HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-09-26 Info PacketCity of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
FROM:
RE:
September 22, 1995
City Council
City Manager
Material in Information Packet
Memorandum from Mayor Horowitz regarding recent meeting Of the League
of Iowa Municipalities.
Memoranda from the City Manager:
a. Highway ~ and Newton Road
c. Removal of Abandoned Vehicles
d. Interior Firefighting Jg/~
Memoranda from the Department of Planning and Con~unity Development:
.a. Melrose Avenue Discussion
b. Near Southside Design Plan Preferred Scenario Report
c. Planning and Zoning. Con~nission Work Program - Pending List
Memoranda from the Department of Public Works:
a. Water Main Extension - Foster Road
b. Mobile Home Park Private Water Metering
,.--2e,,l./...
Copy of letter from the Department of Public Works to the residents in
the area of the Longfellow Area Sanitary and Storm Sewer project.
Memorandum from the Director of Housing and Inspection Services regarding
the Service Quality Committee for Housing Code enforcement.
Fact sheet for the Iowa City Housing Authority.
Memorandum from the City Clerk regarding Council Work Session of
September 11, 1995.
Copy of letters from Senators Simon and Harkin regarding support for the
U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women.
Articles:
a. Outside looking in
b. Pursuing the Elusive Goal of "Sustainable Development"
Agenda for the September 19 meeting of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors.~O
Memorandum from the City Attorney regarding installation of private water ~1.
meters.
A%enda for the 9/26/95 Informal meetin~ of the Board of Supervisors.
Letter from Council Member Lehman regarding housing issues.
Barriers to Rental & Owner Occupied Affordable Housing (date 9/26/95)
Memo from Sr. Buildtn~ Inspector regarding Housing starts for 1995.
Memo from City Mgr, regard~n~ FY95 Vendor List.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
September 20, 1995
TO:
From:
City Council
Susan M. Horowitz, Mayor ~'/'/
Re:
Recent Meeting of the League of Iowa Municipalities
The League of Iowa Municipalities Board of Directors contacted me over a month ago to fill a
temporary vacancy on the Board to represent a city over 50,000. I accepted and the position
expires at the annual meeting in Ames on October 5-6. An Executive Board meeting and a
strategic planning session were held In Des Moinqs on September 11-12.
The Board meeting dealt with recommended 1996 legislative objectives and Council members
attending the Ames meeting will vote on their adoption. Naomi is on the League's Legislative
Policy Committee that pulled together these objectives. She distributed the draft recommen-
dations to' us a couple of-weeks ago. tf you have any comments about them, get to her prior to
the Ames meeting.
Other agenda items such as financial report, constitution and bylaw changes, name change,
membership policies, report from the housing summit, etc. can be reviewed in the Council office.
I'll leave the meeting binder on the shelf for your review.
The League continues to grow in membership but needs more cities to become active. Statewide
Council members are increasing single issue interest groups and have less time for participation
in a statewide organization such as the League. Any suggestions to tackle this problem will be
gratefully considered,
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
September 18, 1995
City Council
City Manager
Highway 6 and Newton Road
You may be familiar with the triangle piece of property at Highway 6 and Newton behind
Carver Hawkeye Arena. This property is adjacent to an apartment building, often overgrown
with weeds and unkempt appearance, and the site of illegal parking, particularly during athletic
events. This happens to be City property. I have asked the Department of Parks and
Recreation staff to design and construct a landscaped area for this piece of property. We will
install plantings as well as a newly designed Iowa City limits - somewhat of a welcoming sign.
Hopefully we can create an attractive welcome to our community as well as relieving the
problems of parking and the weeds and trash accumulation,
bJ~6-newton
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
September 18, 1995
City Council
City Manager
Council Candidate Workshop - Financial Issues
On Thursday evening, September 14, we conducted an informal workshop with Council
candidates concerning City financial issues, particularly the details and complexities of the
state's property tax la~vs. Eight Council candidates were present and I believe the information
was well received. The questions were such that it seemed to help provide a better
understanding of the City's revenues and, in particular, the property tax,
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
September 19, 1995
City Council
City Manager
Removal of Abandoned Vehicles
At the recent Mormon Trek/Rohret Road hearing, a gentleman mentioned the I~roblem of
abandoned vehicles on private streets. He indicated it took an extrsordinary amount of time
and numerous phone calls. I am not aware of the circumstances of his specific complaints;
however, I did check and we clearly have authority to remove abandoned vehicles from
private property. I would think anyone who is out and about in our community will notice
there are'very few, if any, such vehicles. We simply need to be notified, do the research on
the plate or other information on the ~/ehicle, tag the vehicle, then within a set period of time
we can have the vehicle removed from private property. Again, I am not sure of the
circumstances of that complaint, but we do have the authority for such removal.
,e
City of Bowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 20, 1995
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Interior Firefighting
The Federal Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued regulations
pertaining t6 firefighting as it relates to interior structural firefighting. The OSHA calls this an
immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH) atmosphere. Fire Department operations are
guided by this regulation. Basically, the Fire Department directlye requires a minimum of four
firefighters to be assembled in emergency operations dudng intedor structural firefighting. Two
firefighters are required to use the buddy system When operating in a hazard area. Two
additional.firefighters will be on stand-by outside the hazardous area to monitor the operation to
provide assistance should a rescue be necessary. This is a change from the way the Fire
Depa~ii~-~ent previously dealt with interior structural firefighting.
In the past, we have been able to initiate interior structural firefighting operations with a three-
person company. Typically, an officer and a firefighter geared up to make the initial fire attack
and the remaining firefighter operated the fire apparatus. Additional fire companies would ardve
and support the attack crew. The multiple dispatch of fire apparatus will provide for sufficient
personnel and equipment. We believe we can fulfill our obligations to the public in response to
fire emergency, as well as comply with OSHA guidelines to protect the safety of our fire
employees.
bj~ntedot
MEMORANDUM
City of Iowa City
Date: September21, 1995
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Jeff Davidson, Assistant Director of Planning and Community .Development
Re: Melrose Avenue discussion
We are scheduled to discuss the Melrose Avenue street and bridge replacement projects at
your September 25 work session. At the meeting, you will have the option of selecting the
recommended alternative for the street and bddge reconstruction, or determining what steps
are necessary prior to making your decision on the recommended alternative.
To assist your discussion, I have attached the formal public comments received from members
of the Melrose Avenue focus group dudng the environmental assessment. The focus group
was established by the City Council at the beginning of the environmental assessment process
to ensure that each impacted party's voice would be heard during the discussion. The attached
comments are from the focus group members that chose to respond during the public comment
period. Representatives of the Melrese Avenue West neighborhood area, the Iowa Department
of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration chose not to respond.
Bring any questions you have to the September 25 meeting.
cc: Rick Fosse
Mayor Don Swanson
138 Koser Ave.
University Heights, Iowa 52246
May 8, 1995
Jeff Davidson
City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Davidson:
The City of University Heights is corarait~ed to its vision ofmaintsining the residential
character, the quality of life and the safe environment of Un. iversity Heights. Widening Meirose
Avenue within University Heights would have a significant negative impact in all three of these
Because the City of University Heights will not widen Melrose Avenue within its borders, it
opposds the three and four lane bridge alternatives as plans that have negative consequences
without benefits. The three and four lane alternatives all would hamper University Heights
businesses by eliminating on street parking. These alternatives also would mean taking more
land from private citizens for the bridge approaches than is involved under the current two lane
plans.
I speak not only for the council but for the overwhelming majority of University Heights'
citizens. No one issue has so strongly aroused as much concern in University Heights. More
citizens have artended council meetings or contacted council members about this issue than any
previous topic. Almost without exception these citizens have been of the opinion that Melrose
Avenue in University Heights should not be widened and a wider bridge should be opposed.
Sincerely,
Don Swanson
Cc: Mr. Roger Anderberg, Iowa DOT
Mr. Hubert A. Willard, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration
Mr. Howard Preston, Senior Transportation Engineer, BRW
STATEMENT BY KARIN FRANKLIN, DIRECTOR OF P&CD,
CiTY OF IOWA-CITY, ON THE
MELROSE AVENUE STREET & BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The purpose of the Environmental Assessment was to evaluate each of the alternatives
presented by the Melrose Avenue Focus Group and determine whether there were significant
adverse impacts from any of the alternatives that would warrant an Environmental Impact
Statement. This information would fulfill the requirements of NEPA and assist the City
Council in making its decision regarding the number of lanes and accommodations for
alternative modes of transl~ortation on Melrose Avenue.
As a member of the Melrose Avenue Focus Group, I have reviewed the documents submitted
by BRW, consultants for this assessment, and generally find the report to be complete,
balanced, and fair in treating each of the alternatives. The report is based on recognizing that
Melrose Avenue will continue to function as an arterial street within the community and will
serve as a transportation corridor for many residents and visitors to Iowa City, beyond those
affected in the specific project area. Balancing all of the interests involved in this project is
the task of the City Council in making their final decision about the magnitude of the project.
The environmental assessment evaluates the impacts of each of the alternatives and provides
information to the City Council about the consequences of their decision:making. This
assessment should give the Council a picture of what alternatives are clearly environmentally
acceptable.
One point of the report with which I disagree is the conclusion in Table S-1 under Neighbor-
hood/Community Character. Alternative #1 (the No Action option) is shown as having no
significant impact on University Heights. Given that this alternative ultimately results in
closing the Melrose Avenue Bridge, it would seem that this consequence would have a
significant adverse impact on the citizens of University Heights by impeding their access to
emergency services at University Hos~3itals, and requiring longer trips to reach University
Hospitals, the main campus and downtown Iowa City.
Otherwise, I find this report acceptable in meeting the requirements of the environmental
assessment process and informing the City Council of potential impacts of the various
alternatives,
May 8, 1995
Mr. Howard Preston
BRW, Inc.
% JeffDavidson
Assistant Director'
Department of Harm & Community Development
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Preston:
In response to the Environmental Assessment of the Melrose Avenue Street and Bridge
Reconstruction Project, I have the following comments:
I attended the open meeting conducted by BRW and have read the submission of the
Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Associtltion (MANA). I believe that MANA has done a very
thorough job of evaluating your report, and it has raised some serious questions. Without
meaning to minimize other points, I would stress the concerns about the narrowness of the
project area studied and the fact that traffic congestion does not appear to be alleviated by any
proposal (or at least not adequately alleviated). In particular, I would stress that there is not any
publicly known solution to the bottleneck that would continue to exist at the western end of the
bridge (in University Heights) and perhaps at the eastern end of Melrose Avenue as well.
It would seem an important aspect of any assessment that the solution or solutions to
these traffic problems be publicly known and publicly discussed.
I hone that you will consider this comment and the several suggestions contained in the
MANA submission.
William G. Buss
747 West Benton Street
THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
HOSPITALS AND CLINICS
319/3S6-2681
EO~ce of the DIrector
200 HawXlns Dr.
Iowa City. Iowa 52242-1009
April 18, 1995
Mr. Jeff Davidson
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Davidson:
After reviewing fie "Melrese Avenue Street and Bridge Reconstruction"
Environmental Assessment document prepared by BRW and dated March, 1995, the
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics believes the reports findings am acceptable,
We also believe the document should be sufficient for the Federal Highway
Administration to determine the need for an environmental impact statement and for the
Iowa City City Councirs use in deciding on an appropriate alternative,
Many thanks for the opportunity to review and comment on the report and its
findings.
Sincerely,
Brandt Echtemacht
Assistant Director for Planning
BE:his
cc: Dick Gibson
Ann Rhodes
John Staley
Doug True
THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
April 19, 1995
Mr. Jeff Davidson
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Davidson:
We have reviewed the "Melrose Avenue Street and Bridge Reconstruction"
Environmental Assessment made available to the public on February 28, 1995, arid wish
to provide written comment for consideration as the report is finalized.
A report in the Appendices prepared by VISTA Environmental Information, Inc.,
erroneously assigns ownership of the University of Iowa Boyd Law Building to L & M
Mighty Shop, 504 E. Burlington Street. This is a harmless error but for the fact that it
also reports the presence of a leaking underground storage tank on the property. I
believe this to be in error and am working directly with VISTA to get this corrected.
Please instruct BRW, Inc. to get this corrected in the final report.
Other than for the error reported above and a few other minor errors the correction of
which would not appear to alter the findings of the report. we find the report to be
acceptable and believe it adequately answers the question concerning the need for an
environmental impact statement. In addition, it provides the information necessary for
the City Council to make the political decisions necessary to bring this project to a
successful conclusion.
Thank you for the opportuni;.y to provide input to the study and to offer our comments.
Director
C:
Ann Rhodes
Brandt Echternacht
Doug True
I:~'~o-pas~eaco~ne~Lmel
|ow~ City IA 52242-1223
Pla~mag a~d Admhus~uvo ,$er~ces
416 Naffi Hall 319/335-1248 PAX319rJ35oI210
Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association
629 Melrose Avenue, Iowa City, Iowa 52246
April 26, 1995
Mr. Howard Preston
BRW, Inc.
c/o Jeff Davidson
Assistant Director
De artmentofPlanning&
~ommtmity Development
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Preston:
As representatives of fie Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association, we are writing in
response to the solicitation for comments in coanecdon .with the menfly released Melrose
Avenue Stxeet and Bridge Reconstruction Environmental Assessment tEA).
It is evident fiat your fh'm has devoted much time to gathering and analyzing the information-
needod to help the paxties involved make an intelligent decision on the Melrose Avenue project
Some of our questions have been answered by the document. However, a review of the EA by
members of the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association has nilsod a number of questions
and concerns.
In the attached statement, we first summarize what we consider to be our overriding concerns
with the EA. We then continue with a more detailed discussion of these concerns. Finally, we
outline our Association's posfion on the Melrose project
We hope that ultimately our statement will help in the efforts to reach the best solution for the
Mekose reconstruction project.
Very truly yours,
Steering Group, Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association
cc. Iowa City City Council; University of Iowa; UIHC; University Heights City Council; Board
of Regents, U.S. Rep. Jim Leach; Daniel M. Mathes; Roger Anderberg; Mr. Wallace Taylor,
Esq.; Steven E. BallaM, Esq.; Dr. Lowell J. Soike; Iowa City and University Heights
neighborhood associations; 1.9_W.a City Press Citizen; Daily Iowan; CR Gazette: Des Moines
l~ Iowa City Maaazine: Community B_ettemllil lhlletin: KCRG; KGAN; First
Mennonite Church; St. Andrew Church; ICAN; Environmental Advocates; Friends of Historic
Preservation; Historic Preservation Commission, Members of Focus Group,
Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association
629 Melrose Avenue, Iowa City, Iowa 52246
STATEMENT OF CONCERNS, QUESTIONS AND OUR POSITION
~ THE MELROSE AVENUE STREET AND BRIDGE
RECONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. SUMMARY OF CONCERNS ........................................................................2
H. DISCUSSION OF POINTS RAISED IN THE SUMMARY
A. Study area, i.e., "Project Corridor", is too restrictive ...................................2
B. Congestion at key intersections remains problematic ....................................4
C. Dimensions of the bridge and street alternatives are excessive .........................5
D. Pedestrian and bicycle safety is not a priority ............................................5
E. Consideration of access points is largely ignored ........................................6
F. By-pass of Melrose to the north not adequately explored ..............................6
H'I. MELROSE BRIDGE AND STREET RECONSTRUCTION: OUR POSITION
A. Neighborhoods are worth preserving ......................................................7
B. No single alternative solves the problem ...................................................7
C. Wider alternatives exacerbate the problem ................................................7
D. We support a true 3-lane bridge .............................................................7
E. We support a true 3-lane mad ...............................................................7
F. We support the EA on walkways for pcdcsIfi~ns and lanes for bicyclists .............8
IV. FOR THE LONG TERM: SHARED PROBLEM, SHARED SOLUTION .........................8
APPENDIX: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ERRATA ..........................................9
Page 1 of 10
NEIGHBORHO OD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MELROSE EA (CONT.)
I. SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS
ABOUT THE MELROSE AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CEA)
/
A careful analysis of the environmental assessment by members of the Metrose Avenue
Neighborhood Association has raised a number of concerns about the study, the most significant
of which include:
Study area, i.e., "Project Corridor", is too restrictive. The consultants raxely look beyond
Melrose Avenue in considering the environmental impacts of the 7 alternatives. The
adjoining neighborhoods off the 6 small cul-de-sacs, the 2 side through-sheets (especially
Metrose Court and its feeder slxeets), and University Heights have not been adequately
studied.
Congestion at key intersections remains problemuric. According to the EA itself, three of
the five major intersections in the corridor will show no improvement in congestion levels
regardless of the alternative selected. All five are expected to operate at the lowest levels
of service by the year 2015. What we have now and will continue to have is a half-mile
stretch of road with a bottleneck at each end and one in the middle.
Dimensions of the bridge and street alternatives are excessive. The bridge alternatives
suggested by the consultants are so wide that the proposed 2- and 3-1ane bridge options
can both accommodate 4 lanes of traffic. A similar situation exists with respect to the
strut alternatives. The proposed 5-lane Melrose extending from South Grand Avenue to
Byington Road seems particularly unnecessary.
Pedestrian and bicycle safety is not a priotity. The one-half mile stretch of Melrose
Avenue under investigation is a high-density area not only for vehicles but also for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Crossing the street is given litde consideration, both in terms
of how difficult it will be and where it will be done.
Consideration of access points is largely ignored. The EA fails to discuss how difficult
and dangerous it will be for vehicular traffic to exit from the more than 30 driveway and
side street access points along the project corridor.
By-pass af Melrose to the north is not adequately explored. Alternative 7 is given short
shrift in the EA for several reasons, one of which is the fact that, taken by itself, it offers
less direct improvement to the Metrose congestion than any of the other options.
However, when paired with another alternative, we believe that alternative 7 can play a
significant role in a long-range solution for transporting vehicular traffic destined for the
Hospital and University.
II. DISCUSSION OF POINTS RAISED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S SUMMARY*
Study area, i.e.. "Project rfdlEri{loZL i~ too restrictive,
We believe this to be the largest conceptual flaw in the EA. Although there is no stated definition
of the study area in the document, the sections dealing with Wetlands/Flood Plains (p.88),
Wildlife and Endangered Species (p. 90), Cultural Resources (p. 90), and Traffic Operations
Analysis (p. 105) suggest that it consists of the half-mile segment of Metrose Avenue from the
bridge to Byington Road. What is the definition of the "Melrose Avenue Study
Area"? Is this the same as the "project corridor"?
Points to be specifically addressed by BRW, Inc., are in boldface type.
Page 2 of 10
NBIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT/,,m-LROSE EA (CONT.)
What is the definition of the phrase "integriiy of the surrounding area" as used
in Section 5.2.3? Doesn't using this expression, which suggests consideration
of the neighborhood taken as a whole, contradict the fact that only the impacts
along Meirose Avenue per se were considered?
This narrow scope of investigation fails to take into account the nature of the neidhborhood. Of
the 163 addresses included in the City's Melrose Avenue neighborhood mailing list, only 30 are
located directly on Melrose Avenue. The remainder, which comprises more than 80% of the
ncighborhood's residents, Live on one of the 2 side through-streets (Melrose Court and Grand
Avenue Court), the feeder streets off Melrose Court (Brookl~nd Place and Bmoldand Park
Drive), or the 6 small neighborhood cul-de-sacs (Lucon Drive, Melrose Circle, Melrosc Place,
Triangle Place, Oak Park Court and OHve Street). We believe that a stody which f~s to take
into account potential impacts to more than 80% of the households within the neighborhood is,
by definition, incomplete. How was the decision on the scope of the EA made?
Why was it drawn so narrowly, when a widening of the street and bridge will
have enormous impacts on both the Melrose Avenue and University Heights
neighborhoods?
The failure both to assess fie impacts from the proposed alternatives on Metrose Court and to
include the Melrose Court intersection in the inteF,,ec~on capacity analysis is particularly
troubling. Of those households not located directly on Melrose Avenue, almost three-fourths
use Melrose Court as their sole access to Melrose Avenue. As was pointed out at the public
h~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~,~g on April 19, despite its unassuming appeaxance, Metrose Court plays a significant role in
the wansportation system on the west side of Iowa City. It is the only through-street to the south
between Riverside Drive and Koser Avenue. Drivers can use Metrose Court to get to Benton
Street via Greenwood Drive, where are located numerous large apartment complexes as well as
Roosevelt Elementary School. In addition, they can reach Riverside Drive without encountering
the Riverside/Grand Avenue congestion by means of an illega/turn at Myrtle Avenue (which is
done with impunity). Metrose Court continues to experience problems with cut-through traffic
speeding down this narrow 18.5 ft street. Why were impacts on Melrose Court and on
the Melrose Court intersection omitted from the EA? How much spill-over
traffic onto Melrose Court can be anticipated as a result of the various
alternatives, particularly the wider ones which the EA suggests can be expected
to attract more traffic to the Melrose Avenue area (p. 84)? How will this
increase in traffic onto Meirose Court affect the heavy volume of pedestrians
which, in addition to University students, also includes school children walking
to/from Roosevelt Elementary School and/or one of the 5 day care centers along
Melrose Avenue? What is the current LOS of the Melrose Court intersection,
and what will be the projected LOS under the various alternatives?
Another significant area in which the choice of corridor seems altogether too restrictive is the
axes of cultural resources. We wish to make two points in connection with the cultural resource
investigation conducted in the neighborhood. First, the only properties surveyed for historical
significance were those along Melrose Avenue, three of which are already on the National
Register of Historic Places. It is likely that there are other historically significant houses in oar
neighborhood as well as that of University Heights. Three possible candidates located perhaps
100 yards off Melrose Avenue include numbers 4, 5, and 6 Metrose Circle (see Appendix). In
addition, we believe Grand Avenue Court warrants consideration by virtue of its unique
relationship to the University campus as well as to downtown. Why was the cultural
resource investigation confined to just those properties directly on Melrose
Avenue?
The second point to be made with respect to the cultural resource investigation is that, in
focusing on specific properties, the EA misses the larger issue: the impact on a neighborhood
that has significant historic character as a whole. In support of this point. the Iowa City Historic
Page 3 of 10
NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT Iv~:x ROSE EA (CONT.)
Preservation Cormnission's ~ Preservation P_I. tM1 identifies the Melrose Avenue
neighborhood as a "conservation district". Our neighborhood, running north and south from
Melrose Avenue to Greenwood Drive/Myrtle Avenue and east and west from Riverside Drive to
University Heights, has a unique history and character, combining some of the old rural flavor
of the area (as evidenced by a number of original farm houses and wooded areas) with stable,
family residences and pedeswian access to the City and University. We believe that it may be a
nearly perfect example of the 'Town and Gown Era" (1890-1940), an era of historic
significance, containing a varied mix of selected Victorian homes, "Craftsman" style houses,
cottages and bungalows. In doing the cultural survey, what is the justification for
singling out one street from a neighborhood that has historic significance as a
whole? How could the investigation fail to consider the entire Melrose area as
well as the University Heights neighborhood?
Most critically. ours is a fragile neighborhood, bounded on the north by the University and on
the south by high-density apa,-u,~ents, largely inhabited by students. The widening of Melrose
Avenue and the substantial increases in traffic it would inevitably bring would adversely affect
the atwactiveness of the neighborhood. Further deterioration of the housing along Melrose
Avenue and the streets feeding Melrose through sale, subdivision and a decline in owner
occupancy could directly affect residences throughout this small area. These developments
could increase wansience and undermine the current stability leading to rapid deterioration in the
quality of life and the character of the neighborhood. Why was the issue of possible
land-use changes not addressed? What is the likely economic disadvantage
resulting from the significant downward pressure on property values in a
neighborhood bordered by a fast road with growing traffic flow, not only along
Melrose Avenue itself but on all the side streets and cul-de-saes that open onto
Melrose?
We feel it is crucial that the EA consider the environmental impact on the neighborhood as a
whole, not just on the "Melrose Avenue corridor." We believe that such a narrow focus, as is
curren~y evident throughout the EA, leads to a gross underestimation of the environmental
impacts of the proposed widening, especially from those alternatives that will lead to increased
traffic volume.
Finally, why does the EA fail to address the impacts to University Heights in
any meaningful way? It is difficult to understand how an investigation of the impacts to the
Metrose Avenue corridor could exclude an entire municipality, particularly one in which Melrose
Avenue plays such an integral pan. It is even more difficult to understand how the process of
preparing the EA could have moved forward before it was determined that University Heights
would have to sign off on the bridge proposal in order for federal funds to be released. Do the
consultants acknowledge that the City of University Heights will be required to
sign off on the bridge proposal before federal funds will be released? If so,
why did this fact not play a larger role in shaping the proposed alternatives?
B. 12ongestion at Rey intersections rernain~ problernatic
A review of the intersection capacity analysis (pp. 111 and 115) indicates that of the 5 studied
intersections, only two (at Hawkins Drive and Byingtun) are expected to show improved levels
of service (LOS) and then only under the wider alternatives. By the year 2015, however, each
of the 5 intersections will be operating at a LOS of D, E or F regardless of the alternative
selected. Since these constraints will likely remain a problem, to what extent is it
reasonable to improve the road segment in between? What is the rationale for
considering the roadway segment capacity without taking into account the
intersection capacity? Is there a point to having the road segment operate at an
LOS of C when the intervening intersections are operating at an LOS of D or F?
It is stated that "economic development/redevelopment for the region could occur as a result of
Page 4 of I0
NEIGH~ORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MI~-LROSE EA (CONT.)
improved travel time in the corridor" (Section 5.2.4, p. 51). Is it reasonable to expect
much improvement in travel time given the projected LOS for 3 of the S
intersections included in the EA?
Dimensions o.f the ~ and street alterfiative.~ ars excessive
Simply stated, the dimensions of alternatives 2 through 6 seem excessive. Why are the
bridge and street proposals wider than their descriptions would suggest? The
new 2-lane bridge, at 45.3 feet, is wide enough to support 4 lanes (at 10.8 ft) of traffic. The 3-
lane bridge is exac~y the same width (.54.5 feet) as the 4-lane bridge, and each could support 5
traffic lanes. A similar situation exists with respect to the road proposals. The new 2-lane road
is 38.7 feet (or 3 lanes) wide. The 3- and 4-lane wads are both 47.9 feet (or 4 lanes) wide.
Since wider streets and bridges cost more to build and maintain, how much
could be saved by constructing a true, i.e., narrower 3-lane bridge and road?
Because they entail unnecessary disruption of the neighborhood and promise the possibility of
even greater disruption in the future, these wide alternatives suggest morn disadvantages than
advantages. We consider the failure to offer an analysis of a narrower 3-lane option an
unacceptable deficiency of the EA. Why wasn't an analysis of a narrower 3olane
option considered in the EA? What is the narrowest width of each of the
proposed bridge and street alternatlves that would qualify for federal funding?
Since all of the alternatives su, ffgested by the consultant are in some way at
variance with the federal/IDO guidelines, could a variance be sought for a
bridg{~/road with narrower dimensions?
Why is i~ necessary to widen Melrose Avenue between South Grand Avenue and
Byington? It seems ill-advised to add another lane to an intersection that already oversees the
merging of 2-1ane Byington Road with Grand Avenue (current LOS is E). Given the
insignificant level of eastbound traffic on this road segment, was any
consideration given to changing the present westbound lane to an eastbound
lane, thereby converting this portion of the road to one-way eastbound? This
mad segment includes 2 National Register residences, one on each side of the street The
residence on the north side of Melrose Avenue stands m lose up to 15 of front yard, including 2
old trees. Will these facts be considered when a recommendation is made for this
portion of the project?
D~ Pedestrian and bicycle safety
There are really three issues here. First. pedestrian safety is discussed in the EA generally in
terms of wide sidewalks or other walkways on each side of the road (pp. 22.49 and 61). There
is only one reference (p. 50) to the difficulties one might encounter crossing the su~eet
However, because the private homes. apartments. day care centers, etc., lie south of Melrose
while the Hospital. athletic facilities and westbound city and CAMBUS stops are to the north,
the nature of foot traffic is to cross the street in a north/south direction. Will erossing the
street become more difficult and/or more dangerous as the width of the road is
increased? With respect to bus stops, was the possibility of constructing bus
bays considered? Would it be possible to construct bus bays while maintaining
the south curb by shifting the center of the street slightly to the north within the
existing right-of-way?
A related second issue concerns crosswalks. It is difficult now to cross Melrose Avenue at
certain times of the day. How will the degree of difficulty in crossing the street be
affected by the various alternatives? We believe much of the traffic crosses Melrose
Avenue at the Melrose Court intersection. a suggestion that seems to be supponod by the
pedestrian count survey (Table I, p. 20) included in the EA. The intersection at South
Page 5 of 10
NEIGH~ORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MELROSE EA (CONT.)
Grand/lVlelrose Avenue (which included n~d-block crossings west of the intersection) accounted
for the second highest pedesu'ian count between 4 PM-6 PM of the 5 intersections that were
studied; of the number counted at the South Grand intersection, more than half were heading
south and east, i.e., in the direction of Melrose Corm. Why are there no provisions for
crosswalks in the EA? Hawkins Drive and South Grand Avenue are the locations likely to
include crosswalks, but as noted above, because of Melrose Court's connection with the
neighborhoods, aparunents and elementary school to the south as well as its proximity to the bus
stops and University facilities, that street must be carefully considered as well Where will
crosswalks he located? Will zebras and/or a pedestrian crosswalk light like that
on Clinton Street he considered?
Finally, the EA refers to the Comprehensive Plan's requirement for wide sidewalks to
accomodate bicyclists. In the case of the 4- and S-lane alternatives, is it intended
that bieyclists share the sidewalks with pedestrians? How were the widths of
the bicycles lanes for the street and bridge alternatives determined? Is there a
standard width for bicycle lanes?
E. C~sideration ~ a. Cc~ point8 il lar~e~ ~gnorecl
One of the slated project goals of the EA is "to improve the ability... to use Metrose Avenue with
a higher degree of safety"...[including] "movements from intersecting streets" (plO). The EA
points out that one of the characteristics of the south side of Metrose Avenue is "the large
number of~ccess points for the many narrow residential streets which connect to Melrose
Avenue and the numerous residential driveways (p. 60)." The EA also discusses how
accessibility into the neighborhoods .will be improved under certain alternatives (pp. 49 and 51).
The problem, however, is not so much turning into these access points from Melrose Avenue
but is rather one of turning back out onto Melmse Avenue from a driveway or cul-de-sac. Will
reentering Melrese Avenue from one of the many access points be made more
difficult and/or more dangerous as the width of the road is increased?
F. By-russ ~d[ Melro~ to lJl north ~ adeauatelv explored
There are 2 points to be made here. First, how was the route selected for Alternative
~7 (Figure 13 a/b)? This is not the location that oar Association had discussed prior to the
initiating of the EA process. Numerous individuals and groups, ours included, had suggested a
route which runs north of Melrose Avenue immediately to the west of the University Athletic
Club, along what is cttrrentiy a service mad to the Finkbine commuter lot. This route has
several advantages: 1) it is located entirely on University property; 2) it avoids the need to
traverse the wooded section in University Heights; and 3) it may avoid some of the grade
problems associated with the Alternative as it is currently situated.
Second, Alternative 7 is considered in the EA only as a stand-alone option and, as such, is
quickly dismissed. When paired with another alternative and considered for some
time in the future, would a combination of actions in which some variation of
Alternative 7 were included offer a sensible solution for accommodating our
west side transportation needs beyond the target year of 20157
Ill. MELROSE BRIDGE AND STREET RECONSTRUCTION:
OUR POSITION
The position of the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association on the bridge and street
reconstxuction project is as follows:
Page 6 of 10
NEIG~IBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MM,ROSE EA (CONT.)
A. Neighborhoods are worth preserving. Our neighborhood, like all the others in Iowa City,
is worth preserving. Neighborhoods provide a community with its distinctive character and
vitality. We believe that the selection of the wider bridge and street alternatives (Alternatives
3-6) for the Melrose reconsmmtion project will have undesirable, h-remediable effects on
Iowa City in general .and on our neighborhood in particular. Older neighborhoods like ours
are especially vulnerable. Once gone, such neighborhoods cannot be replaced; a piece of
our historical legacy as a community is forever lost. This concern is one that we share with
other older Iowa City neighborhoods.
B. No ffi ~ f~gLY.~ the ~ Data included-in the EA confirm our belief that
the prnoblern of traffic congestion on Melrnse between University Heights and the Iowa
River will not be solved by any one proposal. Regardless of the alternative selected, three
of the five major intersections in the project corridor show no improvement in currant traffic
cong. esfion, and by the year 2015, all 5 are expected to be operaring at the lowest levels of
service. As as result of the con~nulng problems at the Koser and Riverside
even a significant widening of the road will result in little more than a "superhighway
connecting 2 bottlenecks".
C ~ nlt~alative~ f~ ~ plablel~, The EA also cokfu'rns the existonce of the "If
you build it, they will come" phenornenon:...some of the project alternatives will attract
more traffic than other alternatives" (p. 84).
D. We support ~ Iru~ 3-1ane bridge. We support a mae 3-1unc bridge, i.e., a nattower version
of the one included in alternatives 2 and 3 that could not be restriped as a 4-lane bridge at
some point in the future. If obtaining federal funding for the sligh~y narrower "new 2-lane
bridge" proposed by the consultants will necessitate requesting a variance from the FHWA
and ]DOT, one should be requested.
E. W__e ~ B .V~ -2~ wad. As with the bridge, we support a true 3-lane street like those
in alternatives 3 and 4 (consisting of 2 through lanes and a center left-turn lane), but, again,
one that is nattower than the version proposed by the consultants and that could not be
s~iped for 4 lanes. Of the 3-lane concept, the EA states:
· "The 3 lane alternative provides optimal balance between traffic carrying capacity of
roadways, pedestrians and bicycle facilities, scale of roadway to adjoining uses, and
visual amcni~es in the corridor "(p.72).
o "Left-tun lanes have been proven to reduce accidents by as much as 60%" {p. 118).
· "The 4-lane undivided urban armrial (no left tun) has the highest accident rate of any
urban madway" (p. 125). Urban roadways have been convened to 3-lane design with
increasing frequency because of theif excellent safety rccords" Lv. I 18).
We favor investigating the possibility of constructing bus bays along Melrose by shifting the
center of the s~eet slightly to the noah within the existing right*of-way. Such a street
realignment could enhance clear zones and buffer areas on both sides of Melrose.
What the neighborhood wants is an improved, functional "city street" that does not threaten
the character of the neighborhood and that maximizes the safety of vehicles and pedestrians.
We believe that an actual three lane street is the best alternative. It is less costly than a four-
lane road striped for three; it will require less land and less clear-cutting of the adjacent
landscape; as a road thaL would be only slightly wider than the current two lane road; it
preserves the aesthetic quality of the neighborhood; it may allow spacc for bus bays to
insure the flee flow of ~affic and the safe discharge of passengers; it means a narrower, less
dangerous road for pedes~ans to cross; it allows for ample bicycle lanes; and it offers an
efficient roadway that does not promise to become at some future time a disruptive
thoroughfare. We believe that a ~ruc 3-lane bridge/3-1anc road, especially when paired with
a new roadway (ultcmative #7) that provides direct access to University Hospital and its
Page 7 of 10
NEIOHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MELROSE EA (CONT.)
parking facilities, will create an efficient roadway that preserves and even enhances the
historic and fragile Melrose neighborhood.
F. We support the EA on walkwavs for veclestrians and 10n¢~ .f. ff bicyclists. We
enthusiastically support the provision in the EA for adequate north and south side walk'ways
for pedeslrians and lanes for bicyclists. However, the issue of getting safely across
Melmse Avenue needs additional attention.
IV. FOR THE LONG TERM: SHARED PROBLEM, SHARED SOLUTION
The Melrose Avenue situation has no simple solution. In addition to all the issues raised in the
EA, there are 2 other factors to be considered.
First, it was finally confirmed at the April 19 hearing on the EA that University Heights must
consent to the bridge reconstruction before. federal funds will be released for the project.
Second, it is clear from the EA that no one alternative taken by itself will solve the problem-not
now, and certainly not for the long term. More than one action will be required to successfully
address this issue. We believe that it should be the University which undertakes this second
action, and we believe that this action should consist of the conslruction of a new road to carry
vehicular u'affic into the hospital complex by some means other than Melrose Avenue. In other
words, this action should be some variation of Alternative 7.
Why should the University participate in the search for solutions to the Melrose Avenue
problem? The answer, quite simply, is because it has contributed significantly to the problem, in
a number of ways. UI and UIHC are major generators of traffic along Meirose Avenue, and the
growth of UIHC accounts for a significant portion of the projected increases in traffic congestion
in the area. The steps taken by the University towards the creation of a "pedeswian campus"
have resulted in vehicles beIng displaced onw city streets at the periphery of the campus-sweets
like Metrose Avenue. It was the University that closed Newton Road to 2-way traffic some
years ago, thereby eliminating one alternative to Melrose Avenue on the west side of town.
Finally, it would be naive to think that the University has finished work on the west side
campus. The EA states (p. 54) that the University has plans to relocate Finkbine Golf Course to
another location when space needs warrant. In addition, the 1992 sports and ~
Facilities LOng Rang~ Master p]~ includes plans for a convention center and hotel to be
conslxucted off Melrose Avenue west of Mormon Trek Road across from West High School. It
is unclear whether traffic resulting from this construction has been included in the EA's projected
future traffic growth on Melrose Avenue; if it has not, those numbers have probably been
seriously understated.
Could the University implement Alternative 77 We believe the answer is yes, although not
immediately. This alternative is largely dismissed in the EA for several reasons: 1) it requires a
large acquisition of property from the University; 2) it doesn't address the bridge problem; 3) the
land in question in categorized as 4(0 property, i.e., undeveloped property that may not be
improved unless it can be shown that there is no alternative to doing so; and 4) its construction
would disturb Finkbine Golf Course and the athletic fields. However, a closer look at each of
these objections indicates that none poses a real obstacle. 1) The University already owns the
property in question, so no right-of-way will be needed. 2) and 3) As soon as City Council
selects an altemative from the EA, the bridge problem is taken care of by another means, and the
4 (f) category question is resolved, since at that point there really will be no alternative for
bringing traffic into the hospital. 4) As was mentioned above. the Alternative 7 which we have
suggested (as opposed to that proposed in the EA) runs along an already existing service road
and would compromise neither the Finkbine Golf Course nor the athletic fields. However, since
we are suggesting that Alternative 7 be implemented in conjunction with the relecatinn of the golf
Page 8 of 10
NEIGffBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MELROSE EA (CONT.)
course, the new road could be located virtually anywhere within the cun'ent golf course site.
The sports facilities plan mentioned previously actually includes the design for just such a road
running from Mormon Trek east to the Finkbine Commuter Lot.
Unfortunately for the City of Iowa City, the University, as a state institution, is not subject to
local review of its campus planning, even when such planning has direct impacts on the larger
community. Therefore, the final question to be asked is: woulC[ the University implement
Alternative 77
Marvin Pomeramz, past president of the Board of Regents, stated in 1990 that the Regents and
"the University administration [recognize] that our teaching hospital has a major business
dimension". If it were in its business interests W do so, the University would, we believe,
consider implementing some version of Alternative 7. Individuals representing the University
and UIHC have indicated in the past that it it in their business interests to have a wansporta~on
system that provides for the safe and efficient movement of patients, students, employees,
visitors to their various facilities. We therefore believe that UI and LrlHC are likely to be .
sufficien~y motivated to employ their considerable resources in the search for an answer to the
Metrose Avenue question. And we believe City Council should allow them to do so.
In order to come to a decision on what to do about Melrose Avenue, it will be necessary for the
City to make a serious effort to enlist the cooperation of those paxties who are, by virtue of
circumstance, involved in this process.
At the Same time, it is incumbent upon all the parties--the Iowa City and University Heights City
Councils and the University-to participate fully in this process which hopefully will lead to an
acceptable decision for all. We believe that a negotiated solution is achievable and, indeed
represents the only real hope of finding a design for growth that will serve the community well
for the long term.
APPENDIX: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ERRATA
The following points are presented separately because many of them are more technical rather
than conceptual in nature. We consider it important to include them nonetheless.
5.2.1 Community facilities.
Ernest Horn School should not be considered a part of the Metrose Avenue neighborhood.
Roosevelt High School is actually an elementary school less than one-half mile south of
Melrose Avenue.
The child care facility located at 309 Melrose Avenue is the Brookland Woods Child Care
Center.
The cultural centers at 303 and 308 Melrose Avenue (Afro-American and Chicano/American
Cultural Centers) are University properties and should be designated as part of an unbroken
sweep of campus which includes the four facilities identified as "community facilities".
The buildings at 511 and 707 Melrose Avenue are not churches but axe instead properties
owned by churches; although they are indeed buildings open to a certain public, they do not
generate ~'affic in the same way as a church would. The 2 churches that are in the study area are
SL Andrew Presbyterian Church at 1300 Melrose Avenue in University Heights and First
Mennonite Church at 405 Myrtle Avenue.
5.2.2 Neighborhood/Community Character. What is the definition of the term
"neighborhood character" used in the EA? ltow is this term different from
"community character"? Failure to address these points is significant. since at the focus
meeting the consultants had a specific mandate to study those features of neighborhood which
are not quantifiable, but objectively real nonetheless. This is evident in small details as well as in
Page 9 of 10
NEIGItBORHOOD'S CONCERNS ABOUT MELROSE EA (CONT0
large aspects of the discussion. For instance, the neighborhood is characterized, among other
things, by badly maintained sidewalks and border su'ips. It would not have been difficult to
discover that the City has ruled that sidewalks need not be raplaced until after Melmse Avenue
has been rebuilt Nor would it have been hard to deuandne that the state of the border strips is
the direct result of consu'uction ~ucks backing out over them over a long period of time, a factor
outside the control of householders. A conscientious description must take small but telling
features of this kind into account
5.2.7 Urban Design/Visual Resources. On p. 55, the EA describes the south side of Melrose
Avenue, from University Heights to Byington Road, as being relatively uniform visually, from
end to end. On p. 56 and 57, the claim is made that the residential area varies greatly in character
along the length of the Avenue. The contradiction needs clarification.
Suggested mitigation measures on p. 61 include "the acquisition and conversion to other
uses of the most severely impacted properties...." How can such an action be
considered a possible mitigation measure? This is pan of the problem. Conversion of
residential properties to other uses has happened throughout the neighborhood, particularly at the
eastern end, adding to the de, stabilizing pressures on the area.
5.3.1 Air Quality. The "pardculates" generated by increased traffic were not modeled nor are
current levels measured. Should this be done? The consultants did no actual monitoring of
CO levels along Melrose but instead based their conclusions on modeling. Is this adequate?
5.3.2 Noise. "The smallest change most people can notice for a time varying noise source such
as traffic is 3 dBA" (,p. 86), which, at a level of 70 riB, is equivalent to a doubling of noise
80). How can a ll.9.1lhliilg of noise represent the smallest noticeable change in
noise levels? In Table 6 (p. 84), Site 2 has the biggest variance in the monitored noise level
(65 dBA) and the modeled noise level (59.8 dBA). Is this expected? Might it be due to
the presence of the stone surfaced UIHC building across the street from Site 2
reflecting sound? Is it possible that the projected increase in noise from the
project ("a maximum of 2 dBA") will be greater than expected due to the close
proximity to the street of the large building surfaces of the new hospital
building and parking ramp?
5.3.8 Wildlife. The problem of considering the environmental impact only on the "Melrose
Avenue corridor" is evident in this section. A very rich wildlife habitat, just behind (to the south
of) the corridor would likely be affected. That area, especially between Metrose Court and the
law school. has a rich variety of animals (deer, raccoon, owls, etc.). Why was this not
considered?
5.3.9 Cultural Resources. We believe that there are other properties within the neighborhood
that deserve consideration as being historically significant Three such houses include those
located at 4, 5 and 6 Melrose Circle. Number 5 Melrose Circle. currently the residence of Dr.
and Mrs. Edward Mason, was built in 1924 by a Cedar Rapids architect, Mark Anthony
(Anthony's only other house in Iowa City is located in the historic Woodlawn Dis~ict). Numbor
6 Metrose Circle, owned by Larry Peterson, was built in 1927 and was included among the
timlists in a Better Homes & Gardens contest many years ago. There are likely other
historically signtricot houses in our neighborhood and in the University Heights neighborhood.
These structures need to be considered in the EA.
5.4 Transportation. The percentages used in Figure 32 (p. 108) appear to be incorrect. These
should be corrected.
Why do Alternatives 2 and 7 have such narrow lanes and narrow
sidewalks (p. 124, paragraphs 3 and 4). The 2-lane alternative should have fewer
limitations on lane and sidewalk width and more space for bicycle lanes.
Page 10of 10
L
[
1
I
P, 01
WALLACE L TA~,QR
^~AI'LAW
(31 I) M~-2428
Nay 8, Z995
Mr. Hovard Preston
BRW Inc.
% Jeff Davidson
Department of Planning and Community Development
410 Eusf. Washinpton Street
Iowa Ctty, Iowa 52240
RE~ ' MelTsee Avenue Street and Bridge Construction
Environmental Assessment
Dear Mr. Preston=
The FOllowing are my comments on behalf of the Molesee
Avenue Neighborhood Association regarding the environmental
assessment which your firm has prepared for the proposed
Mclro~e Avenue Street and Brid~e Reconstruction Project.
The purpose of an envLronmental assessment, of COUrse, is
not to choose an alternative or even ~o present sufficient
information upon which a decision can be made, but rather to
determine whether the projec~ would impose a significant
tmpac~ ~hich would justify the preparation Of the
environmonte1 impact statement. We belisv~ that there are
several inadequacieu in the environmental assessment and
that even on the basis o[ the assessment as presented, a
significan~ impact ~s shown, at least ~tth some of the
alternatives, and an environmental impact statement should
be prepared.
The primary problem with the envir0~mental assessment {s
that it defines too nerrovly the con~=xt of the proposed
action. The action must be analyzed in several contexts,
such as tile society as a whole, the affected region, the
affected interests, and the locality. In addition, the
environmental assessment must analyze indirect effects.
Combinin9 these ~wo req~iremenLs in relation to this
particular project means that the entire Maltese Avenue
n~i~hborhood must be considered. The environmental
assessment only look~ at the houses right on Meltsee ~venue.
The NEPA ReSulationS define indirect effects as those which
are caused by the proposed project and are Zater In timu or
farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably fore-
seeable. Certainly, as discussed in dotnil in the comments
oF the Mclrose Avenue Neighborhood Association, the effects
on persons in the neighborhood other than those who live
right on ~elrose Avenue ~ould be significantly affected.
P. 81
The regulation goes on to aa~ that indirect effects may
include growth inducing effects and other effects related to
induced changes in the pattern of land use, population
denslty or growth rate. We believe that the environmental
assessment did not adequately address these factors,
especially with respect to the Meltass Avenue neighborhood
not directly on ~elrose Avenue.
One o~ the mos~ important e£fucts of this Project which the
environmental assessment does not adequately address is the
historic character of the neighborhood. The only historic
Properties mentioned in the environmental assessment were
three (3) houses on Meltass Avenue which have already been
placed on the National Register o~ Historic Places. A
l~te~ from Dr. t,owe11 Soaks of the Sta~o Historic
Preservation Office dated March 21, 1995, expressed
offico's concern with the limited scope with this review.
Dr. Soike noted that there w~re six (6) properties which
SHP0 felt may ~ell be eligible for inclusion in the National
Begaster. Dr. Soi~o recommended more ~nformatiun or
research on ~hose properties. In audition, Dr. Soi~e noted
ttlenty-five (25) other properties which may not be e3~gible,
but Lht. finding was made with some reluctance because no
explanation was given fdr a finding that those Pro~ertios
were not eligible for placement in the Nationa~ Register.
Properties ~hicb are eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places do not need to be directly
damaged in order to require the findin9 that the project
will pose un adverse e[Zect on the historic properties.
Therefore, more analysis should have teen underCaken to
de~ermine Lhe Effect Of the project on the entire historic
character of the MeltasS AvenUe neighborhood.
I hope these oommea~s are helpful
toward the decision to prepare
urnfoment for ~his prOJect.
consideration.
to you and' will lead
an environmen~al impact
Thank you for yo~r
WLT/dis
John & ~lchaelanne ~idnsss
629 Meltsee Avenue
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
Wallace L. Taylor
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
September 21, 1995
To:
From:
Near Southside Design Plan Advisory Committee
Jeff Davidson, Assistant Director, Planning & Community Development
Re:
Near Southside Design Plan Preferred Scenario Report
Enclosed you will find a copy of the Preferred Scenario Report for the Committee's discussion
at its meeting on Monday, September 25, 1995, from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. at ~e Iowa
City Publlo Ubrary, Room A. Please note the location of the rneet/hg.
If you need any further information ~;r if you cannot attend the meeting and want to forward
comments, please contact David Schoon (356-5236) or me (356-5252).
CC:
City Staff
City Council
Gould Evans Associates
f:.L.de~n~,ml~'mitte
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 21, 1995
To: City Council
From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner
Re: Planning & Zoning Commission Work Program
- Pending List
The Planning & Zoning Commission and staff have updated the attached pending list for the next
two fiscal years. The pending list includes ordinance amendments and studies proposed by the
Council, Commission or staff.
If you have any questions or comments about the pending list and the priority assigned by the
Commission and staff, please contact me at 356-5240.
IX~3-4RM
PENDING LIST
Fiscal Year 1996
Zoning Chapter Issues
3.
4.
5.
Requiring bicycle parking areas in multi-family residential and commercial zones. (2-3
months)
Clarification of the number of roomers allowed in the RNC-12 zone. (1 month)
Provisions to allow elderly daycare. (3 months)
Including reference to parking impact fee within Zoning Chapter, (1 month)
Review existing tree regulations, especially for parking lots that exceed the minimum
required parking spaces. (1-2 months)
Review definition of awnings, (1 month)
Review regulations of changeable copy, portable signs and projecting signs. (1 month)
Con6ider restricting the extent of residential uses allowed in the C1-1 zone. (1 month)
Land Use and Zoning Studies
South River Corridor Area (Gilbert Street south of Highway 6). (9 months)
RS-12 zoning in the vicinity of Foster Road. (3 months)
Other
Review development ordinances for barriers to affordable housing. (6 months)
Review of subdivision regulations, including design provisions. (12 months)
Fiscal Year 1997
Zoning Chapter Issues
2.
3.
4.
5.
Develop an entranceway overlay zone. {2-4 months)
Develop a bonus system to promote better design, more pedestrian use and reduction
of parking in the CN-1 zone. (4 months)
Amend the RM-12 zone to allow limited commercial uses by special exception. (2
months)
Provisions to assure neighborhood compatibility within the site plan review ordinance.
(6 months)
Review of performance standards for industrial zones. (6 months)
Land Use and Zoning Studies
Near Northside commercial areas. (6-9 months)
Vicinity of County Administration Building. {6 months)
ppdadmm~pendp&z.96
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO..
FROM:
September 15, 1995
Steve Atkins
Chuck Schmadeke
Water Main Extension - Foster Road
The City's Water Distribution crew is currently installing a 12' water main along the west
end of Taft Speedway, then along No Name Street, and Foster Road to serve developed
properties. A portion of this pipeline will also be used to fill the water storage reservoir on
Bloomington Street when the old water plant is no longer in service.
This work is being undertaken at this time to provide City water to the single family
residences and apartments along Foster Road (26 dwelling units) that have experienced water
shortages this summer from the common well that serves the properties.
Wkh the installation of this water main, sufficiem water for fire protection, which was
lacking in the past, will also be available.
IOWA CITY WATER DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 22, 1995
To: Chuck Schrnadeke
From: Ed Moreno
Re: Mobile Home Park (MHP) Private Water Metering
We have recently received some inquiries from owners of MHP's regarding the
installation of individual water meters for their tenants. The particular MHP's include
Baculis MHP, Thatchef MHP, and Iowa City MHP.
The owners of the MHP's have requested individual metering in order to minimize their
liability and cost of increasing water and wastewater rates by passing it on to their
tenants.
Our response has been to offer one of two options:
The water system may continue to be owned, maintained, and operated by the
MHP. The system has a master meter located ahead of all individual mobile
home unit connections, and individual private meters may be installed and read
by the MHP owner for reallocation of the water and wastewater billing received
from the City via the master meter. The metering system (including billing)
would be owned, maintained, and operated by the MHP.
We have offered our staff to assist with questions regarding billing, installation, and
maintaining the metering system. We have sent our rate schedule and have discussed
proper meter installation with the MHP ownera.
The water system may be upgraded to City standards with respect to water main
construction, service line design, and tim flow design and then dedicated to the
City for ownership, maintenance, and operation. Following the upgrade the City
would provide individual unit water meteri and include the MHPs in the City's
meter reading and billing system.
Again, we have met or discussed this with the MHP owners.
The response from Baculis, Thatcher, and Iowa City MHP has been to proceed with
installation of individual unit meters on their own. The primary reasons given have been
a reluctance to incur the costs of upgrading their water system(s) to meet our current
standards.
Page 2 - MHP Private Metering
We have received several calls from the MHP's tenants stating concerns about the
proposed private metering/billing. We have sent information to them regarding the
current rate structure and have informed them of our policies regarding this issue.
September 20, 1995
Sylvan and Agnes Addink
1802 East Court
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
\
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
RE:
Fairview Avenue/High Street Storm Sewer Project
Longfellow Area Sanitary and Storm Sewer Project
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Addink:
I want to thank you for your cooperation in granting the City easements. Your prompt
response saved the City money and enabled project construction this year.
As you may or may not be aware, it was necessary to condemn one piece of property for the
purpose of constructing the Fairview Avenue/High Street storm sewer. The condemnation
process requires the City to offer monetary compensation for the property being condemned
for the easement. Now, because all of the easements were not.obtained at no cost, and out
of fairness to everyone involved, the City feels obligated to offer you compensation for the
easements. If you desire, the City is prepared to compensate you $393.00 for the temporary
easement and $393.00 for the permanent easement for a total amount of $786.00 for both
easements. The amount is based on the condemnation settlement. If you would like to be
compensated for the previously granted easements, please notify me in writing within
fourteen (14) days.
If you have any questions about this offer, please call me at 319/356-5139.
Sincerely,
Mindy Greer
Project Coordinator
CC;
~tephen Atkins, City Manager
Chuck Schmadeke, Director of Pu/~c ~s
Rick Fosse, City Engineer ·
Offers[it
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
To: i i '.
From: Douglas W. Bo . tor, pection Services
.
Re: Update on t ' ' ' using Code Enforcement
The membership of the Committee has been determined and is listed below. All members have
direct experience with services provided by the Housing Inspection Division, most own rental
property, and each member represents a user group/organization that receives services from
Inspection Services.
Board of Appeals
Housing & Community Development Commission
Friends of Historic Preservation/Apartment
Owner and Manager
Apartment Owner/Manager
Property Manager
Apartment Owners Association
Landlord Tenant Association
John Roffman
Jim Hards
Steve Van Der Woude
Phil Launspach
Nancy Skay (Lincoln Real Estate)
Ed Barker
Areselm Edghono
The Committee's first meeting is scheduled for October 6 to be held weekly until Thanksgiving.
This is an ambitious schedule, but the committee's charge can be accomplished. The charge of
the committee is to:
1. assess the quality of Housing Code inspection services;
2. recommend programs and/or strategies designed to meet the needs and solve the
problems of citizens/customers; and
3. recommend a process for obtaining continuous consumer feedback.
Assuming the schedule is met, the Council can expect a final report sometime in December 1995.
IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Quick Facts
September 21. 1995
Established on April '15,
Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) is the
Iowa City City Council
ICHA is third-largest in the state of Iowa
Administers three federal programs:
1. Section 8 Vouchers
2. Section 8 Certificates
3. Public Housing
· Service Area
1. Section 8 (Certificates and Vouchers)
- Johnson, Iowa. Washington Counties
2. Public Housing
- Iowa City
Public Housing established in Iowa City in
198'i
Total number of families served
1. Section 8
- Vouchers 350
- Certificates 527
- Total 677
Public Housing 92
Under construction 33
Total 125
3. Total number of families served: 1,002
Average waltlng period for housing
assistance (both public housing and
Section 8)
6 months
Funds received annually for housing
assistance
Section 8
Vouchers $1,464,708
Certificates $2,346,535
Total $3,811,243
Public housing (none)
- Public housing is supported by rental
income.
Program turnover rate (clients leaving the
program)
25% - highest in the state
PILOT (Payment in Lieu Of Taxes)
$19,730/year
Program growth (since '1990)
1. Section 8 - 22% (719 to 877 families)
2. Public housing - 100% (62 to 125 units)
Client demographics
1. Odgin of applicants
- 71% live in the ICHA jurisdiction
-26% live in iowa
- 3% live outside Iowa
2. Family characteristics - 57% family
- 38% disabled
- 4% eldedy
- 1% handicapped
Other characteristics
- 83% female head of household
- 80% white
- 99% receive an income (work,
SSDI/SSI, ADC, retirement,
unemployment benefits,
child support, etc)
Employment with no assistance
1. Section 8 - 28%
2. Public housing - 50%
Family income
1. Section 8 average - income $6,700
2. Public housing average income -
$11,876
WHO WE ASSIST
CRITERIA 'h FAMILY COMPOSITION
(meet one of the following)
A family with a legal blood relationship (children, parents. siblings, etc.) or a family by
other operation of law (appointed legal guardian of a dependent, adopted or foster
children, married, etc.)
Unwed parents residing with chi!dren born to their union
A single woman who is pre.qnant.
A single person who is 62 years of age or older.
A single person with a disability or handicap that can be verified by a medical doctor,
psychiatrist or Social Security.
CRITERIA 2: FAMILY INCOME
Gross family income according to family size must be under the following amounts, which are
based on 50% of the median income for this area:
Family Size Monthly Yeady
I $1371 $16,450
2 1567 18.880
3 1763 21,250
4 1958 23,500
5 2117 25,400
6 2271 27,250
7 2429 29,150
8 2583 31,000
CRITERIA 3: FEDERAL PREFERENCE
Current or near future housing situation must be in at least one of the following areas:
Displaced from a residence and being forced to move by no fault of resident.
Living in substandard housing which is dilapidated or unsafe, or are homeless.
Pay more than half of gross income for rent and utilities.
Total Assistance = $36,927,432
$347.109
$819,115
1975 1980 1985
$1,159,690
$2,412,971
$3,811,243
RECEIVING ASSISTANCE
(Section 8 & Public Housing)
Iowa City
. Coralville 188
:Johnson Co. 41
Other IA Co's 19
Out of State 16
. .'; :' . .-.- . .' ,.
· .';}' :..- -.. ....
Johnson CoX Other Iowa Counties
; ~ of Familie~ % of Pro~.
663 72%
20%
4%
2%
2%
CLIENT TYPE
(All P rog ram s )
Disabled
38.0%
Handicapped
1.0%
Elderly
4.0%
Families
57.0%
revised 9/25/95
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
September 25, 1995
To:
Mayor and City Council
From: City Clerk
Re:
Council Work Session, September 11, 1995 - 7:25 p.m. in the Council Chambers
Mayor Pro tem Novick presiding. Council present: Novick, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Pigott,
Throgmorton. Absent: Horowitz. City staff present: Atkins, Helling, Woito, Karr, Burnside, Miklo,
Brachtel, Dollman, Fowler. Tapes: 95-105, Side 2; 95-107, All.
GENERAL DISCUSSION:
Reel 95-105, Side 2
Assistant City Attorney Burnside was available for Council comments regarding CityVote and
parliamentary procedure.
REVIEW ZONING MATFERS:
Reel 95-105, Side 2
Senior Planner Miklo presented the following Planning and Zoning items for discussion:
Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter bV changing the use
regulations on an approximate 2.02 acre tract of land located east of Lakeside Drive and
south of Highway 6 from ID-RS, Interim Development Single-Family Residential, to RM-12,
Low Density, Multi-Family Residential. (Whisperinq Meadows/REZ95-0012)
Chuck Mullen, attorney for the property owner, and MMS consultant Larry Schnittjer
responded to Council and presented information.
Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by changin.q the use
requlations of an approximate 29 acre tract of land located west of Mormon Trek
Boulevard and south of Rohret Road from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential,
to OPDH-8, Planned Development Housing QverlaV. (Mormon Trek Villaae/REZ95-0009)
Ordinance amending the Zoninfi Chapter bV changin.q the use regulations of an approxi-
mate 29 acre tract of land located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard and south of Rohret
Road from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Develop-
ment Housing Overlay. (Mormon Trek Village/REZ95-0009) (First consideration)
Council requested Miklo prepare traffic count figures for Council's formal meeting on
Tuesday. Gary Watts, property developer, responded to Council questions. Watts stated
he will present a landscaping plan to Council by Tuesday. Throgmorton requested that
Miklo ask Watts about his willingness to include a provision for affordable housing in the
conditional zoning agreement.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDU
Date:
September 20, 1995
To:
Mayor and City Council
From: Clerk
Re:
Session, September 1'
- 7:25 p.m. in the Council Chambers
Mayor Horowitz
Absent: Horowitz.
Dollman, Fowler. Ta
Council present:
staff present: Atkins
95-105, Side 2;
Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Pigott, Throgmorton.
Woito, Karr, Burnside, Miklo, Brachtel,
All.
GENERAL DISCUSSION:
Reel 95-105, Side 2
Assistant City Attorney
parliamentary procedure.
for Council comments regarding CityVote and
REVIEW ZONING MATTERS:
Reel 95-105, Side 2
Senior Planner Miklo I:
ring Planning and Zoning items for discussion:
Public hearin~ on
requlations on an
south of Hi.qhwaV
Low Density, M
ordinance lendinq the Zoninq Chapter bV chanqinq the use
~roximate 2.02 ! tract of land located east of Lakeside Drive and
ID-RS, ~ment Sinqle-FamilV Residential, to RM-12,
Residential. Meadows/REZ95-0012)
Chuck Mulle
responded
for the property
presented
and MMS consultant Larry Schnittjer
Public
on an ordinance amendinq
of an approximate 29 acre tract
south of Rohret Road from RS-5
Planned Development Housinc
Zonin.q Chapter bV chanqinq the use
land located west of Mormon Trek
Density Sin.qle-Familv Residential
Mormon Trek Villaqe/REZ95-0009
m~
amending the Zonin~ Chapter bv chanqing 9 use regulations of an approxF
29 acre tract of land located west of Mormon devard and south Of Rohret
from RS-5, Low Density Sinqle-FamilV Residential, OPDH-8, Planned Develop-
Housinq Overlay. (Mormon Trek First consideration)
requested Miklo prepare traffic count figures for
Tuesday. Gary Watts, property developer, responded
he will present a landscaping plan to Council by Tuesday.
Miklo ask Watts about his willingness to include a provisic
conditional zoning agreement.
~cil's formal meeting on
Jestions. Watts stated
'~orton requested that
housing in the
2
Ordinance amendine the Zonine Chapter bV chan~qin.q the use re~qulations of a 3.05 acre
tract located north of American Le.clion Road and west of Arlineton Drive from CountV RS,
Suburban Residential, to RS-5, Low Density Sinqle-Familv Residential. (Watts/REZ94-
0013) (Second consideration)
Amendment to City Code Title 14, Chapter 6, Article V, "Minor Modification Procedures,"
to allow parkin~q for persons with disabilities in the front yard of a commercial zone even
when located adjacent to a residential zone. (First consideration)
Ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by changing the use re~qulations of an
approximate 250 acre property located north of 1-80 and west of N. Dubuque Street from
County A1, Rural, RS, Suburban Residential, and RS3, Suburban Residential, to P, Public.
(Water plant/RE. Z94-0018) (Pass and adopt)
Ordinance amendin~q Title 14, Chapter 4, "Land Control and Development," Article C,
"Historic Preservation Ref:lulations," and Chapter 6, "Zoninq," Article J, "Overlay Zones"
to allow the Citv to desi~qnate historic landmarks and conservation districts. (Pass and
adopt)
Ordinance amendinq the Zoninq Ordinance bV amendin~q the use re~qulations of an
approximate 103.86 acres, which includes the Highway 21 8/HighwaV 1 interchancle and
property located in the southwest qquadrant of the interchanqe from County RS, Suburban
Residential, to C1-1, Intensive Commercial. {Winestein/REZ95-0011) (Pass and adopt)
Resolution approvin.q the final plat of Dean Oakes Fifth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14-1ot
residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road.
(SUB95-0023)
In response to Kubby, Miklo stated staff had received no comments from the neighbor-
hood regarding traffic.
METERING OF LOADING ZONES IN CBD:
Reel 95-107, Side 1
Parking and Transit Director Fowler and Traffic Engineer Brachtel presented information. Council
made no changes to the present procedure, but did ask the parking policies outlined in Resolution
No. 72-132 be updated.
Fowler responded to Kubby's inquiry about agenda item 2e(3) regarding the purchase of a
portable hoist/lift for transit garage.
Fowler responded to Novick's questions about reporting of broken parking meters. Novick
requested that information regarding the procedure be better displayed on a parking ticket.
Staff Action: Action will be taken when new ttckets are ordered. (Fowler)
COUNCIL AGENDNTIME:
Reel 95-107, Side 1
(Agenda Item #2e.(1) - Disposition plan for 1926/1946 Broadway Street.) Kubby
requested that this item be deleted from the consent calendar for a separate vote.
3
(Agenda Item #18 - Intent to convey a portion of the alley east of Gilbert Court.) Kubby
expressed concerns about selling property for 30¢ per square foot. Atkins noted that the
Mildere should be contacted if a change is made.
(Agenda Item #6 - Public hearing for construction of the Iowa River Corridor Trail.) In
response to Kubby, Atkins stated he will check on cost sharing with the University of Iowa.
(Agenda Item #6 - Public headng on construction of the Iowa River Corridor Trail,) In
response to Novick, Atkins stated that he will check on utilizing the tunnel equipment for
other projects.
Kubby inquired about scheduling the ;,4elrose Avenue project for further discussion. City
Manager Atkins stated additional information was forthcoming, and suggested scheduling
discussion of Council's next step at the work session on September 25, 1995.
Throgmorton noted that he will make a CityVote motion after public discussion during
Council's formal Council meeting on Tuesday. City Council and staff discussed the
CityVote issue. City Attorney Woito was directed to officially invite County Auditor Slockett
and County Attorney White to the meeting.
(Agenda Item ~2f.(1 ) - Letter from Pamela Bleckwenn regarding door-to-door soliciting.)
Novick noticed Council received correspondence regarding door-to-door sales in Iowa
City. City Attorney Woito and City Clerk Kerr responded to Council questions. In
response to Council, Atkins stated that he will respond to Blackwarm.
Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
PAUL SIMON
· AUgUSt 30, 1995
COmmITTEES:
LABOR AND HUMAN RESOURCES
dUOICI~RY
Hon. Susan M. Horowitz
City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 B. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Mayor HOrOwitz:
Thank you for letting me know of your support for the United
Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women.
You may know that the United States played a major role in
drafting this international human rights treaty. It guarantees
women such fundamental rights as the right to vote, to enter
freely into marriage, and the right to have equal access to
educati-on, employment, and health care.
You will be interested to know that I was joined by 67 of my
Senate colleagues in sending a letter to the President, which
asks that he take the necessary steps to ratify this treaty.
am optimistic that President Clinton will give every
consideration to this request.
I am pleased to know of our shared concern for women's rights.
Thanks again for contacting me.
My best wishes.
/~2C°rdial~7'
U. S. Senator
PS/mbp
130 S OEARBORN 3 WEST OL9 CAPITOL PLAZA
KLUCZV~SKI 8,OG. 38TN FLOOR SJaT8 t
TOM HARKiN
WASHING] ON DC 205 '~0-1502
September 5, 1995
The Honorable Susan Horowitz
Mayor
City of Iowa City
1129 Kirkwood Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mayor Horowitz:
Thank you for contacting me. I am always glad to hear
from you.
I support the U.N. Convention for the Elimination of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) as well as the upcoming U.N.
Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China. This
convention contains measures that would enable women to achieve
equal access to political, social, economic and civil rights.
The Articles contained in the convention are basic rights and
their observation would dramatically improve the lives of women
around the world.
The Clinton Administration has clarified some of CEDAW's
artiCleS to ensure that the application of its key provisions are
in compliance with current law. This has been done through a
series of reservations, understandings and declarations to the
Convention. CEDAW has been submitted to the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations where it awaits further action.
I believe the Senate should demonstrate its firm commitment
to human rights by approving this Convention. In order to
maintain its leadership in the field of human rights and to
participate in the development of human rights law and practice,
something which is evolving under CEDAW and other conventions, I
believe that the United States must ratify the treaty and send a
delegation to assure that US priorities are underscored.
Again, thanks for sharing your views with me. Please don't
hesitate to let me know how you feel on any issue that concerns
you.
Sincerely,
Tom Harkin
United States Senator
TH/rmg
THE REGISTER'S EDITORIALS
Ou le looking, in
" :ehousm pro, m
· U xf i. houldbeabolished..
One of the larger but fittie n~f~l tneq-
uities in the nation's social welfare
efforts was built into housing assis-
tance in the 1960s, and has persisted with
- little attention.
· The climate of change in Washington
· could bring a correction. 'Recently, in Des
'Moines, a top federal housing official
agreedthatitshouid. th lu
The housing program benefits e cky
few, while the unlucky m~iority, in Iowa
· and elsewhere, tries to tough it out.
Cash assistanco and food stamps avail-
able to the poor with children in Des
: Moines ~ leave them well below the offi-
cial poverty level, which ff~ualiy means.
that decent housing is out of-reach. But a
few of them need pay no more than 30 per-
cent of their incomes for housing, with fed-
eral funds paytrig the rest -- and the 30
-percent is figured after certain dedu~oes
that may reduce their income to the point
that housing becomes almost a free fide.
The few are beneficiaries of the "Section
8" program, in which the Des Moines De-
partment of Housing Services acts as a
go-between for the tenant and landlord
and pays much of the "fair market value"
rent established by federal offdais. Some
1,600 Des Moines families benefit. Another
390 get federal vouchers to help pay their
rent in housing they find on the open
market, and 210 more rent "rehabilitated"
property, which the landlord agrees to fix
and maintain in return for guaranteed
rent- In the year ending June 30, the three
programs paid $7.7 million in federal
money to Des Moines landlords. faint
Meanwhile, there's a waiting list of -
.lies who.would like to share in.the pro-
anL NO new names have been accepted
don't want any more poor families to get'
their hopes up. When the list gets short
they 'accept applicants, then quit taking
names after the list grows to around 1,500.
· The program is patently unf~ to tho~
on the outside looking ~ And the solution
is simple: Abolish t~ and divide the same
money equally to all those whoqualify,
The housing program benefits
the lucky few, while the unlucky
majority, in Iowa and elsewhere,.
trieS to tough it out. The few, are
bene ciari sOf Section
either through vouchers' that-can be spent
only for housing or by direct cash grants.
- George Latimer, special assistant to
Henry Cisneros, U.S. secretary of Housing
and Urban Development, said in Des
Moine~ recently that he agrees the present
program is re'flair and should be scrapped.
His rru~or concern, however, is that suffi-
cient money be made available for distribu-
tion under a revised formul~ Adequate
housing for the poor continues to fall short
oftheneed, hesaid.
Scrapping the subsidy program would
mean that the market, not the federal gov-
enunent, would establish the rental prices.
But the fact that there is no shortage of
landlords willing to accept the "fair
market value" offered by the present Sec-
tion 8 program indicates that free market
competition should keep prices reasonable.
~oHoasing subsidies were'never intended '
benefit a select few. To do so is a misuse
of taxpayermoney.
Joint Eftart with Boulder County Bar and Am erican Planning Association
Growth Management Symposium Draws Burgeonlng Crowd
I',~. Colorado Governors - Roy Romer
,:d R~thard Lamm · lent wc:ghr to
.-~ho]c at the Ccntcr's annual sympo,num
organ.zed m collaborauon w:th the
Boulder County Bar Associatmn. held
March 3-
As Governor Romer commented.
others as a threat. makerig tt dh~cuh to set
pohcy at the statew~de level. Efforts to
propera' rights and ruddy:dual freedoms.
and vet most people recogmze that there
quaiirv of hfe ts related to keeping growth
w~thtn some manageable hmiu. Therefore,
tends to come at the local level. where
there ~s opportunt.t7 to bui'.d understand-
,ng or' the consequences of growth and to
medlods for managing ~t,
The addition of a third sponsor. the
Colorado Chapter of the American Phn-
nmg Assocmuon. swelled registrations to
over 150. creating a hvely dtscusslon of
,'.'hat techmques are avadable to state and
local govemmems, and what oblectmns
there may be to there use.
Colorado Gore,nor Roy Romer (left) thars with
CU Law Dean Gent R- N,chol.
Fo,mer Colorado Governor Rtchard Lamrn
Pursuing the Elusive Goal of "Sustainable
Development" Through International Efforts
Ante,1 ,'~fitrgrethe Halvorssen'
The global environment es deteriorating
in 2urge pate because human~.ty has
accumulated an enormous potential to
dest roy life on earth The depletion of the
stratosphenc ozone layer ~s a prime.
example ofth~s problem The ozone layer
shields us from harmful ultraviolet rays
that can cause shn cancer. blindness. and
destroy certain plankton. which are the
bas~s of the marine food chum. Some of
th:s deter~orauon occurred before we had
kno..~Eedge of the manner ~n which our
actlofts were affecting the envlro~ment
However. we ate now fully aware of the
fact that '.~e ate using natural resources
and the environment :n a '.'.ray that
threatens the sur~tval of future genera-
tlons-
Fottunateb'. humamty has begun to
mend ~ts ways and ~s launching .merna-
tmna! efforts leading to sustainable
development. Ncv, mternattona! restleo-
nuns are now promoting a shift toward a
sus',amable path. For mstance. an
unprecedented mternanonal cooperat:on
effort led to the adopooh of the Mumreal
Protocol m 1987. Th~s protocol regulates
chlorofluorocarbons {CFC'sJ. the man-
made chemical compounds that deplete
the ozone ',ayet. Thss aruc:e wdl dtscuss
some of the progress that has been made
m putsrang sustasnable development
through efforts at ~nternauonal coopera-
.on that budd on the model of the
Montreal Protocol.
The term susta.nable development first
became w,dely used m ',987 '..,'hen the
\Vorld Commlssmn on Envtronment and
Development (\",TCED) published as
report Our Common Future. [n rh. r
report ~t was defined as development that
fulfil'.s the social. economic. and environ-
mental needs of the present w~rhout
$eopardmng the needs of future genera-
nons. The World Comm,ss,on cal',ed for
ihe mtegrat,on of envsronmental conssd-
era:,ons :too all pohcy decis,on making
and planrang ,n order to ach:eve sustain-
able growth. The report was adopted by
Doc:ota~ Can&date at Columbia
L n:~ers,r'. %hooi ol La~.. Law degree from the
kn;.ers,n ofOslo. LLM Columb,a Unxvecsny:
Former Sen,or gxccunvc Oflker. Royal
Hai,orssen taught European Economic
Corntourney Law at the Um~ees~ dColorado
5¢ilooi of Law,n the Spnngof 1992 She was a
19'}2-93 Mos!ofthematerlalusedtoprepare
the UN General Assembly that same fall,
thereby demonstrating that the world
com. munity had finally acknowledged
envtronmental and developmental issues
as interdependent. It had taken fifi:een
years from the time environmental issues
were first introduced into the interna-
tional arena at the United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment,
hdd in Stockholm in 1972, until
development was accepted as being
inseparable from the environment.
Sustainable development does not
mean returning to pro-industrial condi-
tions. It urges economic gro~h, with key
roles being played by governments,
business, and industry in alleviating
poverty and improving living standards,
while preventing global environmental
degradation. Progress toward sustainable
development has been hindered partly
due to a conceptual misunderstanding.
Economic growth and environmental
protection arc not contradictory goals.
Industrialized and developing countries
alike arc beginning to recognize the fact
that unhampcred industrial development,
at the expense of the environment erodes
the potential for long-ti:rm development.
Anti-pollution technology has made
many industries more profitable by
enabling them to become more resource
efficient. Many industries have reached
the conclusion that concern for thc
environment leads to financial savings
and increased compctitiveness. Clean-up
costs surpass the cost of pollution
prevention. Business and industry that
traditionally regarded the natural
resources as unlimited sources of energy
and raw materials arc now beginning to
internalize the costs of pollution control
and waste disposal as costs of doing
business rather than shifting them to
society at large or to future generations.
Governments are beginning to use
national accounts in order to factor in the
loss of natural resources. In addition,
subsidies on environmentally degrading
activities are being removed. Finally,
environmental concerns are more
commonly being taken into consideration
in evaluation of proposed grants of
development funds as well as on domestic
issues.
The Urnted Nations Conference on
Environment and Development
(UNCED), held in Rio m June of 1992.
was a breakthrough in the effort to
integrate env,ronment and development
reached between devclop,ng courtmrs
and industrialized countries. Developing
countries agreed to change their social
and economic policies in an effort to
move toward sustainable economic
development. Industrialized countries
also agreed to address consumption and
production patterns in order co pursue a
more sustainable path., in addition to
halping developing countries with
technical and financial assistance. In
Capadty 21
concentrates on
domestic
environmental
problem in the
developing countries
by~nandng
programs that
benefit mainly the
local'environment.
contrast to the Stockholm conference,
which concentrated on centralizing
management and technical expertise, the
Rio conference focused on individuals,
their communities and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs).
Five new legal instruments were
adopted at Rio, including the Framework
Convention on Climate Change (31
I.L.M.849) and the Convention on
Biological Diversity (31 I.L.M.822). The
principles contained in the non-binding
Rio Declaration (UN Doc. A/
CONF. 151/5 (1992)} set out the rights
and responsibilities of Stares in the area of
sustainable development. A set of 15
Principles for a Global Consensus on the
Management, Conservation and Sustain-
able Development of All Types of Forests
(UN Doc. MCONF. 151/26 (1992)) was
also adopted by the Rio Conference. And
Agenda 21 (UN Doc. MCONF. 15 1 /4
(1992)), also a non-bmding instrument.
was launched as a comprehensi,,e action
program representing the blueprint on
how to get onto the path of sustainable
development.
Agenda 21 ~s a 40 chapter document
coveting virtually every conceivable
aspect of human activity affecting the
environment. Areas analyzed range from
toxic chemicals to poverty issues to the
role of trade unions in promoting
sustainable development. It provides a
framework for global and national actton
for sustainable economic development
and protection of the environment.
In conjunction with the preparauons
for UNCED, the tIN Development
Program (UNDP) launched a program
called Capacity 21. The UNDP's major
function is to assist developing countries
to accelerate their economic and social
development by providing technical
assistance related to their national
development plans and priorities.
Capacity 21 was created to help develop-
ing countries build the capacity'to
formulate and implement national
programs ofsustaifiable development.
Unlike the Global Environmental
Facility, described oelow, which concen-
trates on projects with global environ-
mental benefits, Capacity 21 concentrates
on domestic environmental problems m
the developing countries by financing
pro.grams that benefit mainly the local
gnvlronment.
Since the Rio Conference, the UN
Commission on Sustainable Develop-
ment (CSD), conceived by Agenda 21,
was established in December of 1992
with responsibility for implementing
Agenda 21. Both the Framework
Convention on Climate Change and the
Convention on Biological Diversity have
since been ratified, in 1993 and 1994
respectively. Furthermore, conferences
have been held on high seas fisherits and
the sustainable development of small
island states. Lastly, the Conventio. n to
Combat Desertiflcation, which was called
for ar the Rio Conference, was concluded
in July 1994. This international legal
agreement to curb the degradanon of dr}.'
lands was signed in October and
enter into force once ratified by 50 states.
The CSD is responsible for reviewmg
how well national governments and
international law and institutions are
protecting global natural resources and
helping developing countries become full
partners in these agreements The CSD
functions as a subsid;~ry body of the UN
Economic and Social Counol
(ECOSOC). It is made up of high-level
representatives of 53 nanons elected from
UN member states. Each member ha~ a
three-year term and membership rotates
among governments and diff:rcnt
geographical regions. The Secretariat of
the Commission is located in New York at
the new Department of Policy Coordina-
tion and Sustainable Development. In
addition, a High level Advisory Board of
21 experts was established, which is to
advise the CSD.
The functions of the CSD ate to
monitor the implementation of Agenda 21
through-out the UN system, review
national reports on how states are imple-
menting Agenda 21, review progress in the
implementation of the commitments set
forth in Agenda 21 by donor countries,
and review and analyze information
· provided by NGOs.
The Commission held ~u second
One of the major
problems in the
j llow-up to the Rio
conference is that
states are not
fulfilling their
financial
commitments made
in Rio.
I I
session on May 14-27, 1994. The multi-
year thematic program, instituted at the
1993 session and based on the grouping
of the chapters in Agenda 21, established
the scope of the discussions. Some of the
topics were ctoss-sectoral issues, such as
finance and transfer of technology,
decision making processes, and changing
consumption and production patterns.
Other topics were sectoral issues that
included freshwater, health, and toxic
chemicals.
One of the major problems in the
follow-up to the Rio conference is that
states ate not fulfilling their financial
commitments made in Rio. For Agenda
21 to be ~mplememed $625 billion are
needed, the bulk of this being covered by
developing counmes through the
redeployment of their own resources.
Another poruon of the total amount. $55
billion, will be covered through existing
Official Development Assistance {ODA}.
Without additional finances very little
action will take place as far as developing
countries are concerned. Delegates to the
session stated that this was due partly to
the recession still affecting many industri-
alized countries. Instead of increasing
their official development assistance
(ODA), some donors have actually cut
back on their contributions.
CSD is definitdy a forum in which to
keep the "spirit" of Rio alive. But its
monitoring of implementation of Agenda
21 on the national level leaves a lot to be
desired. Reports speci.fving what each
country has done to implement Agenda
21 were few, mainly because the guide-
lines were too complicated. Suggestions
for using indicators for sustainable
development have not yet been agreed
upon.
In addition to funding from ODA, the
implementation of Agenda 21 is also to be
funded by the Global Environmental
Facility (GEF). The GEF is the main
financial mechanism for sustainable
development projects. It is mn jointly by
the World Bank. the UN Environment
Program {UNEP}, and the UN Develop-
ment Program (UNDP). The GEF
sponsors programs for helping developing
countries participate in solving global
environmental problems. The Facility has
four mandated funding areas: preventing
climate change, loss of biodiversity,
depletion of the ozone layer, and protect-
ing international waters.
The GEF was established in 1990 as a
pilot program for three years to invest m
projects that promote and adopt environ-
mentally sound technologies which wil!
produce global benefits m the four areas
' mentioned above. In March 1994 the
GEF was re. structured and refunded with
$2 billion. Originally, the GEF was
administered by the World Bank: now ~t
will have a more independent status. The
Facility now has an Assembly, a governing
Council, and a Secretariat. In addinon. a
Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel
will provide advice. The World Bank has
been invited to be the trustee of the GEF
Trust Fund. Participation in the GEF is
now open to any state member of the
United Nations or any ofiu specialized
agencies, enabling universal membership.
The Assembly will consist of the
representatives of all the states participat-
ing in the GEF. It will meet ever)' three
years to review the general policies of the
Facility, its operatmns, and ~ts member-
ship. The Council will consist of 32
members; 16 from the developing
countries, 14 from the developed
countries, and two from central and
eastern Europe and the former Soviet
Union. The Council's functions are,
among others, to: revi~. the operation of
the Facility, ensure that GEF programs
are monitored and evaluated on a regular
basis, and review and approve the
.administrative budget of the GEF. The
Secretariat, headed by a oh|el executive
officer appointed by the Council, reports
to the Assembly and the Council.
The GEF finances the incremental
costs of ensuring that a project benefits
the global environment. For instance. if a
developing country has a proleer which is
economically viable. say a fossil fuel
power plant, but requires supplementary
finances to bring about global benefits
(e.g., to switch the technology in order to
use natural gas. thereby lowering emis-
sions of carbon dioxide), then it would be
eligible for GEF funding. GEF also
finances innovative and demonstration
projects, which have a good investment
potential.
In conclusion, it is clear that humanity
has begun to head in the right direction,
toward sustainable development through
efforts in international cooperation.
Awareness of the interdependence of
environmental and developmental issues
has gready,increased in the last two
decades. However, there is still a great
deal of work to be done. The newly
established UN Commission on Sustain-
able Development needs to be strength-
ened in its role as a monitor of the global
environmental situation. In additmn,
developing and industrialized countries
alike, must fulfill their commitmenu
made at the Rio conference.
Glossary of Acronyms
CFCs: man-made chemical com-
pounds that deplete the ozone layer.
UNCED: United Nations Conference
on Environment, also commonly referred
to as Rio.
UNDP: UN Development Program
ECOSOC: UN Economic and Social
Council
CSD: UN Commission on Sustainable
Development
NGO: Non-Governmental Organiza-
tions
ODA: Official Development Assis-
tance
GEF: Global Environmental Fatdin'
To: ZO~ CZTY CLERK
Johnson Coun~j'
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Charles D. Duffy, Chairperson
Joe Bolkcom
Stephen P. Lacina
Don Sebx
Sally Stutsman
September 19, 1995
INFOR1VIAL MEETING
Agenda
1. Call to order 9:00
2. Review of the Mformal and- formal minutes of September 14th and the
canvass of votes for School Election.
3. Business ~'om the Director of Depariment of Public Health,
a) Discussion re: amended Day Care Regulations 0'he major change is
the removal of preschools and before and after school programs from the
rules. These types of operations do not include activities that are most
likely to transmit disease, i.e. no food preparation, etc.).
b) Other
4. Business from Jerry Searle from McClure Engineering Company re:
airport development concept/discussion.
5. Business from the County Auditor.
a) Discussion re:
of FY 1996.
b) Other
resolution appropriating amounts for the second quarter
913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 5224~1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000
FAX: (319) 3566086
To: I0~ CI~ CI.[RK
Fr~: ,jo hogarty 9-18-95 8:SZa: p. 3 or 3
Agenda 9d9-95
Page 2
6. Business from the Board of Superv/sors.
a) Discussion re:
b) Reports
other
drug and alcohol testing.
7. Discussion from the public.
8. Recess.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 22, 1995
To:
From:
Re:
The Honorable Mayor Susan M. Horowitz and Members of the City Council
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney ~
Installation of Pdvate Water Meters in Baculis Mobile Home Park and Iowa City Mobile
Home Park; Licensed Plumbers Required
Attached please find a memo to me from MaW McChdsty, Legal Assistant, regarding installation
of private water meters in Baculis Mobile Home Park. Upon receipt of this inquiry, I contacted
Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector, as to whether a licensed plumber was required to install
private water meters -- as is being now done in both Baculis Mobile Home Park, as well as Iowa
City Mobile Home Park.
At a meeting on Thursday, September 21, 1995, with City Manager Steve Atkins, Public Works
Director Charles Schmadeke, Mary McChristy and Jude Moss from the Water Division, Steve and
I agreed that if the City Code requires that a licensed plumber be required to install private water
meters, as a health and safety measure, then the City should enforce the requirement.
Housing Inspection Services has now sent notices of violation to both the Baculis Mobile Home
Park and the Iowa City Mobile Home Park, notifying them that licensed plumbers are required to
install private water meters. Parenthetically, the City Council should know that the City was
quite willing to install City-owned meters in these mobile home parks, but this would first have
required a City main be installed- which was rejected by the mobile home parks as two
expensive.
Finally, I wanted to pass this information on to you, since questions may be coming to you on
whether the City can regulate or prevent re-sale of Oity water. Under the current City Code,
the City has no authority to control re-sale of water to the mobile home park tenants -- this
is entirely a matter between the park owner and the lot/mobile home tenter.
Please call if you have questions.
In~watermV.mmo
cc: City Nanager
City Clerk
Assistant City Hansget
Public Works Director
Senior Building Inspector
City Attorney Legal Assistant
Water Division - Service Division
First Assistant City Attorney
City of Iowa CBty
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
Fro m:
Re:
September 22, 1995
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney
Mary McChristy, Legal Assistant ~dl~
Installation of Private Water Meters in Baculis Mobile Home Park
I received another call from a tenant of Baculis Park who wished to remain anonymous. The
caller was extremely irate and insisted on knowing why the City felt David Baculis was "above
the law." He stated he had witnessed David Baculis installing water meters on the Baculis
Park mobile homes and that he knew Baculis had purchased the water meters from the City.
The caller also stated that he had talked with Plumbing Inspector Bernie Osvald previously and
Bernie had told the caller that what Baculis was doing "was illegal" under the City Code
because the work could only be done by a licensed plumber.
I explained to the caller what our information was to date and that the meters installed by
Baculis were not purchased through the City (verified through Water Department and Housing
& Inspections). I offered to obtain what information I could from Housing & Inspections and
return a call to him, but the caller still insisted that his identity remain anonymous, stating
"You'll give my name to Baculis and then he'll get me." 1 then told the caller to contact me
on Thursday.
On Thursday morning, I spoke with Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector, who explained to
me that it is against City Code for anyone but a licensed plumber to install water meters, but
that their department has not previously enforced this provision on mobile home parks. You
and I then discussed this information and you called a meeting with Chuck Schmadeke, Ron
Boose, Steve Atkins, Jude Moss and myself to look into the matter further and possibly
decide on a course of action.
We will inform the anonymous caller of the above meeting when, or if, he calls and offer to
provide further information resulting from that meeting if he wishes.
/ram
cc:
Anne Burnside, First Assistant City Attorney
Steve Atkins, City Manager
Chuck Schmadeke, Public Works Director
Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector
Jude Moss, Water Division
To: IOMA CITY
From: jo hogarh 9-Z5-95 8:34am p. Z or z
Johnsun Count)
Charles D. Duffy, Chairperson
Joe Bolkcom
Stophon P. Lacina
Don Sghr
Sally Slutsman
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
September 26, 1995
INFORMAL MEETING
Agenda
C'. cfl
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
2. Review of the informal minutes of September 19th recessed to September
21st and the formal minutes of September 21st.
3. Business ~om Bob Saunders, Zoning Chairperson re:
report/discussion.
North Corridor
4. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Discussion re:
b) Discussion re:
agencies.
c) Discussion re:
Managed Care.
initial budget memo to department heads and to outside
Equipment Maintenance Agreement for the phone
system and county administration building.
d) Discussion re: drug and alcohol testing.
e) Discussion re: Decategorization Grant. An additional $28,696.00 has
been allocated for the purpose of funding a Social Worker II position to
provide Community Outreach Services for family resource centers.
f) Reports
g) Other
5. Discussion from the public.
6. Recess.
913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST P.O BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 3564000
FAX: (319) 3564086
September 25, 1995
City Council Members:
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
As we preepare to discuss housing issues this Saturday morning, I would like to share with you
some of my thoughts and concerns. None of us would disagree, I am sure. that the City should
be involved through our policies and related City programs in providing housing to those who
otherwise would not have adequate accommodations. The questions I have regard the extent
to which the City becomes involved both directly and indirectly, the long range well-being of
those folks whom we choose to help. and the possible long-range liability to the City if and
when federal funds are diminished.
Is it more economical for the City to own residential property or to just administer vouchers for
privately owned dwellings? Ownership requires maintenance, repairs and taxes to be paid.
What would happen if the City, in a planned fashion, divested itself of residential property and
used the proceeds to set up an interest beadng fund, the proceeds from which could be used
for low income subsidies and down payment assistance?
What if we used monies for the construction of subsidized housing, such as has been proposed
by Mr. Bums, as incentives for pdvate contractore on a much smaller scale? Several
contractors have indicated to me that subsidies of the magnitude proposed by Mr. Burns would
be incentive enough to get them into the market. Would this be an effective way of spreading
low income housing within the community?
Just as we have intended to spread out low and very low cost housing within the community,
shouldn't we also insist on mixed income housing? It seems to me that even small
concentrations of low and very low income housing is jut not a very good idea for the low
income folks or for the rest of the neighborhood.
With the probability of decreasing funding from the federal govemment, wouldn't it be prudent
for us to try to set up public/private partnerships between the City and property owners to
facilitate the accommodations of low income renters? It would seem to me that we all would
be better off -- the renters, the property owners and the City.
Ernie Lehman
cc: City Manager
Doug Boothroy
Kadn Franklin
410 EAST WASHINOTON STEEET · IOWA CITY. IOWA 12240.1826 · (3191 316-1000 e FAX 1319) ~1!16.~009 ~
qq,
.. . ' · . ...... , '..',. :':,! - ::C'....//;..;'7' :t-": ':4., ',-'?- '-
September 26, 1995
CITY OF IOWA CITY
BARRIERS TO RENTAL AND OWNER OCCUPIED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
0Phase 1 Working Outline)
INTRODUCTION
FACTORS AFFECTING HOUSING COSTS
A. Presence of the University of Iowa
B. Propen~y tax issues
C. Availability of vacant loB, dilapidated housing, etc.
Building and Housing Codes, Fees, and Charges
1. Use of Uniform Building Codes by contractors
2. Increase of water and sewer fees
E. Cost of land
F. Ownership paRems of available land
Financial Issues
1. Local - eg. land, dollars
2. Subsidies needed/available
3. Competitive nature of funds
4. Involvement of local lenders
FACTORS AffECTING LOCATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Comprehensive Plan
1. Suitably zoned vacant land
2. Infrestmcture needs
Zoning\Subdivision Regulations
1. Infi'estructure standards
2. Effect of development ordinances - eg. Open Space Ordinance
Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY)
I. Aesthetics, crime, lraffic, noise
2. Misconceptions - eg. declining property values
Types of projects being built
1. Mobile home park roles - age of home allowed, etc...
2. Homogeneous development (versus mixed densities)
3. Market desires - 3 bathroom, 3-car garages, etc...
ppdcdbg~lhsng3.doc
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 26, 1995
To: Steve Atkins, City Manager
From: Ron Boose. Senior Building Inspector
Re: Housing Starts for 1995
As reported in the Des Moines Register, housing starts are down compared to 1994 levels. There
are endless ways to analyze the numbers and I've attempted to select a few comparisons to more
clearly illustrate the true impact. The Register article uses figures from the Iowa Department of
Economic Development, which are calculated by summing the value of all residential construction,
single and multi-family, as reported on building permits. I find it more meaningful to look at units
constructed, which quickly illustrates that the big dropoff for Iowa City has been in the multi-family
market.
Single Family Houses
Multi-Family Units
Jan-Aug 1994 Jan-Aug 1995 %Change
157 120 -24%
189 49 -74%
Furthermore, the average value of single"family dwellings constructed has decreased from $128,546
for 1994 to $121,959 for 1995.
Since the past three years have been extremely busy, I averaged the number of units constructed
for the last ten years for comparison. To do so I had to project totals for 1995.
Single-Family
Houses
10-year Average Projected 1995 % Change
( 1985-1994) Totals
143 140 -2%
Multi-Family Units
176 131 -26%
Total number of building permits processed is also down, but not as dramatically. As is usually the
case, when new construction slows down, remodeling and additions tend to pick up. Total permits
include residential new construction, remodeling, and repairs as well as non-residential new
construction, remodeling, and repairs.
Jan-Aug 1994 Jan-Aug 1995 % change
Total Building 641 571 -11%
Permits
However, because many of these permits are for remodeling projects, and the amount of new non-
residential construction is also down, the total value of building permits issued is down substantially.
Total Value of All
Construction
Jan-Aug 1994 Jan-Aug 1995 % change
$49,962,829 $27,634,621 -45%
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
September 25, 1995
City Council
City Manager
FY95 Vendor List
The 1995 fiscal year list of all those businesses, organizations,
etc., that did business with the City.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY95 LOCAL VENDOR LIST
LVENDOR NAME
1 1995 BUSINESS FAIR
2 1ST. AVE. WASH & DRY
3 A & C MECHANICAL SERVICE
4 A. W. INSURANCE GROUP, INC.
5 IAAA MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC
6 AAA TRAVEL AGENCY
7 ACTION SEWER & DRAIN SERVICES
8 ADVANCED ELECTRICAL SERVICES
9 ADVERTISER
10 AERO RENTAL
11 AERO SAW
12 AIR COOLED ENGINE SERVICES
13 ALL-IOWA LOCK
14 AMERICAN LANDSCAPE &
15 AMERICAN RED CROSS
16 ANNIE GRAHAM & CO,
17 APEX SYSTEMS INC
18 AQUADRILL
19 AXIAL INDUSTRIES
20 BACULIS MOBILE HOME SALES
21 BANKERS ADVERTISING CO.
22 BARKER'S INC
23 ~BARRY CLEAN BLINDS
24 ' BARTELS CONSTRUCTION
25 BEA DAY PLUMBERS
28 BEN FRANl(LIN
27 !BERGMAN, TOM
28 BEST BUY
29 'BEST RENT ALL
30 'BIG TEN RENTALS INC
31 BILL'S RENTALS
32 BLUE MOON SATELLITES
33 BOCKENSTEDT EXCAVATING
34 BOYD CROSBY CONSTRUCTION
35 iBRANDT HEATING &
36 ;BREESE PLUMBING & HEATING, INC
37 !BRIGGS INC
38 .BRISI(EY CABINET CO.
39 ;BURl(EN MARl(ETING GROUP
40 .BUSHNELL'S TURTLE
41 :CAPITOL FORD NEW HOLLAND INC
42 'CARL CHADEl( TRUCl(ING SERVICE
4_3 CAT__ERING S__HOPPE
48 'CLEAN CUT INC
47 'COLE CONSTRUCTION INC
48 COLE DEVELOPMENT
49 COLE EXCAVATING INC
50 COLONIAL LANES
51 'COMPUTER SOLUTIONS, INC.
52 .COMPUTERTOTS
53 'CONSUMERS COOPERATIVE SOCIETY
54 CONTRACTOR'S TOOL & SUPPLY CO.
55 .COTTAGE
56 ~CREATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
57 CROWN ELECTRIC
58 CRYSTAL CLEAR
59 CULLIGAN/UNITED STATES WATER
60 D & D CARPET CARE
61 DALLY lOWAN
62 ~DALTON TREE SERVICE
TOTAL
1,140.00
1,829.O9
956.49
2,756.38
3,641.83
17,705.19
2,661.50
8,757.58
4,522.97
12,770.55
1.930.00
9,394.61
750.00
6,410.00
1,268.00
2,286.28
'1,629.80
2,180.00
1,663.54
2,700.00
7,767.93
651,133.32
1,247.50
13,899.74
9,887.81
615.32
3,245.00
5,704.17
7,593.82
1,398.00
2,345.50
1,660.00
8,831 .OO
2,796.66
2,062.55
5,257.72
42,288.05
898.37
840.00
864.83
35,956.32
1,772.66
2,931 .OO
28,841.32
708.40
3,395.00
12,442.00
3,937.50
1,545.00
638.85
3,439.40
889.50
278,231.16
36,687.67
1,506.85
11,568.27
4,310.48
1,691.52
TI6.50
1,108.40
4,541 .O6
4,040.00
P~ge I
VEND295.XLS/2EXPL
8~5ffi5
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY95 LOCAL VENDOR LiST
JVENDOR NAME
63 DAVE LONG PROTECTIVE PRODUCTS
64 DAVIS BUILDING PARTNERS
65 ~DAVIS, ROBERT
66 ~DJ BRASS
67 DON'S LOCK & KEY - DON SHARP
68 DOWNES & ASSOCIATES ]NC
69 DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION
70 DRESSER DECORATING DEN
71 DWAYNE'S RADIATOR SERVICE
72 'EAST IOWA COMMERCIAL REAL
73 ECOLOTREE
74 ECONOFOODS
75 ECONOGAS SERVICE, INC.
76 ELECTRIC MOTORS OF IOWA CITY
77 ELECTRO-MECH INC
78 ELECTRONICS CAVE
79 ,EWERS MENS STORE
80 !FAMILY HEALTH CENTRE
81 'FIRST NATIONAL BANK
82 ;FLEETWAY STORES, INC.
83 FOUNTAIN'S TRANSMISSION
84 FOX. KAREN
85 FRANTZ CONST. CO.
86 FREEMAN LOCK & ALARM, INC.
87 FROHWEIN OFFICE SUPPLY
88 GASKILL SIGNS INC
89 GENERAL PEST CONTROL CO.
90 ~GEO. KONDORA PLUMBING
91 GILPIN PAINT & GLASS, INC.
92 GLASS SERVICES-ROBERT JINDRICH
93 GOODFELLOW PRINTING, INC.
94 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
95 GRAPHIC PRINTING
96 ,GREATER IOWA CITY HOUSING
97 ~GREGORY B NEUZIL & SONS [NC
98 iGRIFFIN CONSTRUCTION
99 iGRIFFIS, STACY
100 H.J. LTD. HEATING AND AIR
1 O1 !HAMAN WELDING
102 ~ HARDWARE SPECIALIST, LTD.
103 ~HARGRAVE MCELENEY, INC.
104 ;HARRY'S CUSTOM TROPHIES, LTD.
105 HARTWIG MOTORS, INC.
106 HAWKEYE COMMUNICATION
107 HAWKEYE FOOD SYSTEMS, INC.
108 HAWKEYE LUMBER CO., INC.
109 HAWKEYE MEDICAL SUPPLY, INC.
110 HAWKEYE PEST CONTROL, INC.
111 HAWKEYE WELD & REPAIR
112 ,HAYEK, HAYEK & BROWN
113 HEARTLAND CUSTOM WOODWORKING
114 ,HENRY LOU S, NC
115 iHILLTOP SUNOCO CAR WASH
116 HOLIDAY INN
117 HOLIDAY WRECKER & CRANE SERV.
118 HOLLAND C JOSEPH
119 HOSPERS & BROTHER PRINTERS
120 HY-VEE FOOD STORE #1
121 HY-VEE FOOD STORE #2
122 HY-VEE FOOD STORE #3
123 IAS INC
124 INDEPENDENT INSURANCE AGENTS
TOTAL
1,569.32
27,150.00
7,298.38
624.38
7,780.32
4,255.00
2,000.00
71,063.50
3,962.04
11,043.55
3,960.00
852.80
4,389.64
4,531.60
1,146.06
2,297.93
922.35
633.00
1,675.00
6,768.44
3,823.44
540.00
16.694.00
7,934.91
149,206.84
2,100.00
1,000.00
11,143.85
1,786.91
3,757.49
3,805.65
50,144.17
3,020.20
8,000.00
1,330.00
1,296.58
8, 100. O0
8,631.75
878.16
1,541.50
78,696.74
5,046.82
11,153.26
7,220.90
1,575.20
14,750.25
2,950.95
2,737.10
10,101.48
76, 183.33
685.00
2,980.56
1,858.50
600.28
4.664.50
4.108. O0
2,593.87
2,723.83
7,454.32
884.83
5,936.38
450,182.97
VEND295.XLS/2EXPL
8125/95
Page 2
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY95 LOCAL VENDOR LIST
IVENDOR NAME
125 hNSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND
126 } IOWA AMATEUR SOFTBALL ASSOC.
127 IOWA ATHLETIC DEPT.
128 IOWA BOOK & SUPPLY CO.
129 IOWA CITY AREA CHAMBER OF
130 IOWA CITY AREA DEVELOPMENT
131 IOWA CITY BABE RUTH
132 ~ IOWA CITY BOYS BASEBALL
133 IOWA CITY COACH CO INC
134 IOWA CITY CONVENTION BUREAU
135 IOWA CITY GIRLS SOFTBALL
136' IOWA CITY GUTTER
137 IOWA CITY LANDSCAPING
138 IOWA CITY PLUMBING
139 IOWA CITY PRESS-CITIZEN
140 IOWA CITY READY MIX, INC.
141 IOWA CITY REPROGRAPHICS
142 IOWA CITY TELEPHONE CO., INC.
143 IOWA CITY TIRE & SERVICE, INC.
144 IOWA ILLINOIS GAS & ELECTRIC
145 IOWA INSTITUTE OF HYDRAULIC
146 IOWA PAPER & CHEMICAL
147 IOWA PARK & RECREATION ASSN
148 IOWA STATE BANK & TRUST
149 J R PAINTING & DECORATING, INC
150 JACKS DISCOUNT, INC.
151 JIM'S REFUSE SERVICE CORP
152 JOHN ROFFMAN CONSTRUCTION
153 JOHN'S CRANE SERVICE, INC.
154 JOHNSON COUNTY ABSTRACT
155 JOHNSON COUNTY AGRICULTURE
156 JOHNSON COUNTY AMBULANCE
157 JOHNSON COUNTY CLERK OF COURT
158 JOHNSON COUNTY DEPT OF PUBLIC
159 JOHNSON COUNTY HISTORICAL
160 JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER
161 JOHNSON COUNTY RED CROSS
162 JOHNSON COUNTY SEATS
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
JOHNSON COUNTY SHERIFF
JOHNSON COUNTY TREASURER
JOHNSON COUNTY TREASURER - SD
;JOYCE'S GREENHOUSE
,K MART 84315
KCJJ RADIO/RIVER'CITY RADIO
!KING'S AUTO REPAIR
I KINGIRON CONSTRUCTION
IKINKAOE, JULIANNE F.
'KNEBEL WINDOWS
~NDMARK SURV~ING AND
LAREW CO., INC.
~WRENCE BROS. AUTOMOTIVE
LEFF, JOYCE
~LENOCH & CILEK TRUE VALUE
LENOCH REPAIR SHOP
LEON LYVERS TREE SURGERY
LIFE SKILLS [NC
LINDER TIRE SERVICE
LL PELLING
Page 3
TOTAL
17,250.00
2.934.00
2,305.00
11,170.27
2,916.00
62,560.00
1,1 O0.00
1,1 O0.00
7,180.84
114,158.45
1,100.00
1,801.00
15,272.54
1,039.31
38,550.37
93,152.49
2,760.07
16,542.55
2.106.78
1,294,093.92
4,660.00
11,272.15
2,842.95
1,254,006.71
613.00
1,564.86
20,816.26
52,780.00
710.00
780.00
3,500.00
2,458.14
828.74
1,035.00
2,300.00
'F' 7,737.20
4,200.00
468,420.00
893.13
15,206.67
1,454.00
600.00
~ 4,183.27
,, 1,414.44
2,554.51
918.58
3.123.00
18,284.16
950.00
3,837.39
775.00
54,301.60
10,905.00
5,585.00
547.72
590.00
8,872.82
1,775.82
4,500.00
18,235.00
35,138.81
163,000.00
VEND295.XLS/2EXPL
8~25~95
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
~06
207
208
209
210
211
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY95 LOCAL VENDOR LIST
IVENDOR NAME
LOREN'S SIGNS/LOREN TEGGATZ
LYNCH BROS PAINTING/
M R S APPRAISALS LC
MARV'S GLASS
MARY JO GRIFFIN CSR RPR
MARY O. COLDREN HOME
MAXWELL CONSTRUCTION CO.
MCCABE EQUIPMENT, INC.
MCCOMAS-LAC[NA CONST. CO.
MEDICAL ASSOCIATES
MENARDS
MERCY HOSPITAL
METRO PAVERS, INC.
METRO PLUMBING & HEAT[NG
MID-EASTERN COUNCIL ON
MILLER BROS MONUMENTS INC
MILLER ELECTRIC INC
MILLER, LINDA
MMS CONSULTANTS, INC.
MOORE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
MULFORD PLUMBING & HEATING
MULLER PLUMBING & HEATING
N & N SANITATION
NAGLE LUMBER CO.
NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS OF
212 NEUMANN MONSON
213 NNW, INC.
214 NOEL'S TREE SERVICE
215 OLD CAPITOL CAB CO.
216 OLD CAPITOL SCREEN PRINTERS
217 OTOLOGIC MEDICAL SERVICES,P.C.
218 PAUL'S
219 PAYLESS CASHWAYS, INC.
220 PECK, DEBBIE
221 PIP
222 PiP PRINTING
223 PLANT CONNECTION
224 PLEASANT VALLEY NURSERY, INC.
225 PLUMBERS SUPPLY CO.
226 PROGRESSIVE PHYSICAL THERAPY
227 PROGRESSIVE REHABILITATION
228 PYRAMID SERVICES. INC.
229 'QUALITY CARE - NATURE CARE CO
230 ',QUALITY ENGRAVED SIGNS
233 ;RAINBOW INTERNATIONAL CARPET
234 ~RANDY'S FINE HOME CARPETS
238 i ROEERTS CONSTRUCTION
239 ROE HEATING & REFRIGERATION
240 [ROFFMAN, JOHN
241 RON MASON FRAMING &
242 S & G MATERIALS
243 SCHOTT CONSTRUCTION
244 SECURITY ABSTRACT CO.
245 SELZER-WERDERITSCH CONST. CO.
246 SERVPRO - RICKEY N WEETER
247 SHAMROCK CONST. CO.
248 SHAY ELECTRIC
TOTAL
2,450.00
18,320.47
1,375.00
5,559.90
1,054.90
17,109.27
83,893.58
35,839.40
13,157.00
12,362.70
8,209.03
44,087.35
587,555.58
793.38
30,059.20
600.00
2,702.92
838.81
115,817.46
76,632.00
3,315.00
8,534.04
613.07
14,360.00
72,362.00
1,100.00
33,107.50
9,080.50
23,319.40
2,873.37
2,331.00
5,462.88
21,105.17
1,046.80
5,969.77
5,053.89
2,613.20
5,946.06
27,247.80
1,915.00
2,379.00
5,063.69
10,713.24
2,281.45
107,505.02
1.490.00
1,110.00
26,378.86
803-29
847.46
34,832.58
62,432.12
2,255.81
600.00
1,072.29
932,498.95
15,483.61
3,711.00
12,130.95
1,122.71
10,561.28
35,082.52
Page 4
VEND295.XLS/2EXPL
8/25/95
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY95 LOCAL VENDOR LIST
IVENDOR NAME
252 .SINGER, DEB PAVA
253 ~SIOUX PHOTO
254 SLAGER APPLIANCES
255 SMALL, BRYAN
256 SOLON HEATING & AIR
257 STBNDLER ORTHOPEDIC CLINIC
258 STEVE'S TYPEWRITER CO.
259 STIERS, INC.
260 STOCKMAN'S LAWN CARE
261 STREB CONST. CO., INC.
262 ~TECHNIGRAPHiCS. INC.
I
263 TEGGATZ, LOREN
264 TEGLER, WAYNE M.D.
265 THERMOGAS CO OF IOWA CITY
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
TIME TRACKERS
TMC OF IOWA CITY LTD
TOM'S CARPETS & VINYL
TOMLINSON-CANNON
TOWNCREST INTERNAL MEDICINE
;TOWNCREST X-RAY DEPARTMENT
~TROESTER, STEVEN
ITRS ROOFING, LTD.
ECONOMY ADV CO
U OF IA
U OF IA.
U OF IA. BUSINESS OFFICE
U OF IA. CREDIT UNION
U OF IA. HOSPITALS AND CLINICS
U OF IA. HYGIENIC LABORATORY
U OF IA. MEMORIAL UNION
U OF IA. PHYSICAL PLANT
U OF IA. PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
U OF IA. ~ECREATIONAL SERVICES
U STORE ALL
U. S. POST OFFICE- ACCT 155
U. S. POST OFFICE - ACCT 163
U. S. POST OFFICE - ACCT 44
U. S. POST OFFICE - ACCT 775
U. S. POSTAL SERVICE
UNIVERSITY CAMERA
UNTRAUER'S DRAFTING SERVICE
VAL-PAK OF EASTERN IOWA
iVAN WINKLE*JACOB ENGINEERING
iVITOSH STANDARD
iWAGEHOFT HOME & LAND CO AND
iWAGNER PONTIAC-JEEP, INC.
'WAL MART STORE 01-1721
WATERMARK DESIGN STUDIO
WEBB CONSTRUCT[~'N
WEST MUSIC CO.
WESTLINK PAGING
WINEBRENNER FORD, INC.
WOLF CONST., INC.
YOUTH HOMES, INC.
YUCUIS. BECKA
ZEPHYR COPIES, INC.
!GRAND TOTAL
TOTAL
435,587.44
122,589.66
912.96
1,062.10
963.74
7,761.94
926.26
3,134.11
18,521.00
1,215.32
1,280.89
4,002.50
473,575.24
20,751.22
789.67
527,25
792.22
1,095.00
2,921.85
588.90
5,910.08
7,260.43
1,079.00
14,770.OO
2,345.87
49,697.20
2,011.O8
7,860.99
2,617.48
3,900.00
3,088.40
20,136.00
1,121.67
5,328.17
877.85
2,342.65
766.00
25,602.64
9,475.00
67,075.00
2.290.00
1.400,42
1,961.42
1,221.40
1,191.08
7,518.45
1,139.13
19,176.30
1,330.10
4,122.50
1.193.00
34,682.00
7.230.55
1,230.10
98,527.18
192.852.75
32,520.00
5,632.15
2,337.72
10,651,331.57
VEND295.XLS/2EXPL
8~25~95
Page 5