Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-04-25 Correspondence MICROFILMED BY C ES- IOWA CITY P,O. Box 64 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244 (319)354-0863 April 10, 1995 Iowa City City Council Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Council Members: The Board of Directors of the Downtown Association of Iowa City would like to ask the City Council to consider lowering the Bus & Shop cost to our members from $.50 per pass to $.35 per pass. We believe this would increase the participation by our members in the Bus & Shop Program and increase ridership on the transit system. This would make the Bus & Shop Program basically the same rate of discount we receive on the Park & Shop Program. Last summer's Downtown Transportation Committee also discussed lowering the Bus & Shop rate and felt it was a good idea. Joe Fowler also supports the idea. Please discuss and vote on this issue. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, President ._ e'~ r~ 701 Eastmoor Drive ~ ~ ~ Iowa City, Iowa · 5 ~3 April 13, 1995 Cit~g~Council City of Iowa City Iowa City~ Iowa 52240 52246 Dear Councillors: With interest I have observed the development of the recy- cling program by the City of Iowa City and, after over a year's time have come to some conclusions which may be of interest to you. They are as follow: The program thus far can be written down as a general failure. Note, that ~ say a general failure and not a total failure. It is certainly not a total success nor even a general success. The reason I say that it is a general failure is that, according to the latest figures I have at my disposal market penetration (i.eo partici- pation) is less than 25%· If this were a private business having a sole monopoly in a single market, such as USWest or Iowa- Illinois Gas and Electric Company, this would be an unmitigated disaster. Without massive financial subsi- dies these companies could not continue to provide their services at their regulated rates. And, in fact, this is also the case with the recycling program. Without signi- ficant subsidies from the public coffer, the program would have died by now. o There must be a reason (or reasons) that participation levels are so low. It seems strange, in the extreme, that in a community such as Iowa City that prides itself on its enlightenment and political correctness that interest in recycling is among the lowest, on a per capita basis, than virtually anywhere else in the country. Even in Dubuque, which does not pride itself in its political correctness, the recycling program has a much higher level of partici- pation. In considering possible reasons for the pathetic amount of participation t come up with the following possibilities: a o Iowa Citizens want to destroy the environment by over- flowing landfills and thus purposefully dump all manner of recyclables into the refuse system. This hardly seems like a probable reason, but it may apply to a few individuals. Iowa Citizens are ignorant of the recycling program and do not know how to participate in it. This is also highly unlikely as the City went to great efforts to provide (poorly attended) training sessions for those poQr and benighted people who did not know how to set ou~ recyclables for collection. I~a Citizens do not produce enough recyclables on a h~_~sehold basis to make weekly recycling at the curb- site a reasonable service° This happens to apply to myself. As the sole individual in my household I put out very little refuse (less than a bag per week) with a small amount of recyclable material. I do not sub- scribe to any newspapers and conscientiously try to avoid purchasing items in packaging which is not biode- gradable. Thus, it is not worth my effort to occasio- nally put out a glass jar or a plastic bag. The program is viewed as being more environmentally damaging than beneficial. I have not read the environ- mental impact statement prepared for the program (as- suming that one was even prepared). However, it ap- pears that positive benefits of the program (recycling) may be outweighed by the negative aspects, which in- clude costs and energy spent building the recycling trucks, nonrenewable energy (gasoline) used in tran- sporting, embedded energy costs in maintaining the fleet, and pollution generated by the fleet. No one can deny that the economic costs of recycling signi- ficantly outweigh the benefits and one might question whether or not the environmental costs also outweigh the benefits. As administered, the program is punitive in nature with no positive incentives for individuals to use the pro- gram. The fact is that each household is billed (taxed) for the program whether or not they use it. This is a negative incentive unless one sees a clear advantage (i.e. produces large amounts of recyclables). Thus, if a household produces five tons they pay as much as the household that produces five ounces. When questioned as to why a household should pay for a program it does not participate in, the responses from City staff fall into two categories - we really don't know - and this is just the way things are and they can't be changed. When pressed, one staff member stated that there simply was no other way to run a recycling program° 3. There are other ways to run a recycling program and, in fact, most of these other ways have proven to be more successful than that used by the City of Iowa City. These include the following: Bury the recycling tax. Do not give it the appearance of a line item service which can be accepted or rejec- ted on a utilities bill. Hide the tax elsewhere. Convenient places to bury it include incorporating it in the refuse collection portion of the bill or within the general property tax. As we all know, hidden taxes generate more positive good will than direct taxes. For example, Americans are ecstatic to see their fine highway system maintained and expanded at no apparent cost to them, not realizing that the costs are fully paid through hidden taxes on gasoline. Bury the program. Admit a failure and get out of the recycling business and sell the fleet of trucks to some other city. Less this seem like a complete downer, this can be replaced with an active public awareness campaign for environmental issues, provoking positive discussion and action to meet needs in an environmen- tally sensitive manner° Privatize the business. Let private industry reap the benefits of recycling. This sounds good but, as ev- eryone knows, is absurd. Recycling is an industry which, unfortunately at this point in time, is highly unprofitable and, in general, must receive additional financial input, usually in the form of subsidies, to survive. Thus, you will find few takers to run a curbside recycling program in Iowa City. Offer positive incentives for recycling. In past dec- ades most cities had highly effective recycling prog- rams in the form of ragmen and tinmen who periodically traversed the neighborhoods paying money for salvage° Although these ind. ividuals are now long gone (as is the rag paper industry but not the salvage metal industry) their example remains. A quarterly or even annual visit by the recycling truck, coupled with positive payments for recycled materials, should not only reduce the fleet of vehicles and staff required to operate them, helping on costs, but also significantly increase participation. Granted that even at this relatively modest level the program would require financial sup- port (subsidies) the level of participation would be significantly higher than at present. If the goal is to increase participation and thereby increase the volume of recyclables and reduce the volumes going into the landfill, then this is probably the best of the evils. I offer these thoughts on high, but merely as present system in need not as an expert dictating to you from an average citizen who finds the of substantial changes. Sincerely, David Arbo~ast April II. 1995 City Council of Iowa City City of Iowa City Civic Center Iowa City, la. 52245 Ladies and Gentlemen. Two years ago my neighbors and I attempted to down zone our neighborI~ood. Our neighborhood is basically the residential area downtown between Jefferson and Market Streets. We felt somewhat satisfied with the results. We went from an apartment permitted zone down to a single family and duplex permitted zone. We were told that we should compromise with the developers in the area and the duplex permitted was the compromise. We had wanted single resident only. Tile developers were then permitted to build a five bedroom, five bath building behind the original single family residence of the property. We were not pleased. It appeared to be a boarding house to us, but we felt we were compromising and accepted the five new cars that were now added to our alley. Tl~is was a sacrifice to our neighborhood because our alley is our only sanctuary. There is very little street parking. We are surrounded by one way traffic. According to Iowa City traffic department, approximately four thousand cars a day pass tl~rough our neighborhood. Tile speed zone ls 25 rnlles an hour but rnost traffic is closer to 40 rnph and according to police report some cars even pass through at 65 mph. The alley helps us keep our sanity. The alley is where we greet one another. We are not considered a part of the traditional Goosetown but we feel a part of it. We have small homes with long lots in the back. These lots were originally Intended for kitchen gardens and many of the neighbors still keep up this tradition. Except the developers, of course, who see this land only as potential profit through the building of big, new, ugly rental homes. On Friday, April 7, these same contractors broke ground to build the second half of a duplex behind the second original house. They own two lots on our block, which they have now divided Into three. To my uneducated mind, a duplex has always been one building divided in half, with two front doors, and a little architectual integrity. However, in I. owa City a duplex is a new three bedroom building butted back to back against an 90+ year old house. This new building faces the alley whereas the old building faces the street. There will also be another parking lot built off the alley for three or four additional cars. A question raised at the time of the down zoning was that if houses are allowed to be built on the alley, will the alleys then bla turned into streets which will then necessitate paving. The Council at the time seemed opposed to this Idea. Why then is this "duplex" considered legal? At the same time we were down zoned, we became a Conservation district. However, even this has not appeared to help us In our attempt to stabilize our neighborhood. The neighbors and I feel rage, rage and anger which is settling into a sadness, which I Imagine will eventually move Into acceptance. Three neighbors in the passion of that anger have expressed the desire to move. We worked very I~ard two years ago to salvage our neighboorhood. We feel betrayed by the City who for some reason chose not to live up to the original intent of our down zoning. Judy Slvertsen 947 E. Market St. Iowa City, la. 52245 Ai)r!l 20, 1995 City Council of Iowa City Civic Center Iowa City, la. 52240 Ladies and Gentlemen, Tills letter ls in response to a telephone conversation I had with Marcia Klingaman. We were discussing various options for the definition of Conservation Zone. t volunteered my input and here it is. To be labeled a RNC 12 would be a neighborhood's attempt to preserve the Integrity of it's origin. A Conservation Zone would make tl~at attempt by eliminating the building of new apartments and compromise by allowin~ duplexes and single family homes. To begin, a new definition for duplex seems appropriate. Aduplex is a new structure built to be divided into two units, with both units having frontal street access. Something like this would prevent back to back building which then treats the alleyways as streets. A duplex would be an existing building divided internally into two units without additional add ons. We have many of these duplexes; however, they have the apparence of single family dwellings. The current limit of three unrelated people in each unit of the duplex seems to work. However, tile parking requirements could use amending. Presently, if the code requires parking for 2 I/2 the Inspection Services goes down and only requires parking for 2. However, each student usually has a car so Inspection Services should go up to 3 parking spaces when the code requires 2 I/2. Also, please observe the apartment at the corner of Governor and Jefferson. This is a three floor apartment building with a lO car parking lot all around it. There Is approximately a 3' by 50' strip of grass. To prevent this, the parking space requirement should be taken out of the original lot size first. Then, the remaining land can be divided proportionality into building and open space. As it is now the parking is being taken out of the open space. In a Conservation Zone as much open space as possible should be maintained. I believe this will also help reduce the size of the new buildings and thus prevent too much crowding. We already have too much traffic in our area. Hopefully, these suggestions will help Inspire more discussion. It's a hard process and I hope that you will find the loopholes before the developers do. If the Inspection Services people aren't part of the review process, perhaps they could be consulted. It would be beneficial to find problems that would undermind the intent of a Conservation Zone before a definition Is decided upon. We like our older homes. We're fixing them up and doing our part to preserve the Iowa City of yesteryear; but we can't do it alone, we need your help. Thanks, Judy Sivertsen 947 E. Market St. Iowa City, la .52245 Copies to: Karen Franklin Marc ia Kllngaman Planning and Zoning Commission ,/ Greater Iowa City Housin$ Fellowship ~pen~ doors' forlowincome families- P,O. Box 1402 Iowa City, IA 52244 319-358-9212 April 20, 1995 Iowa City City Council Civic Center Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Members of the Council: I am writing to update you on the Burns/GICHF joint project to develop affordable rental housing using CDBG and HOME funds. At the Council meeting of April 11, Charlie Eastham informed you that Mr. Bums and the 6ICHF had a verbal agreement to pumhase land in Iowa City. We now have a signed purchase agreement. We plan to use the 1994 funds for this site. We are optimistic about other sites for use of the 1995 funds. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 358-9212. Sincerely, Maryand Dennis Administrator cc: Bob Bums Marianne Milkman I _q :01 ll~] I~ ~Jd~/.q6 Harvey Wehde 2408 Whispering Prairie Avenue Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 354-1059 - Home (319) 338-3104 - Work April 19, 1995 City Of Iowa City Staff and Council Members: The City says that I have to put in a sidewalk at my residential property. This sidewalk should have been installed by the City Of Iowa City or the contractor when the house was built. The cost of adding this sidewalk is $1,100.00. Iowa City has given me until May 15, 1995, to install this sidewalk, or they will add the cost to my property taxes. I will compromise with the City and pay for the sidewalk expense, if the City does something that should have been done long ago. The City has an easement for the stormwater retention area on my property. This has created an "accident waiting to happen," not to mention an environmental hazard. If a child should walk around or jump over my fence and fall into that area, hit their head on the cement or fall into the water when it is high in the spring or summer, a possible drowning could result. The environmental hazard of cans, garbage, trash, papers, beer cans go through this system and flow into the water retention area and the pond itself. The City is spending taxpayers money for this pond and wetland park. The storm water retention area needs to tie all three cement tunnels together into one large pipe, and then fill in the rest of the area. There are two reasons the City has to address this problem as soon as possible: The City may be liable for a law suit. Environmental concerns have to be addressed. If this was a homeowner letting this problem exist, the City would have had the homeowner correct this problem a long time ago. In closing, I urge you to meet this May 15, 1995, deadline, will do so for the $1,100.00 sidewalk that should have been installed before I moved into my home--three years ago. as I Sincerely, Harvey Wehde Homeowner