HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-09-23 OrdinanceCHARLES A. BARKER
dOHN D. CRUISE
MICHAEL W. KENNEDY
STEVEN C. ANDERSON
KIRSTEN H. FREY
KANDIE K. BRISCOE
Barker, Cruise, KENNEDY ~ ANDERSON, L.L.P.
LAWYERS
9:~0 S. DUBUQUE STREET- P.O. BOX 2000
IOWA CITY, IOWA
5~244
September 10, 1997
FAX TRANSMISSION and
ORDINARY MAIL
356-5009
AREA CODE 319
TELEPHONE 351-BI81
FAX 319-3B1-0605
City Council
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Re:
Grading and Sensitive Areas Development Plan for
1122-1136 North Dubuque Street
Dear City Council Members:
I wanted to take this opportunity to put my request in writ-
ing that the City Council expedite consideration of the above-
referenced application and collapse the second and third consid-
eration of the application. As we discussed at last night's
meeting, we believe it is in everyone's best interest to complete
this project yet this fall. Accomplishing the project in this
construction season would avoid any potential problems associated
with allowing the slope to endure yet another winter season and
spring thaw in its unstable condition. Therefore, we
respectfully request that the Council expedite consideration of
this matter in the interests of not only the applicant but also
the interests of the public.
KHF/dc
cc: Bruce R. Glasgow
John D. Cruise
James P. Glasgow
kf8\161b7254
~-~ ~ry truly yours,
Kirsten H. rey
..9: 97
Major Naomi Novick
Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52244
405 S. Summit Street
Iowa City IA 52240
September 16, 1997
S£p 1 ? 1997 ~
Dear Mayor Novick, ~!}r~' [~AI~t]t~'~'$1~}'~'!£~'
I attended the City Council meeting last week because I support the plan for a new
traffic light at Burlington and Governor Streets. But another topic disturbed me.
I was quite surprised by the discussion of the "hill stabilization" plan for the land
behind the Cliffs Apartments. I listened to the presentations, the Council's questions, and
the answers, and grew very concerned. The professionals involved in the plan appeared
unprepared, despite the fact that this process has apparently been going on for a long
time. There were many "I-don't-knows" and "l-hope-sos" from the people who did the
soil borings, designed the plans, and provided the legal council. This uncertainty is
unacceptable for such a major project, particularly when the developer Mr. Glasgow has
been unsuccessful in his previous attempts to stabilize the hill.
For example, when Dee Norton asked the soils fellow what was the weakest point
in the plan, he responded that he didn't know, he referred to "limited data from the [soil]
borings," and said he "hoped the assumptions were correct." Then the design fellow said
he "based the plan on [the soil fellow' s] calculations." This is appalling.
When Naomi Novick asked about the rock, concerned that it not be white, they
said they didn't know the color, they thought it would be some kind of limestone. How
could they not know? I have since heard that white limestone is an inexpensive option -
can the Council provide them with a compelling reason not to use it?
When a councilor asked if they had done similar hill stabilization jobs, they replied
"every-job-is-different", and so on. An important question, but no clear answer.
They did not provide any idea of the visual impact of this plan, which will affect
everyone who drives on Dubuque Street, area residents as well as visitors. The eroded
area is quite large, and visible from the street. With white rock, it will be startling. They
plan to put in several 1.5 inch trees at the base of the hill, and some evergreens at the top.
It is difficult to imagine that such small trees would have much effect on the appearance
for many years.
I am concerned that the project may proceed because everyone wants the problem
fixed as soon as possible, but I saw no indication that this was the best solution. Will this
plan create an eyesore on one of our most traveled streets? More importantly, will this
plan stabilize the hill? The planners made no secret of the fact they are providing no
guarantees.
I ask the City Council to continue to use caution with this project. Please don't
rush this plan just because winter is coming. The public is largely unaware of this
project, and needs time to respond. If the developer has to pay a fine, that seems very
appropriate, considering the damage he has done. There is a reason to impose fines. If a
developer can do such damage without paying a fine, he will feel free to continue. And
this may also encourage other developers to do likewise on other projects that affect the
city.
Please get the specifics of the plan. What will the rock color be? How many trees,
large and small, will be removed (not just the ones on the graded part). And how many
remaining trees will have their roots disturbed by the grading and rock covering? How
large will the equipment be ("not extremely large," as the lawyer said, is not specific
enough). What are the data that show that gravity, and a wall at the bottom, will hold this
together? How long have the engineer's other hill stabilization plans been in force and
how well they are working? What are the qualifications of the company that will actually
do the work? What specifically will happen if the supervising engineer observes a
problem; what is the mechanism to correct the problem? The replacement trees are
described as 1.5 inch; is this the circumference or the diameter? How does the spread,
cover thickness, and lifetime of honey locusts compare to other trees? The developers
should provide realistic sketches showing the visual impact from Dubuque Street and
from the neighborhood uphill. They should also explain how it will look during the
seven months that honey locusts are leafless in Iowa City.
And most importantly, please get a meaningful guarantee. They say their
reputations are riding on this. That has no value to the citizens of Iowa City. They must
guarantee that the hill will remain stable for at least twenty years. They must guarantee
that the trees will survive, or be replaced by larger trees. If they cannot stabilize the hill,
it must be returned to its original grade. The Cliffs may be crushed and used as fill.
Best regards,
Sue M. Travis
354-1521 (home)
335-7574 (work)
cc: Naomi Novick, Larry Baker, Karen Kubby, Ernie Lehman, Dee Norton, Dean Thornberry,
Dee Vanderhoef, Steve Arkins
Prepared by: Bob Miklo, Sr. Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5240
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3805
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE
14, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONING,"
ARTICLE N, ENTITLED "OFF-STREET PARKING
AND LOADING," TO INCREASE THE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES IN
THE CB-5, CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT
ZONE.
WHEREAS, the Citv Council has
determined that demand for parking spaces for
residential uses in the CB-5, Central Business
Support Zone, is similar to parking demands in
other residential zones; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning
Commission has considered amendments to
the parking requirements for the residential
uses in the CB-5 zone and has recommended
that they be the same as in other residential
zones.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA THAT:
SECTION I. AMENDMENT. Chapter 6,
entitled "Zoning," Article N, entitled "Off-Street
Parking and Loading," Section 1, entitled "Off-
Street Parking Requirements" of the City Code
be hereby amended as follows:
Repealing in its entirety Section 14~6N-1.
J.l.e., required number of off-street parking
spaces for multi-family dwellings, and adopting
in lieu thereof a new subsection 14-6N-1 .J.1 .e.
Principal Use
e. Multi-family dwellings
Zone
1. Where permitted except PRM.
Number of Spaces
According to the following table:
# of
Unit Tvpe Parkinq Spaces
efficiency 1
1 bedroom 1
2 bedroom 2
3 bedroom 2
4 bedroom 3
5 bedroom 4
*Expressed as number of dwelling
percentage of automobile parking.
Bicycle
Parkin.q *
0.5/D.U.
0.5/D.U.
0.5/D.U.
1.0/D.U.
1.0/D.U.
1.5/D.U.
units or
Ordinance No. 97-3805
Page 2
Zone
2. PRM
Number of Spaces
According to the following table:
# of Bicycle
Unit Type Parkin¢l Spaces Parkin.q*
efficiency 1 1.0/D.U.
1 bedroom I 1.0/D.U.
2 bedrooms or
more 2 1.0/D.U.
*Expressed as number of dwelling units or
percentage of automobile parking.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances
and parts of ordinances in conflict with the
provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
repealed.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any
section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall
be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional,
such adjudication shall not affect the validity of
the Ordinance as a whole or any section,
provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 23rd day of
September ,19 97
MAYOR /--~ ~/
ATTEST: ///'/~/_~ ,~,¢.,~ ..~
CITY CLERK
ppdadminNrd/cb-Szone.doc
Ordinance No, 97-3805
Page .3,
It was moved by Baker and seconded by
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
X Baker
X Kubby
X Lehman
X Norton
X Novick
X Thornberry
X Vanderhoef
Norton that the
First Consideration
Vote for passage: AYES:
Vanderhoef, Baker, Kubby.
8/26/97
Lehman, Norton, Novick, Thornberry,
NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration 9/9/97
Vote for passage: AYES: Novick, Thornberry, Vanderhoef,
Kubby, Lehman, Norton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published 10 / 1/97
Baker,
Prepared by: Karin Franklin, Director of PCD, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5232
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3806
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, "UNI-
FIED DEVELOPMENT CODE" OF THE CITY
CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE A,
ENTITLED "PARKING FACILITY IMPACT FEE"
TO REVISE THE FORMULA FOR PAYMENT IN
THE CB-5 ZONE.
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the Near
Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan
to guide development in the Near Southside
Neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, a parking facility impact fee ordi-
nance will assist in the implementation of the
plan, and guide the use and development of
land so as to assure that new residential devel-
opment in the Near Southside Neighborhood
bears a proportionate share of the cost of
capital expenditures necessary to provide off-
street parking in the Near Southside Neighbor-
hood of Iowa City; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to encourage
greater intensity of land use in the CB-5 zone
of the Near Southside; and
WHEREAS, the proportionality of in-lieu pay-
ment of fee and parking provided on-site is
directly related to the intensity of land use.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENT. Title 14, entitled
"Unified Development Code" of the City Code
is hereby amended by repealing Chapter 9,
Article A, entitled, "Parking Facility Impact
Fee," and adding thereto a new Chapter 9,
Article A to read as follows:
ARTICLE A. PARKING FACILITY IMPACT FEE
14-9A-1: LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS: The City
Council finds, determines and declares the
following as legislative facts:
A. Residential development and redevelop-
ment in the Near Southside Neighbor-
hood ("Neighborhood"), will create an
increased demand and need for off-street
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Pa§e 2
B4
E0
parking; that such development and
redevelopment will have an impact on
the City parking facility system; and that
without the provision of adequate off-
street motor vehicular parking spaces,
such development and redevelopment
would create undue traffic congestion
and generally be contrary to the health,
safety and welfare of the citizens of Iowa
City.
Due to the Neighborhood's proximity to
the downtown area, it is undesirable to
devote significant portions of develop-
ment sites to parking in the Near South-
side Neighborhood, since it is in the
public interest to develop land now avail-
able in the Neighborhood for more inten-
sive residential uses.
New residential development in that
portion of the Near Southside Neighbor-
hood referred to as the "Near Southside
Parking Facility District" will create an
increased demand for additional off-street
parking, which demand should be met by
and/or paid for by the development itself
according to the proportionality of the
development's impact upon existing off-
street parking facilities, and the
development's creation of increased
demand for additional off-street parking
facilities.
The City needs to expand its parking
facility system to accommodate new
residential development in order to en-
sure adequate off-street parking, and the
City Council recognizes such expansion is
necessary to promote and protect the
public health, safety and welfare.
The increased need and demand for off-
street parking created by new residential
development in the Near Southside Park-
ing Facility District is reasonably and
rationally related to the development's
payment of a proportionate share of a
new City parking facility or facilities, and
a "payment in lieu of off-street parking"
is a reasonable and rational method to
further the City's goals of promoting and
facilitating intensive economic develop-
ment near the downtown area, and at
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 3
the same time minimizing the use of large
land masses for private parking lots.
F. The imposition of parking impact fees is
a reasonably and rationally calculable
method of ensuring that new develop-
ment bears a proportionate share of the
cost of parking facilities necessary to
accommodate the resulting increased
demands for off-street parking created by
the new development, and the Council
wishes to avail itself of this method.
G. The fee established in Section 14-9A-6
hereof is directly derived from, based on
and does not exceed the cost of provid-
ing additional off-street City parking
facilities as a capital improvement cost
necessitated and generated by the new
residential development for which the fee
is to be charged.
H. City involvement in the expansion of the
parking facility system as a capital im-
provement is appropriate due to the scale
and cost of such facilities, and is neces-
sary due to the proximity of the Neigh-
borhood to the downtown area and the
expected high use levels of such a park-
ing facility system.
I. The fee established by this Article does
not constitute a tax.
1z~-9A-2: TITLE AND AUTHORITY:
A. Title: This Article shall be known and
may be cited as the. NEAR SOUTHSIDE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKING FACILITY
DISTRICT IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE,
B. Authority: The City Council has the
authority to adopt this Article under its
home rule powers, pursuant to the Con-
stitution of the State of Iowa, as amend-
ed, the Code of Iowa, as amended, and
the United States Constitution.
1z~-9A-3: INTENT AND PURPOSE:
A. This Article is intended to assist in the
implementation of the Iowa City Compre-
hensive Plan, as amended, and the Near
Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment
Plan, as amended.
B. The purpose of this Article is to regulate
the use and development of land so as to
ensure that new residential development
in the Near Southside Neighborhood
bears a proportionate share of the capital
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 4
improvement costs necessary to meet
the additional parking needs and de-
mands caused by development in this
Neighborhood, and to do so by paying a
portion of the costs needed to meet the
need for off-street parking in a City park-
ing facility within the Near Southside
Parking Facility District of Iowa City.
14-9A-4: APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS:
This Article shall apply to all real property
within the Near Southside Parking Facility
District. Where the provisions hereof are in
conflict with those of the Iowa City Zoning
Ordinance, or in conflict with the Near South-
side Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan, as
amended, the provisions hereof shall prevail.
14-9A-5: DEFINITIONS: As used in this Arti-
cle, the following definitions shall apply:
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COST: In-
cludes costs of design, engineering, necessary
consultants, construction, financing of a capital
improvement including debt service, land
acquisition, site improvements, and buildings
and equipment necessary for a City off-street
parking facility, but excludes maintenance and
operation of such facility.
CITY PARKING FACILITY: A ramp, sur-
face lot or combination thereof designed to
accommodate the off-street parking of motor
vehicles as a capital improvement.
NEAR SOUTHSIDE PARKING FACILITY
DISTRICT: That area of Iowa City bounded by
Burlington Street on the north, Gilbert Street on
the east, the Iowa Interstate Railway Main Line
on the south and Madison Street on the west,
except for Blocks 10 and 21 of County Seat
Addition; Lots 5 and 6 of Block 13, County
Seat Addition; Lots 3, 4, 5, the east 50 feet of
Lot 6, and the south 40 feet of Lot 2, Block
11, County Seat Addition; and Lots 10-15,
Lyon's First Addition.
RESIDENTIAL FEE PAYOR: A person
applying for the issuance of an occupancy
permit for residential development in the Near
Southside Parking Facility District.
14-9A-6: IMPLEMENTATION OF FEE:
A. Any person who, after the effective date
hereof, seeks to develop land within the
Near Southside Parking Facility District
by applying for an occupancy permit for
a residential use is deemed to have creat-
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 5
ed a need and demand for additional off-
street parking in the Near Southside
Parking Facility District, and is thereby
required to pay a proportionate share of
the capital improvement costs necessary
to meet the additional off-street parking
needs and demands created by such
development by contributing a propor-
tional share of the costs of a City parking
facility, which share shall be a "parking
facility impact fee" to be paid in the
manner and amount set forth in this
Article.
B. No new occupancy permit for a residen-
tial use requiring the payment of an im-
pact fee pursuant to this Article shall be
issued unless and until the parking facili-
ty impact fee hereby required has been
paid in accordance with Section 14-9A-
8, Payment of Fee.
14-9A-7: COMPUTATION OF FEE AMOUNT:
A. Cost Estimates: The parking facility im-
pact fee imposed by this Article is based
on current best estimates of the capital
improvement costs of the construction of
a parking facility or facilities in the Near
Southside Parking Facility District. Based
on 1992 architects' estimates of con-
struction costs of ten thousand dollars
(810,000.00) per parking space con-
structed and land costs of approximately
sixteen dollars (816.00) per square foot,
the City Council finds that such capital
improvement costs total in the amount of
at least twelve thousand dollars (-
812,000.00) per parking space in 1992
dollars.
Apportionment: The City Council further
finds that given current Department of
Planning and Community Development
estimates of new residential development
in the Near Southside Parking Facility
District, and given the City's ability to
manipulate City parking system rates,
monthly permit policies and on-street
parking ordinances, the use of an off-
street parking facility in the Near ,South-
side Parking Facility District will be ap-
portioned as follows: thirty-three and
one-third percent (331/s%) to users attrib-
utable to new residential development in
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 6
the Near Southside Parking Facility Dis-
trict; and sixty-six and two-thirds percent
(66%%) to users from other areas.
Cost per Space: Based on the foregoing,
the amount of the parking facility impact
fee required by this Article, in 1992
dollars, shall be four thousand dollars
(~4,000.00) per parking space for resi-
dential uses. The parking facility impact
fee shall be adjusted annually according
to provisions of subsection F of this
section.
In-Lieu Payment: In order that available
land in the Near Southside Parking Facili-
ty District is intensively used, and that a
portion of residential parking is combined
in a City off-street parking facility or
facilities, rather than scattered through-
out the Near Southside Parking Facility
District, the City Council finds that the
residential parking facility impact fee
shall be paid for a minimum of seventy-
five percent (75%) of the parking spaces
oth~rwi~s r~quirsd by th~ City ?oning
Ordin~nd~ for regidential uge9 in the CB-5
zone; if fewer than 25% of the required
spaces are provided on site, the fee shall
be increased accordingly and if more
than 25% of the required spaces are
provided on site, the fee shall be 75%, In
lieu of providing fifty percent (50%) of
the parking spaces otherwise required by
the City Zoning Ordinance for residential
uses in all other zones of the Near
Southside Parking Facility District, a fee
shall be paid. The Council further finds
that this parking facility impact fee is rea-
sonably and rationally related to the in-
creased off-street parking need or impact
created by said new residential develop-
ment.
Formula: The total residential parking
facility impact fee required by this Article
shall be calculated by multiplying the
number of parking spaces otherwise
required by the Zoning Ordinance for
residential uses by seventy-five percent
(75%) in the CB-5 zone and fifty percent
(50%) in all other zones of the district,
and multiplying that product by the per
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 7
space parking facility impact fee amount,
as expressed in the formula:
(RPS x .75) RIF = TRF or
(RPS x .5) RIF = TRF
Where:
RPS is the number of parking
spaces otherwise required by the
Zoning Ordinance for residential use;
RIF is the per space residential
parking facility impact fee for resi-
dential uses; and
TRF is the total residential park-
ing facility impact fee required by
this Article.
F. Adjustment: To ensure accurate esti-
mates of current parking facility capital
improvement costs, the amount of the
parking facility impact fee required by
this Article shall be adjusted annually
based on the national historical cost
indexes contained in the most recent
edition of Means Square Foot Costs
manual, as amended.
G. Documentation: The calculation of park-
ing facility impact fees and the receipt
thereof by the City shall be documented
in a form recordable in the office of the
County Recorder.
14-9A-8: PAYMENT OF FEE:
A. The City Manager or designee shall calcu-
late and assess the entire parking impact
fee upon issuance of an occupancy per-
mit. The fee payor may pay the entire
fee at the issuance of the occupancy
permit, or may elect to pay the fee in
three (3) equal annual installments, the
first of which shall be due and collected
at the issuance of the occupancy permit.
If the fee payor elects to pay the fee in
three (3) annual installments, the fee
payor shall execute an agreement with
the City before the City issues a occu-
pancy permit, which agreement sets
forth the timing and amounts of the
remaining installments to be paid and
also sets forth that, upon confirmation by
the Iowa City Finance Department 'that
the fee payor has defaulted on an install-
ment payment, the City Clerk shall certify
the outstanding fee balance to Johnson
County as a lien upon the premises for
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 8
which the occupancy permit was issued.
Said lien will not preclude the City from
pursuing recovery of the fee by other
legal or equitable remedies.
B. All fees collected shall be promptly trans-
ferred for deposit in the Near Southside
Parking Facility District Impact Fee Re-
stricted Fund, established in Section 14-
9A-10 hereof, and held there and used
solely and exclusively for the purposes
specified in this Article.
14-9A-9: REFUND OF FEES:
A. Any funds not expended for a City park-
ing facility or which remain unencum-
bered by the end of the calendar quarter
immediately following five (5) years from
the date of the final impact fee payment
shall, on application of the fee payor or
the fee payor's successor in interest, be
returned to such fee payor with interest
at the rates earned by the Restricted
Fund during such time as the fees were
held in the Fund, provided the fee payor
submits an application for the refund to
the City Manager or designee within one
hundred eighty (180) calendar days of
the expiration of the five (5) year period.
As used in this subsection, funds shall be
deemed "encumbered" if the City Council
has approved a contract for acquisition
and/or construction of a parking facility
or facilities in the Near Southside Parking
Facility District.
14-9A-10: PARKING FACILITY IMPACT FEE
RESTRICTED FUND:
A. Fund Established: There is hereby estab-
lished the Near Southside Parking Facility
District Impact Fee Restricted Fund.
B. Use of Funds:
1. Monies held in the Restricted Fund,
including any accrued interest, shall
be used solely and exclusively for
the purpose of the City capital im-
provement costs for providing off-
street parking facilities to be located
in the Near Southside Parking Facili-
ty District, and shall not be used for
maintenance or operation or for any
other purpose.
2. Monies shall be expended in the
order in which they are collected.
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 9
3. In the event that bonds or similar
debt instruments are issued for the
construction of capital facilities for
which parking facility impact fees
are to be expended, monies held in
the Restricted Fund may be used to
pay debt service on such bonds or
similar debt instruments, as capital
improvement costs.
4. Monies in the Restricted Fund may
be used to provide refunds as pro-
vided in Section 14-9A-9 hereof.
5. Monies in the Restricted Fund shall
be used for the purposes enumerat-
ed herein, exclusive of all others and
shall remain inviolate within the Re-
stricted Fund.
C. Annual Report Required: At least once
each fiscal year the City Manager or
designee shall present to the City Council
an accounting of the Restricted Fund.
14-9A-11: PARKING FACILITIES:
A. On-Site Parking Spaces:
1. Notwithstanding provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance which may be to
the contrary, payment of the resi-
dential parking facility impact fee
shall require the residential fee payor
to provide between 15% and 25%
of the parking spaces otherwise
required in the CB-5 zone; an addi-
tional 10% of required parking spac-
es may be provided on site; howev-
er, the fee shall not be reduced. No
fewer than fifty percent (50%) of
the parking spaces otherwise re-
quired for residential uses on the site
in all other zones within the Near
Southside Parking Facility District
shall be provided on site.
2. Those parking spaces provided on-
site after payment of the parking
facility impact fee shall:
a. Be sized in accordance with the
prevailing proportionality re~
quirements of the Zoning Ordi-
nance regarding standard and
compact car sized spaces; and
b. Include all required disabled
accessible spaces.
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 10
B. Construction of Parking Facility: The off-
site parking facilities financed in part by
the Near Southside Neighborhood parking
facility impact fee shall be:
1. Constructed in the Near Southside
Parking Facility District.
2, Constructed at a time and in accord
with a design at the sole discretion
of the City Council.
3. Designed and operated to accommo-
date new parking demands up to
fifty percent (50%) of capacity and
existing demand up to fifty percent
(50%) of capacity.
14-9A~12: RIGHTS OF FEE PAYORS:
A. This Article is intended to provide resi-
dential fee payors a reasonably and ratio-
nally calculable method to meet the
needs for off-street parking created by
their development for residents of new
residential development in the Near
Southside Parking Facility District,
B. The payment of the parking facility im-
pact fee does not guarantee a residential
fee payor a parking space or a monthly
permit in a City off-street parking facility,
either existing or those financed in part
by this Article; however, the City Manag-
er or designee shall, to the extent reason-
ably possible, give preference to occu-
pants of residential development for
which a parking facility impact fee was
paid.
14-9A-13: EXEMPTIONS FROM PROVISIONS:
The following shall be exempted from the
requirements of this Article:
A. Residential development which consti-
tutes "elderly housing" as defined in the
Zoning Ordinance.
B. Historic properties, identified in the Near
Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment
Plan and that have been preserved or
restored in accordance with the 1990
revised edition of the Secretary of Interi-
ors Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings, to the extent that the fee
payor shall be exempt from providing the
on-site parking spaces otherwise re-
quired, but the impact fee provided here-
in must be paid.
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page 1 1
14-9A-14: VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES:
Any violation of this Article shall be considered
a simple misdemeanor or Municipal infraction
provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4 of the City
Code.
SECTION 11. REPEALER. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION Ill. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be ad~
judged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision
or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 23rd day of
September, 1997.
MAYORI ~/ (
ATTEST: ~~~ /~. ~J
CITY CLERK
City Attorney's Office
ppdadmin\chap9.ord
Ordinance No. 97-3806
Page _]2.._
It was moved by Thornberry and seconded by
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Baker
Kubby
Lehman
Norton
Novick
Thornberry
Vanderhoef
Lehman that the
First Consideration
Vote for passage:
Baker, Kubby, Lehman.
8/26/9~
AYES: Norton, Novick, Thornberry, Vanderhoef,
NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration '9/9/97
Vote for passage: AYES: Norton, Novick, Thornberry, Vanderhoef,
Baker, Kubby, Lehman. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published 10/1/97
Prepared by: Doug Ripley, Traffic Engineering, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5252
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3807
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9,
ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES AND
TRAFFIC," CHAPTER 3 ENTITLED "RULES OF
THE ROAD," BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 12
THEREIN TO MANDATE LANE USE CONTROL
AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS ON MELROSE
AVENUE FROM UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS TO
BYINGTON ROAD.
WHEREAS, Melrose Avenue was reconstructed
to a three-lane bridge/three-lane road design from
University Heights to S. Grand Avenue and a two-
lane road design from S. Grand Avenue to
Byington Road including wide shoulders to
accommodate bicycles and buses; and
WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 95-321 it was
resolved to incorporate these lane designations
and appropriate pavement markings into a City
ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENT. Title 9, entitled
"Motor Vehicles and Traffic, Chapter 3, entitled
"Rules of the Road," is hereby amended by
adding a new Section 12 to read as follows:
"Melrose Avenue from University Heights
to S. Grand Avenue shall consist of two (2)
11' travel lanes, one (1) 11' center left turn
lane, and one (1) 7' shoulder on each side
of the traveled way, including pavement
markings identifying such lane usage, and
Melrose Avenue from S. Grand Avenue to
Byington Road shall consist of two (2) 11'
travel lanes and one (1) 5' shoulder on
each side of the traveled way, including
pavement markings identifying such lane
usage."
SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances
and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any
section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or
part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
Ordinance No. 97-3807
Page 2
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 23~d day of
September' ,19 97 .
(.MAYOR
City Attorney's Office
jccogtp/ord/melros e.doc
Ordinance No. 97-3807
Page 3
It was moved by Lehman and seconded by
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Baker
Kubby
Lehman
Norton
Novick
Thornberry
Vanderhoef
Thornberry that the
First Consideration 9/9/97
Vote f or passage: AYES:Norton, Novick, Thornberry, Vanderhoef,
Baker, Kubby, Lehman. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration
Vote for passage:
Date published
10/1/97
Moved by Lehman, seconded by Thornberry, that the rule requiring ordinances
to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to
the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second
consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final
passage at this time. AYES: Vanderhoef, Baker, Lehman, Norton, Novick,
Thornberry. NAYS: Kubby. ABSENT: None.
Prepared by: Julie Tallman, Development Regulations Specialist, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5132
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3808
ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, ENTITLED
"UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE,"
CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONING,"
ARTICLE S, ENTITLED "PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS," SECTION '1'1, ENTITLED
"SCREENING," BY ADDING CHILD CARE
CENTERS TO THE LIST OF AREAS WHICH
MUST BE SCREENED FROM COMMERCIAL
AND INDUSTRIAL USES.
WHEREAS, child care centers are permitted in
zones which allow commercial and industrial
uses; and
WHEREAS, the outdoor storage of
merchandise, vehicular traffic, and industrial
activity may detract from the environment of a
child care center; and
WHEREAS, there is currently no requirement
that a child care center be screened from
adjacent commercial or industrial activity.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. Title 14, entitled
"Uniform Development Code," Chapter 6, entitled
"ZONING," Article S, entitled "Performance
Standards," Section 11, entitled "Screening," is
hereby amended by repealing the first paragraph
of Section 11 and adding a new first paragraph
to read as follows:
SCREENING: Where a lot occupied by a
commercial or industrial use abuts or is across a
street, highway, alley or railroad right-of-way
from an R or ORP zone, a child care center, a
school or recreational area, including a park,
playground or the Iowa River, screening shall be
preserved, planted or constructed and
maintained by the owner of the commercial or
industrial use in accordance with the provisions
set forth below. In the instance where a lot
occupied by a manufactured housing use,
located in an RFBH zone, abuts or is across the
street from an RR-1 or RS-5 zone, screening, in
accordance with the provisions set forth below,
shall also be provided by the owner of the
manufactured housing use. Notwithstanding the
above regarding child care centers, it is the
responsibility of the child care center, rather than
Ordinance No. 97-3808
Page 2
the commercial or industrial user, to provide
screening pursuant to Section 14-6L-1D.3 when
said child care center is built subsequent to the
commercial or industrial use.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision
or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 23rd day of
September ,19 97
MAYOR | ~ (
CITY CL'-ERK
Approved by . ~
City Attorney's Office
hisadmin\ord\screenin.doc
Ordinance No. 97-3808
Page. 3
It was moved by Thornberry and seconded by ,
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Baker
Kubby .
Lehman
Norton
Novick
Thornberry
Vanderhoef
Vanderh~ef that the
First Consideration 9/9/97
Vote f or passage:AYES: Vanderhoef, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Norton,
Novick, Thornberry. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration
Vote for passage:
Date published
10/1/97
Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Vanderhoef, that the rule requiring
ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council
meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be
suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance
be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Lehman, Norton,
Novick, Thornberry, Vanderhoef, Baker. NAYS: Kubby. ABSENT: None.