision. The use of a mandatory park dedication ordinance, or fees in lieu of, is widespread throughout the country. At the present time, mandatory I j park dedication or fees in lieu of is in effect and working in Iowa in i the cities of Ankeny and Urbandale. In both cities, the Parks and Rec- reation Department feels that the ordinance is working well. In Urban- dale, the city requires that 10% of the land in all residential develop- ments of more than 1/2 acre be dedicated, or that fees in lieu of be paid, or a combination of both. The amount of the fee shall be the fair market value of the land as determined by an impartial appraisal. In Ankeny the amount of parkland dedicated is determined by the following formula. Minimum Lot Area Per Unit Percentage of Total Land Area 25,000 sq, ft. to 40,000 sq. ft. or greater 3% 8,000 sq, ft. to 24,999 sq. ft. 5% 2,499 sq. ft. or less to 7,999 sq. ft. 10% In cases where land dedication is not compatible with the comprehensive plan, or impractical because of size, fees in lieu of are paid, based on fair market value, and determined by an appointed valuation committee consisting of three persons having knowledge of real estate values. In both cities, fees collected are put into a special fund, only to be used for the purchase of parkland in the immediate area. The cities do not designate an exact site prior to development; they wait for a subdivision plat, see what size it is, where it is located, how many acres of parkland it would generate, and then decide on the exact site. The cities of Ankeny and Urbandale do not immediately guarantee a neighborhood park for residents in all new residential areas; there may be a waiting period until the area is approximately 1/3 to 1/2 develop - 10 i MICROFILMED BY I l_1 -'JORM_--M IC RICA 6'_ CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I 3or ed, and fees in lieu of are enough to purchase the designated site. It I is certainly desirable to be able to provide a park for the first few people in a new area; to do this you would need some sort of a revolv- ing fund. Perhaps a portion of the proceeds from the sale of Elm Grove Park could be used to start such a fund. i i DUAL -USE OF SCHOOLS AND PARKS At the present time the Recreation Division is using many of the public schools for programs, such as: 1. Summer playgrounds at Lem*, Twain, Hoover, and Wood. 2. Weekend gyms at South East and West from January 18 to March 15. 3. Flag football at Wood and Twain, Saturdays in September. 4. ASERP classes at most of the elementary schools (conducted by. University recreation education classes). 5. Volleyball at South East and West, November -March. 6. Gyms at Lucas, Mann, Twain, and Hoover for S.P.I. 7. Hoover gym on Saturday mornings, December -March, for a youth basketball program, organized and supervised by Parks and Rec- reation Commission member Fred Riddle. 8. Gyms at Horn, Lerme, Lucas, Mann, Shimek, and Wood, January - March, for grade school children physical activities. 9. Some of the diamonds at South East for girls softball in the summer. The schools use our facilities for a number of uses, such as: 1. Mercer Park tennis courts for physical education and meets, used by South East and City. 2. Mercer Pool by South East for physical education, late August to mid September. 3. City Park tennis courts for practice and meets by West. 4. Social Hall for various reasons including physicals. 5. Recreation Center pool from late August to late February. The city provided some play equipment and plant materials for Long- fellow and Twain schools through the Block Grant Program in 1977-1978. The schools agreed to maintain the improvements. It has been suggested that a possible solution to our shortage of neighborhood parks would be to "designate" school grounds as dual -use schools -parks. The Comprehensive Plan makes reference to this on page 11 RM 141CROFILIIED BY -- 1. JORM-MICR�ILAO. 1..• f` I CEDAR RF RIDS DES MOImES / 'r 102: "Currently there are approximately two acres per 1,000 population of neighborhood and mini parks. School playgrounds were not included in this total although these areas frequently serve as neighborhood parks." Elementary schools in Iowa City are as follows: Hoover 6 acres Horn 8 acres Lelnne 8 acres Lincoln 5 acres Longfellow 10 acres Lucas 9 acres Mann 4 acres Roosevelt 6 acres Shimek 16 acres Twain 10 acres Wood 8 acres Total 90 acres The 90 acres includes land used for buildings, parking lots, roads, etc. Even if you included all.90 acres as parkland for statistical purposes, and added the existing 62 acres of neighborhood parks, you would still be approximately 100 acres short of the Comprehensive Plan recommendation of five acres per 1,000 population. If lie do designate school grounds as dual -use neighborhood parks, almost assuredly it will lead to a contribu- tion by the city to maintenance of these areas. Dual -use designation will not increase the acreage available to the public for recreation, open space, etc., nor will it correct the number one need for parks in Iowa City, which is neighborhood parks in newly developing areas. In conclusion, my recommendations for implementation of a systematic policy to acquire new neighborhood parks are: 1. Adopt a mandatory parkland dedication ordinance for neighborhood parks. 2. Use any money from the sale of Elm Grove Park to acquire Aber and/or Miller Parks, and/or use the money to establish a revolv- ing fund to help get the mandatory park dedication policy started. f ' ij 111CROFILMED BY � 1. _DORM---MICR46L-A:6" CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I' M 12 f ' ij 111CROFILMED BY � 1. _DORM---MICR46L-A:6" CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I' M 1 ORDINANCE N0. S4fi�(,''/� • AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SUBDIVISIO 8110 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR DEDICATION I OF LAND, PAYMENT OF FEES, OR BOTH FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND RECREATION LAND IN iSUBDIVISIONS. i BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: i r SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish the standards and requirements for - the dedication of land, payment of fees, or both in I providing neighborhood park and recreational facilities to serve future residents in all new subdivisions. SECTION 2. THE SUBDIVIDERS MUST PROVIDE PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. Every subdivider who ha d subdivides and sedicate a portion of such land, pay a fee, or do both as set forth in this ordinance. SECTION 3. APPLICATION. The purpose of this ordinance shall appy to all subdivisions except 1 • those for which preliminary subdivision plats have I ;f been filed within thirty (30) days after the j ffff lL effective date of this ordinance and business and industrial subdivisions. ' SECTION 4. RELATION OF LAND RE UIRED TO POPULA- TION DENSITY. hat the public interest, convenience, health, welfare and safety require that five (5) acres of land, for each one thousand (1000) persons residing within the City, be devoted to neighborhood park and recreational purposes. t SECTION 5. AMOUNT OF LAND TO BE DEDICATED. The amount of land required to be dedicated by the j subdivider pursuant to this ordinance, shall be based on the gross area included in the subdivision, determined by the following formula: DENSITY FORMULA % of Gross Area of the Net Density Per Subdivision Required when Dwelling Unit Parkland is Dedicated 1 D.U. per acre or more 0.60% 301' MICROFILMED BY - I' 1. -DORM"MIC Rf�LA0 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES i i '�^dinance No. rage 2 1 141CROFILMED BY 1---JORM---MICR4ICAE4'- - 111 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401NES I� P t 3og' 1 D.U. per 1/2-2 acre 1.20% 1 D.U. per 10,000 square feet to 1/2 acre 1.70% 1 D.U. per 9,000-9,999 square feet 2.70% 1 D.U. per 8,000-8,999 square feet 3.00% 1 D.U. per 7,000-7,999 square feet 3.40% 1 D.U. per 6,000-6,999 square feet 3.90% 1 D.U. per 5,000-5,999 square feet 4.60% 10-19 D.U.'s per acre 5.80% 20-29 D.U.'s per acre 9.30% 30-39 D.U.'s per acre 12.00% 40-49 O.U.'s per acre 15.00% 50-59 D.U.'s per acre 18.00% 60-69 D.U.'s per acre 21.00% 70-79 D.U.'s per acre 23.00% 80-89 D.U.'s per acre 26.00% 90-99 O.U.'s per acre 28.00% 100 D.U.'s and over per acre 29.00% SECTION 7. AMOUNT OF FEE IN LIEU OF LAND DEDICA- ON. A. Where such dedication or reservation is not feasible or compatible with the comprehensive plan as determined by the City Council upon recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the subdivider or developer shall, in lieu thereof, pay to the City a fee or combination of fee and land, equivalent to the value of the required dedication or reservation. 1 141CROFILMED BY 1---JORM---MICR4ICAE4'- - 111 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES I401NES I� P t 3og' i ,I dinance No. rage 3 B. Such fee shall be used exclusively for �_. • immediate or future site acquisition' and development and shall be used only for the purpose providing neighborhood park and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision or development for which it was received. C. In all cases the City Council, upon recommen- dation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall direct and determine that fees are to be I deposited, or that a combination of fees and land are to be deposited, dedicated for providing neighborhood park and recreational I facilities or a combination thereof. The amount of such fee shall be the sum equal to the fair market value of the amount of land required and shall be determined at the time of the filing of the final plat in accordance with the following: (a) the fair market value as determined by the City Council based upon the then assessed value, modified to equal market value in accordance with current practice of the City Accessor; or • (b) if the subdivider objects to such evalua- tion he may, at his expense, obtain an appraisal of the property by a qualified real estate appraiser approved by the City, which appraisal may be accepted by the City Council if not reasonable; or { (c) the City and subdivider may agree as to the fair market value. i SECTION B. CREDIT FOR PRIVATEOPEN SPACE. Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a proposed subdivision and such space is to be privately owned and maintained for future residents of the subdivision, such area shall be credited against. the requirement of parkland dedication as set forth in Section 5 hereof, or the payment of fees in lieu of, as set forth in Section 6 hereof, provided the City Council finds, upon recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, it is in the public interest to do so, and that the following standards are met: (a) that yards, court areas, set backs, and other . open areas required to be maintained by the zoning and building regulations shall not be ` included in the computation of such private open space; and f � 11 y MICROFILMED BY 1. 'J" ORM�MIC RILA9- ' CEDAR RAPIDS • DES M0MES I / I � I rdinance No. Page 4 i • (b) that the private ownership and maintenance'of f the open space is adequately provided for' by written agreement; and (c) that the use of the private open space is restricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of future owners of the property within the tract and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the City; and (d) that the proposed private open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes, taking into considera- tion such factors as size, shape, topography, i geology, access, and location of private open space land; and (e) that facilities proposed for open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the community facilities element of the comprehensive plan, and are approved, upon recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, by the City Council. • SECTION 9. CHOICE OF LAND OR FEE. l (a) PROCEDURE. The procedure for determining whether the subdivider is to dedicate land, pay a fee, or both, shall be as follows: (1) SUBDIVIDER. At the time of filing a preliminary plat for approval, the owner of the property shall, as part of such filing, indicate whether he desires to dedicate property for park and recreational purposes, or whether he desires to pay a fee in lieu thereof. If he desires to dedicate land for this purpose, he shall designate the area thereof on the preliminary plat as submitted. (2) COOPERATION WITH THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. At the time of filing of the preliminary plat, the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall cause to be forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission the preliminary plat, and any and all attachments, and • shall request that said Parks and Recrea- tion Commission review same and make recommendations and suggestions thereon Ii i MICROFILMED BY -I - 1"-JORNI--"'MIC Rf�IL 4a _ 1JJ I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 I �l dinance No. age 5 • with regard to the placement, siie,- design, and location of the proposed park area, fees in lieu of dedication, or both, within the terms of this ordinance. Within twenty-one (21) days after receipt of a copy of said preliminary plat, the Parks and Recreation Commission shall make recommendations and suggestions and same shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Failure of the Parks and Recreation Commission to make recommendations and suggestions within the twenty-one (21) days aforementioned shall in no way serve to delay, postpone, or reject the preliminary plat and the requirement of the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendations and suggestions shall thereby be waived. (3) ACTION OF CITY. At the time of the preliminary plat approval, the City Council, upon recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall determine as a part of such approval, whether to require a dedication of land within the subdivision, payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both. (4) PREREQUISITES FOR APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT. Where dedication is required, a dedication document shall be submitted prior to the approval of the final plat. Where fees are required the same shall be deposited with the City prior to the approval of the final plat. Open space covenants for private park and recreational facilities shall be submitted to the City prior to approval of the final plat and shall be recorded contemporaneously with the final plat. (b) DETERMINATION. Whether the City Council, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, accepts land dedication or elects to require payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, shall be determined by consideration of the following: (1) community facilities element of the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan for land use, trafficways, and community facilities; and ' 1 111CROFILMED BY --JORM-MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES J� f- • r—" rdinance No. Page 6 (2) topography, geology, access, and location of land in subdivision available for dedication; and (3) size and shape of the subdivision and land available for dedication. (4) the relation of the subdivision or development to the Comprehensive Plan Map, particularly as such plan map may show proposed neighborhood parks and . recreational areas. (5) the character and recreational needs of the neighborhood in which the subdivision or development is located. (6) recommendations and suggestions of the Planning and Zoning Commission. (7) the determination of the City Council, upon recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as to whether land shall be dedicated, or whether a fee shall be charged or a combination thereof, shall be final and conclusive. SECTION 10. TIME OF COMMENCEMENT MUST BE DESIGNATED. At the time the final pat is approved the ity Council shall designate the time when development of the neighborhood park and recreational facility shall be commenced. SECTION 11. LIMITATION ON USE OF THE LAND AND FEES. The land and fees received under this ordinance shall be used only for the purpose of providing neighborhood parks and recreational facilities to serve the subdivision for which received and the location of the land and amount of fee shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivision. i SECTION 12. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in con ict with the provision of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 13. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provi- sion or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such ajudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a • whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. i MICROFILMED BY 1..1 JOR M- MIC R#CA B- ..7 CEDAR RAPIDS DES 1401NES 1� M: E Jl Local Government Benefits • Pern7nsappropriate pa 10 fill IlGlllltn al the lime st rams arc laid nut. • I"Icifilmes the pl r><iblciae+leraliec planning efforts for perk and schaul sibs. • AssunslhatpavkanJnpa•n;pacvn•tµdn•mrnlsan• mel al 1 he I ime raw land is 1•lai tel. • Prom utesmo. eefficient land development st rat tgits, including dttato, and nlanntd unit dcvelopmeals. r—�^ • Pntvidaa for future amenity values for the community in thesame manner asusher Appropriate land development controls. • Shields l he commtuuly lrom land value inflation and prig• gouging allcmplaJ by many developers, including the payment of impruveJ land values fur rate land. Liabilities • Re�ryimthct><7mmunih•tua0tcatvfundsw developand maintain Iheltark prior it, the lull rfRming of the stidivisimi s las base leading to an increase in eahting properly taxes. • I.nnntrages n7mmunilit5 ttirvly un dadicat innas tl+csole method uf acquiring aatdilional park land. • Increases theast'If development which willle passed through 11, the future residents of the subdivision thus increasing the initial not of a lilt and horse. Deveioper Benefits • Vernlite.hv jet-e;q-e.- in>an7n case, n7 daluci llec slue of the land dtdicated as.0 hmint�a ccpanx•. " 1{n_urts lite ae'adahililyo(slralrgicail%'kW:aJ nri�ld�+:hu J parka which enhance the marlaet at+i hey of lots it ilhin the sutdi%•isiun. �.• F'nmuragts develo(v»em ufdinsity btmus frust k t> lav dali6at ions in veeese of the minimtun retlutrcnnenis. • I'rovidte a nae to use• wine nundceelultdde land as earl of the upx•n space «quiremcnt. 14 -ducts develupmt•nl tied%%rhea using cliNvrin; and duther innm•alit_e drvelnpn7rnt tet hniyua�. Liabilities • Reduces the number of development lots in the S"ivision. this r"iring a higher sale price per IM to offset the cash hiss of the dedicated park land. 141CROFILMED BY _I JORM'—MICR#L"AIT- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES t401RES Resident Benefits (( i • Addsdiversity,characwr.and environmental�•'�I integrity to the neighl,,tn,11tiod. Park!opens ce landsaremany times nondevelopabl wooded. 2 areas, flotdplains, hilly or ru&vcd land forms. or arve to protect « iticai ecological processes, all of which may wn* to enhance the livability of an arta. • Int'nrises urnparty t•alucnf humesmijaecnl toor a 0 close by parks and open sp.tce lands. • Permilstile communftvIt) develop the park land %vilh fewer funds invoived than if a costly land purchase was involved. Thio ensures that there will be a dccoloped parkas apposed Ill only ra%y land in the prtcpeci of no convenient neighbcrhod park. Liabilities • If the land is not developed for several years, the . vacant prof-wly may become a neighborhood eye:coreas%veilasahazardous area for small ` children. • \laynsuhinhigherpruferly'laxtsinmderlu ' finance park devadnpmenl and maintenance. parks & recreationMEMO__ department to; City Council and City Manager re; Mandatory Park Dedication PROPOSAL from. Dennis E. Showalter date . February 10, 1983 The Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department would like the Iowa City City Council to approve an ordinance amending the subdivision ordinance of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, establishing regulations for dedication of land, payment of fees, or both for neighborhood park and recreation land in subdivisions. INTRODUCTION Mandatory park dedication is a transfer of a land easement for a public recrea- tion area or park. With no matching federal funds for parkland acquisition currently available, no present possibilities of usable land for park purposes, and no funds to purchase parkland outright, the best method for obtaining needed neighborhood parkland is dedication. The Comprehensive Plan recommends five acres of neighborhood parkland per 1,000 population. A more realistic recommendation to adopt would be the National Recreation and Park Association standard of 2.5 acres of neighborhood parkland per 1,000 population. A combination of 17.0 acres of dedication and designation of 45.7 acres of school playgrounds as dual -use schools -parks would meet this i standard. I NRPA STANDARD Acres Percent of Standard Current neighborhood parkland 62,3 49.8 School playgrounds 45.7 36.6 Scott Park dedication 5.0 4.0 Miller Park dedication 4.5 3.6 Foster Road Park dedication 7.5 6.0 Totals 125.0 100.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF DEDICATION Mandatory park dedication should.be part of the, preliminary platting process. The developer would submit the plat and indicate whether he desires to dedicate property for park and recreational purposes or pay a fee (fair market price determined at the time of the filing of the final plat). The preliminary plat would be forwarded from the Planning and Zoning Commission to the Parks and Recreation Commission to make recommendations with regard to the placement, city of iowa city MICROFILMED BY DORM ' ICRbCA B' I ' fj I CEDAR RAPIDS •DES MOINES j ..1 UN -J i Mandatory Park Dedication, Page 2 size, design, and location of the proposed park area, fees in lieu of dedication, or both. At the time of the preliminary plat approval, the City Council, upon recommenda- tion by the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall determine as a part of such approval whether to require a dedication of land within the subdivision, payment of a fee, or a combination of both. Where dedication is required, a dedication document shall be submitted prior to the approval of the final plat. Any fees must be deposited with the City prior to the approval of the final plat. CASE STUDY - FOSTER ROAD PARK Foster Road Park is a proposed eight -acre park north of the proposed Foster Road Extension, south of Interstate 80, and west of Prairie du Chien Road. There is no park within one-half mile of this area. This site is suited for a neighborhood park containing some play fields and shade trees. The probable acquisition cost is $70,000-$80,000. This area is surrounded by 120.7 acres of unplatted land. The City planners have projected 1,302 dwelling units with 2.3 residents per dwelling unit, totaling 2,995 residents. Using the standard of 2.5 acres of neighborhood park- land per 1,000 population, the developers should present a preliminary plat indicating that 7.5 acres will be dedicated for park and recreation purposes, or indicating that a fee for 7.5 acres of land will be paid to the City. A dedication document or a fee will be provided with the final plat, which will detail all dedicated land. parks & recreation department MEMO_. to: City Council and City Manager from. Dennis E. Showalter re: Mandatory Park Dedication Data date: February 10, 1983 308 1 1 t I- 141CROFILIAED BY I r 1. -DORM-'MIC R�IC,4 LIJ I CEDAR RARI05.OES MOIYES i % FORMULAS 1. Projected Cost = probable acquisition cost; taken from Parkland Acquisition for Iowa City, February 1982, by Dennis E. Showalter. 2. Projected Size = park size in acres; taken from Parkland Acquisition for Iowa City, February 1982, by Des E. Showalter. nm 3. Number of Surrounding Acres = non -platted land, including parkland, outlined in red on the attached maps. 4. Projected Value of Surrounding Acres =projected cost _ x PFsize no. of surrounding acres 5. Projected i Dwelling Units = maximum density per acre as listed in the Comprehensive Plan x number of surrounding acres. 6. Cost per Dwelling Unit =•projected value of surrounding acres pro,7ected dwelling units 7. Dwelling Units per Acre = projected dwelling units number of surrounding acres 8. Percent of Acres to be Dedicated (Showalter's Formula) = 2.5 acres of neighborhood parkland to be dedicated per 1,000 population, using the 1980 census figure of 2.3 residents per dwelling unit. Projected dwelling units x 2.3 residents per dwelling unit divided by 1,000 population x 2.5 acres to be dedicated. Showalter's formula: Parkland Acquisition for Iowa City, February 1982. 1980 census figure: city planners. 9. Percent of Acres to be Dedicated (Boothroy's Formula) = density formula taken from Boothroy's preliminary ordinance "Amending the Sub- division Ordinance of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, Establish- ing Regulations for Dedication of Land, Payment of Fees, or Both for Neighborhood Park and Recreation Land in Subdivisions." Dwelling units per acre = Na of gross area to be dedicated x number of surrounding acres. city of iowa city 308 1 1 t I- 141CROFILIAED BY I r 1. -DORM-'MIC R�IC,4 LIJ I CEDAR RARI05.OES MOIYES i % Mandatory Park Dedication Data, Page 2 FOSTER ROAD PARK Projected cost: $80,000 Projected size: 7.5 acres Number of surrounding acres: 112.7 acres Projected value of surrounding acres: $1,127,000 Projected dwelling units: 1,302 dwelling units (50 acres @ 8-16 dwelling units/acre; 62.7 acres @ 2-8 dwelling units/acre) Cost per dwelling unit: $865.59 Dwelling units per acre: 11.55 dwelling units per acre Percent of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 6.7% Number of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 7.5 acres Percent of acres to be dedicated (Boothroy): 5.8% Number of acres to be dedicated (Boothroy): 6.5 acres SCOTT PARK Projected cost: $50,000 Projected size: 5 acres Number of surrounding acres: 125.9 acres Projected value of surrounding acres: $1,259,000 Projected dwelling units: 1,007 dwelling units (2-8 dwelling units/acre) Cost per dwelling unit: $1,114 Dwelling units per acre: 8 dwelling units/acre Percent of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 4.6% Number of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 5.8 acres Percent of acres to be dedicated (Boothroy): 4.6 % Number of acres to be dedicated (Boothroy): 5.8 acres Ii MICROFILMED BY_1 �- - JORM: 'MICR#LAB` 111 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 308 T r. Mandatory Park Dedication Data, Page 3 MILLER PARK Projected cost: $100,000 Projected size: 8 acres Number of surrounding acres: 56.3 acres Projected value of surrounding acres: $703,750 Projected dwelling units: 781 dwelling units (15 acres @ 2-8 dwelling units/ acre; 41.3 acres @ 8-16 dwelling units/acre) Cost per dwelling unit: $901.32 Dwelling units per acre: 13.87 dwelling units Percent of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 7.98% Number of acres to be dedicated (Showalter): 4.5 acres i I' i f. 0 or lNEffigie'; tip j If P. f VIGI&A ULM S if MICROFILMED BY _"DORM MICR46LAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES MOINES ftm I ao LT IIINI �!Ii (2 pl/ J� City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: December 14, 1982 R� To: Neal Berlin and Dennis E. Showalter 1 From: Robert W. Jansen and Richard J. Boyle Re: Mandatory Parkland Dedication by Subdividers The Iowa City Parks and Recreation Commission would like the Iowa City Council to enact an ordinance amending the subdivision regulations (City Code Chapter 32), to require that subdividers dedicate to the City a portion of any tract which is being subdivided for neighborhood park and recreation use, or in lieu of dedication, to pay a fee which would be used for parkland acquisition. For purposes of this memorandum the term "parkland" dedication," or similar terms, will be used to mean dedication, or payment of a fee in lieu of dedication. QUESTION PRESENTED Is the City empowered to enact such an ordinance? CONCLUSION There is no definitive answer, but the City probably has such power. The Iowa Code does not expressly authorize such dedications, or fees in lieu thereof, but enactment will undoubtedly lead to one or more challenges to its legality. On at least two previous occasions (in 1974 and 1976) legal department opinions on this question have been prepared (copies are attached). Those memoranda are quite comprehensive, so this memorandum will be limited to a summary and update of the discussions contained in those memos. DISCUSSION Generally, dedication of parkland may only be required by municipalities where there is authorization in state statutes, either express or implied. The Ryan and Braun memoranda adequately discuss this requirement, and reflect the current status of the law. However, one point which is not discussed is the effect of home rule. The commentators (e.g. McQuillen, Municipal Corporation (3rd Ed.), Sec. 25.146a) and cases cited in the memoranda appear to be based on the pre -home rule analysis of the powers of. municipalities. The old rule was that municipalities possess and can exercise only those powers granted in express words of the laws of the General Assembly. However, subsequent to the state constitutional amendment granting home rule powers to municipalities (Iowa Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 38A), municipalities are given "home rule power and authority, not inconsistant with the laws of the General Assembly." Further, Iowa Code (1981), Section 364.2(2) authorizes cities to exercise home rule powers "subject only to limitations expressly imposed by a state or city law," and Section 364.2(3) states that "An exercise of a city power is not inconsistant with a state law unless it is irreconcilable with the state law." I l 14ICRor1LMED BY I1 - JORM - MICR46LA6- CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES Wi J Code Section 364.3 places certain limitations on the powers of cities, including the following: "(3) A city may not set standards and requirements which are lower or less stringent than those imposed by state law, but may set standards and requirements which are higher or more stringent than those imposed by state law, unless a state law provides otherwise. (4) A city may not levy a tax unless specifically authorized by a state law." The Iowa Supreme Court has interpreted the home rule power grant literally, allowing imposition of requirements unless state law expressly prohibits such requirements. Bryan v. City of Des Moines, 261 N.W.2d 685 (Iowa 1978); accord, Chelsea Theater Corporation v. City of Burlington, 258 N.W.2d 372 (Iowa 1977). That is, a municipal regulation which is I merely additional to that of state law does not create a conflict with the state law. See Gannett v. Cook, 245 Iowa 750, 61 N.W.2d 703, 706-707 (1954). In our opinion, although the Iowa statute (Code Sec. 409.14) does not expressly provide for dedication of parkland as a condition to approval of a subdivision plat, a requirement for such dedication is not inconsistant with the Code (i.e., the laws of the General Assembly) so it is probably permissible under Iowa law. It is not expressly prohibited. However, assuming the correctness of the foregoing conclusion, substantial questions remain concerning 1) the reasonableness of the requirements, and 2) whether fees in lieu of dedication are permissible. As pointed out in the Ryan and Braun memoranda, the rule as to what is reasonable in order to satisfy constitutional requirements, is that "No developer shall be compelled to dedicate open space unless the need for it is specifically and uniquely attributable to its activity and which would otherwise be cast upon the public." Pioneer Trust and Savings Bank v. Village of Mount Prospect, 22 Ill.2d 375, 1766 N.E.2d 799, 801 1961] Requirements exceeding those would be an unconstitutional taking of property. In Jordan v. Village of Menomonee Falls, 137 N.W.2d 422 (Wis. 1966) the Court accepted the Pioneer Trust test, but noted that that test should not be so restrictively applied as to cast an unreasonable burden of proof upon the municipality. The Wisconsin court suggested a test which would allow the municipality to show needs arising from overall growth of the community, as opposed to a more specific finding of need arising solely because of a particualr developer's plan. Collis v. City of Bloomington, 246 N.W.2d 19 (Minn. 1976) adopted the same test. In California, the test appears to be whether the amount and location of land bears a reasonable relationship to the use of the facilities by future inhabitants of the subdivision. KM MICRO(ILMED BY -DORM -MICR(6LA13 ` r CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES J As we understand it, the proposed ordinance (in Sec. 6) based the amount of land to be dedicated upon projected or average number of occupants per dwelling unit. The standard is to be five acres of neighborhood parkland per 1,000 population. That recommendation is greater than National Recreation and Park Association standards, but is the standard adopted in the current Comprehensive Plan. The draft Comprehensive Plan indicates the "traditional" standard has been 10 acres per 1,000 population. The standard acreage is then converted into a percentage of the total subdivision by use of a formula using 1980 census data showing an average of 2.3 residents per dwelling unit (We assume that is the average for Iowa City). Although we have not attempted to check the percentage requirements shown in the proposed ordinance, we note that Section 4 states that 5 acres per 1,000 population standard, and assume the density formula set forth in the proposed ordinance is based on that standard. Presumably, an opponent would contend that the mandatory dedication violates substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and denies equal protection, also in violation of the 14th Amendment, because there is no fair and substantial relationship between those to whom the dedication requirement applies and an appropriate governmental objective. See: Bryan v. C� of Des Moines, SIMa. The Iowa Supreme Court, in Bryan, noted that the same analysis applies to both claims, the test being whether a rational relationship exists between the requirement (i.e., mandatory dedication) and the public health, safety and welfare. In our opinion, it is possible to show a reational relationship between the parkland dedication requirement in the proposed ordinance and the public health, safety, and welfare, based upon the "traditional" parkland needs standard, the National Recreational and Parks Association standard, and the Comprehensive Plan standard. See Bryan v. City of Des Moines, osU Td. HOWEVER, it should be borne in mind that that statement is an pinion and it is almost a certainty that, if enacted, the dedication requirement will undoubtedly be challenged in court. With specific regard to fees in lieu of dedication, the proposed ordinance suggests an amount equal to the fair market value of the amount of land which would be required, such value to be determined upon the basis of the City Assessor's valuation of the land, or an appraisal obtained by the developer. Although we have not reviewed all of the ordinances referred to in the cases cited in the Ryan and Braun memos, we note that many contain specific dollar amounts (e.g., $200 per lot in Jordan v. Village of Menomonee Falls) rather than an amount explicitly based on fair market value. It is not possible to determine, based on information contained in the cases, whether the stated amount is equivalent to land value. We cannot give any definitive opinion regarding the reasonableness of the fee, but can surmise that, if the land dedication requirement is reasonable, the fee in an equivalent amount should also be considered reasonable. i 1 111 CROF I LR ED BY 1. —DORM "MIC R;L AB'- CEDAR RAPIDS DES 4OI4E5 3o J r I 4 Another facet of the fee in lieu of dedication legality problem is based on the use to be made of any fees which are collected. The proposed ordinance (Secs. 7B and 11) limits use of the fees to acquire and develop neighborhood parkland "to serve the subdivision or development for which it was received." Those provisions may be adequate to overcome a 11 contention that the fee is not reasonably related to requirements specifically and uniquely attributable to the proposed development." However, implementation of the ordinance may be much more difficult than its statement limiting use of the money. For example, if land is not available at a reasonable price within easy walking distance of the development, can the fee be collected? Can the fees be used to acquire land which might serve the subdivision or development if occupants thereof wish to transport themselves to a somewhat distant site. That is, what is a reasonable relationship on development and the proposed park? Further, how long may the City hold the funds before acquiring parkland? If the fees being paid by a developer are not adequate to purchase parkland at a i given time, would the City be required to furnish whatever additional funds might be needed? Section 10 of the proposed ordinance requires that J the City Council shall, at the time of final plat approval, designate the t time when development of the neighborhood park shall be commenced. If 1 fees are paid in lieu of dedication, that provision could be construed as placing•a burden on the Council to make up any shortage of required -funds to acquire land for a park for a subdivision. i ' The final facet of the fee question is whether such fee would be considered a tax, the imposition of which is not expressly authorized by state law and, therefore, beyond the power of the City as limited by Iowa Code Sec. 364.3(4). The Iowa Court has not been faced with the exact question of whether the fee in lieu of dedication is a tax. However, it has defined the word "tax." In Newman v. Cof Indianola, 232 N.W.2d ear1 568, 573-574 (Iowa 1975), quoting an lier decision, the ourt said: "Generally speaking, assessments are generally imposed by an exercise of the taxing power, yet a clear distinction is everywhere recognized between a "tax" in the proper sense of the word and a "special assessment." The former may be said to be a contribution or levy imposed upon property for general public purposes without regard to the generation of special benefits conferred, while the latter is imposed only as a payment for special benefits conferred upon the property charged by an improvement the expense of which is thus to be met." While the Iowa Court's definition appears to be restrictive enough that the fee in lieu of dedication would not be deemed a tax, since the fee would be collected for a specific purpose - parkland acquisition - rather than general public purposes, the issue is far from clear, and again opens an area for litigation, particularly since courts in other states have found such fees to be taxes, e.g. Aunt Hack Ri"ee Estates, Inc. v. Pla�nnin_g Commission of Danbury, 273 A.A.-2d BW( oC nn. 1�b7j; Haugen v. eGl ason, 33FT2d 1087bre. 1961). bj/sp cc: Don Schmeiser 30 8' I MICROFILMED BY 1. - - 1 --, DORM -MIC Rf�LAB- II1 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES I �- EMcity roof Iowa ditty UM DATE: February 8, 1974 TO: John Hayek, City Attorney FROM: Dick Braun, Assistant City Attorney RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Subdivision regulations requiring the mandatory dedication of land or Fees -in -lieu of land as precedent to plat approval must generally be authorized by state legislation. States fall into three categories on this issue: 1. States specifically allowing mandatory dedication of land or fees -in -lieu of dedication. 2. States where enabling legislation neither specifically authorizes nor forbids mandatory dedication of land or fees - in -lieu thereof. 3. States lepe mandatory dedicationere of lands ortion feessinclieuathey reofhibits I will discuss these three in order placing Iowa in the Proper perspective. 1. To name a few, California, Arkansas, Washington, and Minnesota have adopted legislation authorizing dedication and fees -in -lieu provisions. Out of this list of states the California example has created the strongest impact. Prior to the enactment of mandatory dedication legislation in California in 1965, there was a 1949 landmark case already in existence in that state, Ayres v. City of Los Angeles, 34 Cal.2d 31, 207 P.2d 31 (1949). The A res case stands for the proposition that a land oomer or developer can be required to pay for improvements which are generated by his use of the land whether or not the community is also benefited by the expenditure. It is Che C_tligation of the subdivider to comply with reasonable conditions for design, dedication, improvement, and restrictive use of the land so as to conform to the safety and general welfare of the lot owners in the subdivision and of the public. Thus, identifying the existence of benefits to those intended to be burdened by the restrictions, the court made its ultimate leap of logic for which Ayres has been cited ever since: "It is no defense to the condition imposed in a subdivision map proceeding that their fulfillment will incidently benefit the City as a whole.", pyres vs. City of Lai-!! at page 7. Subsequent to the Ayres case, in 1965, 1 l RICROFILMED BY 1 ' JORM "MICR6LAB` i I CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES Kul J NEMORANDUM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Page 2 California passed specific legislation (Section 11546 of the Business Code of the State), which authorized cities and counties, as a condition of subdivision map approval, to require a subdivider to dedicate land for neighborhood parks, or in -lieu thereof, to pay fees for such purposes. Subsequent to this date the Supreme Court of California in 1971 in an expansion of the A res doctrine to require dedication of land or fees -in -lieu of dedication for parks and other open spaces handed down an opinion in Associated Home Builders, Etc. v. Walnut Creek, 94 Cal.Rptr. 630,-787 P.2d �.._,. sustained the validity of Section 115 49'of the Business and Professional Code of the State of California and additionally sustained an ordinance of the city of Walnut Creek enacted pursuant to said statute. The Supreme Court found a merit in the contention that the city should be able to use the collected fees anywhere in the community and not be required to spend such fees on a park conveniently located to the subdivision. It should be noted at this time for future reference that Associated Home Builders disposed of, in a footnote, an important Illinois case in this area, Pioneer Trust and Sav1n s Bank v. Villa e of Mount Prospect, 22 Ill.2d 375, 197 N.E.2d 799 lybl It can obviously j be noted that the California position represents one end of the spectrum; that being the most liberal and progressive approach. ? 2. By far, the most difficult and complex situation is when enabling legislation neither expressly permits nor prohibits requirements for dedication or fees -in -lieu dedication of land as precedent to plat approval. To date there is no general agreement among the various state courts involved, concerning the constitu- tionality of requiring dedications as a condition to subdivision approval. But a few courts have identified constitutional principles that underlie their decision. Common subdivision exactions, such as the dedication of streets and sidewalks are designed to minimize the impact of the subdivision on the municipality and are supported by the general welfare aim of the police power. The arguments supporting these requirements have been uniformly accepted by the courts. A leading case in this area, Ayres v. City Cour.:.il of Los Angeles, has supported this issue as far back as•ly149. This brings us then to the key problem --whether the newer kinds of requirements in sub- divisions, parks for example, should be treated any differently from the more traditional requirements which have received judicial approval (see Iowa Code Section 409.5). Dees the require- ment to dedicate land for parks as a condition to subdivision approval lie within the permissible objectives of the police power to protect the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the general public? 1� i 111CR0(ILI.IED BY �- "JORM-MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES :10 NES �U.J J MEMORANDUM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Page 3 New York and Wisconsin have enabling legislation which neither specifically authorizes nor forbids a municipality to require park land dedication or fees -in -lieu thereof and such provisions have been upheld in principle in their courts. In what has been •:ontrasted as the polar opposite to Ayres and its prog.ency, the Illinois Supreme Court in 1961 enunciated its "specifically and uniquely attributable" test in Pioneer Trust ar.!t Savir---Xs Bank v. Village of Mount Prospect, 22 I11.2d 375, 17c tJ.E.2d 799 19b1 This case involved a municipal ordinance adopted pursuant to the enabling act which required a subdivider to dedicate one acre of land for each 60 residential lots and 1/10 of an acre for each acre of business property to be used for park or school sites. In dispute was the demand by Mount Prospect that a developer of 250 lots dedicate 6.78 acres before his plat would be approved. Ironically, the court in Pioneer Trust took notice of Ayres and relied upon it in its decision. The Pioneer Trust court took notice as in Ayres that the subdivision in question was merely a small piece in a rapidly evolving pattern of development; neither party disputed that school and park sites were badly needed. Unlike Ayres, however, the Illinois court made no reference to any master plan nor to any previous practice of requiring other developers to dedicate land. Treating the immediate subdivision as a matter of first impression, the court reached exactly the opposite conclusion as to Ayres on the critical issue of external benefits: "No developer shall be compelled to dedicate open space unless the need for it is specifically and uniquely attributable to its activity and which would otherwise be cast on the public.", Pioneer Trust at page 801. As is typical, American state courts are prone to disagree with each other. But again, the irony of Pioneer Trust is that it purported to follow Ayres in reaching its decision. The reading of Ayres and the reliance thereon by the Illinois Supreme Court has been criticized by courts and other authorities. Jordan v. Village of Menomonee Falls, 137 N.W.2d 442 (1966), a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, interpreted 1959 ordinance provisions of the Village of Menomonee Falls (see Appendix A) as follows: "The Court accepted the guidelines given in Pioneer Trust yet observed that the phrase 'specifically and uniquely attributable to his activity' must not be 'so restrictively applied as to cast an unreasonable burden of proof upon the municipality which has enacted the ordinance under attack'." In most instances it would be impossible for the municipality to prove that the land required to be dedicated for a park or school site as to meet a need solely attributable to the anticiapted influx of people into the community to occupy this particular subdivision. On the other hand, the municipality might well be able to establish that a group of subdivisions approved over a period of several years had been responsible for bringing into the community a considerable 1 i i 141CRDEILIIED BY -� -JORM--MICROCAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES EM J MEMORANDUM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Page 4 number of people making it necessary that the land j dedications required of the subdividers be utilized j for school, park and recreation purposes for the benefit of such influx. In the absence of contravening evidence this would establish a reasonable basis for finding the need for the acquisition was occasioned by the activity of the subdivider. (Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Nov. 2, 1965, 137 N.W.2d 442) At this point it is extremely important to examine Statutues Of Wisconsin, Chapter 236. The pertinent parts of Section 236.45 are layed out in the Jordan decision at pages 445 and 446. Please examine the parts of this section in light of the italicized emphasis provided. This italicized emphasis refers generally to facilitating adequate provision for parks, providing other approving requirements for subdivisions, and liberal construction iin favor of the municipality for any ordinance adopted pursuant - ; to state enabling legislation for local subdivision regulation. In 1971 the Wisconsin Supreme Court again reviewed Chapter 236, Statutes, which delegates powers to the cities to approve subdivision plats. In Rodenbeck v, American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., 190 N.1•1.2d 917 1971 the court at page 916 { discussed Chapter 236 as follows: "While it is hornbook law that cities, as creatures of the legislature, have only such j powers as are expressly granted to them and such others as are necessary and convenient to the powers expressly granted, it is clear, in regard to plat approvals, that discretion, within limits, was granted to the municipalities." Skipping down 13 lines in the same paragraph the court went on to say, "Section 236,45(2)(b) (the same section referred to in Jordan) directs that any ordinance adopted by a municipality shall be liberally construed in favor of the municipality. This reserves to the city a broad area of discretion in implementing subdivision control provided that the ordinances it adopts are in accord with the general declaration of legislative intent and are not contrary, expressly or by implication, to the standards set up by the legislature. This is a grant of wide discretion which a municipality may exercise by ordinance or appropriate resolution." In 1960 the New York Supreme Court in Gulest Associates, Inc. v. Town deof Newburgh, 25 Misc.2d 1004, 209 N.Y,S.2d 729, discussed' dication for fees -in -lieu of dedication. The Gulest case provides that the requirements must not only represent the needs Of the particular subdivision but that the advantages of the requirement must directly benefit this subdivision. The question of "who benefits" is particularly important in cases dealing with fees -in -lieu. tm I _ MICROFILMED BY -JORMMICROLAB- 1 L CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES i MEMORANDUM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications ( Page 5 Again in 1966 the New York Supreme Court in Jenad, Inc. v. Villaa of Scarsdale, 18 N.Y.2d 78, 218 N.E.2d 673, 271 N.Y.S.2d 55 19 ), examined dedication or fees -in -lieu of dedication. In this decision the New York Court went even a step further. It not only held that communities in New York could impose such requirements, but that it was an example of fine city planning and therefore reversed the Gulest case on the grounds that the benefit did not have to run directly to the subdivision in question. The court stated that in such situations where separate subdivisions were too small to permit substantial park lands to be set off the creation of such subdivisions.were still found to have enlarged the demand for more recreational space in the community. In such cases it was just as reasonable to assess the subdividers on amount per lot to go into a fund for more park lands for the village or town. The court found that one arrangement was no more of a "tax" or "illegal taking" then the other. In coming to their decision in Jenad the New York court cited with approval both Jordan and a-1917 Montana Supreme Court case, Billin s Properties Inc, v. Yellowstone Count , 144 Montana 25, 39 P.2d 1 2, where a state statute require land to be dedicated for park and playground purposes as a condition precedent to approval of a subdivision plat and which statute authorized ! the county planning board to waive the requirement in appropriate cases. The Montana court remarked (page 29, 294 P.2d, page 185) that: "Statutes requiring dedication of park and playground land as a condition precedent to the approval of plats are in force in one form or another in most all states." The court said this at page 33, 394 P.2d at page 187: "Appellant does not deny the need for parks and playgrounds, however,it would i require the city to purchase or condemn land for th01r establish-. ment. But this court is of the opinion that if the subdivision creates the specific need for such parks and playgrounds, then it is not unreasonable to charge the subdivider with the burden of providing them." 3. States where legislations specifically prohibit mandatory dedication of land or fees -in -lieu thereof. I was unable to find any legislation that specifically prohibited this activity, rather states such as Illinois in the Pioneer Trust decision have had their statutes interpreted to bring about prohibition of mandatory dedication. In other words, most all states fall under situation #2 where the statutory language neither specifically authorizes nor forbids, but the Supreme Court either allows or disallows mandatory dedication in varying degrees such as in New York, Wisconsin, and Illinois. In Iowa we fall under situation #2 where there is no specific legislation approving mandatory dedication nor is there specific legislation denying mandatory dedication. The more traditional requirements are covered by section 409.5 Code of Iowa, 1973. These are sidewalks, paving, sewers, water, gas, 36r i.^ 141CROFILMED BY 1. -DORM MIC R(SLAB J 1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOIYES j /� MEMORANDUIM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Page 6 and electric utilities --all required before th? plat is approved. The newer kinds of requirements for subdivisions such as parks would in my opinlon be covered by section 1109.111 Code of Iowa, 1973. This section is quite lengthy so I will just set out appropriate sections and allow the rest to be read in its entirety from the Code itself. Please read section 409.14 keeping in mind the Jordan decision and comparing Iowa's statutory language with Wisconsin's at pages 445 and 446 of 137 N.W.2d. The relevant paragraph under section 409.14 is paragraph 4 beginning at the bottom left-hand column of page 1830 Code of Iowa, 1973. This section states that plats shall conform to the general plan of the city with regard to streets, alleys, boulevards, parks, and public places and be conducive to an orderly develop- ment thereof and not otherwise interfere with the carrying out of a comprehensive city plan. Additionally, the plats shall conform to the ordinances of the city involved. As you move to the end of the fourth paragraph the following language appears: "Provided that the city council may require as a condition of approval of such plats that the owner of the land bring all streets to a grade acceptable to the council, and comply with such other reasonable requirements in regard to installation of public utilities or other improve lents as the coucil may deem requisite for the protection of the public interest. It this last quotation is compared to the statutory language of the state of Wisconsin contained in the Jordan opinion, it proves to be very similar. Chapter 368 Code of Iowa, 1973, also contains language that is extremely similar to that contained in the Wisconsin statutes and additionally the language supports an interpretation of Chapter 409 that would allow mandatory dedication or fees -in -lieu thereof. Section 368.2 Code of Iowa, 1973, states in relevant part the following: "It is -hereby declared to be the policy of the State of Iowa that the provision of the Code relating to the powers, privileges, and immunities of cities and towns are intended to confer broad powers of self-determination as to strictly local and internal affairs upon such municipal corporations and should be liberally construed in favor of such corporations." "Its provisions (Code) shall be construed to confer upon such cor- porations broad and implied power over all local and internal affairs which may exist within constitutional limits. In search of the cases in Iowa, I find no authority concerning mandatory dedication or fees -in -lieu thereof. The objectives of provisions for mandatory dedication or fees -in -lieu of dedication may be considered acceptable in light of traditional subdivision requireMents because they are intended to minimise the overcrowding of existing recreation facilities. Most municipalities do not have the economic resources available to meet the increasing demands of new development for municipal services. As a result of new development, the I ; MICROFILMED BY 1. -1 'JORM -MIC ROIL AB CEDAR RN'IDS OCS 1401,]0 308 J MEEMIORANDUM RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications Page 7 City must respond by supplying the necessary additional capital facilities such as streets, water, sewer facilities and parks. Consequently, the need to reduce this impact would seem to be a proper objective of the police power. Certainly these facilities should be regarded as important to the general welfare of any community. Thus, the arguments that support the constitutionality of dedication requirements are based on reasoning that the need for this additional land is generated by the new subdivision and that dedication or fees -in -lieu of land is for its benefit. It is, therefore, in the interest of the general welfare because it relieves this burden from the total community for not depriving the neer residents of necessary facilities. In summary, allowing for the varying degrees of application in the different states and in light of the authorities cited, I feel that the City of Iowa City may require mandatory dedica- tion or fees -in -lieu of dedication if the following standards are adhered to: 1. The park required must be included in our com_cre- hensive or general plan. 2. The subdivision exaction must be considered reasonable, with regard to the subdivision in question. 3. The reouirements must be attributable to the s_oecific needs of the subdivision in question. 4. The advantage gained from the requirement must be used to the direct benefit of the people in that subdivision. 1 MICROFILMED BY -DORM--MIC R#L,40` (( CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES M_ A City of Iowa City DATE: December B, 1976 TO: Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee FROM: Angela Ryan, Asst. City Attorney RE: Mandatory Park Land Dedications FACTS The Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee is considering requiring mandatory park land dedication or fees in lieu of dedication by developers. Does the Iowa Code authorize mandatory land dedications or exactions? Since the Iowa Code neither specifically authorizes nor forbids mandatory land dedications and there ha.c ben no appellate cases on point in Iowa, there is not a definitive answer. However, I believe that the strongest argument ent is that mandatory land dedications would not be upheld in Iowa. DISCUSSICN In determining whether mandatory lard dedications or exactions will be upheld, the primary issue is whether state enabling legisla- tien has granted to municipalities the authority to require exactions. since enabling legislation will vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, cases from other jurisdictions are of limited value as precedent outside the particular jurisdiction. Many states, including California, Arkansas, and Minnesota, Have enacted legislation author- izing dedication and fees in lieu of dedication. Massachusetts specifically prohibits such exactions. Many states, like Iowa, neither specifically authorize or prohibit exactions and state courts have been divided on the validity of exactions in these states. There has not been an appellate case in Iowa for precedent. The basic premise of exactions is that the subdivides is seeking to acquire the advantages of lot subdivision and as a consequence, he shoulders the burden of compliance with reasonable conditions for design, dedication, improvement arca restrictive use of land to provide for the health, safety and general welfare of the lot owners in the subdivision 1 i I I � i 141CROE ILI•fED BY -DORM MICR6LAB'- CEDAR RA IDS • DES MOINES I J� -2- and of the public. opinions have wrestled with the question of when police power regulation becomes so excessive that it constitutes a taking of private property and requires ccopensation. In Pioneer Trust & Savings Bank V. Monett Prospect, 176 N.E. 2d 799 (1961), the developer objected to a requirement that he dedicate 6.7 acres of land. The Illinois Supreme Court held that if the burden placed upon the developer was specifically and uniquely attributable to his activity, then the require- ment was permissible; if not, then it was a confiscation of private property. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in Jordan v. Mxiamoree Falls, 137 N.W.2d 442 (1965) accepted this test but stated that the words "specifically and uniquely attributable to his activity" need not be so restrictively applied as could place an unreasonable burden of proof on the municipality. In Associated Home Builders, Inc. v. Walnut Creek, 484 P.2d 606 (1971), the court upheld a statute which required that the amount and location of land bear a reasonable relation- ship to the use of the facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivision. The Connecticut case of Aunt Hack Ridge Estates, Inc. v. Planning Comissror of Danbury, 230 P.2d 45 (1967), held that monies collected must be specifically limited to use for the direct benefit of the regulated subdivision. Since there was no such limitation in that regulation which permitted the purchase of land anywhere for use of the residents of Danbury, the court held an "in lieu of land" dedication fee of $60.00 per lot when it would better serve the public interest to be a regulation amounting to a tax and therefore unconstitu- tional. Haugen v. Gleason, 359 P.2d 108 (1961) also held a Forney in lieu of land provision to be a tax. A state statute authorized the governing body of a county or city to regulate subdivision growth by adopting standards for the approval of plats including "such other requirements as the governing body considers necessary for . . . providing adequate light and air, for prevent- ing overcrowding of land or for facilitating adequate provision of transpor- tation, water supply, sewerage, drainage, education, recreation or other needs." Acting pursuant to this authority, the county adopted a subdivision regulation whereby (as a condition of approval of the subdivision) the dedication of land for park purposes might be required. Subsequently, a fee of $37.50 per lot was set requiring the money to be used for land acquisition by the county or the school district. The court held that the state statute delegated the power to regulate, but not the power to levy arty tax or produce revenue. Using the test that only when the primary purpose of a law is regulation can it claim a basis in police power, while if revenue is the primary purpose and regulation is only incidental, the court found the exaction to be a tax. Moreover, it held that it was a tax upon one class of landowners for a public purpose which might be, but need not be, related to the activity being regulated. Therefore, the regulation was held unlawful because it failed to limit the use of the money to the direct benefit of the regulated subdivision. Another theory for the justification of exactions is the economic benefit theory which states that development is a privilege granted by the government for which the developer should pay. and that the portion taken is put to a use which enhances the value of the development. opponents of this view argue that owners of land have an unfettered right to use it as they choose subject only to police power restrictions for public safety and that the privilege rationale lacks a proper legal base in the Constitution. MICROFILMED BY "-JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES I M f r -3 - Iowa Code To determine if mandatory dedications will be upheld in Iowa, the follow- ing sections of the Iowa Code need to be analyzed: Article I, Section 18 of the Iowa Constitution states, "Eminent Domain. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensa- tion first being made, or secured to be made to the owner thereof, as soon as the damages shall be assessed by a jury, who shall not take into consideration any advantages that may result to said owner on account of the improvement for which it is taken." Section 409.14 sets out the basis for approval by the City Council (and the Planning and Zoning Commission where it exists). It contains a provision that approval of a plat shall be conditioned upon the ordinances and statutes relating to plats within the city; that streets, alleys, boulevards,arks and public places shall conform to the general plan and plat for the city; and that the city council may make any other reasonable requirements in regard to installation of public utilities or other improvements as the council may deem requisite for the protection of the public interest. Sections 409.4, 5 and 6 delineate the specific requirements regarding streets and blocks, grade of streets, and alleys. There are no requirements in these sections concerning parks, nor for the council to require a plat to show land which the subdivider must dedicate for park purposes. This mast be contrasted with the express requirements for streets and blocks, paving, sidewalks, sewers, water service, gas and electric utilities. Section 409.14 also states, "If such plats shall conform to the statutes of the state and ordinances of such city, and if they shall fall within the general plan for such city and the extensions thereof, regard being had for public streets, alleys, parks, sewer connections, water service, and service of other utilities, then it shall be the duty of said council and commission to endorse their approval upon the plat submitted to it . . . " A reasonable interpretation is that this section sets out a method by which the plat can be compared to the city plan and the developer advised whether it includes .any area for which the city has planned a future use for which the developer is not responsible. Then the city could act to arrange for the purchase and all parties could benefit; the city, because it need not pay a larger amount, and the developer, because of the avoidance of unnecessary expanse, none of which would be true if a method did not exist for notice and action prior to romancing the subdivision. Landau, Land for Recreational use, 22 Drake LR 71, 85 (1972). In Chapter 414, FAmicipal Zoning, the municipality is given the power to regulate the size of yards, courts and other open spaces. Among the basis for such regulations are those of providing adequate light and air, adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other requirements. The Iowa Supreme Court has held, regarding powers exercised by the municipality pursuant to this chapter that: "Property cannot be confiscated under the guise of the police power." Keller v. Council Bluffs, 66 N.W.2d 113, 117 (1954). If the exaction is viewed as a tax, Section 364.3(4) states that: "A city nay not levy a tax unless specifically authorized by state law." 1 —4 - This limitation on the power to tax is al which conferred bane Wile: Iowa so found in the 1968 amendmentConstitution, Article III, 940 Municipal home rule. "Municipal corporations are granted home rule power and authori not inconsistent with the laws of the General Assembly, to determine their, local affairs and government, except that they shall not have power to any tax unless expressly authorized by the General Assembly. levy Other Constitutional Problems 1. Arbitrariness The Problem of arbitrariness is one of an absence of standards or _. to Provide for a teniform impact in the relative costs of their effects. fail- Standardsot+er Y general that�thhe violate dedication may be actually absent or so unclear and vagueness if it Permitarbitrarydue isiprooess. An ordinance may be void for interpretation of the authorizing decisions which go beyond any reasonable a greater burden on the leve statute. It may be arbitrary if it places ordinance was held invalid forgefailing is fired for the f tions ordinance 1 specifyan Public good. An and or Irony, and for not li Y upper limit for exac- to the collected. ;m; Lyng the use of such funds 109 (19611) . in addifor which they were collected. Haugen v. Gleason, 359 P.2d ( confiscato tion, if the amount of the exaction is too r3'• East Neck Estate Ltd. v. Luchin , 305 N.Y.S.2d 922t(1969). 2. Diction Dis=iminati ( the residents of ors occurs when the exactions are not limited to the benefit of their the subdivision involved and are not reasonably aPPortioned to needs. Unr iMact or apportionment of costs raises equal protection � Problem. An twin standards which a exaction according to the reasonable recreational PPortt°n the amount of be served. This is never achieved needs with fl the to Provisions to I not and/or constant. ae'• Discrimination wil result ifpopulation rate pravisiens foz densities ane Eliot Iendau, in Urban Concentration and Land Exactions for Recreational Use, 22 Drake Law Review 71 (1972) Provides a detailed analysis of relevant Iowa Code sections- He concluded that Iowa cities did to enact exaction Ordinances? and that even if sufficient audit authorization found, it would be difficult to draft an ordinance which would meet all appli_ cable tests for constitutionalityduetolcMany ordinances in other jurisdictions have been a exaction. invalid due to a lack reasonable standards for determining the size Of the nexus ben th shave been struck down for a failure to create a reason_ able nexus be "' lieu of land none the subdivision from which the era tar' fee and a direct benefit to still whether thepolice me is taken• The most serious obstacle is tYPE of mandatory dedicati�r can o' titutionaliy used as a base for this MICROFILMED BY I - JORM MICR46LAB I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 309 n City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: February 9, 1983 TO: City Council FROM: Doug Boothroy, Senior Planner,,— RE: Manville Heights Rezoning Enclosed in the Council's packet is a revised schedule for the rezoning of the R3A area of Manville Heights to'RNC-20. Please note that the Planning a Zoning Commission's public hearing has been changed from February 24 to February 28. The Council will receive the Commission's recommendation in time for the March 8th hearing before the Council. 0 i I i MANVILLE HEIGHTS REZONING - SCHEDULE I 1 February 1, 1983 City Council will set a public hearing for March 8, 1983, to consider the downzoning of the entire R3A area of Manville Heights to RNC-20; the Council will refer the downzoning issue to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their study and recommendation. I February 3, 1983 Planning and Zoning Commission will set a public hearing for February 28, 1983, to consider the downzoning of the entire R3A area of Manville Heights to RNC-20. February 17, 1983 Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public discussion on the proposed rezoning of the R3A area of Manville Heights. February 28, 1983 The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold its public hearing. March 3, 1983 The Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public discussion, if necessary, and send its recommendation to the City Council. March 8, 1983 The City Council will hold its public hearing. I March 15, 1983 First reading of the ordinance to rezone. March 22, 1983 Second reading of the ordinance. 1 March 29, 1983 Third reading of the ordinance. f April 1, 1983 Ordinance will be published in the paper. 60- day suspension of building permit issuance will i be over. i r 4 i 4 r C ' 309 I 1 MICROFIL14ED BY -1 I DORM "-MIC R¢LlC B'- - j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES l City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 11, 1983 To: Iowa City Board of Adjustment From: Richard J. Boyle 0 Re: Appeal of Casey Mahon (No. V-8303): Opening of Streets and Alleys Mike Furman has obtained a building permit for an eleven unit apartment house on property at 204 McLean Street in Iowa City. Among other things, the plot plan submitted with the building permit application shows that all required parking would be located in the rear of the property with access via a platted and dedicated, but unopened alley. The land upon which the alley is to be located is, in part, a ravine. It is my understanding that the builder intends to fill the ravine to the extent necessary to provide access to the property in question. Casey Mahon, a neighbor, has appealed the issuance of the building permit and has alleged, among other things, that the required parking is, in fact, inaccessible because the alley is a ravine. That contention raises the following issue: ISSUE May an abutting property owner 'open" a platted and dedicated alley without City Council authorization? CONCLUSION City Council approval is required before a dedicated alley may be opened. DISCUSSION Iowa Code (1981) section 364.12 provides, in part, as follows: "(2) A city is responsible for the care, supervision, and control of public grounds, streets, sidewalks, alleys, bridges, culverts..., and the city shall keep all public ways open, in repair, and free from nuisance.... It Iowa Code section 364.2(1) provides that the power of a city is vested in its city council except as otherwise provided by law. Section 364.3(1) provides that a city council shall exercise a power only by the passage of a motion, a resolution, an amendment, or an ordinance. A city has plenary power to open, widen and keep open and free from obstruction, all streets and alleys. Vien v. Harrison County, 209 Iowa 580, 228 N.W. 19. That power to open streets Is dlTetionary, and a city is under no duty to open a street unless the proper body regards it as 141CROFIL14ED BY "'DORM--MICR46LAET- - -I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES i Sia I i C 4 J I' Jl 2 necessary. Tott v. Sioux Com, 261 Iowa 677, 155 N.W,2d 502, 505. In that case, the court said(at p. 505): A city may "establish" or "lay off" streets or accept a dedication of streets to the public without being required to open them to the public upon request. Cities must be able to intelligently plan their streets for future needs. Plats may be necessary long before public need demands the opening of a street. "We have said repeatedly that many streets in new plats were dedicated with no serious thought of their immediate improvement or extensive use, but largely to accommodate future needs. The cit council has just discretion in determining whether public necessity requiresathatca street be opened as it does in exercising any of the other enumerated powers. In response to a contention that abutting property owners have a special right in a street, the court said (at p. 506): j "This is true where a street has been opened and used.... No special f rights are acquired until the street has been opened and used by the property owner. i Stom V. City of Council Bluffs, 189 N.W.2d 522 (Iowa) was an eminent I domain case involving plaintiff's claim for damages for loss of access caused by street improvements which cut off all access to plaintiff's i property. The improvement cut off his use of an unimproved but dedicated street. The court (at p. 526) noted that the question was not the same as that presented in the Tott case, although some language in Stom may be inconsistent with language in Tott. The specific question involved in this matter is, however, somewhat different because the property owner intends to do the improvement (i.e., the opening). There do not seem to be any Iowa cases an this point. However, McQuillen, in sec. 30.57, says: "Abutters have no right, without municipal authority, to change the grade of a street, notwithstanding the fact that the street is thereby widened and made more suitable for travel." That statement appears to be consistent with the general rule that cities have plenary power with respect to the opening, widening and keeping open streets. In the instant matter, filling the ravine would clearly change the grade of the alley. .310 i MICROFILMED BY 1. -DORM-MIC R¢LAB % + CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES / I 3 UM 1IXI Since cities have plenary power over their streets and alleys and such power rests in the city council, an abutting property owner may not open or improve a platted street or alley without consent of the city council. bdw/sp cc: City Council Robert W. Jansen Neal Berlin Chuck.Schmadeke j MICADFILMED BY _� - JORM--MICROLAB ( DEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES 316 . ` J i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 8, 1983 To: City Council and Neal Berlin From: Frank Farmer, City Engineer Re: Melrose Court Neighborhood Meeting On Sunday, February 6, 1983, at 7:30 p.m., Denny Gannon and I attended a neighborhood meeting regarding the Melrose Court improvements. The -.._.-- meeting was held at the Mark and Debra Wolraich residence. Of the 33 property owners affected by the project, ten were represented at the meeting. The proposed project, as explained to the group, consisted of constructing curb and gutter along both sides of the entire street. Utility poles are - to remain as they now exist and a proposed five foot wide sidewalk is to be constructed along the west side of Melrose Court. Driveways and retaining walls are to be removed and replaced or added as necessary. The drainage problem located in mid -block is to be eliminated. Construction easements are to be obtained from all abutting property owners on both sides of the street. Briefly, consensus of the group is that they are in favor of the project, as explained, and are willing to give the necessary construction easements if the project is funded by the City. Also, the group in attendance, will contact the absent property owners, explain the project to them, and then report the results to my office. r 1 Additional information will be forwarded to the City Council as it is i received by this office. bdw2/4 1 I i i all MICROFILI4ED BY JORM.._MICR6LAO._. ..-..._l-_� /• L I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES 1 •1 � 1 i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM -� Date: February 9, 1983 To: City Council and Neal Berlin y From: Frank Farmer, City EngineeriC Re: Westminster Street Water Problem (Letter from Nary C. Panther at 135 N. Westminster on January 18, 1983, Council Agenda) This section of Westminster Street was constructed in a very wet area. The ground water seeps through the joints in the paving creating a problem thoughout the year. The attached drawing shows the area in question and proposed solution. A six (6) inch diameter tile is proposed along both sides of the street. This tile will be tied directly into the existing 36 inch storm sewer or intakes as noted. Removal and replacement of three (3) drive approaches on the east side of Westminster will be required. Construction will be completed by the City Street Division during the Spring when weather permits. Property owners affected will be notified immediately of the City's intentions via this memo and again in the spring before the work begins. Material cost for this project are estimated at $2,200, which will come out of Pollution Control's operating budget. Labor will be supplied by the City Street Division. tpl/11 14S to Wes t er •I ` OIIpfE LAI 1S2 ` \ cowrAci[0 MATIN[ t. �•i� i �.LJ ' {p5• .III �In[YAI 460 LJ•6'•PL P. PV.:, 6r IOM. LSCONCar `[ '. I [ACM• TAP INTAKE I [ACM- TAP 36 -MCP 165 I I i �FASMLD LIM[STOW [ 6• PVC OIICN pgCIIG, MICROFILMED BY i _l -Z DORM-�"MICR�LAB` CEDAR RAPIDS I DES M01AES 205 202 y:tt_ I I )"OPS ON USI SIO[ Of WESTMINSTER Sri [ASI OP CAST CWIB 6••FAT[0 ON USI SID[ OF wLSIMINSUP• ArrNOA. L"DEC TI[ ALL [AISIIND CNAIN TIL[ INTO II[w 6'•r[NIONAILD P'/c II. i I 1 Mary C. Panther Jk61^ 135 North Westminster ,�I.• Iowa City, Iowa 52240 i January S. 1983 City Council City of Iowa City Civic Centre Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Sirs: I would like to bring to your attention a situation which exists ; in our neighborhood. ! There is an underground stream running under the street in the one hundred block of North Westminster. In November of 1981 it began seeping through the street and now leaves the pavement constantly wet in the warm months and ice packed now that it is I cold. When it began to seep we thought it to be a oroken water main. The water was tested both by the city and a private source and was determined to be surface water. In the winter of 1982 routine snow removal kept the freezing flow to a minimum. Spring thaw gave way to wet alge-ridden pavement which lasted until freezing weather began late in 1982. j In early December 1982 the ice became thickened to 4-5 inches in places. A police officer inquired as to the cause and reported it as a safety hazzard. Since then street crews have graded, and sanded and salted routinely to keep the bus route open. I have been assured by Jim Schulte of the street Department that continued sanding and grading can be expected. I feel that this is a year around problem and that it should to treated at its source rather than just at its effect. Thank you for your attention into this matter. 5incerelys Mary C. Panther i ccs Clemens Erdahl f J f' MICROFILMED By M-R CEDAR RAPIDS •'MICDES M01ICA'JES 312, Jj City of Iowa City I - MEMORANDUM Date: February 9, 1983 To: Neal Berlin and City Council G�' From: Frank Farmer, City Engineer �, Re: FAUS Funding for Dubuque Street Improvements, Proposed FY84 CIP On February 3, 1983, I contacted Jim Loy, Local Systems Engineer for the Iowa Department of Transportation, regarding the possibility of receiving FAUS funding for Dubuque Street. If the street construction were to remain 41 feet in width, he replied that a four lane facility of 41 feet could not be approved and that even a facility of 45 feet in width, rather than 49 feet, would have to have strong justification. I explained the problem with the existing trees having to be removed if the street width were to be greater than 41 feet, but he felt that the required tree removal would not constitute reasonable justification. tpl/3 +1 4 MICROFILMED DY -1 - JO RIVI--'"MIC Rfi�►C"A 6' CEDAR RAPIDS BEY I 313 i J t City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: February 4, 1983 To: Marianne Milkman, Planner �� `•.I j From: David Brown, Assistant City Attorney t Re: Systems Unlimited, Inc. r/L/ n. ISSUE: Does Systems Unlimited, Inc., qualify for CDBG funding for the purpose of constructing two homes for mentally handicapped children? I j CONCLUSION: I Yes, assuming the homes are constructed in an area where the construction would constitute "revitalization" of the neighborhood. i DISCUSSION: i Generally, new housing construction is not an eligible activity for CDBG funds. However, as provided by 5570.207(b)(3)(ii), C.F.R., assistance may be used for the construction of new permanent residential structures j "when carried out by a subrecipient pursuant to 5570.204(a)(2)." 5570.204(a)(2) reads as follows: (a) "Eligible activities." The recipient may grant CDBG funds to any of the three types of subrecipients specified in paragraph (c) below, to carry out a neighborhood revitalization, community economic development, or energy conservation prod ct. Such a project may include: I (2) activities not otherwise listed as eligible under this Subpart, except those described as ineligible in 5507.207(a), when the recipient determines that such j activities are necessary or appropriate to achieve its community development objectives. (Emphasis added.) One of the three subrecipients specified in paragraph (c) is "Local Development Corporations." According to 5507.204(c)(3), C.F.R., a local development corporation includes: i (i) an entity organized pursuant to Title VII of the Headstart, Economic Opportunity, and Community Partnership Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2981); (iii) other entities incorporated under State or local law similar in purpose, function, and scope to those specified in (i) or (ii) above. I 141CROFILIIED BY �•1_ 111 _ - JORM 'MIC R;LAO L (% j CEDAR RAPIDS • DES F101NES ' �1 2 As defined in 52981(a), 42 U.S.C., a "community development corporation" means a non-profit organization responsible to residents of the area it serves. Although Systems Unlimited was not organized pursuant to Title i VII of the Headstart, Economic Opportunity, and Community Partnership Act of 1974, it is a non-profit organization incorporated under state law which is similar in purpose to the entities organized under the above Act. Systems Unlimited was organized, in part, for the purpose of establishing residential services for the developmentally disabled and to promote the general welfare of such persons. The result of its programs is to improve the quality of its clients' economic and social participation in community ___.... life and the establishment of permanent economic and social benefits. Accordingly, it is my opinion that Systems Unlimited qualifies as an eligible subrecipient as being a "local development corporation." fHaving determined that Systems Unlimited is an eligible subrecipient, it I! is now necessary to decide whether the proposed funding activity is within the scope of the projects which qualify for funding. It appears that the proposal to construct homes for mentally handicapped children could qualify as a "neighborhood revitalization" project as provided in 5570.204(a). The rules and regulations do not define "neighborhood revitalization." However, it is my opinion that the construction of new group homes in an older part of the City, such as the designated 5403 urban renewal area, would constitute revitalization. This is presuming I that the new construction will be either infill development or replacing older structures. If Systems Unlimited can only find suitable sites for construction outside the $403 area, it may be difficult to justify the construction as "neighborhood revitalization." In the alternative, should Systems Unlimited opt to rehabilitate existing housing for use as the proposed group homes rather than constructing new homes, such rehabilitation would clearly qualify as an eligible funding activity. $507.202, C.F.R. cc: Neal Berlin, City Manager Robert Jansen, City Attorney I bj5/9-10 I i I 3W 1 MICROFILMED BY -JORMMICR46L AB'- - ' CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOMES r—, I City of Iowa City MEMORANDVIA -' C,"111 Date: February 7, 1983 I .M1 J To: Neal Berlin, City Manager From: Michael E. Kucharzak, Director, H& S David E. Munson, Planner, H&IS��r Re: Report on Congregate Housing This memo is in reference to the report on congregate housing entitled, "Congregate Housing: A Study of Local Elderly Needs", which has been included in this week's Council packet. Because the final report has come out posteriori (i.e., the findings of the survey were made available in November, 1982), we have not attached any additional information to the report. We have chosen, instead, to prepare this memo for your benefit as City Manager. Should you deem it appropriate to "introduce" this report to the Council or have questions asked of you by the Council or the media (four print media have expressed interest in the report and have requested copies), the following information may be helpful: In order to obtain an adequate understanding of congregate housing and hence, the direction and findings of this report without having to "wade through" technical explanations and statistics, certain sections may be omitted. From our vantage point, the relevant areas to read which do not require previous exposure to -statistical methods are: 1) The opening letter from the Housing Commission and Congregate Housing Task Force; 2) The Preface: pp, i -iii; 3) Chapter I: pp. 1-9; 4) Chapter II: pp. 10-13; 5) Chapter V: pp. 50-58; and 6) Chapter VI: pp. 59-63. The opening letter, and Chapters II, V and VI are particularly relevant and contain what we believe to be the "heart" of this report, and indeed, of the very concept of congregate housing. Though Chapters III, IV and the Appendices are mandatory readings for a thorough understanding of this report, past experience has shown that few have taken an interest in these areas with the exception of University professors who were interested in the survey techniques employed. If you have any questions concerning the survey, the techniques used, or the overal report, please let us know. tp5/3 1 I I i IIICROFIL14ED BY 1" JORM--MICR6LA13 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES 140INES 31S J r Burninglssue n7efighnnstradttlons run deep• A for- door. They know It's me because I've got the mer fare comMsdoner here once had the smallest shoes in the place." a city's udy showed that Yelloww is the mast because recruit and accept woSome cities have men firde efal ighters. Seafforts t Women Firefighters ble color at night. But Mr. Langdon, a for. Ue Initially had a mer fireman, Ord;red the trucks repainted Program, including we weight IUWg, to eial women's training co r Still Spark Resentment red. And one complaint here at Engine Com• age women interested in "nontraditional Puy 3 I that the firehouse, the city's new. Jobs." It now has 31 women firefighters N In Strongly Macho Job en' doesn't have a shiny brass pole m slide Its 91Pmember force. "At first, I viewed g Y dawn; when the alarm sounds, firefighters them with apprehensinn;' says Roger Hasa. TO down stairs to the two trucks, sey, the battalion chief of the Seattle Fire Many Men Contend Females The Danger Mystique Department, "but now I can say the women Part of the tradition. tau, Is the fire. have Performed as capably as their male Lack the Needed Muscle; fighter mystique fostered by stories about counterparts... was ordered a "oust m Their Wives Also Gripe that the jfire fightinglea (Union ail occupatiosns in hire female firefighters, Officials decided - deaths on the Joh-58 per 100,0°0 workers in that the city wouldn't lower Its physical 1981.) The men here delight In swapping standards. It Put Robert Galloway, a fire. A Bl Test: 'Eating Smoke' Wes around the dining -room •room table while man with a flair for salesmanship, in charge Big g waiting for the next emergency. They re. Of recruiting women. He barnstormed local count the call when a man attempting sW college �n� In scout for female ath• By ROBERTS. GEEMBERM11 cide with a shotgun blew, off letes• Result; Three of Dallas's 10 women Staff Re,,artl. of T,IN WALL STacm SOUOX•L backside• and the time sever firemen firefighters are five-foot, 1D•Inch basketball BUFFALO. N.Y.—Nearly all the guys crawled on their bellies N a smoky second• players. Another played semt.pmfesslonal here N Engine Company 3 are convinced story room not knowing whether the whole football for the Dallas Bluebonnets, a now - story a woman's place B not N the fire• floor still was there, defunct women's team. house. There Is even an Initiation of sons In this "I was looking for physical women.,- Mr. Even after a year on the Job as the fraternity. In the 'Old days, the firemen as. Galloway says. "You can't take a little of crew's first and only woman, Leslie Gray Is sert, a rookie was given the hose to lead the secretary and build her Into what we viewed with resentment Ob sure, the fire. way Into the flames so that the others could want men corrode, she can do routine firehouse take the measure of the man. They contendStill, matt ane° CHng to their own and chores, On pumper truckfiest tbatnicarrla thd and eholies,'But spared thts ritual. Indthe that MISS Gray is eed." view of bemuseher Job to focus onrtheM�oPercentage of their women. They tend was when It eoma to the guts and glory of fire. ="Y B to hook up the hoses to the work that requires exceptloaW pbysieal fithWg—chaRini Into a blazing building Pumper truck, she rarely Is first Into a �n�. In firehouses across the country, and chopping down the walls—they assert fire. the buzzword. Is "upper body strength." that female firefighter don't have the right 'I've never seen her come back from a Moet firemen Insist that It Is needed to mise stuff. fire and throw u , the wen we sometimes ladders and wield an ax, and they insist Nat "Women can be engineers, surgeon, lots do" from smoke Inhalation, says Dennis most women don't have It. of things;' � re not equipped to do this. a fireman ed out for Tthe Buffalo• Bilis professional Inca and"Thdodo a late of the stuff we do,-, hem'an who once They lack aggressiveness. I really think It's fowsfi team • "Just once." he sen Me- Hynes, the Buffalo firefighter. "But that In the hormones." Ilk" to see be; eat some smoke like tthhe rrest last 59e B chapping your way through a A small but growing number of women of °s do, and come back here and puke." house to get the job done, and most women are challenging such assumption in an as. Importance Of Belag Flfat can't do IL" salt on one of the lut male button of the "They all have this thing about being the Stalbdatds rk American workplace, the firefighting profes• flnt one Into the fire." says five.faot, five- In New York CCity,whlce last year hired slon. Some cities, such as Seattle, have been Inch Leslie Ann Gray, who entered ibis ma• women Breflghters for the first time in the voluotaray adding women firefighters. Cho world In December 1981. "1 can do what- department's 117 -year • history, Nicholas .any other cities, Including New York, ever they can do. 1 can carry a Mpound MwCusO, the president of the Uniform Mre• Dallas, Jacksonville, Fie., New Haven, man on my back," asserts MLcs Graywho lighters Association, an Independent union, Con., and ButWo. have hired women, often weighs about. 110 Pounds. asserts that "the entire training standard over fire departments' oblection, because The 31•Year•old Miss Gray senses another has been loosened" to accommodate women. of court orders and federal antldiscrlmina• reason for the firemen's antagonism. '•The He says that carrying a Mpound dummy tion actions. real problem here Is that their ego are up and down a ted hoe the new of staff has been elLm• Fdnotllrbgl Factors threatened. When they go home at night and rest Period has been added d 74 -minute Part of the heated resistance Involves a tell their wives It's been a tough day, they the debate over whether phytical•strength scan- don't want to think maybe a woman can do The 180.0*member intemadonl Assoc). dards, and thus Safety, have to be sacrificed It too." Bum of Fireffghfers union also takes a dim to accommodate womenIn some placesThe men Of Engine Company 3 relate to view of affirmative -action programs. "It's a the temdons have been famed by firemen's their fe1°ale co-worker on two different lev nice concept, but when you're talking about wlves.angry that women are working and els On the surface, there is good.natured selecting Individuals that need certain skill, sleeping In firehouses with the wives' bus• banter; many of the men are personal) affirmative action shouldn't be applicable;' hands. But much of the resistance grows out fond of the cheerful Miss Gray, But there Is says Carol Vougloukles, the former dlrect•- of the feeling of many firemen that firelight also resentment, and the men refuse to of the union's human -resource program. Ing tradltloaafiy has been a men's world. make 3°y accommodation for her. The bar • But other experts contend that the em. Maly firernen here have fathers, uncles racks language of the firehouse intenlffes PhadR d strength job has ch requirements V "Tagger. and Morten who worked in firehouses when she ts present. Miss Gray sleeps in the aced and that the Job hes changed, "Today, where women were never sew. And the an. common bunkroom and hangs her pants on there's a lot of first-aid work, a lot of code dpathy to court-ordered women drefightem the metal hook next to her bed Just as the enforcement The- criteria for the Job B coma from the top,' too. "We've alwa men do. There aren't any special markings changing- We have to have smart, atticWate been tsugbt that the female Is weaker or lacks on the bathrooms or shower.mom People, says WIIBam Gosnell, the secre. Says Buffalo Fire Commissioner Fred Lang- doors. tarytrttle. of the firefighters, unity local dm. "We've been told to open car doors for "When I want to take a shower," she In Battle' them, to never hit our sisters. It's put the Says, "I just leave my shoes Outside the way we were brought up." 3/6 i - I-0ICRDCILIICD B0 - JORM MICR '101 CEDAR RAPIDS •DCS �101'ICS t I indeed, of the 2.163 cab that Buffalo's RLehg Pressure Eagloe Company 3 made last year, I.W Currently, there are only about 150 were first-aW emergency calls, and 976 were women out 0! ]ad,a(p pall firemen N the fires. The firehouse has 10 firefighters or so U.S.. but pressures are building In many cit• on each of four daily shifts. ies to hire more females. Earlier this rear. blrst.Aid Mission a federal judge ruled that the Physical test During a recent, typical call, Pirefighter for applicants to New York City's fire de. j Gray raced up a flight of stairs lugging a lo- Bent discriminated against women. He pound oxygen tank unit An elderly man ordered the 1Y.o0Pmember department, the sprawled m a couch -had suffered an appose nation's latgest•th hire up to 46 women and ent stroke. Waiting for the ambulance, Mia w ratan firefighters, the test New YoIn new has 3e I women hracelnot a Including Eve Gray put an oxygen mask over the man's women who recently resigned. moor. and talked ted the N a soothing tone. Jacksonville, Fla, and New Haven. Later. she comforted her the man's distraught Cama have hired women firefighters after wife air helped her Intover the ambulance. with the loss At thea, "tape never rcfttwa to do nay being enue&abset"foods because ofatenedr charge thing, and she's never afraid." says ederal Ronald that they discriminated against women. Cur- Morgand, a'13,year veteran who Js the lieu- rendy, the federal revenue-sharing office tenant N charge of MISS Gray's truck, "I've ..... . . ...... . stood side by side with her in burning aides has a case pending against Moa Point that were so hot we got blisters on our Miss.. contending that the city violated fed - ears." eras jobdncrlmination law by not hiring a woman j man for Its 2&member fire department Miss Gray, a allege graduate, says she As a result of such pressure, some fire• has always wanted to be a firefighter. She lighters are reluctantly accepting women N recalls that her second-grade teacher once the flrehouse. But old attitudes won't change asked the pupils to draw pletutes of what eathy. „lank, they're here, so we might as they wanted to do in Ilfe. "I thought nurses well nuke the bat of It," says Jahn Bawer. . and bride were boring. s0 I drew a Bae- a Buffalo fireman. He pauses and adds: fighter;' she says. I "Let's e faze do anyone says a woman fire - In IM, rd r. pan of of overall was lighter can do who I can da, they're action veer, the dry u lig No was mid Ali cruy .. hhe Eve wmua, including MW Gray. All i had taken the entrance teen but been I paoW oyer for appoNttnat After training I sehmi, �Ee wan aW�d N Junes M to a i hook•aod-ndder company, whete the' be came the1Wa moo, or rar driver. "I loved ' that job. The guys ribbed me by calling me i the 'tiller pen et' " she recalts. . A Worgled Wife Behind the constant jam, however, Is re- sa ment of Min Gray for Intruding Into this man's world as well a the fear that she . nal be relied on a a team member; "My wife tells me she doesn't want me N a bum. W haw with her;' U Paw Mscoughy says "She's afraid that if anything happens, Lille won't be able to dnf me ant' The presence of women firefighters has upet firemen's wives In many dila. When San Dlego9 fhe department -Wed five wmra nffttm N 1874, amts firemen's wive organized a group that attended drills to observe the female mrulu. Later, the wive periodically visited Anhoum where wo mn were wmpag, "Their big mmpw#nze were am expected sexual activity and Is"," recalls Robert Osby, who was then the deper"t's chi#. He says that to hes koowltdge none of the MOCIO s was real - had. in Iowa Qty, Iowa, P7rEghter Undo Be. ion shocked traditionalists when she fought and won in Il -month legal battle for the right to breast-feed her baby at the Ore- ham. rrhaus. Firefighters N Iowa City work 2h hour shlEs ase as Wowed a certain amwat of "tree time" while m duty. Mize Eaton asserted that she bid the right to use bar free time to rune, her child. On four oc- ca#ms when the alum wundhd while she was aurlog, MW Eaton gave�the baby to her baby titter ad responded to the call, y Ma Eaton later resigned, but she bas filed {III a lawsuit contending that her resignation was caused by constant harassment �I MICRorILMED BY I I. 'DORM- "MICRILAB I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOPES ! I +acus . LEGISLATIVEn.- • , ~eMlatf• >r;w BULLETIN �ao I ow Main,, law lW Ie � I!t!I assasat iFirst Session, Bulletin 3 February 10, 1983 LEGISLATURE APPROVES It TAX , In what may become a modern-day record, the legislature passed last week a bill which calls for one additional cent of sales and use tax effective March 1, 1983. fovernor Branstad signed the bill on Monday. Despite numerous attempts to exempt various items from the tax such as farm-"....- implements, automobiles and other large purchases, the bill is almost a carbon copy of the current sales tax with food and drug items exempt. Passage of the bill this early in the session means that an additional S13 million will be collected during the month of March. As originally proposed the Governor had called for the tax to take effect an April I. - In our last bulletin we had reported that the additional le would produce an i estimated 517.5 million for the RUT fund with cities getting about $3.1 million. f Under the bill as passed, the sales and use tax would go into effect one month ppp earlier than these estimated figures and therefore additional revenues could be available in the RUT fund. Precise estimates are not available since the bill was passed in such record time. i E PUBLIC NEARING ON BUSINESS CLOSINGS i Sen. Ted Anderson (D-wacerloo)has introduced draft legislation (SSB 48) deal- . l ing with plant closings and relocation. A public hearing has been set for Tues- day, February I5, 7:00 p.m., Wallace Building auditorium, The bill calls for an employer who has 100 or more employees cogive one - notice of a closing relocation or reduction of operations in a city. An employe one -yea with more than 50 but less than 100 employees must give six months' notice. Of particular interest to cities is a provision in the draft bill which would J require an employer to pay an amount equal to BS% of the annual tax loss which ) ' 1 occurs because of a decision to close, relocate or reduce operations to the city or ocher tax -receiving bodies. i i �Additionally, residents of a city or the employees of a plan[ scheduled for � + closing or relocation are allowed to bring civil action against the employer for failure to comply with the law, t SENATE PASSES PROMOTION BILL 0n a 37-8 vote the Se natehas passed SF 116, a bill relating to eligible�. motion lists for certain civil service employees. pro - The bill, which was opposed last year and this year by the League, received little debate and had earlier in the week been passed out of the Senate Local Government Cammlttee without dissent. The bill as passed would allow only firefighters to remain on the civil ser. viceeligible promotion list for three years as opposed to the current two for i other civil servants. The decision on whether to allow such extension of cimehas i been left to the local civil service commission. Last session similar legislation was vetoed by Governor Ray as being prefer- ential and discriminatory. The vote was as follows:. Voting yes: Anderson, grown, Bruner, Carr, Coleman, Calton, Deluhery, Dlele- •A no votesupports the League position. (over) 3/7 i MICROFILMED BY f -DORM MIC RdL Af3 CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES / \ 1 I I man, Doyle, Drake, Gallagher, Gettings, Goodwin, Hall, Hester, Ham, Hultman, Hu- sak, Hutchins, Junkins, Kinley, Lind, Mann, Miller C., Miller A., Palmer, Pr Rodgers, Schwenge)s, Slater, Taylor, Tieden, Vande Hoef, Van Gilst, Waldstein and Welsh. Voting No: Gentleman, Holden, Holt. Hulse, Jensen, Readinger, Rife and Ric- sema. � Absent or not voting: Briles, Gratias, Lura, Nystrom and Small. LOCAL OPTION ADVANCES IN SENATE The Senate Nays and Means Subcommittee on Local Option Taxes SSB 44 voted unanimously (5-0) to send the bill to full committee for debate. Members of the subcommittee were: Readinger (R -Urbandale), Chair, Palmer (D -Des Moines), Halt (R -Spencer), Rodgers (D -Adel) and Carr (D -Dubuque). The League would encourage city officials to send a special thanks to the subcommittee members for their efforts and to now contact the remaining membersof the Ways and Means Committee and encourage early passage. j The remaining members are: Sen(s) Husak (P-Toledol, Oicleman III-Pellal, Van (:i 1st rD-Oskaloosa), Brown (P-Montctuma), Deluhery (P -Davenport), Gratias (R -Nora Springsl, Hester (R -Haney Creek), Lura (R -Marshalltown) and Holden (R -Davenport). I EXECUTIVE 00AR11 OPI'OSE5 OPEN S(%1PE The Executive Board of the I,eayuc has voted to oppose any legislation which h:u as its inronded goal to open the scope of negotiations under collective bar. gaining. { This action was taken during a meeting of the Board on January 78. `t The Board felt that a combination of open scope and final binding arbitration ! which is already law would render valueless the concerns about local government spending priorities raised by local taxpayers. I This position, which now becomes policy for the League, was transmitted to I the Governor. CONGRESSIONAL FY 84 BUDGET ' The President's FY SJ budget sent to the Hill this week continues last year's 1 levels for general revenue sharing ($4.6 billion), community development block grants (53.5 billion), wastewater treatment ($:.4 billion). All other programs for cities represent cuts rather than a freece from previous years. Human ser - i vice programs are down over 10:, environmental and energy programs and assisted housing are virtually eliminated. Mass transit is cut 5900 million offsetting ' the 51.1 billion of additional revenues raised by the one -cent gas increase. The UDAG program has been cut from S44U million to 5196 million, although some carry- 1 _ over money from FY 83 could theoretically continue the program at the 5440 mil- lion level. SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE DEBATES SIDEWALK LIABILITY I f A Senate subcommittee composed of Sen(s) Wells, Ne ldstein and Brown has held its first informational meeting on SSB 31, an Act relating to liability for to - move[ of snow and ice accumulations from public ways,. The bill, which is a modified version of the one debated by the Senate last session, addresses the question of liability on the basis of negligence rather than shifting absolute liability to abutting property owners. Letters of support for passage of the bill should be sent to all members of the Senate Local Government Committee. They are: Miller, A. (D -Ventura), Chair, James Wells (D -Cedar Rapids), James Briles (R -Corning), Joe Brown (D-Moncetuma), Milo Colton (D -Sioux City), Norman Goodwin (R -DeWitt), Thomas Mann (D -Des Moines), Charles Miller (D -Burlington), Richard Vande Hoef (R -Harris) and Arne Waldstein (R -Stars Lake). SMALL CITIES POLICE TRAINING BILL House File 188, a bill relating to the minimum basic training requirements of 317 l i I41CA0FILMED RY —.JORM-MICR1>/CA6__ l`..... i CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES / -S- of police officers, has been approved by the House Local Government Committee and sent to the House for debate. The vote was 15-7. Voting yes: Black, Oxley, Pancy, Spear, Cooper, Feick, Renken, Grandia, Iter. man, Lageschulte, Menke, Royer, Swearingen, Tofte and Torrence. Voting No: O'Kane, Buhr, Renaud, Sher_an, Connors, Running and Lloyd -.tones. Prior to final passage in committee, an amendment offered by Rep. Menke was defeated which would have changed the population eligibility from 1,000 to 750. BILLBOARDS BILL BACK Last ,year the League was successful in blocking legislation which would have required cities to compensate owners of off -premises advertising devices if the sicn is taken or removed. ,1 similar bill has now been proposed in the (louse. The reference number is llouse Study Bill 159, proposed committee on transportation bill. At issue is the question of compensation. Sign companies contend thatamorti- cation is not compensation. City officials contend that amortization takes Into account value of sign. in December the District Court in Polk County ruled that the City of Des Moines possessed the power and authority under the coning enabling law. Chapterala, to roptire removal of non -conforming hit lboards after a period of amortization. In so ruling the court found that :after municipal home rule any limitations on a city's powers by state most be expressly imposed. In examining the question, the court found that the legislature had not either expressly or implicitly im- posed any limitation on a city's powers to provide for eventual termination of non- conforming uses by means of amortization. Although ruling in favor of the city on this one issue, there still remains six separate points of law before the court that must still be resolved. The position of the League continues to be that of opposition to any bill which limits a city's action regarding zoning rights for non -conforming signs and which could prejudice the court's final ruling. Letters opposing this bill should be directed to members of the House Trans. portation Committee. They are: Jack Woods (D -Des Moines), chairman; Dec Koenigs (D-Mclntirel, vice chair; Raymond Logeschulte (R -Waverly); Wayne Bennett (R -Galva); Dale Cochran (D. Eagle Grove); James Cooper (D -Russell); Virgil Corey (R -Morning Sun); Philip Davitt (D -St. Charles); Tom Fey (D -Davenport); Daniel Fogarty (0 -Cylinder); Wil- liam Harbor (R -Henderson); Jean Lloyd -Jones (D -Iowa City); Leo Miller (D -Sioux City); Louis Muhl bauer (D -Manilla); David Osterberg (D -Mt. Vernon); Frail Pavich (D -Council Bluffs); Wendell Pellett (R -Atlantic); Dennis Renaud (D -Altoona); Mike Van Camp (R -Davenport); Harold Van Mannan (R-Oskaloosal; Richard Walden (R -Iowa Falls). NEW BILLS OF INTEREST SENATE SENATE FILE 167, TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (Miller, C., Burlington) Ends the tax in- crement t nanc ng law by prohibiting the city from passing an ordinance afterthe effective date of the bill which would provide for the division of tares levied for the benefit of taring district other than itself. The bill continues to per. mit the city to provide for the division of taxes levied for the benefit of it - %elf on the propertv located in the project area. (0) SENATE FILE 168, VETERANS PREFERENCE (Mann) Provides for a uniform veterans pref- erence or a pu c agencaea. (FT SENATR PILE. 175, LIABILITY (Getting$) Provides immunity from liability to a county, city or an employee of a city or county for self-inflicted injuries to a prisoner in a county or city jail. (F) (over) MICROFILMED BY —� 'JORM " MI C R(�LAS CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES f 317 , I i Ji SFNATE FILE 190, LEAVES OF ABSENCE (Stater, et all Be' SF 109 - Bulletin 90. : SENATE FILE 202, TRANSPORTATION (Coleman) Provides For two pilot projects by OOT tar t e purpose of Stu yang the Feasibility of a cooperative effort among public and private transportation providers. (H) MUSE: HOUSE Ff!X IIIhLEdVES OF ABSENCE (Connolly) See SF 109, Bulletin No. 2. ISIII.SF FILE 115, PUBLIC UTILITY NITERS [Connolly) Requires public electric and gos ifilities to Install only digital meters far its customers. All existing meters which are not digital must be replaced with digital meters within three years. (U) Ic1U.Sli FILE 117, .IPPEALS TO BUR ANn I. IOIRIII l:gs011 tiS lON (Yon }laanen, ct all Local un it ssof government would he empowered to approve or deny applications, may over- rule the hearing board to prevent issuance of a license or permit and may prevent a reducrinn Ina suspension or a reinstatement. Applicant may file for iudieial rvriew el"' ;In" action hY the hearing hoard in the case 0f a resolution for disap- proval. IFI 11MISIF 1:111i NB, MIN REl'ITALI:AT ION INcgvanl Authorises a city to declare any ant nr'Te cty wh lch meets certain conditions as an urban revirali-••scion arca. This hill confines urban revital uatiun to those downtown areas in existence on the Ofevetive Jac of this bill. 1111 IInII.SE _PILI: 1'19. .1111111S IRcnaud, et all Requires audits of cities, counties and sc1lnnl .ripCrr••f5 for which audits sure required by state law to be completed within one )•oar Of the close of the fiscal vcar that is subject to the audit. (F) MIN: 111.1i Cs. IOC,IL OPTION 1.2121111, INIvich• et all Provides for the estahlish- acnt„I':, meal art tan c tY Iu Ren. I'he city lottery stn be conducted after a majority Of vntcrs ippvnve it at a referendum. IU) IMINE PILI[ IB;, IpI411NTMENFS UNDER CIY11. SERVICE (Spear) Provides that the method Oiaappoinetng she chter or the ponce department and the chief of the fire depart- ment shall he specified by city ordinance or city charter. fill 011.I.II:fi Cli BARGAINING CHANGES he reported in Ilulletin No. 2 that numerous bills had bccn intrndueed ru .,p', the stupe Of cullevtivc bargaining. This week another study 6111 was Introduced, 5SB 82, which pulls together all of the elements of the other hills into one proposal. This bill would: I. Change the definition of a confidential employee. 2. Provide remedies which may be ordered by the PERS and allow the Board to petition the district court for enforcement of the Board orders. S. Provide that the scope of negotiations be changed to wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment. a. Allow negotiations for retirement provisions or benefits which are not related to a state -mandated retirement system. S. Specify the dace for completion of negotiations between employer and em- ployce at May 15. i u. Specify the method for selecting an arbitrator, the authority of the ar- bitrator, the Factors an arbitrator must consider in reaching a decision, and pro- vide that the decision of the arbitrator is binding. 7. Strikes the management rights section of Chapter 20. TAX FAX BROCHURES The League has just published a short brochure about local option taxes. 1Lltiple copies are available comembers of the Legislative Support Group and to other city officials to hand out when you are at tending meetings In ,your area. Brochures can be ordered by calling the League office at (515) 255.9961. f - I 1 r 141CROFILMED BY r—JORM-MIC R¢LAB'- CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOIRES I 317 ( I CITY OF I CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 i February 7, 1983 I Barker, Cruise & Kennedy 311 Iowa Avenue P.O. Box 2000 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 ATTN: Mr. John Cruise I Dear Mr. Cruise: This letter is in response to some correspondence I received from you dated February 3, 1983 concerning the protection of some work that has already been done on the premises at 365 Ellis Avenue. This correspondence is generated under the assumption that the work outlined in your February 3, 1983 correspondence is the minimum necessary to protect the work that has already been completed. Based on that assumption, the City has no objection to your client's proceeding as you proposed; however, it must be understood that any ! work beyond that outlined in your letter will fall under the stop work order presently applying to that property and would be stopped. Further, the City makes no representation that any of the work already done, or to be done as outlined in your letter, would be acceptable for purposes of a new building permit if the Board of Adjustment, or courts should determine that the current building permit should be revoked. i If you are unclear about any part of this correspondence or should have any questions whatsoever, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Glenn R. Siders Senior Building Inspector tpl/l cc: Neal Berlin Mike Kucharzak Bob Jansen Dick Boyle 3/ir i MICROFIL14ED BY ; �..�, DORM-��MIC R�C,4B- � !� II CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' ! - -- B BARKER, CRUISE & KENNEDY LAWYERS CHARLES A. MARKER 011 IOWA AVENUE - P.O. OOE 2000 JOHN D. CRUISE IOWA CITY, IOWA MICHAEL W. KENNEDY 02244 JAMES D. HOUGHTON DAVID L roOYa February 3, 1983 Mr. Glenn R. Siders F 0 Senior Building Inspector FEB3 1983 City of Iowa City / Civic Center /� _ 410 East Washington MY CLERK Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Casey Mahon - Furman Construction, Inc. Appeal of Issuance of Building Permit for Construction at 365 Ellis Street, Iowa City, Iowa I Dear fir. Siders: i I have received your letter of February 2, 1983, con- cerning the above -referenced matter and the problem with the 1 imminent damage to the property at 365 Ellis Avenue. After meeting with Mike Furman, we have decided to submit the follow- ing proposal as you have requested: To protect the work in progress from imminent damage, Furman Construction should be allowed to deck the first floor of the proposed construction. The company will omit the cement slab, plumbing and underground electrical conduit work. It will be allowed to place the four bearing walls on the lower level, those walls being necessary to support the deck. it will then deck the first floor across the bearing walls and the existing outside walls. Finally, it will backfill the outside walls. All of this work is necessary to protect the poured con- crete walls and footings that are now in place. If the exist- ing work is left unprotected, substantial damage is likely to occur to it. tie would like your response to this proposal immediately so that we can, if necessary, pursue other legal remedies available to us. Very truly yours, /9 bhn D. Cruise ,TDC/bp CC: Furman Construction, Inc. i MICROFILMED BY JORM�"MIC RfS -] CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MDI>!ES i 310 0 � JI