Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-06-02 CorrespondenceJune 2, 2015 Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission 913 S. Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Rezoning 3200 Newport Road NE Dear Members of the Commission: Sam CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org The Iowa City City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission have reviewed the request submitted to Johnson County to rezone 28.04 acres of property at 3022 Newport Road NE from Agricultural -A to Residential (R) and (R3). The Fringe Area Agreement provides for review of County zoning cases for property within two miles of Iowa City. The subject property is located in Fringe Area A, the North Corridor Fringe Area, but is outside of Iowa City's growth area and not in an area where annexation to the city is planned. Page 2 of the Fringe Area Agreement states that rezonings in this area will be considered on the basis of the Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies. Johnson County Planning Staff has confirmed that this requested rezoning conforms with the Johnson County Land Use Plan, which identifies this property as appropriate for residential development. The majority of the property is not suitable for crops. At its May 21 meeting, the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission found the proposal is consistent with the Fringe Area Agreement and recommended approval of the rezoning. The City Council concurs with the Commission and recommends that the requested rezoning be approved. Thank you for your consideration of our comments on this application. Sincerely, Allcz-� Matthew J. Hayek Mayor May 27, 2015 Johnson County Planning 913 S. Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Rezoning 3200 Newport Dear Members of the Comm Zoning Commission n: NE � � 1 14444 —=�-=®� 3d U) -•%A& - ITY OF IOWA CITY 10 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www. icgov. org The Iowa City City Council nd the Planninga Zoning Commission have reviewed the request submitted to Johnson County to rezone 04 acres of property at 3022 Newport Road NE from Agricultural -A to Resi ential (R) and ). The Fringe Area Agreement p miles of Iowa City. The subje( Area, but is outside of Iowa Cil planned. Page 2 of the Frin considered on the basis of t Johnson County Planning Sta Johnson County Land Use ,O g n, development. The majority/bf the des for view of County zoning cases for property within two 'ope is located in Fringe Area A, the North Corridor Fringe gro h area and not in an area where annexation to the city is ea Agreement states that rezonings in this area will be Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies. as confirmed that this requested rezoning conforms with the �`which identifies this property as appropriate for residential operty is not suitable for crops. At its May 21 meeting -/'the Iowa CI y Planning and Zoning Commission found the proposal is consistent with the Fringe Area Ag eement and recommended approval of the rezoning. The City Council concurs with the Com fission and recommends that the requested rezoning be approved. Thank you f your consideration of ou comments on this application. S Matthew J. Hayek Mayor Date To: City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM May 21, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner RE: CZ15-00001 3022 Newport Road The applicants, Nicholas and M. Kay Colangelo, have requested a rezoning from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R) and County Residential (R3) for 28.04 acres of property located at 3022 Newport Road NE in Johnson County. They are additionally requesting preliminary and final plat approval for a 1 -lot and 1- outlout subdivision of the property. The Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Agreement allows the City to review county rezoning applications in the two-mile area of Johnson County surrounding Iowa City. Subdivisions of fewer than 3 lots are not subject to City review, so in this case only the rezoning request is to be reviewed by the City. If the outlot is further subdivided in the future, that subdivision will be subject to City approval. The property currently consists of an existing residential home and auxiliary buildings on the northwestern portion of the property. Lot 1 of the proposed subdivision will include approximately 3.37 acres surrounding the existing structures. The applicant has proposed that the remaining 24.67 acres be an outlot intended for future development. Much of the land is covered by woodland and will be subject to the County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The applicant has also requested that Lot 1 be rezoned from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R3) and that the outlot be rezoned from County Agriculture (A) to County Residential (R). The A zone is intended to preserve agricultural resources and protect agricultural land from encroachment of urban land uses. The R and R3 zones are appropriate for single family uses. The R zone has a minimum lot area requirement of 40,000 square feet, and the R3 zone has a minimum lot area requirement of 3 acres. The subject property is located in Fringe Area A, the North Corridor Fringe Area, but is outside of Iowa City's growth area and not in an area where annexation to the city is planned. Page 2 of the Fringe Area Agreement states that rezonings in this area will be considered on the basis of the Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies. Johnson County Planning Staff has confirmed that this requested rezoning conforms with the Johnson County Land Use Plan, which identifies this property as appropriate for residential development. The majority of the property is not suitable for crops. May 15, 2015 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City send a letter to the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission finding that the requested rezoning at 3022 Newport Road NE is consistent with the Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Agreement and the City recommends approval. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. County Application Approved by: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services T N N O p � N E T T W � a � 9 `- a n R a n m d . 4 " N IL 00 ` O • V ' 1 W Z '0 4 Y L J Q J 1\ n ' z 1. CD U O 3 O 0 1 U I � JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA APPLICATION TO REZONE TO BE FILED WITH THE OFFICE OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. APPLICATION NUMBER: oZ 5 a T DATE: 4/9/15 PARCEL ID#: 0726176001 TO: JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JOHNSON COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION THE UNDERSIGNED IS THE (OWNER, CONTRACT PURCHASER, CONTRACT OWNER, OPTION PURCHASER, AGENT) OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF Newport TOWNSHIP, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA AND REQUESTS THAT YOU CONSIDER THE RECLASSIFICATION OF SAID PROPERTY FROM A DISTRICT TO R & R3 DISTRICT LOCATED AT (LAYMAN'S DESCRIPTION) On the east side of Newport Road NE and immediately north of and adjacent to Toad Road NE AREA TO BE REZONED IS COMPOSED OF 28.04 ACRES AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: (PLEASE ATTACH LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SITE PLAN OF AREA TO BE REZONED). PROPOSED USE Residential NAME AND ADDRESSES OF OWNERS OF RECORD: Nicholas & M. Kay Colangelo, 3022 Newport Rd NE, Iowa City, IA 52240 THE APPLICATION SHALL CONTAIN: • A MAP OF LARGE ENOUGH SIZE TO SHOW THE PROPERTY FOR REZONING OUT -LINED IN RED, THE PROPERTY WITHIN 5 0 0 FEET OF THE PROPERTY FOR RE -ZONING OUTLINED IN BLUE. • A DIAGRAM DRAWN TO SCALE (NO SMALLER THAN ONE INCH EQUALS ONE HUNDRED FEET) SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED OR EXISTING ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY. • A LIST OF NAME AND ADDRESSES OF THOSE PERSONS OWNING PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY OF THE OWNER OF RECORD. • APPLICATIONS FEES (CHECK MADE PAYABLE TO THE JOHNSON COUNTY TREASURER): TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) FOR A REZONING SIGN, THE OTHER IN AN AMOUNT WHICH VARIES DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE APPLICATION. FEES MAY BE SUBMITTED IN ONE CHECK. • A SIGNED RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE STABILITY OF THE CURRENT ROAD SYSTEM. • A COVER LETTER EXPLAINING THE PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION. • DOES THIS REQUEST ADDRESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA? f'14p • AN ELECTRONIC OR DIGITIZED COPY OF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA TO BE REZONED AND A PDF COPY OF ENTIRE APPLICATION. THE APPLICANT IS TO OBTAIN AND POST THE REZONING SIGN ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN SEVEN (7 DAYS) FROM FILING OF THIS APPLICATION. Nicholas & M. Kay Colangelo APPLICANT (PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE ADDRESS: 3022 Newport Rd NE CITY/STATE: Iowa City, IA 52240 TELEPHONE: 319-337-7383 08/08/2012 AGENT (PLEASE PRINT) SIGNATURE f APR 0 9 2015 PLANNING U t 19 9 A" TA U OWN M MMS Consultants, Inc. ��—• Experts in Planningand Development5ince 1975 April 9, 2015 Mr. josh Busard Johnson County Planning & Zoning Office 913 S. Dubuque St, Suite 204 Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Letter of Intent for Old Mill Farmstead Second Subdivision Dear josh: 1917 S. Gilbert Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319.351.8282 mmsconsultants.net mms@mmsconsultants.net Kay and Nicholas Colangelo desire to rezone and split their property located at 3022 Newport Road NE, Iowa City, Iowa 52240 into one lot and one outlot. Lot 1 contains the existing home and the auxiliary buildings. Lot 1 will utilize the existing septic system and the existing well. Outlot A is intended for future development, but will be owned by the Colangelos at this point in time. A shared drive at the location of the existing drive is proposed at this time. Respectfully submitted, /7L ,� Glen D. Meisner, P.E. & P.L.S. T:\9686\9686-001-\9686001L1.docx %ON Goa ``FILED ►anuu,u,ir; a c APR '0 9 2015 _ 1 �LAHIVING. & ; DEpAR���`�',c � ar►tnuuiu►►►►. _ . • co, 1F .F f • co, 1F 06-02-15 3f(1) Marian Karr From: Jennifer Jordan Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:26 AM To: 'michaelmj0901 @gmail.com' Cc: Council; Ron Knoche; Chris O'Brien Subject: RE: Iowa City Recylcing Hi Mr. McIntyre, Thanks for your email. As you may know, the City offers curbside recycling to residents who live in single family homes up to four-plex apartments. That's about 15,000 households, but it leaves about 12,000 without recycling unless the apartment owner or manager chooses to offer recycling (and a small handful do). In an effort to get easier recycling access to more people, staff at the landfill and recycling have completed a pilot program for apartment recycling which resulted in a best management practices manual and a lot of outreach to apartment owners, managers and condominium associations. More information is available at www.icgov.org/recyclepilot. With these efforts, a few more landlords have hired private recycling services over the past couple of years but the vast majority has not. I updated City Council on these efforts and results in February and was given direction to work with the City Attorneys' Office to draft a code change that would require all landlords/managers and condo associations to provide recycling, just as they have been required to provide trash services for many years. We will have a couple of opportunities late this summer and early this fall for public input, then I'll take the draft code change back to Council for their consideration this fall. Your input would be very welcome again then—the public input opportunities will be listed on the community environmental events section at www.icgov.org/esrc. In the meantime, I encourage you to continue to use the drop-off recycling sites listed at www.icgov.org/recycle. We've tried to make them as easy to use as possible, but please let me know if you have suggestions. Thank you, Jen Jordan Recycling Coordinator City of Iowa City 319-887-6160 9ennifer-iordanCaD-iowa-city.org Upcoming environmental events: www.icaov.org/esrc From: michael mcintyre <michaelmj0901(a)gmail.com> Date: May 20, 2015 at 8:59:02 PM CDT To: <councilAiowa-city.org> Subject: Iowa City Recylcing Hello my name is Michael and I am a resident of Iowa City, IA. I am writing today to express my concern of the recycling program here in Iowa City. I think that everyone in the city should have access to easy recycling. It is way to hard for me to separate all of my recycling and then have to drive it to the recycling center. Don't you think it would be a good investment for the planet to have a pick up recycling program for every resident of Iowa City? Thank you for your time, Michael McIntyre J 3f(2) Jerry Moore 320 S. Dubuque St. Apt. 111 Iowa City, IA 52240 319-351-3742 &Y 19, 2016 Jean Playot & Counai4 40"t OideHiHf ,the 4idewaU On Tcit&49tO4 StAeet by otd Wei Ifank CtO4P- to the- A" Now Za..the VAw to do 4oixe of it,,, if you tate.. 0 Nowt,►. & 4em p t. the puppe&, ��''moo v+ r. -=icy .<r w M04e, 06-02-15 Marian Karr 3f(3) From: Mike Moran Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 11:59 AM To: New, Mary B (mary-new@uiowa.edu) Cc: Tom Markus; Council; Chad Dyson; Matthew Eckhardt Subject: FW: City Park Pool Passes Good Morning Mary, In 2013 we made the change in our pool pass structure that eliminated our traditional summer pass and extended the 30 day pass to be available for purchase the months of June, July, and August. This change was made for the following reasons: 1) We had received numerous complaints from patrons that they did not use the full 3 months' worth of swimming that the summer pass gave them, primarily due to vacations and school resuming in August. 2) The 30 -Day pass is effectively less costly for patrons then the summer swim pass. The family summer pass (2013) was $139 (or $46 month) compared to the 30 day family (2013) pass of $36 (or $108 for 3 months). 3) The 30 -day pass also allows the user the flexibility to start the pass on their schedule as opposed to the monthly format. For example many users do not start actively swimming at City Park Pool until after school ends so by using the 30 -day pass they would not have to pay for parts of the year they do not swim. 4) Patrons can also purchase multiple increments of 30 day passes. We do still offer the 30 -day family pass (5 persons per family). Users do not have to purchase individual 30 -day passes for each family member. We also allow pass holders to suspend their pass for given periods of time so if a vacation comes up during the middle of the month we can suspend the pass and start it again at the pass holders request without any lost time on the pass holders part. I hope this answers your questions and concerns. If you need any other information please feel free to contact us. Michael Moran CPRP Director, Parks and Recreation City of Iowa City 220 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319-356-5100 From: New, Mary B [mailto:mary-new@uiowa.edu] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:18 PM To: Mike Moran Cc: tom-markus@iowa.city.org; council@iowa.city.org Subject: City Park Pool Passes Mr. Moran, I have been purchasing City Park Pool passes since 1975. For the past 10 years, I have purchased a family SEASON pass for my daughter and her family as a birthday gift. Imagine my surprise when I went to the Rec Center today to purchase the family pass for this summer and was told that the SEASON PASS had been discontinued. Instead of being able to buy a family pass for 4 people that would be valid from Memorial Day to Labor Day, I now have to buy monthly passes for each member. That means that for a family of 4 who had been issued one pass each for the whole summer, now they would be issued 3 passes per month, per person, for a total of 12 passes versus 4. I can't begin to imagine the reasoning that went into the decision to no longer issue season passes. Since I don't know my daughter and her family's summer plans, I will not be buying monthly passes. If they are out of town for extended parts of any month, the passes would be a poor value. Whereas before, if they were gone for parts of the summer, it didn't make a difference what month it was. It's a shame that Parks & Rec has made the swim season that much harder to enjoy this year. I urge you to reconsider this policy for next year. Unless there is a significant cost savings for eliminating a seasonal pass, you are alienating many longtime loyal swim families. Mary New 852 Foster Rd 351-4714 Mary New (319) 351-4714 06- 3f(4) ii PUBLIC HEALTH Douglas Beardsley, MPH Director OLED Promoting Health. Preventing Harm. MAY 2 w 2015 City uerK May 22, 2015 Iowa City, Iowa To: Council Members, City of Iowa City From: Douglas Beardsley, Director, Johnson County Public Health Re: Regulation of Electronic Cigarettes Dear Council members, I am writing to follow up on action taken September 16, 2014 to prohibit the use of electronic cigarettes (e -cigarettes) on City property. I want to, again, thank you for your action to protect and promote health in Iowa City. We have received many positive comments in favor of your policy and other efforts to address e -cigarette use in Johnson County. During the discussions leading up to the City policy, several members of the City Council expressed interest in adopting an ordinance to prohibit e -cigarette use in public areas where tobacco cigarette use is prohibited by the Iowa Smoke Free Air Act. With recent developments and additional information and research, now would be a good time to have more discussions on the need for such an ordinance. The recent developments can be organized in to three categories. 1. The 2014 Iowa Youth Survey data has been released. A new question about e - cigarette use was added to the 2014 survey. The data shows that I I% of l la' graders in Iowa had used an e -cigarette within the last 30 days. This compares to 9% who had smoked a tobacco cigarette in the same time period. In Johnson County, 7% of 1 la' graders used an e -cigarette in the past 30 days while only 4% had smoked a tobacco cigarette. These data point to the rapid uptake of these devices by our youth primarily due to the tobacco industry's very aggressive and misleading marketing and the multitude of candy flavors. Nicotine is very addictive and particularly damaging to growing bodies and brains. lrcigarettes have not been demonstrated to be safe. Our previous presentation to the Council included information on the various known harmful substances found in e -cigarette vapor. 2. The University of Iowa, after lengthy and thorough review, has adopted a strengthened tobacco -free campus policy which includes a prohibition on e -cigarette use. The Iowa City Community School District has also added e -cigarettes to its tobacco -free campus policy. We applaud the University and ICCSD for these changes in policy and 855 S. DUBUQUE STREET, SUITE 217 ♦ IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ♦ PHONE: (319) 356-6040 ♦ FAX: (319) 356-6044 I: 028\EcigsU.ocal Policy WorkUC Council follow up.docx hope that their action will provide the example for municipalities to adopt ordinances to provide consistent protections for the public. 3. Research continues to accumulate casting further doubt on the safety of e - cigarettes (documenting the harmful effects on users and non-users exposed to the vapor) and also demonstrating that they are actually counter-productive as a cessation device. We are asking the City Council to further discuss an ordinance that would prohibit electronic cigarette use in those public areas where tobacco cigarette use is prohibited under State law. Such an ordinance would provide reasonable protections from exposure to e -cigarette by-products and would serve as reinforcement of efforts to create healthy environments in Iowa City. I, and other members of Clean Air For Everyone Johnson County (CAFE JC), would be happy to attend a work session to provide additional background. Thank you for your time in reading this memo and for all of your service to Iowa City. F FN)UL �_ MAY 2 2 HIS City Clet Iowa City, lovia 855 S. DUBUQUE STREET, SUITE 217 ♦ IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 ♦ PHONE: (319) 356-6040 ♦ FAX: (319) 356-6044 I:\028\Ecigs\Local Policy Work\IC Council follow up.docx ... 3f(5) Marian Karr From: Jim Cochran <jimboyvw@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 4:10 PM To: Council; Matt Hayek Subject: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] Attachments: IC Bicycle Code.pdf; Attorney General.pdf Dear Mayor Hayek and City Council Members, Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] (1978) needs to be updated to reflect Iowa City's "Bicycle Friendly Community" silver status, to represent a statement made by the Attorney General of Iowa, and to abide by Iowa Law 321.236 [10] It is also important to note that all of Iowa City's Code 9-8-1 promote safe use of streets and sidewalks and abide by State Law 321.236 [10] except for Code 9-8-1 [C]. From the support provided in the attached document it will be apparent that two abreast riding is safer than single -file riding and that code 9-8-1 [C] should be amended immediately not only to promote the safety of cyclist and motor vehicles, but to align with State Law and not be in violation of State Law.. I have also attached a letter submitted to the Attorney General Tom Miller requesting him to review this situation. Sincerely, Jim Cochran 3305 Arbor Drive Iowa City, IA Dear Mayor Hayek and City Council Members, Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] (1978) needs to be updated to reflect Iowa City's "Bicycle Friendly Community' silver status, to represent a statement made by the Attorney General of Iowa, and to abide by Iowa Law 321.236 [10] It is also important to note that all of Iowa City's Code 9-8-1 promote safe use of streets and sidewalks and abide by State Law 321.236 [10] except for Code 9-8-1 [C]. From the support provided below it will be apparent that two abreast riding is safer than single -file riding and that code 9-8-1 [C] should be amended immediately to promote the safety of cyclist and motor vehicles, and align with State Laws. Iowa City CODE 9-8-1 (Bicycles A. Observation of Traffic Rules: 1. All persons riding bicycles upon any street or sidewalk within the City shall obey all traffic ordinances and rules as to traffic lights and highway and street stop signs and shall be required to signal any change of direction or course of travel in the same manner as such signals are required under the law governing the use of motor vehicles and shall not turn to the right or left in traffic except at regular intersections of streets, alleys or driveways. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) 2. All persons riding bicycles upon any street, sidewalk or bike lane within the City shall observe all ordinances and rules as to traffic limits and shall make full and complete stops at official stop signs. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) 3. In addition, all persons riding bicycles shall be subject to the provisions of ordinances applicable to the driver of a motor vehicle, except as to those provisions which, by their very nature, can have no application. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) B. Method of Riding: 1. A bicycle rider shall not ride other than astride a permanent and regular bicycle seat. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) 2. No rider of a bicycle intended for one person shall carry a second person on any part of the bicycle, except infants may be carried when a suitable and proper seat is provided. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) 3. No person riding a bicycle shall carry any package, bundle or article which would prevent the rider from keeping both hands on the handlebars. (Promotes safety of motor vehicles and safety of cyclist) C. Riding On Roadways: Persons riding bicycles on the roadway shall ride single file, and every person riding a bicycle on the roadway shall ride as near to the right-hand side of the roadway as practicable, except for turning movements or where bike lanes so designate. (The perception is that this is safer for cyclist and easier for vehicles to pass, but however you will see from the data, diagrams, and statement from the attorney general of Iowa that this Is not the case) D. Careful Riding: No person shall ride or propel a bicycle upon any sidewalk or roadway except in a prudent and careful manner. (Promotes safety of pedestrians and safety of cyclist) E. Riding on Sidewalk: 1. No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk in the Central Downtown Business District. The Central Downtown Business District is the area bounded by and including Capitol Street to the west, Burlington Street to the south, Gilbert Street to the east, and Jefferson Street to the north. (Promotes safety of pedestrians and safety of cyclist) 2. Whenever any person is riding a bicycle upon a sidewalk, such person shall yield the right of way to any pedestrian and shall give audible signal before overtaking and passing such pedestrian. (Promotes safety of pedestrians and safety of cyclist) F. Riding On Bikeways: No person shall ride or operate a bicycle within a bicycle lane or path in any direction except that permitted by vehicular traffic traveling on the same side of the roadway, provided bicycles may proceed either way along a lane or path where arrows or signs designate two-way bicycle traffic. (Promotes safety of pedestrians and safety of cyclist) PROPOSED AMMENDMENT FOR CODE 9-8-1 [Cl Code 9-8-1 [C] does not promote the safety of motor vehicle operators or the safety of cyclists this code should be amended to the following: C. Riding On Roadways: Persons riding bicycles on the roadway shall ride no more than two abreast, and every person or pair or riders shall ride as near to the right-hand side of the roadway as practicable and safe, except for turning movements or where bike lanes so designate. RATIONAL Although no other justification other than Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] is in violation of State Law 321.236 [10] is need, it is important for all road way user to understand the rational for two abreast cycling. When cyclists ride single file near the right edge of a narrow lane, an overtaking motor vehicle driver may misjudge the remaining space in the cyclists' lane, and fail to change lanes. This is the most common cause of car -overtaking -bicycle collisions in daylight. But when cyclists make it clear from a distance that a same -lane pass is not possible, motorists slow down earlier and plan their lane change sooner, reducing the cyclists' risk of a sideswipe, "cut -in" crashes, and rear -end crashes. One way cyclists can be more visible to motor vehicles is with a two abreast riding formation. Experienced cyclists report fewer too -close passes and other near -collisions when riding two abreast than when riding single file near the edge of a narrow lane. Although two abreast cycling is popular, actual rear -end collisions involving cyclists riding two abreast are extremely rare. The vast majority of motor vehicles passing cyclist crashes involve solo or single file cyclists at the roadway edge. Bicycling groups riding two abreast in daylight are highly conspicuous, making it easy for same -direction motorists to slow in time. The few media - reported crashes involving two abreast cyclists generally result from hazards in front of the group, such as head- on collisions involving impaired drivers careening onto the wrong side of the road. It should be noted that in 180 years of cycling there has been absolutely no data showing two abreast cycling increases risks to road users. Riding two abreast promotes safety for cyclist and for other vehicles on the road, and riding two abreast helps encourage vehicles to wait to pass safely and in accordance with guidelines set forth by the Iowa Attorney General. For the safety of all road users it is time for Iowa City to amend the nearly 40 year old Code 9-8-1 [C] to allow two abreast riding. Important Notes • The Iowa Attorney General has ruled that because bicyclists have "all the rights and duties... applicable to the driver of a vehicle..." (321.213, 2), then the rules of 321 apply to them as well, which includes the rule of passing and giving the device/vehicle being passed the whole lane. • The Iowa DOT Drivers Manual has been modified to read: "Give bicycle riders the room they deserve and need for safety. When passing a bicycle rider, pass as if the cyclist were a vehicle and move into the other lane." • The Iowa Attorney General has issued an opinion (binding on all county attorneys in the state, and law enforcement as well), that the Iowa Code requires vehicles passing bicyclists to give them the whole lane DIAGRAMS Diagram 1 Cycling two abreast deters unsafe same -lane passing in narrow lanes and makes the cyclists as visible as a car from the front and behind. This is the safest formation to deter cars from trying to pass in the same lane and "squeeze by" a pair of riders, and since the Attorney General supports vehicles moving entirely into the other lane to pass, two abreast riding will help encourage safety and support of the Attorney General's statement. Diagram 2 In this diagram you can clearly see with 4 riders that it will take less time for a vehicle to pass two abreast riders than riders riding single file. Diagram 33 In this diagram you can see the common passing procedure for many drivers in Iowa City. This gives the riders about a 3 -foot safety zone, but does not meet the standards of the Attorney General. When vehicles pass in this manner "cut -in" crash are more likely to occur, on coming vehicles are forced off the road, and vehicles may collide (see Diagam 4.) i I I r r I I I Diagram 4 "Cut -in" crashes are one of the most common types of bicycle crashes. Single file riding promotes drivers into thinking there is enough room to pass, when oncoming traffic approaches, the vehicle cuts in and strikes the front rider. Two abreast riding will deter vehicles from passing when there is not space, and also will give vehicles a short passing time as seen in diagram 2. Diagram 5 In this diagram the riders are pushed too far to the right and since they are not riding two abreast, the red car believes there may be enough room to pass safely. There is not! This is a typical dangerous passing situation that is promoted by riders riding too far right and not riding two abreast. This obviously violates the Attorney General's statement for cars to move into the other lane when passing a bicycle. Diagram 6 In this diagram the vehicle has not move completely into the other lane, but is forced to wait for a clear path in other lane to abide more closely to the Attorney General's statement, and the driver will resist the temptation to "squeeze by" single file riders. Riding two abreast helps motorists make the right decision when passing (Also seen in diagram 7) Diagram 7 In this diagram you can clearly see what typically happens when car A approaches two riders riding two abreast vs riding single file. In the two abreast diagram the car will be forced to wait and thus abide by the Attorney General's statement. In the single file diagram, car A will often think there is a enough room to pass and endanger the oncoming car B, themselves, and risk causing a cut -in accident to the front rider. Also, in the single file diagram car A is in violation of the attorney generals statement regarding proper passing. Diagram 8 i B ! As stated in the "Iowa rules of the road for bicyclists" from the Iowa DOT, one of the most important safety aspects of cycling is being visible to motorists. In this side-by-side it can easily be seen that two abreast riders are more visible in the lane of traffic and thus provide safety to the riders and promote the vehicle to move into the other lane for passing. As Diagram 9 Communication of road hazards and visibility of road hazard is crucial in safe cycling. In this diagram the rear rider in the single file formation cannot see the road hazard. The front rider will have to turn behind to communicate the road hazard or take a hand off the handle bars to try to communicate the danger, of which neither is practical in safe cycling. Conclusion Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] has no basis in safety, and was likely introduced for the convenience of motorists. The code promotes cyclists as an inferior class of road user, effectively requiring them to yield the road to motor vehicles, and promotes vehicles passing cyclists in a manner directly in opposition to the Iowa Attorney General's guidelines. In addition, Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] which requires "Persons riding bicycles on the roadway shall ride single file.." is in violation of Iowa Law 321.236 [10] which states, that power of local authorities to issue regulations for bicycles shall not conflict with the provisions of the section Iowa Law 321.234 which states, "A person, including a peace officer, riding a bicycle on the highway is subject to the provisions of this chapter and has all the rights and duties under this chapter applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except those provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application," which indicates cyclist may ride two abreast by Iowa Law 321.275 [4] "Use of traffic lanes. Persons shall not operate motorcycles or motorized bicycles more than two abreast in a single lane" applies to bicycles as well. It has been demonstrated with creditable evidence that this code actually increases the danger to cyclists and motorist and is in violation of Iowa State Law, therefore, Iowa City code 9-8-1 [C] should immediately be revised to abide by State Laws and promote safety for all road users by allowing two abreast cycling. Follow-up This document has supported that two abreast cycling is a safer practice for cyclist and all road users. If code 9- 8-1 [C] will not be revised could rational be offered for the existence of the single -file code related to the five following items? 1. Single -file riding promotes proper passing of cyclist by motor vehicles is in accordance with the Iowa Attorney General's statement, "Give bicycle riders the room they deserve and need for safety. When passing a bicycle rider, pass as if the cyclist were a vehicle and move into the other lane." 2. Single -file riding is safer for cyclist. 3. Single -file riding is safer for motor vehicles. 4. Single -file riding cyclists are more visible to motor vehicles. 5. Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] does not violate Iowa Law 321.236 [10] I will be sharing a version of this document with the Attorney General Office of Iowa and be asking them to review the Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] and provide feedback on moving forward in revising the code. References/Laws/Ordinances Iowa Law 321.234 Bicycles, animals, or animal -drawn vehicles. 1. A person riding an animal or driving an animal drawing a vehicle upon a roadway is subject to the provisions of this chapter applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except those provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application. 2. A person, including a peace officer, riding a bicycle on the highway is subject to the provisions of this chapter and has all the rights and duties under this chapter applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except those provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application or those provisions for which specific exceptions have been set forth regarding police bicycles. 3. A person propelling a bicycle on the highway shall not ride other than upon or astride a permanent and regular seat attached to the bicycle. 4. A person shall not use a bicycle on the highway to carry more persons at one time than the number of persons for which the bicycle is designed and equipped. 5. This section does not apply to the use of a bicycle in a parade authorized by proper permit from local authorities Iowa Law 321.236 Powers of local authorities. Local authorities shall have no power to enact, enforce, or maintain any ordinance, rule, or regulation in any way in conflict with, contrary to, or inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, and no such ordinance, rule, or regulation of said local authorities heretofore or hereafter enacted shall have any force or effect. However, the provisions of this chapter shall not be deemed to prevent local authorities, with respect to streets and highways under their jurisdiction and within the reasonable exercise of the police power, from doing any of the following: 10. Regulating the operation of bicycles and requiring the registration and licensing of the same, including the requirement of a registration fee. However, the regulations shall not conflict with the provisions of section 321.234. Iowa Law 321.275 Operation of motorcycles and motorized bicycles. 4. Use of traffic lanes. Persons shall not operate motorcycles or motorized bicycles more than two abreast in a single lane. Except for persons operating such vehicles two abreast, a motor vehicle shall not be operated in a manner depriving a motorcycle or motorized bicycle operator of the full use of a lane. A motorcycle or motorized bicycle shall not be operated between lanes of traffic or between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles. The operator of a motorcycle or motorized bicycle shall not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken unless the vehicle being overtaken is a motorcycle or motorized bicycle. Iowa Law 321.299 Overtaking a vehicle. The following rules shall govern the overtaking and passing of vehicles proceeding in the same direction, subject to those limitations, exceptions, and special rules hereinafter stated: 1. The driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left of the other vehicle at a safe distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle. 2. Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle and shall not increase the speed of the overtaken vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle. Coralville, Iowa Code 76.04 TWO ABREAST LIMIT. Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two (2) abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles. All bicycles ridden on the roadway shall be kept to the right and shall be operated as near as practicable to the right-hand edge of the roadway. (Code of Iowa, Sec. 321.236 [10]) Ames, Iowa and Iowa State University Ride no more than two abreast while riding on a street, except on designated bicycle paths. De Witt, Iowa 75.04 TWO ABREAST LIMIT. Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two (2) abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.(Code of Iowa, Sec. 321.236 [10]) Dubuque, Iowa City Ordinance Bicyclists on a street or a bicycle path shall not ride more than two abreast. Bicyclists operating bicycles two abreast on a laned street shall do so within a single lane. Bicyclists operating vehicles two abreast on a street should not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. Attorney General: "Share the Road" Posted on February 4, 2013 by Benjamin Clark On January 17, 2013, the Iowa Attorney General issued an opinion regarding bicycle side path rules, specifically the newly -passed ordinance in the City of Grimes, Iowa. A side path rule is one that prohibits the use of bicycles within the road right-of-way when an adjacent trail is available. The Attorney General noted that the Iowa Code at 321.234(2) provides that a person riding a bicycle on the highway has all the rights and duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle. Further, the Code states that local authorities are without the power to enact, enforce, or maintain any ordinance, rule, or regulation that conflicts with the Code. Ultimately, the Attorney General concluded that the Grimes ordinance violates state law. The City of Grimes has yet to decide how it will proceed in light of this opinion. Tiffany De Masters wrote a great article in the Des Moines Register regarding the interplay between the Grimes ordinance, the Attorney General opinion, and many other related issues. Iowa Law Blog Published by Sullivan and Ward, P.C. http://www.iowa-lawblog.com/2013/02/articles/general-law-1 /attorney -general -share -the -road/ Office of the Attorney General of Iowa 5/27/2015 Hoover State Office Building 1305 E. Walnut Street Des Moines IA 50319 Dear Attorney General Tom Miller, I am writing to inquire what action takes place when a city ordinance violates a State Law, and what I can do as a citizen to promote the code to be amended or removed. Similarly to Grimes, Iowa's city ordinance incident violating Iowa Law 321.234, Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] which requires "Persons riding bicycles on the roadway shall ride single file.." is in violation of Iowa Law 321.236 [10] which states, that power of local authorities to issue regulations for bicycles shall not conflict with the provisions of the section Iowa Law 321.234 which states, "A person, including a peace officer, riding a bicycle on the highway is subject to the provisions of this chapter and has all the rights and duties under this chapter applicable to the driver of a vehicle, except those provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application," which indicates cyclist may ride two abreast by Iowa Law 321.275 [4], "Use of traffic lanes. Persons shall not operate motorcycles or motorized bicycles more than two abreast in a single lane" applies to bicycles as well. I have enclosed a document sent to Mayor Hayek and the Iowa City Council explaining this violation of State Law. In addition, the document explains why two abreast cycling is the safest practice for a pair or group of riders travel on roadways. Iowa city cyclist look forward to your quick response in order resolve this violation of State Law to promote safety for all road users, as stated on your profile page on the internet, "Protecting the public has always been one of Attorney General Miller's top priorities." Sincerely, Jim Cochran 3305 Arbor Drive Iowa City, IA 52245 Late Addition/Handouts June 1, 2015 Page 2 ITEM 3d(13) WALDEN WOOD PART 10 -RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE STORM SEWER AND SANITARY SEWER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR WALDEN WOOD PART 10,... — Added P & Z minutes. Setting Public Hearing: ITEM 3e(6) CONVEY 725 E. DAVENPORT STREET - RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 16, 2015, ON A PROPOSAL TO CONVEY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 725 EAST DAVENPORT STREET — See Correspondence: ITEM 3f(5) Jim Cochran: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 (two abreast bicycle riding) - Staff response included ITEM 3f(7) David Robertson: Crime at Wetherby Park Regular Agenda: ITEM 5b NORTH EAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREET [CHAUNCEY] — REZONING APPROXIMATELY 0.62 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREET, FROM PUBLIC (P-1) AND CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB -5) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CB -10). (REZ15-00006) — Added copy of Chauncey Timeline and additional correspondence ITEM 5c VACATION OF BLOCK 43 ALLEY [CHAUNCEY] VACATING PORTIONS OF PUBLIC ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED IN BLOCK 43, CITY OF IOWA CITY (VAC15-00001) — Added P & Z minutes. INFORMATION PACKETS 5/21: IP 8 Planning and Zoning Commission: May 7 — See corrected Attendance Record INFORMATION PACKET 5/28: IP 3 Memorandum from City Clerk: Revised KXIC Radio Show schedule Marian Karr J Subject: FW: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] From: Kent Ralston Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 2:57 PM To: 'jimboyvw@gmail.com' Cc: *City Council; Matt Hayek Subject: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] Hello Mr. Cochran —Your correspondence was forwarded tome for review. Thank you for providing your thoughts with respect to the City Code and updates that may be needed. Iowa City values its Bicycle Friendly Community status and strives to provide safe streets and sidewalks for the public. Please allow me sometime to digest the information that you've provided and discuss with City staff. While I don't disagree with your statements, I want to make sure I fully understand the Codes that you reference prior to recommending any changes. Please don't hesitate to contact me directly should you have any additional information to share. I plan to be in touch in the coming weeks. Best regards, Kent Ralston, AICP Executive Director I Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County Transportation Planner I City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5253 From: Jim Cochran [mailto:jimboyvw@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 4:10 PM To: Council; Matt Hayek Subject: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] Dear Mayor Hayek and City Council Members, Iowa City Code 9-8-1 [C] (1978) needs to be updated to reflect Iowa City's "Bicycle Friendly Community" silver status, to represent a statement made by the Attorney General of Iowa, and to abide by Iowa Law 321.236 [10] It is also important to note that all of Iowa City's Code 9-8-1 promote safe use of streets and sidewalks and abide by State Law 321.236 [10] except for Code 9-8-1 [C]. From the support provided in the attached document it will be apparent that two abreast riding is safer than single -file riding and that code 9-8-1 [C] should be amended immediately not only to promote the safety of cyclist and motor vehicles, but to align with State Law and not be in violation of State Law.. I have also attached a letter submitted to the Attorney General Tom Miller requesting him to review this situation. Sincerely, Jim Cochran 3305 Arbor Drive Iowa City, IA r 06 CITY OF IOWA CITY 3f(6) MEMORANDUM Date: May 22"d, 2015 To: City Clerk From: Darian Nagle-Gamm, Traffic Engineering Planner Re: Item for June 2"d, 2015 City Council meeting; Installation of (1) STOP sign on the northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue and Eastbrook Street. As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3B of the City Code, this is to advise the City Council of the following action. Action: Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A (5); Install (1) STOP sign on the northwest corner of the intersection of Muscatine Avenue an Eastbrook Street. Comment: This action is being taken to clarify the right of way at the Muscatine Avenue and Eastbrook Street intersection. O cn r w -� --4p(?) Marian Karr From: Matthew J. Hayek <mhayek@hhbmlaw.com> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 8:23 AM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: Crime at Wetherby Park Attachments: wetherby park.wps From: David Robertson [mailto:david1101@msn.coml Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:25 PM To: Matt Hayek; michell-payne@iowa-city.org; Susan Mims; Rick Dobyns; Kingsley Botchway; Jim Throgmorton; Terry Dickens Subject: Crime at Wetherby Park On May 28th my wife and I met with Zach Hall, Marcia Bollinger, Chad Dyson, Rob Cash, Cindy Roberts, Jerry Hanson, Al Mebus, and Karen Dawes at Wetherby Park at 7:00 p.m. to discuss the vandalism, noise, and fighting that has taken place there. During our 2 1/2 hour conversation, a group of kids were in the shelter disrespecting the officers and basically raising hell. This goes on frequently at the park. At times there are 30 to 40 kids at the park swearing, fighting, vandalizing, and simply harassing anyone that goes up there. Some days, this starts as early as 500 and lasts til long after 1000. One property I own at 1227 1229 Burns Avenue backs up to the park. When I was inside one of the units with everything shut up, and the tv on, I could still hear the f bombs and screaming. I had written a letter which started the process of scheduling the meeting. That letter is attached. Since I sent that letter, I called the police one night about 930 after witnessing a kid with a gun fighting with a drunken man. The man started beating several kids with the plastic bat. I have proposed putting up a 6 foot high chain link fence along the north edge of the park to protect the private property from vandalism. This fence would also eliminate several escape routes that the kids use when running from the police. As discussed, we encourage the drafting and enforcement of a law against loitering. I also propose an earlier curfew of 830 at this park if these problems can not be controlled. The problems have escalated to the point where the next step will be someone getting shot. Let's not wait til it gets worse. We need to give the police officers something they can work with to quiet everything down. Unfortunately, my neighbors , friends, and renters can not enjoy the park that many of us have contributed money to through the taxes we pay. Why do we protect the rights of vandals, bullies, and thugs, while limiting the access and enjoyment of something (the park) that many of us help pay for and take care of. Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent. I would appreciate any discussion, suggestions, and help from the council on finding a remedy to this situation. I would also like to invite each one of you to view the problems for yourself. I would like each one of you to visit the park alone after dark on a night when it is loaded with teenage kids . I would like to know how safe you feel in that crowd. Thank you David W. Robertson 2260 Balsam Court 319 930 0562 May 14 2015 To: Parks and Recreation Services: This letter is to inform you of the problems going on at the Wetherby Park and to ask for your assistance in finding a remedy. My name is David Robertson. I live at 2260 Balsam Court. My wife and I own rental property at the following addresses: 2259 2261 Taylor Drive, 1039 Sandusky Drive, 2259 2261 Davis Street, and 1227 1229 Burns Avenue. I have lived in the area since I built and lived in the house at 1039 Sandusky in 1981. I also built and lived in the house at 1101 Sandusky before moving to my current address. I have called the police on three different occasions in the last 2 weeks. The first two times were to report fighting at the park involving twenty to thirty kids. They were also breaking glass bottles in the parking lot and being obnoxious to people in the park. Last night when I was running at the park I tried to use the rest room, only to find approximately 8 to 10 kids starting a fire in the men's rest room. I told them I called the police ( which I did not do) and they left. I starting running loops again. When I was back by the shelter, they had a fire started using paper and cardboard under one of the picnic tables. I chased them off again and was able to call the police. I put the fire out. I called the police after some of the kids returned. As they left the park, I followed them to Grant Wood School. I was in contact with police so they could talk to the kids. The police had to go on an emergency call and told me to go on home, letting the kids go free. These problems are having a direct effect on my rental property. Mobs of kids continually cut between the duplexes on Burns to get to the park. The neighborhood can no longer enjoy the park that our taxes pay for. I spent a lot of time in this park with my son as I raised him. I had soccer practices at the park for the teams that I coached. A lot of my friends and neighbors are afraid to spend time at the park because of the harassment from these mobs. The police have promised extra patrols, but the second they leave, the problems start up again. I hope you can brainstorm and find a solution to remedy these problems. I have a couple suggestions that I hope you will consider. 1. Impose an earlier park closing than 10:00 p.m. Consider an 8:30 p.m. closing and enforce it for large groups. Individuals or small groups using the trail cutting through the park would be exempt. 2.Installing a 6 foot high chain link fence along the north side of the park, making it inconvenient to cut through private property. I have had my fence destroyed and had to remove it. A taller fence would deter people that want to climb over it. Another option would be a thick thorny hedge. This would also act as a noise buffer. When problems like this arise, it reminds me of a saying. "Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent". When we tolerate bad behavior, the one's that pay the penalties and suffer are the people that are acting appropriately. I would appreciate any thoughts and any actions that might help. Please pass this letter on to anyone that may be able to help. My suggestions would be Chief of Police, City Manager, Mike Moran, any neighborhood organizations, and anyone else that may be able to assist with this issue. Please feel free to contact me by email, text, or phone(319 930 0562). Thank you for your time and effort, David W. Robertson Marian Karr From: David Freeman <david.freeman1986@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 4:31 PM To: Council Subject: Wetherby Park Safety *This note was previously sent to Parks/Rec on Friday, May 29th. They are working on these issues, but said to email Iowa City City Council.* To Whom It May Concern: Homeowners on the Wetherby Drive cul-de-sac, specifically addresses 1410 and 1405, which are both adjacent to a city entrance path to Wetherby Park, have become increasingly concerned about safety. Safety of ourselves, our family, our homes and the safety of others. As the weather warms and school is adjourned for the summer months, Wetherby Park traffic/ activity always increases, which leads to increased foot traffic on the park entrance path between our two homes. This is all well and fine as we know it promotes activity and community, but it has also led to obnoxious, even illegal, behavior. Mostly by adolescents passing through. Examples of this behavior include kids throwing rocks at houses, mailboxes, in yards and at fences. Other times it has been messing or tampering with mailboxes, which is a federal offense. A few weeks ago, we had a group of teenagers mingling near our front door while messing with our water valve. Measures have been taken by my wife and I along with our HOA to limit the behavior by removing the rock from our cul-de-sac island, installing a fence and placing a lock on our water valve. Most recently, a city police officer drove through the park looking for a couple teenagers who ended up dropping a backpack that contained an air pistol made to look like a 9mm handgun. Not to mention we've smelled marijuana at night and just this past Friday night, our neighbor notified city police after a black male, 17 yrs old, was harassing a 14 yr old white female on the entrance path between our homes. Police were able to pick up the female and take her home. They are trying to locate the male. Wetherby Park is great. It's a great place for people to have fun, relax, play sports, garden, you name it. It's mostly a good thing as opposed to bad. However, it has been a'double-edged sword'. The park, and mostly the entrance path have led to all this bad behavior, at least around our two properties. Essentially what we are trying to say is that we and city can't be too careful, erring on the side of caution, when it comes to civil safety. We know we can't fully stop obnoxious or illegal behavior, but we can deter it. Our solution or proposal would be for the city to install spotlights (maybe solar powered?) around the park walking path, or at the very least, one at the end of this entrance path to deter people from lingering/loitering. What increased this level of concern was the incident with the air pistol. It could have been a real gun, someone could have been shot and even killed. If this note could be forwarded to the appropriate persons and if a city representative would like to come out and discuss this further, that would be much appreciated. This is not urgent, but we'd like some course of action to be taken soon as we are looking out for the safety and common decency everyone deserves. Thanks for the time and I look forward to hearing from someone! Regards, David Freeman 1410 Wetherby Drive 319 325 0340