HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-01-16 Public hearingNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
(~h
Notice Is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the CiW Council of Iowa City,
Iowa, at 7:30 p.m. on the 16th day of January,
1996, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at
hearing the Council will consider:
An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions for a .5 acre property located at
840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1,
Commercial Office, to CC-2, Communi-
ty Commercial.
2. An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions of an approximate .3 acre proper-
ty located at 1500 Sycamore Street
from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family
Residential, to CO-1, Office Commer-
cial.
3. An ordinance amending Title 14, Chap-
ter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article D,
entitled "Residential Zones," Section §,
entitled "Neighborhood Conservation
Residential Zone {RNC-12)," to clarify
the number of roomers permitted in
duplex units in the RNC-12 zone.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa, Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
Prepared by Charles Dennay, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-524-7
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING
ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE USE REGULA-
TIONS FOR A .5 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 840 CROSS PARK AVENUE FROM CO-'I,
COMMERCIAL OFFICE, TO CC-2, COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL.
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a
zone change from CO-1, Commercial Office, to
CC-2, Community Commercial, for the property
known as Lot 19, Block One, Braverman Center
Subdivision, located at 840 Cross Park Avenue;
end
WHEREAS, there are other CC-2 zoned
properties in the area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA:
SECTION I. APPROVAL. The property de-
scribed below is hereby reclassified from its
present classification of CO-1, Commercial
Office Zone, to CC-2, Community Commercial
Zone:
Lot 19, Block One, Braverman Center
Subdivision. Said tract of land contains
0.5 acre, more or less, and is subject to
easements and restrictions of record.
SECTION II. ZONING MAP. The Building in-
spector is hereby authorized and directed to
change the Zoning Map of the City of Iowa
City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon
final passage, approval and publication of this
Ordinance as provided by law.
SECTION III. CERTIFICATION AND RECORD-
ING. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance and
to record the same at the Office of the County
Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa, at owner's
expense, upon final passage and publication as
provided by law.
SECTION IV. REPEALER. All ordinances end
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Ordinance No.
Page 2
SECTION V. 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 e whole or any section, provision
or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti*
tutional.
SECTION Vl. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of
,19
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
/" Attorne~
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Prepared by: Charles Denney
Item: REZ95-0014; 840 Cross Park Avenue
Date: November 16, 1995
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Tom and Mary Sundblad
4047 West Overlook Rd
Iowa City, IA 52240
354-2975
Requested action:
Rezoning from CO-1, Commercial Of-
rice, zone to CC-2, Community Com-
mercial, zone.
Purpose:
To allow development of a retail use on
this lot and the lot immediately to the
north.
Location:
840 Cross Park Avenue
Size:
21,889 square feet.
Existing land use and zoning:
Vacant; C0-1
Surrounding land use and zoning:
North - Vacant; CC-2
East - Grocery Store; CC-2
South - Residential; RM-12
West - Vacant; C0-1
Comprehensive Plan:
General Commercial
File date:
October 26, 1995
45-day limitation period:
December 11, 1995
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicants, Tom and Mary Sundblad, are requesting a rezoning of the subject property
from CO-1, Commercial Office, zone to CC-2, Community Commercial, zone. The applicants
have indicated that they intend to develop the site with a retail establishment located on Lot
13 to the north and then provide parking for the retail use on the subject property. This block
of Braverman Center was rezoned from RM-12 to CO-1 in 1990 with the justification being
that the CO-1 zoning would serve as a good transition and buffer between the more intensive
commercial uses allowed the CC-2 zone and the RM-1 2 zoned property located south of Cross
Park Avenue.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the City Council of Iowa City,
Iowa, at 7:30 p.m. onthe 16th day of January,
1998, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at
which hearing the Council will consider:
1. An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions for a .5 acre properW located at
840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1,
Commercial Office, to CC-2, Communi-
ty Commercial.
An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions of an approximate .3 acre proper-
ty located at 1500 Sycamore Street
from RS-5, Low Densiw Single-Family
Residential, to CO-1, Office Commer-
cial.
3. An ordinance amending Title 14, Chap-
ter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article D,
entitled "Residential Zones," Section 5,
entitled "Neighborhood Conservation
Residential Zone (RNC-12)," to clarify
the number of roomers permitted in
duplex units in the RNC-12 zone.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the office of the City
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa CiW, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K, KARR, CITY CLERK
Prepared by: Scott G. Kugler, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)356-5243
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CHAP-
TER BY CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE USE
REGULATIONS OF APPROXIMATELY .3 ACRES
OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1500 SYCAMORE
STREET FROM RS-5, LOW DENSITY SINGLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, TO CO-1, COMMER-
CIAL OFFICE.
WH EREAS, the applicant, Community Coordi-
nated Child Care, and the owner, Lutheran
Social Services, have requested that the City
fezone approximately .3 acres of property
located at 1500 Sycamore Street from RS-5,
Low Density Single-Family Residential, to CO-1,
Commercial Office; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning will allow
the continued use of the building located on the
propercy as an office or other use permitted in
the CO-1 zone while ensuring that the use of
the subject property is compatible with adja-
cent properties zoned RS-§; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code § 414.5 {1995)
provides that the City of Iowa City may impose
reasonable conditions on granting an
applicant's rezoning request, over and above
existing regulations, in order to satisfy public
needs directly caused by the requested change;
and
WHEREAS, the applicant and ,owners ac-
knowledge that certain conditions and restric-
tions are reasonable to ensure appropriate use
of this property in relation to surrounding
properties and to ensure that vehicular traffic
circulating to, from and on the subject property
does not. negatively impact the surrounding
residential property; and
WHEREAS, the applicant and owners have
agreed to use this property in accordance with
the terms and conditions of a Conditional
Zoning Agreement to ensure appropriate use of
this property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA;
SECTION I. APPROVAL. Subject to the terms
and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agree-
ment, attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein, the property described below
is hereby reclassified from its present classifica-
tion of RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Resi-
dential, to CO-1, Commercial Office:
Lot 7 and Lot 8, Marion's Subdivision, Part
Two, Johnson County, Iowa City, Iowa,
excepting therefrom the following; Begin-
ning st s point 61.61' easterly along the
southern boundary line of Lot 7, thence
38.3' northeasterly along the southeast
boundary line to the southeast corner of Lot
7, thence 126,1' northwesterly along the
northeast boundary line to the northeast
corner of Lot 7, thence 15' southwesterly
along the northwest boundary line of Lot 7,
thence southeasterly to the place of begin-
ning, all in Marion's Subdivision, Part Two,
Iowa City, Iowa.
SECTION II, ZONING MAP, Upon final pas-
sage, approval and publication of this Ordi-
nance as provided by law, the Building Official
is hereby authorized and directed to change the
zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to
conform to this zoning amendment,
SECTION IIh CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREE-
MENT. Following final passage and approval of
this Ordinance, the Mayor is hereby authorized
and directed to sign, and the CiW Clerk to
attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement
between the property owners, applicants and
the City.
SECTION IV. CERTIFICATION AND RECORD-
ING. Upon passage and approval of the Ordi-
nance, and after execution of the Conditional
Zoning Agreement, the City Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to certi~ a cop'/of this
Ordinance and the Conditional Zoning Agree-
ment for recordation in the Office of the Re-
corder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Appli-
cant's expense, all as provided by law.
SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and
parts of ordlnaoces in conflict with the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION VI. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision
or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
Ordinance No.
Page 3
SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CiTY CLERK
Prepared by: Scott G. Kugler, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa CiW, IA 52240 (319)356-5243
CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter "City), Lutheran Social Services (hereinafter "Owner), and Community
Coordinated Child Care (hereinafter "Applicant").
WHEREAS, the applicant, Community Coordinated Child Care, and the owner, Lutheran Social
Services, have requested that the City fezone approximately .3 acres of property located at
1500 Sycamore Street from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to CO-1,
Commercial Office; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning will allow the continued use of the building located on the
property as an office or other use permitted in the C0-1 zone, while ensuring that the use of
the subject property is compatible with adjacent properties zoned RS-5;; and
WHEREAS, Iowa Code § 414.5 (1995) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose
reasonable conditions on granting an applicant's rezoning request, over and above existing
regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the requested change; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant and Owner acknowledge that certain conditions and restrictions are
reasonable to ensure appropriate use of this property in relation to surrounding properties and
to ensure that vehicular traffic circulating to, from and on the subject property does' not
negatively impact the surrounding residential property; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant and Owner have agreed to use this property in accordance with the
terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement to ensure appropriate use of this
property.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree
as follows:
Lutheran Social Services is the owner and legal title holder of property located at 1500
Sycamore Street, which property is more particularly described as follows:
Lot 7 and Lot 8, Marion's Subdivision, Part Two, Johnson County, Iowa City, Iowa,
excepting therefrom the following: Beginning at a point 61.61' easterly along the
southern boundary line of Lot 7, thence 38.3' northeasterly along the southeast
boundary line to the southeast corner of Lot 7, thence 1 26.1' northwesterly along the
northeast boundary line to the northeast corner of Lot 7, thence 15' southwesterly
along the northwest boundary line of Lot 7, thence southeasterly to the place of
beginning, all in Marion's Subdivision, Part Two, Iowa City, Iowa.
2
Owner and Applicant acknowledge that the City wishes to ensure the appropriate use
of the subject property compatible with adjacent properties which are zoned RS-5.
Therefore, Owner and Applicant agree to certain conditions over and above City
regulations in order to ensure that the use of the subject propertv does not further
encroach into the surrounding residential neighborhood, and that on-site vehicular
circulation and traffic do not negatively impact the existing RS-5 development
surrounding the subject property to the north, east, and west.
In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property from RS-5 to C0-1, Owner
and Applicant agree that use of the subject property will conform to all of the
requirements of the CO-1 zone as well as the following additional conditions:
No vehicular access shall be permitted to the subject property from DeForest
Avenue.
No parldng or access drives shall be permitted to the north of any building on
the site.
Future building additions or new structures on the property shall not be located
any closer to DeForest Avenue than the current structure.
d. The existing landscaped screening along the east property line shall be retained.
The Owner and Applicant acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are
reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code § 414.5 (1995), and
that said conditions satisfy public needs which are directly caused by the requested
zoning change.
The Owner and Applicant acknowledge that in the event the subject property is
transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the
terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement.
The Parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to
be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full
force and effect as a covenant running with the title to the land unless or until released
of record by the City. The Parties further acknowledge that this Agreement shall inure
to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives and assigns of the Parties.
Owner and Applicant acknowledge that nothing in this Conditional Zoning Agreement
shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all applicable
local, state and federal regulations.
The Parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by
reference into the Ordinance rezoning the subject property; and that upon adoption and
publication of the Ordinance, this Agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County
Recorder's Office.
3
Dated this day of
LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES
, 1996.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
By By:
Patricia Geissel, Director
Naomi J. Novick, Mayor
COMMUNITY COORDINATED CHILD CARE
By
Sandy I(uhlmann, Executive Director
Attest:
Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
STATE OF IOWA )
) ss:
JOHNSON COUNTY
On this day of ,19 , before me,
, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally
appeared Naomi J. Novick and Marian K. Karr, to me personally known, and, who, being by
me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of
Iowa City, Iowa; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the
corporation, and that the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the corporation, by
authority of its City Council, as contained in (Ordinance) (Resolution) No. passed
by the City Council, on the day of , 19__, and that
Naomi J. Novick and Marian K. Karr acknowledged the execution of the instrument to be their
voluntary act and deed and the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it voluntarily
executed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
4
STATE OF IOWA )
) as:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of ,A.D. 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Patricia Geiasel to me
personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that she is the Executive Director
of said corporation executing the within and foregoing instrument to which this is a~tached,
that (no seal has been procured by the said) corporation; that said instrument was signed (and
sealed) on behalf of (the seal affixed thereto is the seal of said) said corporation by authority
of its Board of Directors; and that the said and
as such officers acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and
deed of said corporation, by it and by them voluntarily executed.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF IOWA )
) as:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of , A.D, 19 , before me, the undersigned, a
Notary ~ublic in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared Sandy Kuhlmann, to me
personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that she is the Executive Director
of said corporation executing the within and foregoing instrument to which this is attached,
that (no seal has been procured by the said) corporation; that said instrument was signed (and
sealed) on behalf of (the seal affixed thereto is the seal of said) said corporation by authority
of its Board of Directors; and that the said and
as such officers acknowledged the execution of said instrument to be the voluntary act and
deed of said corporation, by it and by them voluntarily executed.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Item: REZ95-0015. Community Coordinated
Child Care (4Cs)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Contact person:
Requested action:
Purpose:
Location:
Size:
Existing land use and zoning:
Surrounding land use and zoning:
Comprehensive Plan:
Applicable Code requirements:
File date:
45-day limitation period:
Prepared by: Scott Kugler
Date: November 16, 1995
Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs)
PO Box 2876
202 S, Linn St,
Iowa City, IA 52240
Sandy Kuhlmann
Director, 4Cs
Phone: 338-7684
To rezone property from RS-5 to CO-1.
To allow the operation of the appli-
cant's administrative offices from the
existing structure on the property.
1500 Sycamore Street
Approximately .3 acres.
The property contains an office building
that formerly housed Lutheran Social
Services, approved as a religious insti-
tution, zoned RS-5.
North, west, and northeast: single-
family residential, RS-5;
South and southeast: Commercial, CC-
2.
Residential, 2-8 DU/A.
City Code Section 14-6E-1, Commercial
Office Zone (CO-1).
October 26, 1995
December 11, 1995
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Community Coordinated Child Care (4Cs), on behalf of Lutheran Social
Services, is requesting a rezoning from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to C0-1,
Commercial Office, for property located at 1500 Sycamore Street. The property currently
contains an office building that formerly housed the Lutheran Social Services offices. The
building was approved in the RS-5 zone as a religious institution. Before any use other than
a religious institution or a single-family residence can occupy the office building, the property
would need to be rezoned to an appropriate zoning classification for the intended use. In this
case, the CO-1 zone is the least intensive zone for the proposed office use.
ANALYSIS:
As with any rezoning request, this application will be evaluated in terms of its compatibility
with surrounding land uses and the Comprehensive Plan. Consideration should also be given
to the fact that a vacant office building currently exists on the site, even though it is presently
zoned RS-5. The current situation was the result of the approval of a special exception in
1967 to allow a religious institution to be established in a residential zone. The Lutheran
Social Services offices have since moved to a new location, leaving behind a vacant building
that may not be readily adaptable for residential use. As it is currently zoned, the only uses
that could be established on the property other than another religious institution would be a
single family dwelling, a child care facility located within a private residence (less than 12
children), and a family care facility. The RS-5 zoning designation imposes limitations on the
use of this particular lot due to the unusual situation that exists presently.
Suerounding Land Use: This site lies immediately north of a CC-2, Community Commercial
zone that contains Sycamore Mall and a Randali's grocery store. The balance of the
surrounding area consists of single-family homes located on both sides of Deforest Avenue,
on the west side of Sycamore Street, and to the north along Sycamore Street. Careful
consideration should be given to any request for a rezoning of this nature to ensure that the
impact of proposed and future potential land uses will not be detrimental to the surrounding
neighborhood.
This site has been used for many years as an office for a religious institution, and presently
contains a two-story office building. While the proposed office use is a commercial business,
it is significantly less intense and of a smaller scale than the adjacent commercial development
to the south. The "Intent" section of the CO-1 zone regulations states that "it]he CO-1 zone
can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial uses."
In staff's opimon, this site is a transition site between the existing commercial and residential
areas, and meets the intent of the CO-1 zone.
The site contains a parking area on the south side of the lot with access from the mall parking
lot to the south and from Sycamore Street. While the building has a secondary entrance on
its north facade, facing Deforest Avenue, it otherwise seems to be only a minor intrusion to
this residential street. There is no paved perking to the north or east of the building, and
landscaped screening provides a buffer between this site and the property immediately to the
east. There may be some on-street parking that occurs on Deforest Avenue due to the north
entrance to the building, but the "commercial" aspects of this site are largely orientated to the
south and west, away from the bulk of the surrounding residences. There are single-family
3
homes located on the west side of Sycamore Street across from this site, but they are double-
frontage lots that back up onto Sycamore and are fairly well screened from this site and the
existing commercial development.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan suggests residential development at 2 to 8
dwelling units per acre for the property fronting on Deforest Avenue, and general commercial
for the property to the south. The land use pattern suggested in the Comprehensive Plan is
intended to be a general guide for development in the city. The use boundaries shown on the
Land Use Map are not to serve as specific zoning boundaries, but rather provide an overall
framework around which to plan for various types of development. They do not necessarily
correspond with property lines or current zoning boundaries. In this case, however, it is
apparent that the intent of the plan is to protect the surrounding residential neighborhood by
not allowing the commercial development associated with Sycamore Mall to front on Deforest
Avenue and encroach into the neighborhood. As mentioned above, however, the proposed
use is of a much smaller scale and is less intrusive than the CC-2 development to the south.
It is the intent of the Comprehensive Plan that boundaries of different uses be interpreted with
flexibility in order to allow appropriate transitions. In staff's opinion, the proposed rezoning,
if carefully controlled with regard to its impact on Deforest Avenue, will continue to allow an
appropriate transition between the existing commercial and residential uses.
Additional Considerations: This site appears to meet the intent of the CO-1 zone, and the
existing site design helps to provide the commercial/residential buffer discussed in the CO-1
zone regulations. Other uses permitted in the CO-1 zone that could locate on this site if this
rezoning is approved are mainly relatively low key businesses, though some would generate
more traffic than a typical office, such as a florist shop, copy center, or pharmacy. However,
staff feels that if the vehicular traffic is restricted to the south end of the property the impact
on the neighborhood to the north will be minimal. Other uses that are likely to generate a
significantly higher level of traffic, such as a restaurant, child care facility, beauty shop, or
drive-in bank, would require a special exception involving an additional level of public review.
Although staff is of the opinion that CO-1 zoning is appropriate for this site, the Commission
may wish to condition the rezoning in order to retain its current orientation toward the south
and west. Restrictions on vehicular access along Deforest Avenue, and prohibiting parking
or on-site drives on the north side of the building may help to ensure that future expansions
or future occupants do not significantly alter this site's impact on Deforest Avenue. Staff also
recommends that future additions to this building or a new building not be permitted to
encroach any closer to Deforest Avenue than the current building, and that the screening
along the east property line be retained.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ95-O015, a request to rezone approximately .3 acres from RS-5
to CO-1 for property located at 1500 Sycamore Street, be approved, subject to the following
conditions: 1) No vehicular access shall be permitted from Deforest Avenue; 2) No parking
or access drives shall be permitted to the north of the existing building; 3) Future building
additions or new structures on the property shall not be located any closer to Deforest Avenue
than the current structure; and 4) The existing landscaped screening along the east property
line shall be retained.
4
ATTACHMENTS:
1, Location map,
2, Applicant's statement regarding rezoning request,
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
Ill_-=
~ F~ENDLY
LOCAT ~ ON
MAP
REZC~5-0015
RS-5 TO CO-I
I---H III IH
III
C ST
HIGHLAND
DEFO~FST
AVE
IIII
SPRUCE
III
III
III
III
-~ IllllllI
I mIm
'11111
U.S. H~. 6
SITE LOCATION
I
II
FIRE
4C J
S Cornmumty Coordinated Ci¢ild Care
202 South Linn St.. P.O. Box 2876 - Iowa City. Iowa. 52244 . (319) 338-7684
APPLICATION STATENlENT
This statement is to accompany a request for rezoning of the property located at 1509~ycamore, Iowa
City, Iowa 52240.
The aforementioned property is owned by Lutheran Social Services, and has been operated as an
office/social service center since 1967. Lutheran Social Services has vacated the building, moving
their offices to a new location. and have sought to sell this building. 4Cs Community Coordinated
Child Care currently has an accepted contract with Lutheran Social Services to purchase this building
contingent upon rezoning.
4Cs is a United Way primary agency that has provided social services in Johnson County for the past
twenty-four years. 4Cs is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization with a governing Board of Directors.
The agency is dedicated to the promotion of children and their families through quality programs that
assist parents, child care providers and others with educational and technical information. Included in
this packet are attachments relating the history of 4Cs and our diverse programming.
4Cs and Lutheran Social Services are requesting a rezoning for this property to allow 4Cs to purchase
the building and operate administratix e offices at this location. 4Cs will follow a path parallel to that
of Lutheran Social Services in the operation of this space. The use of the space would be the same; in
fact, actual commercial intrusion to the neighborhood would be lowered. The programs 4Cs would
operate from these administrative offices have few to no walk-in clients; the primary method of
consumer contact is through postal and telephone conversations. For those programs which have
walk-in clients, 4Cs ~ould maintain their current locations: the Toy Lending Library and Educational
classes will continue at the Old Public Library. and the child care space for Home · Ties would remain
at the First Mennonite Church site. There would be no child care on the premises at any time.
This property, though in a residential zone, is adjacent to the Sycamore Mall parking lot. The view
from two sides of the building are of commercial property, namely Randalls and Sears. Additionally,
the design of the building is for office space, (without plumbing on the main level), not a single family
home. These facts combined prohibit the sale of this space within the confines of the zoning codes.
The rezoning and completed purchase of this property will allow a continuation of the worthwhile
history of this building in a not-t~)r-profit manner. 4Cs will be an excellent neighbor in this
family-oriented district. 4Cs has 1onge,,ity in the community and is well-established as a responsible
organization. 4Cs has never launched a capital campaign or sought city funding. Purchase of this
building will give 4Cs the space demanded by the growth and expansion of their programs, without the
necessity of a capital campaign. Rezoning of this property will allow Lutheran Social Services to
recoup their money from this building and return it to their community services. If this fezoffing
request fails, Lutheran Social Serices will be unable to sell this property since it does not readily lend
itself to the allowed zoning uses. Unfortunately, both projects would be blocked, Lutheran Social
Services would be unable to free up needed financial assets, and 4Cs would be forced to begin a capital
campaign in order to compete for office space at market prices.
Child Care Rclk:rral · Provider Training · Parent Edtlcation. Child Advocacy. Toy Library
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 1, 1995
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Re: REZ95-0015. 1500 Sycamore: Additional Information.
At the Commission's November 16 meeting, a number of questions were raised regarding the
history of this property and traffic along DeForest Avenue. More specifically, were there any
conditions attached to the approval of the religious institution in 1967, and can an assessment
be made regarding the impact that this mzoning may have on the traffic along DeForest Avenue?
Clarification of 1967 Board of Adjustment Action: Further reseamh into the 1967 Board of
Adjustment case for this property has revealed that the use of this building as a religious
institution was not approved as a special exception as reported in the November 16 staff report.
Rather it was the result of a request for an interpretation from the Board as to whether or not the
proposed use was permitted on the site under the zoning regulations that were in place at that
time.
In 1967, this property was located in the R 1B zone. The R1B zone was a single-family residential
zone, but it also permitted a number of other uses by right. For example, public libraries, public
schools, public playgrounds, public community buildings, golf courses and country clubs, nurseries
and other child care facilities, and churches were all permitted uses in the R1B zone. At that
time, the City Code contained no definition of a church or a religious institution. The Board was
asked to determine whether the proposed social service center could be considered a church
under the R1B zoning regulations. On a 4-0 vote, the Board's interpretation was that it was a
permitted use in the R1B zone. Because the Board's action was an interpretation of a certain
provision of the zoning regulations and not approval of a specific use or project, there could not
have been any conditions attached to the Board's decision regarding the future use of the
building. From the City's standpoint, the property can be used for any use permitted in the zone
in which it is located. A copy of the minutes of the October 4, 1967, Board of Adjustment meeting
and the public notice for that meeting are attached for your review.
Although there were no conditions attached to the Board's action, neighborhood residents have
indicated that statements were made in 1967 that indicated the building would be converted for
residential use if the religious use was discontinued. The City's records contain no reference to
such an agreement. Therefore, staff cannot verify whether or not such an agreement had been
reached at that time.
DeForest Avenue Traffic Issues: Because DeForest Avenue connects between Lower
Muscatine Road and Sycamore Street, an arterial and a collector street, it is likely that it carries
more traffic than would be typical for a local residential street. However, no traffic counts exist
to indicate what the actual traffic volume is along DeForest Avenue. The City traffic engineer
feels that it would be difficult to predict the impact that the proposed rezoning would have on
DeForest Avenue, but suspects that it would be minimal due to the design of the site and the
relatively low intensity of the proposed use. Staff feels that the conditions suggested as part of
the staff recommendation contained in the November 16 staff report would also help to limit the
impact of traffic generated from this site on DeForest Avenue.
bCS-3SK
MINUTES OF MEETING OF BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT
Council Chambers 5:00 P.M. October 4, 1967
Members Present: Mr. Moore, Mr. Graham, Mr. Plank, Mr. Wicks
Members Absent: Mr. McCreedy
Petition for Social Service Center in RIB zone proposed for location at 1805
DeForest Street.
Arthur K. Merck: Explained the need and function of the center; extent of
services to the community and area; type of personnel that will staff the
center; explained the type of construction and how it will fit into the general
neighborhood.
Erich Hesse: Stated that he lives at 1809 DeForest Street and next to the
proposed site and he is in favor of granting the petition.
Mr. Mu!len: He was speaking for Dr. Whisenand who lives at 1813 DeForest
Street. He stated that Dr. Whisenand was not objecting to the petition. His
objections had been to the zoning of the property and the Board has no power
over zoning.
Mr. Graham: Moved that the petition be granted as per Section 8.10.28, H.l.d.
and Section 8.10.19, B of the 1965 Municipal Code of Iowa City. Motion seconded
by Mr. Plank.
Roll call vote was as follows:
Mr. Graham Yes
Mr. Moore Yes
Mr. Plank Yes
Mr. Wicks Yes
Motion carried.
Meeting adjourned.
Fred Moore, Assistant Secretary
FM/Jk
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notics is hereby given chac the Board of Adju~manc of Iowa ¢i~, Johnson
County, Iowa, ~11 hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers of the
Civic Center on the 4th day of October at 5:00 P.M. on an interpretation
of the Zoning Ordinance #2238 regarding classification of a religious
institution to be built at 1805 DeForest Street legally described as
Lots 7 and 8, Part 2, Marion's Subdivision, all in Iowa City, Johnson
County, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, at which time parties
interested and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard on such
zoning variance.
Dated at Iowa City, Iowa this September 18, 1967.
Board 'of Adjustment
Melfo{d A. Dahl, Secretary
Cs Community Coordinated Cttild Care
202 South Linn St. · P.O. Box 2876 · Iowa City, Iowa. 52244 · (319) 338-7684
December 8, 1995
Scott Kugler
Planning and Zoning
Civic Center
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Kugler,
This letter is a formal request from 4Cs Community Coordinated Child Care and Lutheran Social
Service to have the rezoning application for the property located at 1500 Sycamore, Item
REZ95-0015, forwarded on to City Council for consideration. We are requesting as well that all
materials submitted with this rezoning application be forwarded on to City Council members.
Thank you for your time and energy involving this matter.
Sincerely,
'"-'Sandy Kuhlmann
Executive Director
Child Care Referral · Provider Training · Parent Education. Child Advocacy · Toy Library
Lorraine Saeger
Administrative Assistant
Re: Zoning Application REZ95-0015
For inclusion in Council packets
Dear City Council;
4Cs, Lutheran Social Service, and neighbors of the building located at 1500 Sycamore would
like to request that Council not close the public hearing portion of this zoning consideration but
continue it to the January 30th meeting.
The above mentioned parties are currently working on a solution for all parties involved. This
solution involves drafting a private covenant to protect :he interests of homeowners in the
neighborhood as well as 4Cs or successive owners of the property located at 1500 Sycamore.
It is oar understanding that even though Planning and Zoning staff recommended approval of the
rezoning application, that Planning and Zoning Commission voted down the application due to
the neighborhood homeowner objections. These neighbors stated for pnblic record that their
objection was not directed at 4Cs' occupancy of the building, and that in fact, if an avenue could
be arrived at in which 4Cs could operate in the building without exposing the property to other
types of commercial enterprises, they would support it. It is with this objective in mind that the
neighbors, 4Cs, and Lutheran Social Service, with the assistance of a mediator, have been
meeting and drafting a private covenant which addresses all concerns.
With a positive conclusion of the private covenant, the neighbors have stated they would
withdraw their formal objection to the rezoning of this property. In fact, a private covenant
drafted correctly will give the neighbors a sense of security because their rights would be
protected and they would not have to go tl~ough this process again. At this time, however, the
process is still in draft and negotiating stage. We feel we will be able to conclude this
cooperative arrangement positively if given a continuation of the public hearing until the January
30th City Council meeting. Thank you for the time and consideration that you have given to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Don McChristy
1804 DeForest Avenue
Paul VanDorpe
1802 DeForest Avenue
'"Sandy Kt~dmann
4Cs Executive Director
Pat Geisel
Lutheran Social Service Executive Director
96 JAN 12
Restrictive Covenants
These c~%~n~ declared by Community Coordinated Child Care, 4C's of Johnson
Count~ ~,~ofit corporation providing social services in Johnson County
(h~einafter called 4C's) and are approved by the undersigned residential neighbors
of ~he commercial site t~ be acquired by 4C's as described in this agreement. The
parties state as a factual background for these covenants as follows:
1. 4c's has entered into a purchase agreement with Lutheran Social service to
buy the real estate located at 1500 Sycamore, more particularly described on Exhibit
1 to these covenants. The restrictions declared in these covenants shall apply to
that real estate on the terms and conditions herein expressed.
2. The current zoning applicable to the above-described real estate is RS-5,
which designation would prohibit 4C's intended use of the property as administrative
offices.
3. That 4C's has applied for re-zoning of said parcel to CO-1.
4. That certain of the residential property owners in the neighborhood of said
real estate have expressed formal and informal objections to the re-zoning.
S. 4C's wishes to accommodate the neighbors' interests to impose such
restrictions as would speak to the neighbors' concerns yet assure 4c's intended use
of the property.
Accordingly, 4C's, in consideration of the withdrawal of objections by the
undersigned neighbors to the re-zoning, which withdrawals are given in reliance upon
the execution of these covenants, hereby declares the following restrictions to be
applicable to the real estate described on Exhibit 1 to these covenants:
1. AREA BENEFITTED. The restrictions declared by this document shall inure to
the benefit of and shall be enforceable by the current and future owners of the
parcel within the area depicted on the graphic attached to these covenants as Exhibit
2. A list of the legal descriptions of the benefitted lots appear on Exhibit 3 to
these covenants.
2. DURATION OF RESTRICTION. 4C's states that these covenants shall restrict
the use of the real estate described on Exhibit 1 in perpetuity and shall bind the
current and future owners of such real estate. These covenants shall be deemed to
automatically renew each twenty years unless revoked by the consent of all of the
residential owners within the area depicted on Exhibit 2 to these covenants.
3. MANNER OF ALTERATION OR REVOCATION. These covenants shall not be revoked
or altered except by the consent of all of the residential owners of the properties
located within the area designated on Exhibit 2 to this agreement.
4. RESTRICTIONS PURSUANTTO STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 4c's hereby declares that
it voluntarily imposes the restrictions recommended by city planning staff to the
planning and zoning commission by written recommendation bearing date of November 16,
1995. Specifically, the restrictions involved state that:
A. No vehicular access shall be permitted to the subject tract from
Deforest Avenue.
NO parking or access drives shall be permitted to the north of the
existing building.
Future building additions or new structures shall not be located
any closer to Deforest Avenue than the current struoture.
The existing landscape screening along the east property line shall
be retained (subject to the possibility that the existing hedge is
owned by the neighbor to the east, in which case 4C's would not be
able to make this restriction).
5. RESTRICTION ON T~ SIZE OF ADDITIONS. 4C's hereby declares that no
addition to the existing st=ucture shall increase the total floor area of the current
building by more than 10%.
6. RESTRICTION ON =a~ SIZE OF A REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE. 4C's hereby states
that in the event of partial or total destruction of the existing structure that the
total floor area of the replacement structure shall not exceed the total floor area
of the existing structure by more than 10%.
7. RESTRICTION ON INCREASE IN THE SIZE OF T~ PAVED PORTION OF =~ PA~KING
LOT. 4C's hereby declares that the total paved area of the parking lot shall not
increase by more than 10%.
8. RESTRICTION ON MIXED RESIDENTIAL ~ND COMMERCIAL USES. Notwithstanding any
current or future zoning permission, 4C's hereby states that no mixed residential and
commercial uses will be simultaneously made of the existing or any replacement
structure. It is expressly understood that this restriction does not prohibit the
use of the tract in question as a single-family residence.
9. RESTRICTIONS ON SIGNAGE. Notwithstanding any other permissible uses under
the ordinances of Iowa City, 4C's hereby declares that the only sign to be affixed to
the building currently located on the structure or as may be added to or replaced,
shall be a single unlighted wall sign sized as provided in the sign provisions of the
ordinances of Iowa City.
10. RESTRICTIONS ON LIGHTING. All lighting on the subject lot shall currently
conform to the requirements of Section 14-65-8 of the code of ordinances of Iowa
City.
11. RESTRICTIONS ON FENCINO. Any fencing to be installed on the subject lot
shall conform to the requirements of Section 14-6P-2 of the code of ordinances of
Iowa City as if the subject lot was located in an "R" zone. No metal fencing shall
12. EFFECTIVE DATE OF RESTRICTIONS. These restrictions ~.all be effective upon
the recordation of the conveyance document to 4C's. If for any teasone's does not
take title, the provisions of these restrictive covenants shall ~_~f ~ force and
effect.
2
Community Coordinated Child Care, 4C's of Johnson County, Iowa, by:
Dated this of , 1995.
Dated this of , 1995.
State of Iowa
County of Johnson
On this day of , 1995, before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, personally appeared
and , to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did
say that they are the directors of Community Coordinated Child Care, 4C's of Johnson
County, an Iowa nonprofit corporation, and that the instrument was signed on behalf
of the corporation by authority of the directors and the directors acknowledged the
execution of the instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of the corporation by it
and by the directors voluntarily executed.
notary public in and for said state
Date .Name
SIGNR. U:URES OF RE$IDENTTRL
Address
Lot 7 and Lot 8, Marion's Subdivision Part Two, Johneon County,
Iowa City, Iowa, according to the recorded plat thereof, excepting
therefrom beginning at a point 61.61' easterly along the southern
boundary line of Lot 7, thence 38.3' northeasterly a~ong the
southeast boundary line to the most easterly corner of Lot 7,
thence 126.1' northwesterly along the northeast boundary line to
the northeast corner of Lot 7, thence 15' southwesterly along the
northwest boundary line of Lot 7, thence southeasterly to the
place of beginning, all in Marion's subdivision Part 2, Iowa City,
Iowa.
EXHIBIT I
?RIENOLY
LOCATION MAP
HIGHLAND
MARK
u.s. HwY. 6
SITE LOCATION
~A~ON
2
ANALYSIS:
Currently, the area south of Cross Park Avenue is developed with multi-family housing.
Direcfiy east of the subject property is Econofoods Grocery Store, with a loading dock facing
Cross Park Avenue. To the west are offices with dwelling units above the first floor. The
office uses with dwellings above provide the best transition between the CC-2 Zone and the
RM-12 Zone to the south and west.
As previously mentioned, when this area was rezoned from RM-12 to C0-1 in 1990, the
justification for the rezoning was that the area would serve as a transition from the more
intensive commercial uses allowed in the CC-2 zone to the multi-family residential uses in the
RM-12 zone. When the two Lots 13 and 14, immediately north of the subject property, were
being considered for rezoning to CC-2, the Commission felt that if Lots 18 and 1 9 were kept
in the CO-1 zone the intent of the transition area would be maintained, and so the
Commission recommended approval of the rezoning of Lots 13 and 14 to CC-2.
The existing situation between Econofoods and the Villa Garden Apartments, with a zoning
change occurring along a street, as opposed to at rear property lines as recommended in the
Comprehensive Plan, is less than ideal. During the review of the subdivision creating Cross
Park Avenue, staff recommended a more southerly alignment for the road that would have
allowed for the zone change between the Econofoods lot and the RM-12 area to occur at a
rear property line. However, the existing alignment is what was approved. Allowing
additional intensive commercial uses on the north side of Cross Park Avenue, would
exacerbate the situation.
Uses allowed in the CC-2 zone will likely generate more traffic, will be open later hours and
have more signage than uses permitted in the C0-1 zone, and thus have a greater negative
impact on the existing residential uses. Although the applicants indicate that they plan to use
the subject property as a parking lot, the CC-2 zoning, if approved, would permit future
owners to develop the lot more intensively. The office uses permitted by the current C0-1
zoning, especially with dwellings on the second floor, would be more appropriate across the
street from residential development than either a parking lot or retail uses. Staff feels that it
is important to maintain some buffer between the existing residential uses on the south side
of Cross Park Avenue and the retail commercial uses developing to the north.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REZ95-0014, a request to rezone a 21,889 square foot property
located at 840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1 to CC-2 be denied.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map.
2. Final Plat of a Portion of Block 1 Braverman Center
3. Applicants statement regarding the rezoning.
Approved by:
Robert M~klo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
LOCATOON HAP
R~Z~5-001~
CO-~ 7o CC-~,
so ~OA~r[
I
~0
II
DEFOREST ,
SITE
-OCATION
P
WEiN[R8Y
PARK
FOLLOWIN(3 18 '~ "~
BE~ DOOU~NT AVAIL.~.! E
11. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT AS TO WHY ZONE CHANGE IS WARRANTED.
Applicant is the owner and operator of Kids' Stuff, a
consigrunent store that features low cost clothing, children's
games, sporting equipment and toys. Applicant's business is
currently located on Keokuk Street, approximately one and a half
blocks from Lot 19, a portion of Block 1, Braverman Center, Iowa
City, Iowa, and draws heavily from nearby residential neighborhoods
for its customer base. Applicant desires to expand her business
and stay located in the immediate neighborhood. Applicant has been
looking for commercial property to buy for some time, and Lots 13
and 19, Block 1, Braverman Center, are in a price range and
location that are acceptable to applicant ~or her expansion.
The proposed expansion plans involve the construction of a new
building on Lots 13 and 19. Both lots are needed for the expansion
to provide adequate parking, safety and convenience for customers.
A rezoning would not adversely impact the neighborhood, as it
already consists of varied residential, commercial and commercial
office classifications. Lots 14 and 13, Block 1, Braverman Center,
which front Pepperwood Lane are already zoned CC-2. Additional
CC-2 zoning on the north side of Cross Park Avenue (Lot 19) should
also not adversely impact the neighborhood, as over half of that
frontage is already zoned CC-2 (Econofoods).
DEC 12 1995
.1~ I')-
Mayor of Iowa City and Council Members,
We recently applied to the Planning and Zoning Commission to rezone a .5
acre property Iooated at 840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1, Office Commercial, to CC-
2, Community Commercial. Even though the Commission denied our application, we
would like you to consider rezoning this property.
Sincerely,
Tom and Mary Sundblad
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the City Council of Iowa City,
Iowa, at 7:30 p.m. on the 16th day of January,
1996, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa; at
which hearing the Council will consider:
1. An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions for a .5 acre property located at
840 Cross Park Avenue from CO-1,
Commercial Office, to CC-2, Communi-
W Commercial.
2. An ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by changing the use regula-
tions of an approximate .3 acre proper-
ty located at 1500 Sycamore Street
from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family
Residential, to CO-1, Office Commer-
cial.
An ordinance amending Title 14, Chap-
ter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article D,
entitled "Residential Zones," Section 5,
entitled "Neighborhood Conservation
Residential Zone (RNC-12)," to clarify
the number of roomers permitted in
duplex units in the RNC-12 zone.
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file
for public examination in the office of the CiW
Clerk, Civic Center, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons
wishing to make their views known for Council
consideration are encouraged to appear at the
above-mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
Prepared by: Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240; 319/356-5251
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER
6, ENTITLED "ZONING," ARTICLE D, ENTI-
TLED "RESIDENTIAL ZONES," SECTION 5,
ENTITLED "NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVA-
TION RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RNC-12)," TO
CLARIFY THE NUMBER OF ROOMERS PER-
MITTED IN DUPLEX UNITS IN THE RNC-12
ZONE.
WHEREAS, the Neighborhood Conservation
Residential (RNC-12) zone was created to "stabi-
lize certain existing residential neighborhoods;"
and
WHEREAS, areas that are now zoned RNC-12,
Neighborhood Conservation Residential, were
previously zoned RM-12, Low Density Multi-
Family Residential; and
WHEREAS, all uses or buildings which con-
formed to the requirements of the RM-12 zone
prior to January 1, 1993, are considered con-
forming uses in the RNC-12 zone; and
WHEREAS, there is a discrepancy between the
number of roomers permitted in a duplex unit in
the RM-12 zone (two roomers) and the RNC-12
zone (one roomer); and
WHEREAS, allowing the same number of
roomers in both zones for duplex units, as is the
case for single-family residences and multi-family
residences in the RM-12 and RNC-12 zones, will
clarify the density requirement for duplexes in the
RNC-12 zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. Title 14, Chapter
6, entitled "Zoning," Article D, Section 5, entitled
"Neighborhood Conservation Residential Zone
(RNC-12)," is hereby amended by repealing
subsection 14-6D-5Cl, and adding a new sub-
section 14-6D-5Cl to read as follows:
Ordinance No.
Page 2
1. A maximum of two (2) roomers in single-
family dwellings and two (2) roomers in each
dwelling unit In duplexes, provided additional
off-street parking spaces shall be furnished at
the ratio of one-half (1/2) space per roomer.
Multi-family dwellings shall be permitted two
(2) roomers per dwelling unit.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions
of this Ordinance are heroby 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 day of
,19
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CiTY CLERK
Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner, 410
Washington St.. Iowa City, IA 52240;
5251
ORDINANCE NO.
CE AMENDING'
ENTITLED "ZONING," ARTIC D, ENTI-
D "RESIDENTIAL ZONES,' 5,
"NEIGI CONBERVA-
RESIDENTIAL ZONE TO
NUMBER OI~ PER-
IN DUPLEX UNr IN THE RNC-12
ZONE.
3, the
Residential
lize certain
and
WHEREAS,
Neighborhood
previously zo~
Family Resid~
formed to
prior to 1,
forming
EAS, there is a
the zone
zon one morner); and
allowing the
both for ~
Conservation
"stabi-
neighborhoods;"
sthat are now zoned RNC-12,
Residential, were
:~M-12, Low Density Multi-
nd
buildings which con-
of the RM-12 zone
are considered con-
12 zone; and
, between the
a duplex unit in
and the RNC-12
RM-12 and
' the density requirement h
RNC-12 zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
number of
units, as Is the
multi-family
will
INED BY
IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. Title 14, C~apter
6, entitled "Zoning," Article D, Section 5, enidled
"Neighborhood Conservation Residential ZO[~e
(RNC-12)," is hereby amended by repealirt,~
subsection 14-6D-5C1, and adding a new sub-
section 14-6D-5C1 to read as follows:
Ordinance No.
Page 2
each dwelling unit in duplexes,
additional off-street parking Ill be
furnished at the ratio of one-half space
per roomer. Multi-family dwelli~ ~ shall be
permitted two (2) roomers unit.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All or and
parts of ordinances in conflict the provi-
sions of this Ordinance are repealed.
III. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
· ' or part of the Ordir shall be ad-
to be invalid or stitutional, such
ication shall not validity of the
as a whole or ~ section, provision
unconsti-
nance
approval
Passed
DATE. This Ordi-
in after its final passage,
provided by law.
an this __ day of
,19
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY --RK
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
November 16, 1995
To:
From:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Melody Rockwell, As~ Planner
Re:
Proposed Amendment Concerning Roomers in the RNC-12 Zone
The Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) zone was created to "stabilize certain
existing residential neighborhoods by preserving the predominantly single-family residential
character of these neighborhoods and preventing existing multi-family uses in these
neighborhoods from becoming nonconforming." Areas that are now zoned RNC-12 were
previously zoned RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residential. Section G of the RNC-12 zone
provides that "all uses or buildings which were conforming to the requirements of Section 14-6D-7
of this Article, Low Density Multi-Family Residential Zone (RM-12), prior to January 1, 1993, shall
be considered conforming under this Chapter."
A problem has surfaced since the RNC-12 zone was established in 1994. The number of
roomers permitted in a duplex in the RM-12 zone is two (2), and in the RNC-12 zone only one
(1) roomer is permitted in a duplex. This discrepancy has created some administrative confusion
for rental housing inspectors and rental property owners. Duplexes with two roomers per unit in
the RNC-12 zone are treated as conforming if they were established prior to 1993, but are
considered illegal if established after January 1, 1993. Instead of having to juggle the density
requirements for a duplex depending on the date it was established, it may be more effective to
make the density requirement for roomers in a duplex in the RNC-12 zone the same as it is in
the RM-12 zone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-12) zone be amended
to allow two (2) roomers in each dwelling unit in duplexes. Section 14-6D-5Cl would be revised
as follows:
A maximum of two (2) roomers in single-family dwellings and ono roomor two (2)
roomers in each dwelling unit in duplexes, provided additional off-street parking
spaces shall be furnished at the ratio of one-half (1/2) space per roomer. Multi-
family dwellings shall be permitted two (2) roomers per dwelling unit.
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
December 7, 1995
Planning and Zoning Commission
Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner
Proposed Amendment Concerning the Number of Roomers in Duplexes in the
RNC-12 Zone
At the November 16, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, a number of questions
were raised about the enforcement practices of the Department of Housing and Inspection
Services (HIS) when regulating density [overoccupancy] in the RNC-12 zone. At the
Commission's request, Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector, HIS, will be present at your
Monday, December 4 informal work session to answer questions concerning the proposed Zoning
Chapter amendment and the enforcement practices used by HIS.
~r,ual v 8. 1996
Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council.
'we are writing to express our continued concern over the p~b6~)S~
increase in the number of roomers allowed in the RNC-12 zone.
~Jnfortunately. we feel this change will make a more negative impact or,
our neighborhood than it will make as a positive bookkeeping procedure.
At the time we went through our rezoning, three vears ago, we were
very apreciative of all the time and effort the city put into helping us. We
accepted the compromises as a solution for preserving the character of
our neighbOrhOod. We felt the City had entered into a commitment with us
and we hope that com~qltment will continue.
.At the time of rezoning, the City increased tile frontage and the
minimum lot area needed to construct single family residences. They did
not Increase those requirements for duplexes, but they did decrease the
number of roomers in a duplex. Tt~is was tl}e compronqise.
If the number of roomers in a duplex is Increased to two, or a total of
four single people per side, we are concerned that the building of duplexes
will become more financially benlfical than the building of single family
units. Most of our area is already developed and the majority of duplexes
are older homes that have been converted Into duplexes. If this
bookkeeping amendment is approved, a single family residence housing
four people could be converted into a duplex and the ensuing four new
residents would double our current population. We are concerned this
amendment might spur on new construction which we consider out of
character and scale for our neighborhood.
Along with people, come cars. Thus, in attempting to assure adequate
parking, we have had landlords turn whole backyards into parking lots.
This is not what we consider appropiate open space.
This IS our neighborhood and we take pride in It. We are dedicated to
preserving our heritage and our nelghorbood community. We hope that the
city is also. Please vote against the amendment to increase the number of
boarders In duplexes in the RNC-12 zone.
Sincerely,
Nancy Carlsen
(Spokesperson for RNC-12 zone between Jefferson & Market)
.
Min, Lot'area (square feet)
Single family (non 0-lot line)
Duplexes
Multi-Family
ZONING COMPARISON
· ,.,~.-,~, ! ..../,.I~)v i~ ~.. .,..
RS-12/RNC-12 RM-12/RM-12 with
design review
5000
6000 (3000 per unit)
4O00
6000 {3000 per unit)
8175 {2726 per unit)
MIn lot width
Single family
Duplexes
Multi-Family
45 ft, 35 ft.
45 ft. 45 ft.
-- 60 ft.
Min. yards
Front
Side
Rear
20 ft, 20 ft,
5ft. 5ft.
20 ft. 20 ft.
Max. units per acre
Single family 8 10
Duplex 14 14
Multi-family -- 15
Planning & Zoning Commission
Janua~ 21, 1993
Page 9
ZONING ITEMS:
Public discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance adopting Section 36-10.5,
Neighborhood Conservai~on Zone (RNC-12).
Mild0 said the amendment was drafted at the direction of the Commission. He said the
new zone is similar to RS-12, except that existing multi-family dwellings would be allowed
as conforming uses.
In response to a question from Gibson, Scott said public discussion may address this
amendment and REZ92-0018, an application to fezone properties in the general vicinity
of Johnson Street on the west, Clapp Street on the east, Market Street on the North, and
Jefferson Street on the south, from RM-12, Low Density Multi-Family Residential~.to RNC-
12, Neighborhood Conservation Zone.
Mildo said the overall area is currently developed at 12 units per acre in accordance with
the Comprehensive Plan. He said the proposed RNC-12 zoning would allow single-family
homes at eight units per acre and development at 14 units per acre.
Public discussion opened at 10:52 p.m.
Nancy Carlson, 1002 East Jefferson Street, supported the amendment and thanked staff
and the Commission for efforts to reach a compromise.
Bob Downer, 2029 Rochester Court, representing Mr. and Mrs. Jim Muller, said he
opposed the amendment, but if it was ultimately approved, asked that the number of
roomers per unit in a duplex be increased to two per unit. He said this area was intended
as a transition area. He said other nearby zoning classifications are CO-1 and RS-5. He
said the property owned by his clients had, although not due to his clients, fallen into
disrepair and was unsuitable for occupancy. Miklo said to increase the number of
roomers could increase the number of unrelated occupants, bringing increased traffic and
associated parI,Jng problems. He said the intent of the proposed RNC-12 zone is to
stabilize neighborhoods. Therefore, staff recommends that the requirements regarding
roomers be the same as the RS-8 and RS-12 zones.
Sandy Eskin, 1047 Woodlawn Avenue, said she owns three properties in the neighbor-
hood and thinks the neighbors are primarily concerned that structures similar to the Clark
Apartments not be allowed. She said any development in the area should be assessed
in terms of design, setbacks, porches, off-street parking, and scale. She st:pported the
proposed zone.
Eric Gates, 931 East Market Street, said at issue is owning versus renting. He said
neighbors want to encourage owner-occupied homes in the area.
Gary Sloat, 102 Cla.op Street, said he purchased his property as an investment. He said
he owns, lives in and rents his property. He said some homes in the area are little more
than converted garages and will stay that way if this amendment is approved. He said
thero are some nice, ngwer homes in the area which could not have been buiJt under
RNC-12 zoning. He ss d he has paid higher ta):es for a specific zoning classification with
plans to utilize that zoning and invest in the property. He said if the zoning of the area
of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 17, 1992
To:
From:
Planning & Zoni.ng Commission
Robert Miklo, Associate Planner
Re: RM-12 Zone Between Jefferson & Market Streets
At the November 5, 1992, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission requested
that staff consider a zoning amendment for the properties generally located in the vicinity of
Evans, Market and Jefferson streets. Staff has conducted a land use survey of the area and
formulated two alternative zoning proposals which might be considered to guide furlher
development in this neighborhood. If it is the goal of the City to stabilize the neighborhood, a
rezoning from the Low Density Multi-Family Residential zone (RM-12) to a Low Density
Neighborhood Residential Conservation zone (RNC-12) may be appropriate. If it is a goal of the
City to allow the neighborhood to redevelop at a higher density as permitted by the RM-12 zone,
design review standards may be appropriate to encourage new development to be compatible
with the neighborhood. The land use survey and these alternatives are discussed below.
Land Use Survey
Using the City Assessor's records, staff has completed a land use survey of the RM-12 area
generally located on both sides of Jefferson and Market streets between Johnson and the east
side of Clapp Street {see Exhibit A). This survey revealed that the maiority (approximately 87%)
of the properties within the area are developed with single family homes or duplexes.
Approximately 61% of the lots contain single family homes. Of these, 57% are owner occupied.
Approximately 25% of the lots are developed with duplexes. Approximately 29% of the duplexes
are owner occupied in that the owner lives in one of the two units. Only 10% of the lots are
developed with multi-family buildings. The area also contains two rooming houses, two office
buildings and a three unit owner-occupied condominium.
This information indicates that the general character of the area is that of a single family and
duplex neighborhood, with only a small percentage of multi-family buildings, The multi-family
buildings also tend to be structures that were built as single family homes but were later
converted into three or more units. There are only 5 structures within the neighborhood which
were built as multi-family buildings. Therefore, the visual character of the area resembles a single
family/duplex neighborhood rather than a multi-family neighborhood.
The existing RM-12 zoning would allow lots within this area which have a minimum lot area of
8,175 square feet and which meet the other requirements of the RM-12 zone, to redevelop with
multi-family structures. Approximately 30 of the lots within the area meet the minimum 8,175
2
square foot lot area and could be redeveloped at a higher density. The aggregation of two or
more of the other lots within the area to achieve the 8;175 minimum lot area requirement could
allow further redevelopment for multi-family structures according to the RM~12 regulations.
Zoning Alternatives
Several property owners within this vicinity have requested that the City consider zoning
amendments which would help stabilize the single family/duplex character of this area. In
particular, a rezoning from RM-12 to RS-12 has been requested. If the area were rezoned to RS-
12, construction of multi-family buildings or the conversion of existing buildings to multi-family
units would be prohibited. Existing multi-family buildings would become legal non-conforming
uses and would be subject to the non-conforming requirements of Division 4, of the Zoning
Ordinance. The construction of duplexes or the conversion of existing buildings to duplexes
would be allowed for lots which contain a minimum area of 6,000 square feet and meet the other
dimensional requirements of the RS-12 zone (Section 36-10(e)).
If the City determines that it is appropriate to utilize the Zoning Ordinance to help stabilize the
current character of this neighborhood, as an alternative to RM~12 or RS-12 zoning, It may be
appropriate to consider a zoning district similar to the Neighborhood Conservation Residential
Zone (RNC-20), which applies to the areas to the south of this RM-12 zone. Staff would suggest
the creation of an RNC-12 Zone. The RNC-12 Zone could be based on the RS-12 Zone but also
contain special provisions similar to Section 36-13(g) contained in the RNC-20 Zone. These
provisions would allow existing multi-family buildings and rooming houses which do not exceed
the RM-12 density to continue as conforming uses within the new zone.
Regardless of the development of 942 and 950 E. Jefferson Street, staff suggests that an RNC-12
zoning classification be given consideration for this area. If 942 and 950 are redeveloped for
multi-family structures, the new zoning classification would help stabilize the general character
of the remainder of the neighborhood.
If the City determines that it is appropriate to allow the continued redevelopment of this RM-12
Zone, the rezoning to RS-12 or RNC-12 would not be appropriate. if this is the case, staff
suggests that consideration be given to adopting design guidelines for this RM-12 Zone and
perhaps other RM-12 Zones located in older areas of the city, to help assure that new
construction is compatible with the existing character of the surrounding older neighborhood. The
design review process could be similar to that proposed for conservation districts in the Historic
Preservation Plan. Pages 14-17 of the City's neighborhood design book (attached) contain
general guidelines for new construction in older neighborhoods. The November 1992 issue of
Zoninq News which is included in your packet discusses how other communities have applied
such zoning techniques. By applying such guidelines to this neighborhood, redevelopment at a
higher density would be allowed. However, the guidelines would help assure that the visual
character of the neighborhood would not be radically altered by new construction.
Staff Recommendation
Given the general single family/duplex character of the neighborhood, staff believes there may
be merits in attempting to conserve its existing character. The housing stock in the area is
predominantly made up of single family and duplex structures. Given the ages of these
3
structures, they tend to be more affordable for entry level homebuyers than newer single family
or duplex developments. The existing RM-12 zoning provides Incentives for the destruction of
this single family and duplex housing stock to allow its replacement with multi-family structures.
Staff recommends that an RNC-12 Zone be adopted and applied to this area. If such a zoning
classification Is not determined to be appropriate as a stablllzation technique for this
neighborhood, staff would recommend that general design guldellnes be adopted for this RM-12
Zone. If the Commission wlshes to amend the Zoning Ordinance to Include an RNC-12 zone,
staff would have an amendment ready for the January 7th meeting. If the Commission wishes
to adopt design guidelines for this area, additional time would be required to develop an
ordinance amendment.
Attachmente:
Locatioq Map.
Exhibit A - Land Use Survey.
Excerpt from Neighborhood Design Book.
Accompaniment:
1. Zonin.q News, November 1992
bcl-2
Approved by:
Monica Moen, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and
Community Development
,. x E C · x
0
LI [
,January 8, !996
Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council,
we are writing to express our continued concern over the proposed
increase in the number of roomers allowed in the RNC-12 zone.
Unfortunately, we feel this change will make a more negative Impact on
our neighborhood than it will make as a positive bookkeeping procedure.
At the time we went through our rezoning, three years ago, we were
very apreciatlve of all the time and effort the city put into helping us. We
accepted the compromises as a solution for preserving the character of
our neighborhood. We felt the city had entered into a commitment with us
and we hope that commitment will continue.
At the time of rezoning, the city increased the frontage and the
minimum lot area needed to con_~truct single family residences. They did
not increase those requirements for duplexes, but they did decrease the
number of roomers in a duplex. This was the compromise.
If the number of roomers in a duplex is increased to two, or a total of
four sinqle people per side, we are concerned that the building of duplexes
will become more financially benifical than the building of single family
units. Most of our area is already developed and the majority of duplexes
are older homes that have been converted into duplexes. If this
bookkeeping amendment is approved, a single family residence housing
four people could be converted into a duplex and the ensuing four new
residents wo,Jld double our current population. We are concerned this
amendment might spur on new construction which we consider out of
character and scale for our neighborhood.
Along with people, come cars. Thus, in attempting to assure adequate
parking, we have had landlords turn whole backyards into parking lots.
This is not what we consider appropiate open space.
This is our neighborhood and we take pride in It. We are dedicated to
preserving our heritage and our nelghorbood community. We hope that the
city is also. Please vote against the amendment to increase the number of
boarders in duplexes in the RNC- 12 zone.
Sincerely,
Nancy Carlsen
(Spokesperson for RNC- 12 zone between Jefferson & Market)
January 8, !996
Ladies and Gentlemen ,:,f the City Council,
we are writing to e:~press our continued concern over the proposed
increase in the number of roomers allowed in the RNC- 12 zone.
Ur, fortunately, we feel this change will make a more negative Impact on
our neighborhood than it will make as a positive bookkeeping procedure.
At the time we went through our rezonlng, three years ago, we were
ver'~/apreciative of all the time and effort the city put into helping us. We
accepted the compromises as a solution for preserving the character of
our neighborhood. We felt the city had entered Into a commitment with us
and we hope that commitment will continue.
At the time of rezoning, the City increased the frontage and the
minimum lot area needed to construct single family residences. They did
not increase those requirements for duplexes, but they did decrease the
number of roomers in a duplex. This was the compromise.
If the number of roomers in a duplex is increased to two, or a total of
four sinqle people per side, we are concerned that the building of duplexes
will become more financially benifical than the building of single family
units. Most of our area is already developed and the majority of duplexes
are older homes that have been converted into duplexes. If this
bookkeeping amendment is approved, a single family residence housing
four people could be converted into a duplex and the ensuing four new
re~4dents would double our current population. we are concerned thi~
amendment might spur on new construction which we consider out of
character and scale for our neighborhood.
Along with people, come cars. Thus, in attempting to assure adequate
parking, we have had landlords turn whole backyards into parking lots.
This is not what we consider appropiate open space.
This iS our neighborhood and we take pride in it. We are dedicated to
preserving our heritage and our neighorbood community. We hope that the
c~ty is also. Please vote against the amendment to increase the number Of
boarders in duplexes in the RNC- 12 zone.
Sincerely,
Nancy Carlsen
(SpOkeSperson for RNC- 12 zone between Jefferson & Market)
January 8, 1996
Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council,
we are writing to express our continued concern over posed
:rease in the number of roomers allowed in the RNC-'
,rtur~atelY, we feel this change will rnake a more ative impact on
our
At
ver~/
accepted
our nei .ql
and we hope
At the time
minimum lot area
not increase those re(
number of roomers in a
If the number of room
four sinqle people per
will become more financ
units. Most of our are
are older homes that
qhborhood than it will make as a positive
time we went through our rezonlng,
~tive of all the time and effort
:orepromises as a solution f(
We felt the city had
:ommitment will c(
zoning, the
to
~ping procedure.
years ago, we were
)ut into helping us. We
g the character of
into a commitment with us
)sed the frontage and the
single family residences. They did
duplexes, but they did decrease the
was the compromise.
a duplex is increased to two, or a total of
are concerned that the building of duplexes
ifical than the building of single family
alread' .~veloped and the majority of duplexes
been ted into duplexes. If this
bookkeeping amend
four people could
residents
amendment m
character an
Along
parking,
is approved,
converted into a
our current POI
spur on new construction
for our neighborhOOd.
people, come cars. Thus, in attem
have had landlords turn whole back~
ngle family residence housing
and the ensuing four new
~. We are concerned this
ch we consider out of
~g to assure adequate
~to parking lots.
This lS
Thi.'
prese
city
boa
what we consider approplate open space.
s our neighborhood and we take pride in it.
ing our heritage and our neighorbood community.
also. Please vote against the amendment to
in duplexes in the RNC- 1 2 zone.
'e dedicated to
hope that the
le number of
Sincerely,
Nancy Carlsen
(Spokesperson for RNC-12 zone between .Jefferson & Market)
,620' Dupiex~sfor'
Rent
R~or~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT
AND ESTIMATED COST FOR
Highlander Area Sanitary Sewer
Uft Station and Force Main PROJECT
IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
TO ALL TAXPAYERS OF THE CITY OF 10WA
CITY, IOWA, AND TO OTHER INTERESTED
PERSONS:
Public notice is hereby given that the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will con-
duct a public hearing on plans. specifications,
form of contract and estimated cost for the
construction of. the Highlander Area Sanitary
Sewer Lift Station and Force Main Project in
said City at 7:30 p.m. on the 1~ th day of
January .1996, said meeting to be held in
the Council Chambers in the Civic Center in
said City.
Said plans, specifications, form of contract
and estimated cost are now on file in the office
of the City Clerk in the Civic Center in Iowa
City, Iowa, and may be inspected by any
interested persons.
Any interested persons may appear at said
meeting of the City Council for the purpose of
making objections to and comments concerning
said plans, specifications, contract or the cost
of making said improvement.
This notice is given by order of the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa and as
provided by law.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
PH-1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice Is hereby given that a public hearing
will be held by the City Council of the City of
Iowa City, Iowa, In the Council Chambers at the
Clvlc Center at the regular scheduled Council
meeting at 7:30 p.m. on December 5, 1995, for
the purpose of headng comments for or against
the proposed new rate Increases for the Water
System and the Wastewater Treatment System.
Information on the proposed rate Increases is
available at the City Clerk's Office and at the
Office of the Director of Finance.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 11, 1996
To: City Council and City Manager
From: Chuck Schmadeke, Public Works Director
Donald Yucuis, Finance Director D~--
Re: Recommended Ordinance Changes in Wastewater Service Charges and Fees
Attached you will find the proposed wastewater service charge and fee ordinance that
incorporates recommended changes from staff and also incorporates the proposed new
wastewater rates.
All fees and charges have been increased by 15% which includes the minimum monthly charge,
the monthly charge for each additional 100 cubic feet of water past the minimum, unmetered user
and manufactured housing park, monthly minimum per lot.
The monthly surcharge for BOD (per pound) was increased from $.18 to $.22, and the monthly
surcharge suspended solids (SS) (per pound) was increased from $.13 to $.16.
Staff is recommending a new holding tank waste hauler fee. The fee would include an annual
permit of $800 per year and a holding tank waste fee of $.03 per gallon.
Please call us if you have any questions.
Attachment
b j/changes
BARKER
A P A R T M E
January 15, 1996
N
Naomi Novick
306 Mullin Ave.
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
T S
COPIES TO: City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Finance,
~C~ty Clerk
Dear Mayor Novick:
The agenda for tomorrow nlght's Council meeting recommends raising water rates 30%
and wastewater rates 15% beginning with March 1, billings. These rates are based on having a
20% cash accumulation and 80% borrowing as well as using a 7% interest rate on the bonds that
will be sold for the purpose of construction.
In June, 1995, the City Administration proposed several possibilities for a rate structure,
all bringing about the completion of construction at the same time. It is difficult to understand
why the Council members at this time did not request from the list of proposals presented by the
City Administration in June, 1995, one which would result in the lowest rate structure possible
over the next seven years. Keep in mind that all of the proposals made last June would result in
construction being completed at the same time Under these proposals, the obvious choice would
be to select the rate structure based on 10% and 15% accumulation of cash for the water and
wastewater projects, respectively. Although the rate structure currently under consideration is for
one year only, the administration projected what, in its judgment, would likely happen to rates
over the next seven years. In reviewing those figures, you would find that the average combined
water/wastewater bill for a typical user would be $69.75 in the year 2002. Under the 10% and
15% proposal prepared by the City Administration, that same bill in 2002 would be $66.35. That
may seem to be a small difference, but if you figure it out, the 10% and 15% proposal would save
residential water users over the seven year period approximately $10,518,480. When all
proposals bring about the completion of construction at the same time, don't you owe it to the
rate payers to select the one that brings about the lowest rates?
The Director of Finance has never been directed to develop proposals for consideration
based on a 6.5% interest rate for the bonds. Currently, water revenue bonds are selling for
5.35%. Six months ago they were selling fbr 5.49%. The proposal before you calls for a 7%
interest rate. Although we have not analyzed the numbers, I suspect that if we did, we would find
that the rates t proposed to you in December would be doable. If you adopt these rates, you
could save the residential rate payers an additional $1,005,480 over the seven year period
Savings for commercial users would also be significant.
I urge you in the strongest terms possible to adopt a rate structure that provides for the
lowest rates possible that will also allow you to complete construction on schedule.
Sincerely yours,
Edwin K. Barker
Seville
Scotsdale Park Place Parkside Manor Westgate Villa
6 Lime Kiln Lane N.E. · Iowa City, Iowa 52240 · (319) 354-2410
Emerald Court
Fiscal Year
FY 1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
Proposal - Edwin Barker
Prepared Dec 9, 1995
15% Cash In 2001 10% Cash In 2001 Combined Water/Wastewater
Monthly
Wastewater Residential Monthly Combined Total i'~.onthly
Rate Cost for Water Rate Residential Rate Residential
Adjustment Wastewater Adjustment Cost for Water Adjustment Cost
35.00% 19.94 40.00% 14.05 -33.99
11.08% 22.15 20.56% 16.94 15.0% 39.09
11.51 % 24.70 19.53% 20.25 15.0% 44.95
10.44% 27.28 20.5.4% 24.41 1 50% 51.69
13.93% 31.08 14.15% 27.86 14.0% 58.94
5.00% 32.63 10.00% 30.65 7.4% 63.28
0.00% 32.63 10.03% 33.72 4.9% 66.35
0.00% 32.63 0,00% 33.72 0.0% 66.35
Fiscal Year
FY 1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
15% Cash In 2001
Monthly
10% Cash In 2001
Combined Water/Wastewater
Wastewater Residential Monthly Combined Total Monthly
Rate Cost for Water Rate Residential Rate Residential
Adjustment Wastewater Adjustment Cost for Water Adjustment Cost
35.00% 19.94 40.00% 14.05 33.99
15.00% 22.93 25.00% 17.56 19.1% 40.49
12.00% 25.68 20.00% 21.07 15.5% 46.75
10.00% 28.25 15.00% 24.23 12,3% 52.48
10.00% 31.08 15.00% 27.86 12.3% 58.94
5.00% 32.63 10.00% 30.65 7.4% 63.28
0.00% 32.63 10.00% 33.72 4.9% 66.35
0.00% 32.63 0.00% 33.72 0.0% 66.35
Proposal - City Administration as Adjusted by Edwin K. Barker Based on June 30. 1995 Memo
15% Cash In 2001
Monthly
Wastewater Residential
Rate Cost for
Fiscal Year Adjustment Wastewater
FY 1995 ............ ........ 1 .94
FY 1996 14.90% 22.91
FY 1997 10.80% 25.38
FY 1998 10.50% 28.04
FY 1999 10.00% 30.84
FY 2000 5.30% 32.47
FY 2001 0.00% 32.47
FY 2002 0.00% 32.47
10% Cash In 2001
Combined Water/Wastewater
Monthly Combined Total Monthly
Water Rate Residential Rate Residential
Adjustment Cost for Water . Adjustment Cost
40.00% 14,05 33.99
24.90% 17.55 19.0% 40.46
21.70% 21.36 15.5% 46.74
13.80% 24.31 12.0% -52.35
14.40% 27.81 12.0% 58.65
10.45% 30.72 7.7% 63.19
10.30% 33.88 5.0% 66.35
0.00% 33.88 0.0% 66.35
Fiscal Year
~=Y 1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
Proposal- City Administration Based On December 11, 1995 information
20% Cash In 2000 20% Cash In 2001
Monthly
Combined Water/Wastewater
Wastewater Residential Monthly Combined Total Monthly
Rate Cost for Water Rate Residential Rate Residential
Adjustment Wastewater Adjustment Cost for Water Adjustment Cost
35.00% 19.94 40.00% 14.05 33.99
15.00% 22.93 30.00% 18.27 21.2% 41.20
12.00% 25.68 26.00% 23.02 18.2% 48.70
10.00% 28.25 25.00% 28.78 17.1% 57.03
10.06% 31.08 20.00% 34.54 15.1% 65.62
10.00% 34.19 20.00% 41.45 15.3% 75.64
-10.00% 30.77 15.00% 47.67 3.7% 78.44
-5.00% 29.23 -15.00% 40.52 -11.1 % 69.75
Fiscal Year
FY 1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
20% Cash In 2000 20% Cash In 2001 Combined Water/Wastewater
Monthly
Wastewater Residential Monthly Combined Total Monthly
Rate Cost for Water Rate Residential Rate Residential
Adjustment Wastewater Adjustment Cost for Water Adjustment Cost
35.00% 19.94 40.00% 14.05 33.99
14.60% 22.85 30.00% 18.27 21.0% 41.12
11.65% 25.51 26.00% 23.02 18.0% 48.53
9.80% 28.01 25.00% 28.78 17.0% 56.79
9.90% 30.78 20.00% 34.54 15.0% 65.32
9.36% 33.66 20.00% 41.45 15.0% 75.11
-9.61% 30.42 15.00% 47.67 4.0% 78.09
-3.92% 29.23 -15.00% 40.52 -10.7% 69.75
ESTIMATED SAVINGS FOR RESIDENTIAL USERS IF ONE OF FOLLOWING RATE
SCHEDULES IS ADOPTED RATHER THAN ONE CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED
Year
City's Proposal
10% Water, 15% Wastewater
Cash Accumulation & 7% Int
Barker's Proposal
10% Water, 15% Wastewater
Cash Accumulation & 6.5% Int
1996 $ 178,920 $ 531,720
1997 $ 491,400 $ 945,000
1998 $1,146,600 $1,345,680
1999 $1,583,360 $1,683,360
2000 $ 3,114,720 $ 3,114,720
2001 $ 3,046,680 $ 3,046,680
2002 $ 856,800 $ 856,800
Total Savings
$10,518~480
$11~523,960
These figures are based on 21,000 family units using an average of 700 cuff per month. Savings
for commercial users would also be significant.
WASTEWATER FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
PROJECT AWARD SCHEDULE
1995 through 1998
CONTRACT #1 I
South River Corridor Interceptor Sewer
and Relief Sewer (Plum Street Area and
Sandusky Drive Area)
Award Contract December 1995
Estimated Project Construction Cost $15,300,000
CONTRACT #2 I
Napoleon Park
Pump Station Improvements
Award Contract June 1996
Estimated Project Construction Cost $ 5,047,000
CONTRACT #3
South Wastewater Treatment
Plant Improvements
Award Contract December 1998
Estimated Project Construction Cost $13,500,000
WATER FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
PROJECT AWARD SCHEDULE PART I
1995 and 1996
Silurian Wells SW-1 and SW-2,
Observation Wells and Pump Test
(* Lower Terminus)
Jordan Well JW-1
(* Lower Terminus)
Ground Storage Reservoir Renovations
at Rochester Avenue, Emerald Street
and Sycamore Street
Raw Water Piping
iowa River Power
Dam Improvements
Sanitary Sewer Extension
Siluran Wells SW-3 and SW-4,
(4) Silurian Wells, & (1) Jordan Well
(** Upper Terminus)
Williams Brothers
Gas Pipeline Relooation
Pond Stabilization and Site Work
TOTAL
PART I (Project construction Cost) $ 5,493,000
Lower Terminus: well drilling, casing and grouting
· °n
Upper Terminus: pump, discharge p~p~ g, structure, electrical & controls
WATER
................. ~ #z~'~..,.~, I/ ~ .
FACILITY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
PROJECT AWARD SCHEDULE PART II
1997 and 1998
Collector Wells CW-1, CW-2, CW-3
and CW-4, Observation Wells and
Pump Test (*Lower Terminus)
Collector Wells CW-1, CW-2,
CW-3 and CW-4
(**Upper Terminus)
Sand Pit Pump Station
and River Intake
Finished Water Mains
Plant Site Work including
Access Roads and Lagoons
TOTAL PART II (Project Cost)
$ 2,077,000
$ 860,000
$1,332,00O
$ 3,468,000
$1,971,000
$ 9,708,000
PROJECT AWARD SCHEDULE PART III
1999 and 2000
Treatment Plant
Existing Water Treatment
Plant Demolition and
Booster Station Construotion
$ 27,773,000
$1,374,00O
TOTAL PART III (Project cost)
$ 29,147,000
Lower Terminus: well drilling, casing and grouting
Upper Terminus: pump, discharge piping, structure, electrical & controls
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, ON THE
MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
(;6,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
(FOR AN ESSENTIAL CORPORATE PURPOSE)
OF SAID CITY, AND THE HEARING ON THE
ISSUANCE THEREOF.
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the
Council of the CiW of Iowa CiW, Iowa, will hold
a public hearing on the 16th day of January,
1996, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., in the Council
Chembers, Civic Center, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa CiW, Iowa, at which meeting the
Council proposes to take additional action for
the issuance of $6,200,000 General Obligation
Bonds for an essential corporate purpose of
said City, in order to provide funds to pay costs
of improvements and extensions to the
Municipal Waterworks Plant and System.
At the above meeting the Council shall
receive oral or written objections from any
resident or properW owner of said City, to the
above action. After all objections have been
received and considered, the Council will at this
meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take
additional action for the issuance of said bonds
or will abandon the proposal to issue said
bonds.
This notice is given bv order of the Council of
Iowa City, Iowa, as provided by Section
384.25 of the City Code of iowa.
Dated this 5th day of January
1996.
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, ON THE
MATTER OF THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF
$28,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
(FOR AN ESSENTIAL CORPORATE PURPOSE)
OF SAID CITY, AND THE HEARING ON THE
ISSUANCE THEREOF
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the
Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, will hold
a public hearing on the 16th day of January,
1996, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., in the Council
Chambers, Civic Center, 410 E. Washington
Street, Iowa City, Iowa, at which meeting the
Council proposes to take additional action for
the issuance of $28,000,000 General
Obligation Bonds for an essential corporate
purpose of said CiW, in order to provide funds
to pay costs of the construction,
reconstruction, extension, improvement and
equipping of the Municipal Sanitary Sewer
Utility Plant and System.
At the above meeting the Council shall
receive oral or written objections from any
resident or property owner of said City, to the
above action. After all objections have been
received and considered, the Council will at this
meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take
additional action for the issuance of said bonds
or will abandon the proposal to issue said
bonds.
This notice is given by order of the Council of
Iowa City, Iowa, as provided by Section
384.25 of the City Code of Iowa.
Dated this 5th day of January
1996.
City Clerk of Iowa City, Iowa