HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/12/2015THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
REGULAR SESSION TO BE HELD AT
THE HAROLD E. GETTY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Monday, January 12, 2015
5:30 PM
CITY OF WATERLOO
GOALS
1. Support economic development efforts that attract, retain and create quality jobs
resulting in a diverse economic base and increased population.
2. Continue to support implementation of the Downtown Master Plan.
3. Facilitate and promote the development of housing options to meet the needs of current
and future Waterloo citizens.
4. Develop a customer -centered service delivery approach.
5. Seek additional opportunities to share services and resources with other government
entities.
6. Collaborate with statewide elected officials to reduce the burden on local property taxes.
7. Address the changing public workforce needs in Waterloo.
8. Enhance and protect a diverse, family-oriented community where neighborhoods are
safe and well maintained.
9. Enhance the quality of place opportunities for the citizens of our community.
General Rules for Public Participation
1. At the chair/presider's discretion, you may address an item on the current agenda by
stepping to the podium, and after recognition by the chair/presider, state your name,
address and group affiliation (if appropriate) and speak clearly into the microphone.
2. You may speak one (1) time per item for a maximum of five (5) minutes as long as
you have registered with the City Clerk's office no later than 4:00 p.m. on the day of
the Council Meeting. If not registered with the City Clerk's office you may speak one
(1) time per item for a maximum of three (3) minutes.
3. If there is a hearing scheduled as part of an agenda item, the chair/presider will allow
everyone who wishes to address the council, using the same participation guidelines
found in these "general rules".
4. Although not required by city code of ordinances, oral presentations may be allowed
at the chair/presider's (usually the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem) discretion. The "oral
presentations" section of the agenda is your opportunity to address items not on the
agenda. You may speak one (1) time per item for a maximum of five (5) minutes as
long as you have registered with the City Clerk's office no later than 4:00 p.m. on the
day of the Council Meeting. If not registered with the City Clerk's office a speaker
may speak to one (1) issue per meeting for a maximum of three (3) minutes. Official
action cannot be taken by the Council at that time, but may be placed on a future
agenda or referred to the appropriate department.
5. Keep comments germane and refrain from personal, impertinent or slanderous
remarks.
6. Questions concerning these rules or any agenda item may be directed to the Clerk's
Office at 291-4323.
7. Citizens are encouraged to register with the Clerk's Office by 4:00 p.m. on Monday of
the day of the City Council meeting to appear before the City Council (may also
register by phone). Registered speakers will be Given first priority.
I I
Roll Call.
Moment of Silence.
Pledge of Allegiance
Dan Trelka, Director of Safety Services.
Agenda, as proposed or amended.
Minutes of January 5, 2015, Regular Session, as proposed.
Proclamation: Observance of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day on January 19, 2015.
Recognition of Dennis Gentz as the January 2015 Team Member of the Month.
Recognition of Gary Luck as the 2014 Team Member of the Year.
1. Consent Agenda:
(The following items will be acted upon by voice vote on a single motion without
separate discussion, unless someone from the council or public requests that a
specific item be considered separately.)
A. Resolution to approve the following:
1. Bills Payment, Finance Committee Invoice Summary Report, a copy of which is on
file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. Request to set the date of public hearing as January 26, 2015 on the adoption of
the Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for Black Hawk County, Iowa.
Submitted By: Aric Schroeder, City Planner
3. Request to preliminarily approving plans, specifications, form of contract, etc. and
set the date of bid opening as February 12, 2015 and public hearing as February
16, 2015 for the F.Y. 2014 Belt Filter Press Addition, Contract No. 869.
Submitted By: Larry N. Smith, Waste Management Services Superintendent
4. Resolution preliminarily approving request for proposals, form of contract, etc. and
setting date of bid opening as January 29, 2015 and hearing as February 2, 2015
for animal control services for the City of Waterloo.
Submitted By: Sandie Greco, Traffic Operations Superintendent
B. Motion to approve the following:
5. LIQUOR LICENSES
a. Beck's Sports Brewery, 3295 University Avenue
Class: C Liquor & Brew Pub
Renewal Includes Sunday
Application
Expiration Date: 12/31/15
b. Elitte Cafe Bar, 1108 Jefferson Street
Class: C Liquor
Renewal Includes Sunday
Application
Expiration Date: 2/7/16
c. Placita, 322 West 4th Street
Class: B Beer
New Application Includes Sunday
Expiration Date: 12/1/15
d. VFW Post 1623, 1406 Commercial Street
Class: A Liquor, Outdoor
Renewal Includes Sunday
Application
Expiration Date: 1/14/16
6. APPOINTMENTS
a. Re -Appointment of Marilyn Robinson to the Memorial Hall Commission
Board/Commission: Memorial Hall Commission
Expires: December 31, 2017
Re -Appointment
7. Recommendation of appointment of Barry Stratton to the position of Property Safety
Inspector, effective January 13, 2015.
Submitted By: Craig Clark, Building Official/Maintenance Administrator
RESOLUTIONS
2. Resolution approving a variance to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance in
Section 11-3-2(C) Preliminary Plat Approval, Section 11-3-3(D) Application Procedure
and Requirements and a waiver to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance in
Section 11-4-4(A) Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements as it relates to the
approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Nottingham Third Addition.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning & Development Director
3. Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC for the 11 -lot
Preliminary Plat of Nottingham Third Addition, Zoned "R-1" One and Two Family
Residence District, located north of West Shaulis Road and west of West 4th Street.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning & Development Director
4. Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC for the 11 -lot Final
Plat of Nottingham Third Addition, Zoned "R-1" One and Two Family Residence District,
located north of West Shaulis Road and west of West 4th Street.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning & Development Director
5. Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC to rename
existing Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning & Development Director
6. Resolution approving the request by Black Hawk Contracting and Development for the
4 -lot Preliminary Plat of Hawthorne Estates First Addition, located at the southeast
corner of Vermont Street and Hawthorne Avenue.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning and Development Director
7. Resolution approving the first of two payments for FY 2015 to Greater Cedar Valley
Alliance for work towards economic development, in the amount of $14,250 base
amount with $15,000 in incentive funds, for a total payment of $29,250.
Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning & Development Director
8. Resolution approving the Consolidated Public Safety Communications 28E Agreement;
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said document.
Submitted By: Daniel J. Trelka, Director of Safety Services
9. Motion approving Change Order No. 5 for a net increase of $158,579.15 for the F.Y.
2014 Bridge Deck Repair and Overlay Program, Contract No. 777; and authorize the
Mayor and City Clerk to execute said document.
Submitted By: Jamie Knutson, P.E., Associate Engineer
10. Resolution approving Completion of Project and Recommendation of Acceptance of
Work for work performed by Cramer and Associates, Inc. of Grimes, Iowa, at a total cost
of $1,473,233.05, for the F.Y. 2014 Bridge Deck Repair and Overlay Program, Contract
No. 777.
Submitted By: Eric Thorson, P.E., City Engineer
11. Resolution to waive the public hearing and bidding policy and award the bid received
from Turfwerks of Johnston, Iowa, for the purchase of one (1) Jacobsen R311 Wide
Area Rough Mower, in the amount of $49,500.00.
Submitted By: JB Bolger, Golf & Downtown Area Maintenance Manager
12. Resolution approving an Impose and Use Application No: 2014-1 for a Passenger
Facility Charge at Waterloo Regional Airport.
Submitted By: Keith Kaspari, Airport Director
OTHER COUNCIL BUSINESS
13. Motion to approve Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to AECOM for a net increase in
the amount of $175,000.00 for the F.Y. 2014 Belt Filter Press Addition, Contract No.
869; and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said document.
Submitted By: Larry Smith, Waste Management Services Superintendent
ORAL PRESENTATIONS
14. Motion to adjourn to Executive Session
EXECUTIVE SESSION
1. Discussion of property acquisitions pursuant to Iowa Code Section 21.5(1)(j)(2014).
Motion to adjourn Executive Session.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn.
Suzy Schares, CMC
City Clerk/Human Resource Director
MEETINGS
3:45 p.m. Council Work Session, Harold E. Getty Council Chambers
4:20 p.m. Building and Grounds Committee, Harold E. Getty Council Chambers
5:00 p.m. Human Resources Committee, Harold E. Getty Council Chambers
5:10 p.m. Finance Committee, Harold E. Getty Council Chambers
PUBLIC INFORMATION
1. Waterloo Water Works Board meeting minutes of December 23, 2014 on file in the City
Clerk's office.
'Subtotal - as of Monday, January 12, 2015
Workers Compensation Issued by TPA
Housing Authority Housing Assistance EFT's
Housing Authority Housing Assistance EFT's
Payroll
IBill Payment Total - Monday, January 12, 2015
Payment to Council n or related entities
City of Waterloo
Finance Committee Open Invoice Report
For January 12 2015 Approve
Finance Committee Accounts Payable Open Invoice Report Total
As of Friday, January 09, 2015
EFT Transactions:
996,464.93
Add: Wellmark EFT 148,989.44
204,792.23
1,350,246.60
5,289.16
3,665.00
1,604,860.74
2,964,061.50
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-12
RESOLUTION SETTING A DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE ADOPTION OF A MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN FOR BLACK HAWK COUNTY,
IOWA, AS JANUARY 26, 2015, AT 5:30 P.M. IN
HAROLD E. GETTY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL,
WATERLOO, IOWA, AND INSTRUCTING THE CITY
CLERK TO PUBLISH THE NOTICE OF HEARING.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Black Hawk County, Iowa
has authorized the Iowa Northland Regional Council of Governments
to develop a Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in
cooperation with the Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Planning Committee for the County; and,
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors, Iowa has received Hazard
Mitigation Grant Planning funds to prepare said Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Waterloo participated in both the grant
writing and award process, as well as the plan preparation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Waterloo, Iowa desires citizen
input on the establishment and adoption of a Multi -Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WATERLOO, IOWA, that a public hearing be held on the adoption of
a Multi -Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for Black Hawk
County, Iowa in the Harold E. Getty Council Chambers, City Hall,
in the City of Waterloo, Iowa, at 5:30 p.m. on the 26th day of
January, 2015.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby
directed to publish notice of the time and place of said hearing
in the Waterloo Courier.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
Ernest G. Clark, Mayor
ATTEST:
y Sch res, CMC
City Cle k
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-13
RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING PLANS,
SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, ESTIMATE
OF COST, ETC., IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE F.Y.
2014 BELT FILTER PRESS ADDITION, CONTRACT
NO. 869 AND FIXING THE DATE AND PLACE OF
HEARING ON SAID PROJECT, AS FEBRUARY 16,
2015, AT 5:30 P.M., IN HAROLD E. GETTY
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, WATERLOO, IOWA
WITH THE TAKING OF BIDS THEREFORE, AND
INSTRUCTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH THE
NOTICE OF HEARING.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
heretofore instructed the Waste Management Services
Superintendent of said City to prepare proposed plans,
specifications, form of contract, estimate of cost, etc., in
conjunction with the F.Y. 2014 Belt Filter Press Addition,
Contract No. 869, in the City of Waterloo, Iowa, and
WHEREAS, said Waste Management Services Superintendent did
file said plans, specifications, form of contract, estimate of
cost, etc., in conjunction with the F.Y. 2014 Belt Filter Press
Addition, Contract No. 869.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That said proposed plans, specifications, form
of contract, estimate of cost, etc., in conjunction with the F.Y.
2014 Belt Filter Press Addition, Contract No. 869, in the City of
Waterloo, Iowa, be, and the same are hereby, preliminarily
approved as filed.
Section 2. That the Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
shall meet in the Harold E. Getty Council Chambers, City Hall, in
the City of Waterloo, Iowa, at 5:30 p.m. on the 16th day of
February, 2015, for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
proposed plans, specifications, form of contract, estimate of
cost, etc., in conjunction with the F.Y. 2014 Belt Filter Press
Addition, Contract No. 869, in the City of Waterloo, Iowa, with
the taking of bids therefore.
Section 3. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish
notice of the time and place of said hearing in the Waterloo
Courier.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
Ernest G. Clark, Mayor
ATTEST:
Suzy Sc ares, CMC
City Cl-rk
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
City Council Meeting: January 12, 2015
Prepared: January 9. 2015
Dept. Head Signature: Sandie C;xeca
# of Attachments: 1
SUBJECT:
Submitted by:
Set Date of Hearing and Opening of Bids for Animal Control Services
for the City of Waterloo
Sandie Greco, Traffic Operations Superintendent
Recommended City Council Action: Set Date of Hearing for February 2, 2015 and Opening of
Bids for January 29, 2015.
Summary Statement: Request for Proposals for Animal Control Services is being requested as
opposed to the City of Waterloo retaining Animal Control Services.
Expenditure Required:
Source of Funds:
Policy Issue
Alternative
Background Information: Costs for Privatizing Animal Control Services and the proposed
FYE16 animal Control Services Budget need to be compared for the best and most economical
service and cost to taxpayers.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS —
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
The City of Waterloo is soliciting proposals to provide equipment, labor and facilities to provide
complete Animal Control Services (the "Services") to the City of Waterloo 24 hours per day, seven
days per week. All proposals shall include a complete price quote. Included in the Animal Control
Service is the Proposer's full cooperation with all of the City of Waterloo departments for enforcement
and observance of the animal control ordinances.
Conditions governing the Services are contained in Exhibit "A", the proposed form of Contract,
attached to this RFP and by this reference incorporated herein.
A. SUBMITTING AND OPENING PROPOSALS
All proposals must be received in a sealed envelope in the City's Clerk's office (date and time
stamped) by Thursday, , 2015 at 11:00 a.m., Central Time (our clock) in order to be
considered. The City Clerk's office is located at 715 Mulberry St., Waterloo, Iowa 50703. Proposals
sent electronically or via facsimile will not be accepted. The mailing container or envelope shall be
plainly marked on the outside with the notation "SEALED RFP FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES,"
and the name of the company submitting the proposal.
The City is not responsible for delays occasioned by the U.S. Postal Service, the internal mail delivery
system of the City, or any other means of delivery employed by the Proposer. Similarly, the City is not
responsible for, and will not open, any proposal responses that are received later than the date and
time stated above. Late proposals will be retained in the RFP file, unopened. No responsibility will be
attached to any person for premature opening of a proposal not properly identified.
Proposals will be opened on Thursday, , 2015, at 1:00 p.m. Central Time in the City
Clerk's office at City Hall, 715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo. The main purpose of this opening is to
reveal the name(s) or the Proposer(s), not to serve as a forum for determining the awarded
proposal(s).
B. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Services to be performed by the successful respondent (the "Contractor") for the City will be those
described in the form of Contract attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which generally include but are not
limited to:
1. Responding to calls involving domestic animals, such as animal complaints, lost or found
animals, etc.
2. Providing domestic animal and wildlife pickup and disposal services.
3. Providing limited veterinary and euthanasia services.
4. Providing facilities for impoundment, shelter and quarantine of animals.
5. Promoting responsible animal ownership, such as promoting pet licensing, and providing
pertinent information to the owners.
6. Establishing a transparent record and bookkeeping system so that information can be
readily provided to the City.
7. Responding to City officials and law enforcement on animal control matters.
8. Hours of operation — 24 hours per day, 7 days per week
a. Normal business hours — 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
b. Seasonal business hours (April 1 to October 31) — 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
c. Night Call Service — 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
d. Seasonal Night Call Service (April 1 to October 31) — 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
9. Providing Services in a manner consistent with and conforming to the City's animal control
ordinances. It is expected that a Contractor, including all of its personnel and contractors,
will be familiar with and have a working knowledge of all relevant ordinances.
C. REQUIRED INFORMATION:
1. A brief description of how you intend to perform the above mentioned General Areas tf
Service, including identification of any contractors or service providers you intend to u e in
performing the Services.
2. A list of personnel names and statement of qualifications, experience and degree of
involvement for those who you expect to be performing services.
3. A brief description of the relevant experience of your company/organization.
4. Proposed breakdown of cost of services and proposed costing structure (if any).
5. Location and description of facility where the services will be performed.
6. Important Exceptions to Contract Documents — The Proposer shall clearly state in the
submitted proposal any exceptions to, or deviations from, the minimum proposal
requirements, and any exceptions to the terms and conditions of this RFP. Such
exceptions or deviations will be considered in evaluating the proposals. Companies are
cautioned that exceptions taken to this RFP may cause their proposal to be rejected.
7. Incomplete Information — Failure to complete or provide any of the information requested in
this RFP, including references, and/or additional information as indicated, may result in
disqualification by reason of non -responsiveness.
D. AWARD OF CONTRACT
1. Final selection of a contractor will be made of the responsive and responsible firm whose
proposal, conforming to these documents, is most advantageous and offers the greatest
overall value to the City of Waterloo with regard to the criteria detailed and the
specifications set forth herein. The City will evaluate proposals in light of all factors it
considers relevant, including but not limited to price, prior dealings, reputation, knowledge,
skills, demonstrated commitment of the humane treatment of animals, demonstrated
experience in managing and working with animals, nature and quality of facilities, and
other information provided by the proposer in response to this RFP. The proposal should
specifically describe the proposer's policies on euthanization and adoption.
2. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals and to waive any
informalities or irregularities in proposals if such waiver does not substantially change the
offer or provide a competitive advantage to any proposer. The City reserves the right to
defer acceptance of any proposal for a period not to exceed sixty (60) calendar days from
the date of the deadline for receiving proposals.
3. The City may select a proposer based on an "all or none" proposal, on individual
responses, or as is otherwise deemed to be in the best interest of the City.
4. A Proposer's submission of a proposal constitutes its acceptance of the City's evaluation
technique described in this section and its recognition and acceptance that subjective
judgments will be used by the evaluators in the evaluation.
5. Any Contract award(s) made by the City of Waterloo is subject to prior approval by the City
of Waterloo City Council.
6. After award, the Proposer will be required to enter into a written contract with the City that
is substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
RFP FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES — 2015 Page 2 of 4
E. MISCELLANEOUS
1. Questions can be directed to Sandie Greco, 625 Glenwood Street, Waterloo, Iowa 50703,
phone 319-291-4439, Email: sandie.greco@waterloo-ia.orq
2. The City of Waterloo Animal Control Ordinance is available online by reviewing Title 5,
Chapter 1, and Articles A and B thereunder, at the following link to the City Code of
Ordinances: http://www.sterlinqcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book id=412. To obtain
a paper copy or an electronic copy, contact sandie.greco@waterloo-ia.org or call (319)
291-4440.
3. This Request for Proposal does not commit the City to make an award, nor will the City
pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of proposals, or costs incurred in
making necessary studies for the preparation of proposals.
F. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROPOSAL
1. LANGUAGE, WORDS USED INTERCHANGEABLY -
The word CITY refers to the CITY OF WATERLOO,
IOWA throughout these Instructions and Terms and
Conditions. Similarly, PROPOSER refers to the person
or company submitting an offer to sell its goods or
services to the CITY, and CONTRACTOR refers to the
successful bidder.
2. PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS - No Proposal shall be
accepted from, and no contract will be awarded to, any
person, firm or corporation that is in arrears to the City
upon debt or contract, that is a defaulter, as surety or
otherwise, upon any obligation to the City, or that is
deemed irresponsible or unreliable by the City. If
requested, Proposers shall be required to submit
satisfactory evidence that they have a practical
knowledge of the particular supply/service proposal and
that they have the necessary financial resources to
provide the proposed supply/service as described in this
Request for Proposal.
3. SPECIFICATION DEVIATIONS BY THE PROPOSER -
Any deviation from this specification MUST be noted in
detail, and submitted in writing in the Proposal.
Completed specifications should be attached for any
substitutions offered, or when amplifications are
desirable or necessary. The absence of the specification
deviation statement and accompanying specifications
will hold the Proposer strictly accountable to the
specifications as written herein. Failure to submit this
document of specification deviation, if applicable, shall
be grounds for rejection of the item when offered for
delivery. If specifications or descriptive papers are
submitted with Proposals, the Proposer's name should
be clearly shown on each document.
4. SPECIFICATION CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND
DELETIONS - All changes in Proposal documents shall
be through written addendum. Verbal information
RFP FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES — 2015 Page 3 of 4
obtained otherwise will NOT be considered in awarding
of Proposals.
5. PROPOSAL CHANGES - Proposals, amendments
thereto, or withdrawal requests received after the time
advertised for Proposal opening, will be void regardless
of when they were mailed.
6. HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT - The Contractor
agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless
the City of Waterloo, its officials, officers, employees
and agents, from and against any and all claims and
damages of every kind and nature made, rendered or
incurred by or in behalf of every person or company
whatsoever, including the parties hereto and their
employees, that may arise, occur, or grow out of any
acts, actions, work or other activity done by the
Contractor, its employees, subcontractors or any
independent contractors working under the direction of
either the Contractor or subcontractor in the
performance of the contract.
7. PROPOSAL CURRENCY/LANGUAGE - All proposal
prices shall be shown in US Dollars ($). All prices must
remain firm for the duration of the contract regardless of
the exchange rate. All proposal responses must be
submitted in English.
8. PAYMENTS - Payments will be made for all
goods/services delivered, inspected and accepted within
30 days after acceptance and on receipt of an original
invoice.
9. MODIFICATION, ADDENDA & INTERPRETATIONS -
Any apparent inconsistencies, or any matter requiring
explanation or interpretation, must be inquired into by
the Proposer in writing at least 72 hours (excluding
weekends and holidays) prior to the time set for the
Proposal opening. Any and all such interpretations or
modifications will be in the form of written addenda. All
addenda shall become part of the contract documents
and shall be acknowledged and dated on the signature
page.
10. LAWS AND REGULATIONS - All applicable State of
Iowa and federal laws, ordinances, licenses and
regulations of a governmental body having jurisdiction
shall apply to the award throughout as the case may be,
and are incorporated herein by reference.
11. SUBCONTRACTING - No portion of this Proposal may
be subcontracted without the prior written approval by
the City.
12. ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL - Telegraphic and/or
proposal offers sent by electronic devices (e.g. facsimile
machines) are not acceptable and will be rejected upon
receipt. Proposers will be expected to allow adequate
time for delivery of their proposal either by airfreight,
postal service, or other means.
13. CANCELLATION - Either party may cancel the contract
in the event that a petition, either voluntary or
involuntary, is filed to declare the other party bankrupt or
insolvent or in the event that such party makes an
assignment for the benefit of creditors.
14. ASSIGNMENT - Proposer shall not assign the contract
or any monies to become due thereunder without the
prior written consent of the City. Any assignment or
attempt at assignment made without such consent of
the City shall be void.
15. TAXES - The City of Waterloo is exempt from sales tax
and certain other use taxes. Any charges for taxes from
which the City is exempt will be deducted from invoices
before payment is made.
16. PROPOSAL INFORMATION IS PUBLIC — All
documents submitted with any proposal and the
proposal shall become public documents and subject to
Iowa Code Chapter 22, which is otherwise known as the
"Iowa Open Records Law". By submitting any document
to the City of Waterloo in connection with a proposal,
the submitting party recognizes this and waives any
claim against the City of Waterloo and any of its
officials, officers and employees relating to the release
of any document or information submitted.
Each submitting party shall hold the City of Waterloo
and its officials, officers and employees harmless from
any claims arising from the release of any document or
information made available to the City of Waterloo
arising from any proposal opportunity.
RFP FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES — 2015 Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT A
CONTRACT PROVISIONS
AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
This Agreement for Animal Control Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into
as of the date set forth on the signature page hereof by and between the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
("City"), and ("Contractor").
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this
Agreement, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1- General Duties of Contractor.
1.1. Contractor will handle cats, dogs, and other domestic animals (collectively,
"Domestic Animals") to the extent of Contractor's resources; provided, however, that Contractor
will furnish and maintain competent personnel and adequate facilities and equipment for the
housing, shelter, care, quarantine, and disposal of such Domestic Animals pursuant to the
ordinances of City.
1.2. Contractor will impound and keep Domestic Animals until otherwise disposed of in
accordance with the provisions of the ordinances of the City tendered to it or by or from any
department of the City. The Contractor shall fully cooperate with the City's ordinance on micro -
chipping animals before owners redeem dogs or cats.
1.3. Contractor shall respond to telephone calls and other communications to it. The
Contractor shall make a complete investigation of complaints pertaining to Domestic Animals,
confined or at -large, or bite incidents, and keep a brief written record of its investigations. The
Contractor agrees as part of its duty and responsibility under this Agreement to seize, if
necessary and possible, any Domestic Animal concerning which complaints may have been
made, and Contractor further agrees to investigate and pursue complaints until finally disposed
of in accordance with the ordinances of the City and statutes of Iowa, relative to the harboring or
licensing of Domestic Animals contemplated by this Agreement. Contractor shall furnish a
suitably equipped vehicle and a competent humane officer to provide animal control in the City.
1.4. Contractor shall fully cooperate with City and any and all departments of the City in
enforcing the ordinances of the City pertaining to licensing of dogs and cats and shall not release
any dog or cat to the owner thereof, or to any other person, until compliance with City animal
control ordinances pertaining to licensing.
1.5. Livestock are not covered by this Agreement, and Contractor has no duties with
respect to livestock except such duties as Contractor may assume from time to time in its sole
discretion.
1.6. Contractor will respond to all calls and requests made by the Waterloo Police
Department or other pertinent City officials, with no regard to animal species or situation. If a
response to such an animal call is not encompassed within the terms of this Agreement, the City
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 1
agrees to pay Contractor a fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) per call. Requests must be made within
the designated contractual hours, Monday through Friday.
1.7. All services provided by Contractor will be done in compliance with applicable City
ordinances. In the event of any conflict between City ordinances and this Agreement, City
ordinances shall control. Contractor, and all of its personnel and permitted subcontractors, shall
be familiar with and have a working knowledge of all relevant ordinances.
1.8. Contractor shall collect all fees required by City ordinance, if any, and shall forward
all amounts to the City at least monthly.
1.9. At least monthly, and more frequently if requested by City, Contractor will provide
City with a report which includes complaint calls, action taken, redemptions, and domestic and
wildlife animal numbers. Contractor shall also provide copies of warnings, citations,
redemptions, licensing/rabies agreements and follow up efforts, spay/neuter contracts and follow
up efforts. City shall have the right to inspect the records of Contractor to ensure that Contractor
is and has abided by the provisions of this Agreement.
1.10. Contractor will provide services under this Agreement twenty-four (24) hours per
day, seven (7) days per week, as follows:
a. Normal business hours — 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
b. Night call service — 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
c. Seasonal hours (April 1 to October 31) — 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
d. Seasonal night call service — 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
2 - Confined and Unlawfully At -Large Domestic Animals.
2.1. Contractor agrees to collect, impound and dispose of Domestic Animals which are
unlawfully at large, as defined by Waterloo Ordinance 5-1-14, but only if the animal is sick,
injured, acting in an aggressive manner, or causing harm to another animal or person, or confined
by a property owner in the territory of City, whether or not such Domestic Animals are licensed
as provided by City ordinance. A confined animal, either domestic or wild, is one that is
deprived of the ability to roam free, including but not limited to an animal kept in a building or
on a leash, and is not owned by the property owner where the animal is confined. The property
owner may be asked to sign a Contractor -approved form affirming the animal being retrieved
from said property does not belong to the property owner, and has not scratched, bitten, or drawn
blood while in the property owner's possession. By signing such form, the property owner will
not thereby be liable for any actions of the confined animal being picked up by Contractor.
2.2. Contractor agrees to provide property owners within City with live traps for Domestic
Animals. Property owner will be expected to sign a rental agreement and pay any trap rental fee.
Property owners will be responsible for bringing said animals to the Contractor. Contractor
reserves the right to refuse renting live animal traps to property owners that have proven abusive
of animals in set traps and/or neglectful of the responsibility of monitoring traps or informing
Contractor when a desired animal has been confined within a set trap.
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 2
3 - Holdinji Periods.
3.1. Except as set forth in paragraph 3.2 below, Contractor agrees to hold impounded
animals for the periods of time, and to issue appropriate notices, as prescribed by applicable
ordinances, provided that if no other ordinance applies then Contractor shall follow the
procedures set forth in Waterloo Ordinance 5-1-13(B). If any such animal is not timely claimed
by its owner, the Contractor will be deemed to be the owner of the animal and will have the right
to determine the disposition of that animal. If the animal is timely claimed by its owner, the
owner will be responsible for all expenses and/or fees incurred by or set forth by Contractor.
3.2. Litters of puppies and kittens will only be held for twenty-four (24) hours. Animals
that are not of age to survive on their own accord will have no required holding period;
Contractor will have the right to determine disposition immediately upon their arrival at
Contractor. The Contractor will immediately euthanize any animal that is found to be sick
and/or injured beyond the care that the Contractor can provide. Cats appearing to be feral will
require no predetermined holding period and may be euthanized immediately.
4 - Quarantine and Rabies Requirements.
4.1. Contractor will assist the City, upon request, in securing stray dogs and cats in bite
cases for purposes of quarantine, and Contractor shall enforce all quarantine requirements,
including, but is not limited to, completion of bite reports, placement of animal in a home or
approved facility such as a veterinarian or licensed boarding kennel (an "Approved Facility"),
and communication and recording of all incidents to the Black Hawk County Health Department.
4.2. Contractor may seize and transport animals that have bitten to an Approved Facility
or Contractor's premises whenever the owner fails to quarantine an animal which has been
involved in a bite case. All applicable fees and requirements will be satisfied in full by the
owner before the animal is returned. Such requirements may include, but are not limited to,
boarding fees, medical fees that may be incurred while in the Contractor's care, and
transport/pick-up fees.
4.3. Quarantine at the Contractor's facility will be at Contractor's discretion. The
Contractor will not be responsible for boarding owned animals that have bitten. The Contractor
may and will board owned animals under unforeseen circumstances, which may include, but are
not limited to, owner refuses to quarantine, animal is unusually aggressive and poses a direct
threat to others, or an uncontrolled situation prevents the owner from being able to quarantine the
animal.
4.4. Contractor or the Approved Facility shall hold stray dogs and cats that have bitten a
person and drawn blood in quarantine as required by City ordinances. If the Animal is not
claimed by its owner within the ten (10) day holding period, the Contractor will be deemed to be
the owner and will be responsible and have the right to determine the disposition of that Animal.
If the Animal is claimed by its owner within the ten (10) day holding period, the owner will be
responsible for all boarding and quarantine expenses incurred and/or other reasonable fees as set
by Contractor.
4.5. Contractor agrees to have any stray or owned Domestic Animal transported and
rabies tested upon request, at the expense of the requestor, or to have any other animal
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 3
transported and rabies tested if the Contractor determines in its own discretion that such testing is
necessary. Testing will only be performed when a proper quarantine period is unable to be
obtained, and/or at the discretion of the Contractor. Contractor shall make available to any
person requesting rabies testing all information regarding options and fees for rabies testing.
Contractor is not responsible for having wildlife tested for rabies.
5 - Dead Animal Services and Wildlife Services.
5.1. Contractor agrees to pick up and dispose of all dead domestic and wildlife animals
found anywhere within the City promptly when requested by City during ordinary business
hours. City agrees to pay Contractor a fee of sixty dollars ($60.00) for the pick up and disposal
of each dead deer.
5.2. Contractor is not responsible for pick up and/or transportation of deceased domestic
"owned" animals from individuals residing in the City. Contractor will pick up and transport
deceased "owned" animals from individuals residing in the City at the discretion of Contractor.
The owner of a dead animal will be solely responsible for all applicable pick up, transport, and
disposal fees.
5.3. Contractor is responsible for responding to calls for sick, injured, nuisance, and/or
abandoned wildlife. The Contractor will have the responsibility for determining the disposition
and disposal of such animal.
5.4. Contractor is not responsible or required to remove nuisance wildlife from property
owner's homes or other indoor structures. The Contractor may remove nuisance wildlife from
property owner's home or other indoor structures at the discretion of the Contractor. The
property owner will be solely responsible for all applicable removal, transport and/or handling
fees.
6 - Night Call Services.
6.1. Contractor agrees to provide at least one animal control officer that will respond to
calls and pick up Domestic Animals on an emergency basis only. Emergency services that will
be responded to include, but are not limited to, any sick or injured domestic or wildlife animal,
confined stray dogs, animals acting in an aggressive manner, Domestic Animals and wild
animals that are posing a direct threat or causing harm to a person and/or a Domestic Animal,
and animals involved in an animal bite incident. The Contractor will respond to all calls and
requests made by the Waterloo Police Department or other pertinent City officials, with no
regard to animal species, situation, or time of call.
7 - Dog Park Monitoring.
7.1. Contractor is responsible for monitoring the City -owned dog park at least twice per
week on non-consecutive days, and Contractor shall also respond to all calls and incidents
stemming from use of the dog park.
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 4
8 - Dangerous Animals.
8.1. Any animal deemed to be dangerous or potentially dangerous pursuant to Title 5,
Chapter 1, Article B of the Waterloo Code of Ordinances will be handled by Contractor in
accordance with the requirements of said ordinances.
9 - Owner -Surrendered Domestic Animals.
9.1. Contractor is not responsible for responding to requests from individuals who wish to
surrender ownership of a specific animal to Contractor, or for collecting animals in such
situations. If an individual no longer desires to own their animal it will be that individual's
responsibility to transport said animal to Contractor and to comply with any protocol and/or fees
required to relinquish ownership of the animal to Contractor. The City has no financial
responsibility to Contractor for animals entering the Contractor as owner -surrendered animals.
9.2. Contractor shall determine the fee to be charged to owners who surrender a Domestic
Animal.
10 - Miscellaneous Terms.
10.1. Contractor shall commence work under this Agreement at 12:01 a.m. on
(the "Start Date"), and shall thereafter provide services hereunder until
11:59 p.m. on the day before the one-year anniversary of the Start Date, unless this Agreement is
terminated earlier as provided in this Section 10. The parties may mutually agree in writing to
extend the term of this Agreement for an additional one-year term.
10.2. City may terminate this Agreement at any time for convenience upon ninety (90)
days' advance written notice to Contractor or at any time for cause upon thirty (30) days'
advance written notice to Contractor. "Cause" shall mean gross neglect or gross mismanagement
of Contractor's duties hereunder, or fraudulent conduct in the performance of said duties or
otherwise with respect to this Agreement. Before giving notice of termination for convenience
or cause, City agrees to consult with Contractor in good faith to attempt to resolve any concerns
about Contractor or its performance under this Agreement.
10.3. Contractor shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for cause upon
thirty (30) days advance written notice to City. "Cause" shall include but not be limited to City's
failure to pay fees as required by this Agreement and/or any other material breach of this
Agreement. Before giving notice of termination for cause, Contractor shall contact City in a
good faith attempt to resolve the material breach. If the breach is not cured within 30 days of the
notice, the Agreement shall terminate.
10.4. City agrees to pay Contractor the base sum of $ per month for the
services provided for in this Agreement. In addition, City agrees to pay Contractor additional
fees as expressly provided elsewhere in this Agreement. All fees for the services of Contractor
are to be paid within thirty (30) days after receipt of Contractor's invoice for same. Contractor
shall not bill City more than monthly. Contractor agrees fees and charges billed to City and an
animal owner shall be mutually exclusive of each other that neither City nor the owner will, with
respect to any given animal or incident, be billed for the same services.
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 5
10.5. By this Agreement City appoints, authorizes, and empowers Contractor to enforce
City's laws pertaining to animals and animal control, including but not limited to the issuing of
citations and appearances in court, including trial.
10.6. City shall have the right, exercisable from time to time in City's sole discretion, to
monitor Contractor's operations in order to assure that such operations are conducted in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement. A City observer will not be expected to assist
Contractor or to perform any duties for or on behalf of Contractor. Contractor shall fully
cooperate with any City observer in good faith and shall provide full access to all reports, data
and information relating to the services provided by Contractor, or required to be provided by
Contractor, pursuant to this Agreement.
10.7. Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered in person
or by United States registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
(a) if to City, at 625 Glenwood Avenue, Waterloo, Iowa 50703, Attention:
Traffic Operations Superintendent, or designee.
(b) if to Contractor, to
Delivery of notice shall be deemed to occur (i) on the date of delivery when delivered in person,
or (ii) three (3) business days following the date of deposit if mailed by United States registered
or certified mail, postage prepaid. A party may change the address for giving notice by any
method set forth in this paragraph. Reports and other non -notice communications between the
parties may be delivered by any commercially reasonable method.
10.8. Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officials, officers,
employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs,
damages, losses, and liabilities whatsoever, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys'
fees and expenses, arising from or in connection with any act or omission of Contractor, or
anyone for whose acts Contractor is responsible, in performing or failing to perform its duties
under this Agreement. This paragraph 10.8 shall survive the expiration or termination for any
reason of this Agreement.
10.9. The Contractor shall at all times during the term of the Agreement maintain in full
force and effect, at its own expense, Employer's Liability, Worker's Compensation, Automobile,
Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, and other insurance and bonds as set forth
below, including contractual liability coverage for the indemnity and hold harmless provisions of
this Agreement. Each policy shall require at least 30 days' advance written notice to the City in
the event of cancellation or material change in terms. The City of Waterloo, Iowa shall be
specifically named as an additional insured on all insurance. Such coverages shall be primary,
non-contributing and contain waivers of subrogation against any coverage held by the City.
Before commencement of work hereunder, the Contractor agrees to furnish the City with
certificates of insurance or other evidence satisfactory to the City to the effect that such
insurance has been procured and is in force. Insurance coverages shall comply with the limits
specified below:
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 6
Coverages
Worker's Compensation
Employer's Liability
Bodily Injury Liability
(except automobile)
Property Damage Liability
(except automobile)
Automobile Bodily Injury Liability
Excess Liability
Automobile Property Damage Liability
Limits of Liability
Statutory
$500,000
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$5,000,000
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Fidelity bond coverage in the amount of at least $100,000, with a responsible surety
company with respect to all of Contractor's employees and agents as may be necessary
to protect against losses, including, without limitation, those arising from theft,
embezzlement, fraud, or misplacement of funds, money, or documents. Coverage must
extend to any losses incurred by the City due to theft, embezzlement, or fraud by
Contractor, its employees or agents.
A renewal certificate shall be provided to City prior to expiration of any policy. Contractor shall
be responsible to insure its own personal property. City may at its own expense procure and
maintain additional insurance for its own benefit.
10.10. Contractor may not assign or delegate any of its duties hereunder without the prior
written consent of City.
10.11. Nothing in this Agreement shall, or shall be deemed or construed to, create or
constitute any joint venture, partnership, agency, employment, or any other relationship between
the parties nor, except as expressly set forth herein, to create any liability for one party with
respect to the liabilities or obligations of the other party or any other person. Contractor is an
independent contractor.
10.12. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and the
respective successors and assigns of each.
10.13. In the event any provision of this Agreement, together with the Contract Documents
(defined below), is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, whether in whole or in part, the
remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full
force and effect. If, for any reason, a court finds that any provision of this Agreement is invalid,
illegal, or unenforceable as written, but that by limiting such provision it would become valid,
legal, and enforceable, then such provision shall be deemed to be written and shall be construed
and enforced as so limited.
10.14. The following documents (the "Contract Documents") are hereby incorporated
herein by reference as though fully set forth herein: Request for Proposals (the "RFP"), addenda
to the RFP, and Contractor's RFP Response (Proposal). In the event of conflict between the
provisions of the Contract Documents and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement
shall prevail. This Agreement, including the Contract Documents, constitutes the entire
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 7
agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may not
be modified or amended except by the mutual written agreement of the parties.
10.15. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement for Animal
Control Services by their duly authorized representatives as of , 2015.
[Contractor name] CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
By: By:
Ernest G. Clark, Mayor
Title:
Attest:
Suzy Schares, City Clerk
Request For Proposals: Waterloo Animal Control Services — Proposed Contract — Page 8
AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
This Agreement for Animal Control Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into
as of the date set forth on the signature page hereof by and between the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
("City"), and ("Contractor").
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this
Agreement, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1 - General Duties of Contractor.
1.1. Contractor will handle cats, dogs, and other domestic animals (collectively,
"Domestic Animals") to the extent of Contractor's resources; provided, however, that Contractor
will furnish and maintain competent personnel and adequate facilities and equipment for the
housing, shelter, care, quarantine, and disposal of such Domestic Animals pursuant to the
ordinances of City.
1.2. Contractor will impound and keep Domestic Animals until otherwise disposed of in
accordance with the provisions of the ordinances of the City tendered to it or by or from any
department of the City. The Contractor shall fully cooperate with the City's ordinance on micro -
chipping animals before owners redeem dogs or cats.
1.3. Contractor shall respond to telephone calls and other communications to it. The
Contractor shall make a complete investigation of complaints pertaining to Domestic Animals,
confined or at -large, or bite incidents, and keep a brief written record of its investigations. The
Contractor agrees as part of its duty and responsibility under this Agreement to seize, if
necessary and possible, any Domestic Animal concerning which complaints may have been
made, and Contractor further agrees to investigate and pursue complaints until finally disposed
of in accordance with the ordinances of the City and statutes of Iowa, relative to the harboring or
licensing of Domestic Animals contemplated by this Agreement. Contractor shall furnish a
suitably equipped vehicle and a competent humane officer to provide animal control in the City.
1.4. Contractor shall fully cooperate with City and any and all departments of the City in
enforcing the ordinances of the City pertaining to licensing of dogs and cats and shall not release
any dog or cat to the owner thereof, or to any other person, until compliance with City animal
control ordinances pertaining to licensing.
1.5. Livestock are not covered by this Agreement, and Contractor has no duties with
respect to livestock except such duties as Contractor may assume from time to time in its sole
discretion.
1.6. Contractor will respond to all calls and requests made by the Waterloo Police
Department or other pertinent City officials, with no regard to animal species or situation. If a
response to such an animal call is not encompassed within the terms of this Agreement, the City
agrees to pay Contractor a fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) per call. Requests must be made within
the designated contractual hours, Monday through Friday.
1.7. All services provided by Contractor will be done in compliance with applicable City
ordinances. In the event of any conflict between City ordinances and this Agreement, City
ordinances shall control. Contractor, and all of its personnel and permitted subcontractors, shall
be familiar with and have a working knowledge of all relevant ordinances.
1.8. Contractor shall collect all fees required by City ordinance, if any, and shall forward
all amounts to the City at least monthly.
1.9. At least monthly, and more frequently if requested by City, Contractor will provide
City with a report which includes complaint calls, action taken, redemptions, and domestic and
wildlife animal numbers. Contractor shall also provide copies of warnings, citations,
redemptions, licensing/rabies agreements and follow up efforts, spay/neuter contracts and follow
up efforts. City shall have the right to inspect the records of Contractor to ensure that Contractor
is and has abided by the provisions of this Agreement.
1.10. Contractor will provide services under this Agreement twenty-four (24) hours per
day, seven (7) days per week, as follows:
a. Normal business hours — 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
b. Night call service — 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
c. Seasonal hours (April 1 to October 31) — 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
d. Seasonal night call service — 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.
2 - Confined and Unlawfully At -Large Domestic Animals.
2.1. Contractor agrees to collect, impound and dispose of Domestic Animals which are
unlawfully at large, as defined by Waterloo Ordinance 5-1-14, but only if the animal is sick,
injured, acting in an aggressive manner, or causing harm to another animal or person, or confined
by a property owner in the territory of City, whether or not such Domestic Animals are licensed
as provided by City ordinance. A confined animal, either domestic or wild, is one that is
deprived of the ability to roam free, including but not limited to an animal kept in a building or
on a leash, and is not owned by the property owner where the animal is confined. The property
owner may be asked to sign a Contractor -approved form affirming the animal being retrieved
from said property does not belong to the property owner, and has not scratched, bitten, or drawn
blood while in the property owner's possession. By signing such form, the property owner will
not thereby be liable for any actions of the confined animal being picked up by Contractor.
2.2. Contractor agrees to provide property owners within City with live traps for Domestic
Animals. Property owner will be expected to sign a rental agreement and pay any trap rental fee.
Property owners will be responsible for bringing said animals to the Contractor. Contractor
reserves the right to refuse renting live animal traps to property owners that have proven abusive
of animals in set traps and/or neglectful of the responsibility of monitoring traps or informing
Contractor when a desired animal has been confined within a set trap.
2
3 - Holdinz Periods.
3.1. Except as set forth in paragraph 3.2 below, Contractor agrees to hold impounded
animals for the periods of time, and to issue appropriate notices, as prescribed by applicable
ordinances, provided that if no other ordinance applies then Contractor shall follow the
procedures set forth in Waterloo Ordinance 5-1-13(B). If any such animal is not timely claimed
by its owner, the Contractor will be deemed to be the owner of the animal and will have the right
to determine the disposition of that animal. If the animal is timely claimed by its owner, the
owner will be responsible for all expenses and/or fees incurred by or set forth by Contractor.
3.2. Litters of puppies and kittens will only be held for twenty-four (24) hours. Animals
that are not of age to survive on their own accord will have no required holding period;
Contractor will have the right to determine disposition immediately upon their arrival at
Contractor. The Contractor will immediately euthanize any animal that is found to be sick
and/or injured beyond the care that the Contractor can provide. Cats appearing to be feral will
require no predetermined holding period and may be euthanized immediately.
4 - Quarantine and Rabies Requirements.
4.1. Contractor will assist the City, upon request, in securing stray dogs and cats in bite
cases for purposes of quarantine, and Contractor shall enforce all quarantine requirements,
including, but is not limited to, completion of bite reports, placement of animal in a home or
approved facility such as a veterinarian or licensed boarding kennel (an "Approved Facility"),
and communication and recording of all incidents to the Black Hawk County Health Department.
4.2. Contractor may seize and transport animals that have bitten to an Approved Facility
or Contractor's premises whenever the owner fails to quarantine an animal which has been
involved in a bite case. All applicable fees and requirements will be satisfied in full by the
owner before the animal is returned. Such requirements may include, but are not limited to,
boarding fees, medical fees that may be incurred while in the Contractor's care, and
transport/pick-up fees.
4.3. Quarantine at the Contractor's facility will be at Contractor's discretion. The
Contractor will not be responsible for boarding owned animals that have bitten. The Contractor
may and will board owned animals under unforeseen circumstances, which may include, but are
not limited to, owner refuses to quarantine, animal is unusually aggressive and poses a direct
threat to others, or an uncontrolled situation prevents the owner from being able to quarantine the
animal.
4.4. Contractor or the Approved Facility shall hold stray dogs and cats that have bitten a
person and drawn blood in quarantine as required by City ordinances. If the Animal is not
claimed by its owner within the ten (10) day holding period, the Contractor will be deemed to be
the owner and will be responsible and have the right to determine the disposition of that Animal.
If the Animal is claimed by its owner within the ten (10) day holding period, the owner will be
responsible for all boarding and quarantine expenses incurred and/or other reasonable fees as set
by Contractor.
3
4.5. Contractor agrees to have any stray or owned Domestic Animal transported and
rabies tested upon request, at the expense of the requestor, or to have any other animal
transported and rabies tested if the Contractor determines in its own discretion that such testing is
necessary. Testing will only be performed when a proper quarantine period is unable to be
obtained, and/or at the discretion of the Contractor. Contractor shall make available to any
person requesting rabies testing all information regarding options and fees for rabies testing.
Contractor is not responsible for having wildlife tested for rabies.
5 - Dead Animal Services and Wildlife Services.
5.1. Contractor agrees to pick up and dispose of all dead domestic and wildlife animals
found anywhere within the City promptly when requested by City during ordinary business
hours. City agrees to pay Contractor a fee of sixty dollars ($60.00) for the pick up and disposal
of each dead deer.
5.2. Contractor is not responsible for pick up and/or transportation of deceased domestic
"owned" animals from individuals residing in the City. Contractor will pick up and transport
deceased "owned" animals from individuals residing in the City at the discretion of Contractor.
The owner of a dead animal will be solely responsible for all applicable pick up, transport, and
disposal fees.
5.3. Contractor is responsible for responding to calls for sick, injured, nuisance, and/or
abandoned wildlife. The Contractor will have the responsibility for determining the disposition
and disposal of such animal.
5.4. Contractor is not responsible or required to remove nuisance wildlife from property
owner's homes or other indoor structures. The Contractor may remove nuisance wildlife from
property owner's home or other indoor structures at the discretion of the Contractor. The
property owner will be solely responsible for all applicable removal, transport and/or handling
fees.
6 - Nijiht Call Services.
6.1. Contractor agrees to provide at least one animal control officer that will respond to
calls and pick up Domestic Animals on an emergency basis only. Emergency services that will
be responded to include, but are not limited to, any sick or injured domestic or wildlife animal,
confined stray dogs, animals acting in an aggressive manner, Domestic Animals and wild
animals that are posing a direct threat or causing harm to a person and/or a Domestic Animal,
and animals involved in an animal bite incident. The Contractor will respond to all calls and
requests made by the Waterloo Police Department or other pertinent City officials, with no
regard to animal species, situation, or time of call.
7 - Do2 Park Monitoring.
7.1. Contractor is responsible for monitoring the City -owned dog park at least twice per
week on non-consecutive days, and Contractor shall also respond to all calls and incidents
stemming from use of the dog park.
4
8 - Dan'erous Animals.
8.1. Any animal deemed to be dangerous or potentially dangerous pursuant to Title 5,
Chapter 1, Article B of the Waterloo Code of Ordinances will be handled by Contractor in
accordance with the requirements of said ordinances.
9 - Owner -Surrendered Domestic Animals.
9.1. Contractor is not responsible for responding to requests from individuals who wish to
surrender ownership of a specific animal to Contractor, or for collecting animals in such
situations. If an individual no longer desires to own their animal it will be that individual's
responsibility to transport said animal to Contractor and to comply with any protocol and/or fees
required to relinquish ownership of the animal to Contractor. The City has no financial
responsibility to Contractor for animals entering the Contractor as owner -surrendered animals.
9.2. Contractor shall determine the fee to be charged to owners who surrender a Domestic
Animal.
10 - Miscellaneous Terms.
10.1. Contractor shall commence work under this Agreement at 12:01 a.m. on
(the "Start Date"), and shall thereafter provide services hereunder until
11:59 p.m. on the day before the one-year anniversary of the Start Date, unless this Agreement is
terminated earlier as provided in this Section 10. The parties may mutually agree in writing to
extend the term of this Agreement for an additional one-year term.
10.2. City may terminate this Agreement at any time for convenience upon ninety (90)
days' advance written notice to Contractor or at any time for cause upon thirty (30) days'
advance written notice to Contractor. "Cause" shall mean gross neglect or gross mismanagement
of Contractor's duties hereunder, or fraudulent conduct in the performance of said duties or
otherwise with respect to this Agreement. Before giving notice of termination for convenience
or cause, City agrees to consult with Contractor in good faith to attempt to resolve any concerns
about Contractor or its performance under this Agreement.
10.3. Contractor shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for cause upon
thirty (30) days advance written notice to City. "Cause" shall include but not be limited to City's
failure to pay fees as required by this Agreement and/or any other material breach of this
Agreement. Before giving notice of termination for cause, Contractor shall contact City in a
good faith attempt to resolve the material breach. If the breach is not cured within 30 days of the
notice, the Agreement shall terminate.
10.4. City agrees to pay Contractor the base sum of $ per month for the
services provided for in this Agreement. In addition, City agrees to pay Contractor additional
fees as expressly provided elsewhere in this Agreement. All fees for the services of Contractor
are to be paid within thirty (30) days after receipt of Contractor's invoice for same. Contractor
shall not bill City more than monthly. Contractor agrees fees and charges billed to City and an
animal owner shall be mutually exclusive of each other that neither City nor the owner will, with
respect to any given animal or incident, be billed for the same services.
5
10.5. By this Agreement City appoints, authorizes, and empowers Contractor to enforce
City's laws pertaining to animals and animal control, including but not limited to the issuing of
citations and appearances in court, including trial.
10.6. City shall have the right, exercisable from time to time in City's sole discretion, to
monitor Contractor's operations in order to assure that such operations are conducted in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement. A City observer will not be expected to assist
Contractor or to perform any duties for or on behalf of Contractor. Contractor shall fully
cooperate with any City observer in good faith and shall provide full access to all reports, data
and information relating to the services provided by Contractor, or required to be provided by
Contractor, pursuant to this Agreement.
10.7. Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered in person
or by United States registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
(a) if to City, at 625 Glenwood Avenue, Waterloo, Iowa 50703, Attention:
Traffic Operations Superintendent, or designee.
(b) if to Contractor, to
Delivery of notice shall be deemed to occur (i) on the date of delivery when delivered in person,
or (ii) three (3) business days following the date of deposit if mailed by United States registered
or certified mail, postage prepaid. A party may change the address for giving notice by any
method set forth in this paragraph. Reports and other non -notice communications between the
parties may be delivered by any commercially reasonable method.
10.8. Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its officials, officers,
employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs,
damages, losses, and liabilities whatsoever, including but not limited to reasonable attorneys'
fees and expenses, arising from or in connection with any act or omission of Contractor, or
anyone for whose acts Contractor is responsible, in performing or failing to perform its duties
under this Agreement. This paragraph 10.8 shall survive the expiration or termination for any
reason of this Agreement.
10.9. The Contractor shall at all times during the term of the Agreement maintain in full
force and effect, at its own expense, Employer's Liability, Worker's Compensation, Automobile,
Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, and other insurance and bonds as set forth
below, including contractual liability coverage for the indemnity and hold harmless provisions of
this Agreement. Each policy shall require at least 30 days' advance written notice to the City in
the event of cancellation or material change in terms. The City of Waterloo, Iowa shall be
specifically named as an additional insured on all insurance. Such coverages shall be primary,
non-contributing and contain waivers of subrogation against any coverage held by the City.
Before commencement of work hereunder, the Contractor agrees to furnish the City with
certificates of insurance or other evidence satisfactory to the City to the effect that such
insurance has been procured and is in force. Insurance coverages shall comply with the limits
specified below:
6
Coverages
Worker's Compensation
Employer's Liability
Bodily Injury Liability
(except automobile)
Property Damage Liability
(except automobile)
Automobile Bodily Injury Liability
Excess Liability
Automobile Property Damage Liability
Limits of Liability
Statutory
$500,000
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$5,000,000
$1,000,000 each occurrence
Fidelity bond coverage in the amount of at least $100,000, with a responsible surety
company with respect to all of Contractor's employees and agents as may be necessary
to protect against losses, including, without limitation, those arising from theft,
embezzlement, fraud, or misplacement of funds, money, or documents. Coverage must
extend to any losses incurred by the City due to theft, embezzlement, or fraud by
Contractor, its employees or agents.
A renewal certificate shall be provided to City prior to expiration of any policy. Contractor shall
be responsible to insure its own personal property. City may at its own expense procure and
maintain additional insurance for its own benefit.
10.10. Contractor may not assign or delegate any of its duties hereunder without the prior
written consent of City.
10.11. Nothing in this Agreement shall, or shall be deemed or construed to, create or
constitute any joint venture, partnership, agency, employment, or any other relationship between
the parties nor, except as expressly set forth herein, to create any liability for one party with
respect to the liabilities or obligations of the other party or any other person. Contractor is an
independent contractor.
10.12. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and the
respective successors and assigns of each.
10.13. In the event any provision of this Agreement, together with the Contract Documents
(defined below), is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, whether in whole or in part, the
remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full
force and effect. If, for any reason, a court finds that any provision of this Agreement is invalid,
illegal, or unenforceable as written, but that by limiting such provision it would become valid,
legal, and enforceable, then such provision shall be deemed to be written and shall be construed
and enforced as so limited.
10.14. The following documents (the "Contract Documents") are hereby incorporated
herein by reference as though fully set forth herein: Request for Proposals (the "RFP"), addenda
to the RFP, and Contractor's RFP Response (Proposal). In the event of conflict between the
provisions of the Contract Documents and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement
shall prevail. This Agreement, including the Contract Documents, constitutes the entire
7
agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may not
be modified or amended except by the mutual written agreement of the parties.
10.15. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement for Animal
Control Services by their duly authorized representatives as of , 2015.
[Contractor name] CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
By: By:
Ernest G. Clark, Mayor
Title:
8
Attest:
Suzy Schares, City Clerk
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-14
RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING REQUEST
FOR PROPOSALS DOCUMENT, SPECIFICATIONS,
FORM OF CONTRACT, ETC., IN CONJUNCTION WITH
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF
WATERLOO AND FIXING THE DATE AND PLACE OF
HEARING ON SAID SERVICES, AS FEBRUARY 2,
2015, AT 5:30 P.M., IN HAROLD E. GETTY
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, WATERLOO, IOWA
WITH THE TAKING OF BIDS THEREFORE, AND
INSTRUCTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH THE
NOTICE OF HEARING.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
heretofore instructed the Traffic Operations Superintendent of
said City to prepare proposed Request for Proposals document,
specifications, form of contract, etc., in conjunction with
Animal Control Services for the City of Waterloo, Iowa, and
WHEREAS, said Traffic Operations Superintendent did file
said Request for Proposals document, specifications, form of
contract, etc., in conjunction with Animal Control Services for
the City of Waterloo.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That said Request for Proposals document,
specifications, form of contract, etc., in conjunction with
Animal Control Services for the City of Waterloo, Iowa, be, and
the same are hereby, preliminarily approved as filed.
Section 2. That the Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa,
shall meet in the Harold E. Getty Council Chambers, City Hall, in
the City of Waterloo, Iowa, at 5:30 p.m. on the 2nd day of
February, 2015, for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
proposed plans, specifications, form of contract, estimate of
cost, etc., in conjunction with Request for Proposals document,
specifications, form of contract, etc., in conjunction with
Animal Control Services for the City of Waterloo, Iowa, with the
taking of bids therefore.
Section 3. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to publish
notice of the time and place of said hearing in the Waterloo
Courier.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
ATTEST:
zy Sch res, CMC
City Cle k
Ernest
. Clar
, Mayor
Nottingham Third Addition
Issues and Ordinances
The following are three major concerns that affect the existing adjacent property
owners, and the future owners of Nottingham Third Addition. There is a brief
narrative in blue explaining the areas of concern and how the existing ordinances
address the concerns. The applicable ordinance sections are in black, with specific
applicable points highlighted with red text.
1) Detention Pond
The proposed detention pond is intended to fulfill the function of storm water
detention as required by the City of Waterloo in order to comply with EPA's
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) regulations.
The detention pond is to be a dry detention basin, with inlet and outlet piping sized
to retain storm water for an extended period, but less than 24 hours. It is to be a
privately owned and maintained impoundment with infrastructure to receive, store,
and release storm water collected by the public street and storm water system.
Further, it is subject to inspection and citation by the City of Waterloo for violation
of the storm water detention requirements. The functionality of these detention
facilities are required to be maintained despite "normal" deterioration of the system
by storm water runoff from the public street and storm sewer system, and in this
case, also the flooding effects of Prescott Creek. The required infrastructure and
its ongoing maintenance requirements, clearly show it is not consistence with the
Floodway Overlay District conditional use 4, Extraction of sands, gravel, or other
materials. As such, this use is not a principal permitted use nor a conditional use
nor any "uses similar in nature to the Principal and Conditional Uses listed herein"
in the Floodway (Overlay) District, and therefore is "prohibited unless a Variance to
the terms of this Ordinance is granted after due consideration by the Board of
Adjustment"
10-4-2 CLASSIFICATION OF FLOOD PLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
In order to classify, regulate and restrict the location of trades and industries and
the location of buildings designed for specific uses, to regulate and limit the height
and bulk of buildings hereafter erected or altered, to regulate and limit the intensity
of the use of lot areas and to regulate and determine the area of yards, courts and
other open spaces within and surrounding such buildings within established flood
prone areas, the City of Waterloo, Iowa is hereby divided into four (4) classes of
flood plain "overlay" districts. i ire ust, height and area regulations are uniform in
each class of said district, and the disti icts shall be Known as:
"F -W" Floodway (Overlay) District
"F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District
"F -P" General Flood Plain (Overlay) District
"S -F" Shallow Flood (Overlay) District
10-4-6 PURPOSE OF FLOOD PLAIN (OVERLAY) DISTRICTS.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
These Flood Plain (Overlay) Districts are to provide special regulations and
restrictions to flood hazard areas in the City of Waterloo. It is the purpose of these
flood plain provisions to promote the public health, safety and general welfare and
to minimize public and private damages due to flooding in specific areas of the
community. The basic purpose and objectives of this Ordinance may also be
identified by the following:
1. To protect human life and health;
2. To minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
3. To minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and
generally undertaken at the expense of the general public;
4. To minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas
mains, electric, telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in areas of
special flood hazard;
5. To require uses vulnerable to floods to be protected against flood damage at the
time of initial construction;
6. To help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and
development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize flood blight areas;
7. To ensure potential buyers are notified that property may be in an area of
special flood hazard and that those who occupy said area assume responsibility
for their actions;
8. To reserve sufficient flood plain area for the conveyance of flood flows so that
flood heights and velocities will not be increased substantially;
9. To assure that eligibility is maintained for property owners in the community to
purchase flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program.
10. Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety or property in
times of flood or which cause excessive increases in flood heights or velocities.
CHAPTER 22
FLOODWAY AND FLOOD PLAIN DISTRICTS
10-22-1 REGULATIONS.
The regulations set forth in this Chapter and those contained in Chapter 5 shall
apply in the Floodway and Flood Plain Districts.
A. General Regulations.
1. Lands to Which Ordinance Applies. This Ordinance shall apply to all lands
within the jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo which uses the Flood Insurance Study
(FIS) as a basis for establishing the flood plain zoning districts. These districts are
shown on the Official Zoning Map as being the boundaries of the Floodway,
Floodway Fringe, General Flood Plain and Shallow Flooding Overlay Districts.
Within these districts, all uses not allowed as Principal Permitted Uses or
permissible as Conditional Uses are prohibited unless a Variance to the terms of
this Ordinance is granted after due consideration by the Board of Adjustment.
10-22-2 "F -W" FLOODWAY (OVERLAY) DISTRICT.
A. Principal Permitted Uses.
The following uses shall be permitted within the Floodway (Overlay) District to the
extent they are not prohibited by other ordinance (or underlying zoning district) and
provided they do not require placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or
other obstruction, the storage of materials or other equipment, excavation, or
alteration of a watercourse.
1. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant
nurseries, horticulture, viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and crop
harvesting.
2. Industrial -commercial uses such as loading areas, parking areas, airport landing
strips.
3. Private and public recreational uses such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving
ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas,
parks, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting
preserves, target ranges, trap and skeet ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking
and horse riding trails.
4. Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas play areas.
5. Such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses.
B. Conditional Uses.
The following uses which involve structures (temporary or permanent), fill, storage
of materials or equipment, excavation or alteration of a watercourse may be
permitted only upon issuance of a Special Exception Permit by the Board of
Adjustment. Such uses must also meet the applicable provisions of the Floodway
District Performance Standards.
1. Uses or structures accessory to open space uses.
2. Circuses, carnivals, and similar transient amusement enterprises.
3. Drive-in theaters, new and used car lots, roadside stands, signs, and billboards.
4. Extraction of sands, gravel, and other material.
5. Marinas, boat rentals, docks, piers, wharves.
6. Utility transmission lines, underground pipelines.
7. Other uses similar in nature to the Principal Permitted and Conditional Uses
described herein which are consistent with the Floodway District Performance
Standards and the general spirit and purpose of this Ordinance.
Also, this detention pond use is not listed as a principal permitted use or any "open
space uses similar in nature to the above uses" in the "F -P" General Flood Plain
(Overlay) District, and therefore is "prohibited unless a Variance to the terms of
this Ordinance is granted after due consideration by the Board of Adjustment"
While a detention pond involves excavation to construct, a detention pond is not
"substantially uniform" with the use of land in the General Floodplain district, and
therefore requires a special permit after the IDNR determines whether it is partly or
wholly within the floodway or floodway fringe.
10-22-4 "F -P" GENERAL FLOOD PLAIN (OVERLAY) DISTRICT.
A. A. Principal Permitted Uses.
The following uses shall be permitted within the General Flood Plain (Overlay)
District to the extent they are not prohibited by any other ordinance (or underlying
zoning district) and provided they do not require placement of structures, factory
built homes, fill or other obstruction; the storage of materials or equipment;
excavation; or alteration of a watercourse, unless approved as herein stated.
[Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
1. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant
nurseries, horticulture, viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming and crop
harvesting.
2. Industrial -commercial uses such as loading areas, parking areas, and airport
landing strips.
3. Private and public recreation uses such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving
ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas,
parks, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting
preserves, target ranges, trap and skeet ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking
and horseback riding trails.
4. Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas and play areas.
5. Such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses. [Ordinance
5049, 6/20/11]
B. Conditional Uses.
Any use which involves placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or other
obstructions; the storage of materials or equipment; excavation; or alteration of a
watercourse may be allowed only upon a determination by the Iowa Department of
Natural Resources (IDNR) to determine (1) whether the land involved is either
wholly or partly within the floodway or floodway fringe and (2) the 100 year flood
level. The applicant shall be responsible for providing the Iowa Department of
Natural Resources (IDNR) with sufficient technical information to make the
determination. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
In addition, since a detention pond is not "substantially uniform" with the use of
land in the Floodway Fringe or General Floodplain district, and because of their
unique characteristics, are of such an unusual nature that their operation may give
rise to unique problems with respect to their impact upon neighboring property,
and therefore also requires a special permit.
10-28-4 SPECIAL PERMITS, APPEALS, AND VARIANCES.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
The Board of Adjustment is hereby established which shall hear and decide:
(i) applications for Special Permits upon which the Board is authorized to pass
under this Ordinance;
(ii) appeals; and
(iii) requests for Variances to the provisions of this Ordinance; and shall take any
other action which is required of the Board.
A. Special Permits.
Requests for Special Permits shall be submitted to the City Planner who shall
forward such to the Board of Adjustment for consideration, after recommendation
of the Commission. Such requests shall include a site plan in accordance with
Section 10-5-1(Q) an information ordinarily submitted with applications as well as
any additional information deemed necessary to the Board of Adjustment.
The following provisions shall apply:
1. Purpose: The development and administration of this Ordinance is based upon
the division of the City into Zoning Districts, within which Districts the use of land
and buildings and the bulk requirements and location of buildings and structures in
relation to the land are substantially uniform. It is recognized, however, that there
are certain uses which, because of their unique characteristics, cannot be properly
classified in any particular District or Districts without consideration in each case of
the impact of those uses upon neighboring land and of the public need for the
particular use at the particular locations. Such uses are typically publicly operated
or affected with a public interest, or uses private in nature, but of such an unusual
nature that their operation may give rise to unique problems with respect to their
impact upon neighboring property or public facilities.
Floodway: The channel of a river or stream and those portions of the flood plains
adjoining the channel, which are reasonably required to carry and discharge flood
waters or flood flows associated with the Regulatory Flood, so that confinement of
flood flows to the floodway area will not result in substantially higher flood levels
and flow velocities. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
Flood Plain: The relatively flat area of low lands adjoining the channel of a river,
stream, or watercourse which has been or may be covered by floodwater.
2) Tract "E"
Parcel "N" was created by the developer with Planning Department approval
without any access provision(s) other than across the side yard of the existing
residence. While the creation of Tract "E" allows for the future extension of a public
street, it does not immediately provide access to Parcel "N" from the proposed
street. Language should be added to the Deed of Dedication allowing for vehicular
access (agricultural equipment) across Tract "E", and a field entrance included in
the construction plans for the public street, or a blanket access easement across
Tract "B" and Tract "C" should be added to the Deed of Dedication to provide
access to Parcel "N" as it currently exists and for it's existing and anticipated use
as agricultural until it is replatted.
A street is normally to be extended to the boundary of the tract (to Parcel "N') to
provide for future access and allow for future development, unless it is not
"necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with
the existing layout or the most advantageous future development or adjacent
tracts". Prior to signing the final plat the developer is to pay the City the cost of
extending street to boundary line, or provide contracts and waivers to guaranty
extension, if City decides the street is not needed at this time. The Deed of
Dedication as submitted shifts the burden to the adjacent landowner for the cost of
extending the street, since the extension is only being deferred until such time that
the current or future owner of Parcel "N" requires the street extension for any use
other than it current agricultural use. Since Parcel "N" is already zoned R-1, a
waiver of the financial obligation of the developer is contrary to Subdivision
Ordinance Section 3.4(2), and without documents for financial guarantees in
place, it is premature to consider the final plat.
Subdivison Ordinance
SECTION 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS
AND DESIGN
4.3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) Proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be
subdivided, unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions, or unless
in the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension is not
necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the
existing layout or the most advantageous future development or adjacent tracts.
SECTION 3. ASSURANCE FOR COMPLETION AND MAINTENANCE OF
IMPROVEMENTS
3.4 Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements
(1) The City Council may defer or waive at the time of Final approval, subject to
appropriate conditions, the provision of any or all such improvements as, in its
judgment, are not requisite in the interests of the public health, safety and general
welfare, or which are inappropriate because of inadequacy or lack of connecting
facilities.
(2) Whenever it is deemed necessary by the City Council to defer the
construction of any improvements required herein because of incompatible
grades, future planning, inadequate or lack of connecting facilities, or for other
reasons, the applicant shall pay his share of the costs of the future improvements
to the local government prior to signing of the final subdivision plat, or the
applicant shall file contracts and waivers regarding completion of said
improvements upon demand of the City Council.
SECTION 2.
PROCESS
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROCEDURE AND APPROVAL
Plats
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. Following the approval of a
preliminary plat the applicant, if he wishes to proceed with the subdivision, shall
file with the Waterloo Plan and Program Commission an application for final
approval of a subdivision plat. The application shall:
(g) be accompanied by the contract and waivers if required, in a form
satisfactory to the City attorney and the City Engineer.
3) Tract "B"
As part of the preliminary plat procedure, Tract B is required to be included in an
overall development plan which would show how it could be re -subdivided in the
future, with the street being extended to the boundary of the tract, unless in the
opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension not necessary or
desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing
layout or the most advantageous future development. This planning is required for
conformity with the surrounding existing, proposed, and future residential areas.
The potential future re -subdivision must be outlined within a development plan for
Tract "B", both for lot and street layout. Any sub -divider of Tract "B" must be
responsible for the cost of extending the street as shown on an approved
development plan, or provide contracts and waivers to guaranty completion of the
street adjacent to Lot 9 and Lot 10, and to provide those lots with exemption from
possible street assessment.
The developer of Nottingham Third Addition has agreed that Tract "B" is to be
restricted to single family residential in the restrictions for Nottingham Third
Addition. However, a re -plat of Tract "B", even if not subdivided, would replace and
supersede any restrictions contained in Deed of Dedication for Nottingham Third
Addition with new covenants and restrictions, which would allow for the possibility
of multiple duplexes constructed on Tract "B" (minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft.),
Since the Waterloo Zoning Ordinance does not have an R -SF, Residential, Single
Family zoning district, in order to guaranty that the agreed restriction of only single
family housing on Tract "B" would still be in force after re -platting, a resolution
would be need to be approved by the City Council accepting the development plan
for Tract "B", defining the proposed lot layout, minimum lot area, and maximum lot
numbers, responsibility for street extension, and restating that nothing other than
single family housing will be allowed on Tract "B", even if it is re -platted and new
covenants are written.
Subdivision Ordinance
SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.12 Resubdivision of Land
(2) Procedure for Subdivisions Where Future Resubdivision is Indicated.
Whenever a parcel of land is subdivided and the subdivision plat shows one or
more lots containing more than one acre of land and there are indications that
such lots will eventually be resubdivided into small building sites, the Waterloo
Plan and Program Commission and City Council may require that such parcel
of land allow for the future opening of streets and the ultimate extension of
adjacent streets. Easements providing for the future opening and extension of
such streets may be made a requirement of the plat.
2.2 Preliminary Plat
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. The applicant shall assist the
Planning Staff in filing an application for approval of a preliminary plat. The
applicant shall:
(e) An overall development plan shall accompany a preliminary plat which is
being submitted for only a portion of the land which is owned by the requestor and
could be subdivided in the future.
SECTION 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS
AND DESIGN
4.2 Lot Improvements
(2) Lot Dimensions.
Lot dimensions shall comply with the minimum standards of the Zoning
Ordinance. Where lots are more than double the minimum required area for the
zoning district, the Plan and Program Commission may require that such lots
be arranged so as to allow further subdivision and the opening of future streets
where they would be necessary to serve such potential lots, all in compliance
with the Zoning Ordinance and these regulations.
4_3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(a) Frontage on Improved Streets. No subdivision shall be approved unless
the area to be subdivided shall have frontage on and access from an existing
street or a street shown upon a plat approved by the Plan and Program
Commission and recorded in the County Recorder of Deeds' Office. Such
street of highway must be suitably improved as required by the highways rules,
regulations, specifications, or orders, or be secured by a contract required
under theses subdivision regulations, with the width and right-of-way required
under these subdivision regulations of the Official Street Plan. Where the area
to be subdivided is to utilize existing street frontage, such street shall be
suitably improved as provided herein above.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) Proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be
subdivided, unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions, or unless
in the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension is not
necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the
existing layout or the most advantageous future development a; of adjacent tracts.
4.6 Sewerage Facilities
(2) Residential Districts. Sanitary sewerage systems shall be constructed as
follows:
(a) Where a public sanitary sewerage system is reasonably accessible the
applicant shall connect with same and provide sewers accessible to each lot in
the subdivision.
SECTION 6. DEFINITIONS
6.2 Words and Terms Defined
Frontage. The side of a lot abutting on a street or way and ordinarily regarded
as the front of the lot, but it shall not be considered as the ordinary side of a corner
lot.
Lot. A tract, plat, or portion of a subdivision or other parcel of land intended as a
unit for the purpose, whether immediate of future, of transfer of ownership or for
building development.
Resubdivision. A change in a map of an approved or recorded subdivision plat if
such change affects any street layout on such map or area reserved thereon for
public use, or any lot line; or if it affects any map or plan legally recorded prior to
the adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions.
Existing Nottingham neighbors concerns
Safety Issues
The city planning staff answered a question about chemical and bacterial dangers of the
proposed retention/detention pond by stating they have had no problems with similar
ponds in subdivisions surrounded by housing developments. How is that comparable to a
pond in a hayfield, in a floodway where agricultural chemicals will drain into that area
frequently?
The size of the retention pond has been stated by Mr. Young and Mr. Claussen to be of
various sizes and depths depending on the presentation. What are the exact dimensions of
the proposed pond? Most of the ones in subdivisions are small, symmetrical and add to
the decorum of the area. How will a long narrow channel that is 18" deep not just be a
trench? What are the standards for the requirements? The only number that they ever
committed to is the volume of the pond, but that will change dramatically by the depth
which has been stated to be several feet, only 3 feet and most recently 18". This needs to
be clear and we don't think a long trench is appropriate or safe.
What disclosures will be required to the potential new homeowners regarding the
retention pond?
When there is flash flooding from Prescott's creek, how will a long trench hold enough
water to capture the flood waters and storm drainage from the surrounding
neighborhood? Mr. Young stated to the planning commission that appropriate tile and
grading will eliminate the risk from the houses, but also wanted the homeowners adjacent
to tract B and lots 10 and 11 to pay half the cost to grade the area of natural drainage.
How can the council and neighborhood be assured that appropriate grading and drainage
will work rather than just cause more backup in the slew along lots 10, 11 and tract B.
How will enforcement of maintenance of the pond and new plat be accomplished before
all the lots are sold?
Has the Iowa DNR been contacted by the city planning staff to ensure that a retention
pond in the floodway is permissible, safe and approved? We understand Mr. Young has
not done that despite being informed that one of the neighbors was denied being able to
build a pond on their own property by the DNR.
Mr. Young told the planning/zoning commission that the water table was low in the
neighborhood. Living at the highest point in the neighborhood, our sump pump runs all
spring through mid -summer and much of the fall. Building our house caused standing
water in the neighbors' yards behind us. Tiling fixed it, because there was a lot of flat
land in the proposed area to dump the water into. How do we assure more existing
neighbors don't have water issues as these houses are built in the natural drainage?
Property values
There was a lot of discussion at the planning/zoning commission about the lot sizes in the
new plat. Mr. Young presented data that the average size of the lot was similar to the
other plats in the neighborhood, however, three or four of the 11 plats are quite large.
What is the mean lot size and how does that compare to the other plats in the
neighborhood? What is the smallest lot size and how does it compare to the other plats?
Average size is as potentially misleading as the volume of a retention pit.
The tax abatement for the city of Waterloo has helped a lot with sales of new homes, but
has made it harder to sell existing homes. With a limited market for larger homes in
Waterloo, what will the city council do to help existing home owners maintain their
property values?
With documented evidence of water issues through lots 9, 10, and tract B, and probably
lot 8 as well, what reassurance will the public and council have that the developers will
grade and tile the new area to ensure those houses and yards are not subject to water
damage? What recourse will existing and new homeowners have when those areas have
water issues?
At least 15 of the 22 existing homeowners signed the petition presented to the
planning/zoning commission despite the fact that only 6-7 houses will be directly affected
by the water drainage issues with grading changes. Why does the council want to dismiss
the valid concerns of so many neighbors and such a high percentage of the
neighborhood?
Legal/Protocol Issues
The city planning department recommends approval, but the planning/zoning commission
denied approval. How often do they disagree? How often does the city council go against
the planning/zoning commission's recommendation?
We have documentation that Cedar Falls does not allow retention ponds in floodways, yet
the city planning staff stated that they do. Several other communities (22 of the largest
25) told us directly they do not, yet the city planning staff claimed they do. What
documentation does the staff have to prove they are correct? How can you reassure the
public and the council that the staff is correct when conflicting information is presented?
The ordinance is very clear about requiring approval from the board of adjustments for
excavating and construction (even a city required retention pond) in a floodway. Why
does the city planning staff think the council and this project is not bound by the rules
and laws established?
A council member at the hearing implied that disapproving a housing development
because of safety, legal and existing property owners concerns would be making
Waterloo more anti -business. How is protecting the public (a legal obligation of the
planning/zoning commission and the reason they voted no) anti -business? As a small
business owner, I don't think carte blanche to allow business to do things that jeopardize
the public is pro-business. Doesn't the city council have to ensure the platting is safe,
maintains property values for existing neighbors and adds to the attraction and growth of
Waterloo not detracts from it?
The developers stated there is a pent-up demand for $500k plus homes in Waterloo.
1) How many home sales exceeding 500K have closed in Waterloo in the past year?
2) What is the average time on market for 500K plus homes?
3) What is the basis for making this statement?
With regard to storm water retention/detention ponds:
1) What measures has the city put into place for the regular inspection and testing of
these facilities to ensure they are not contaminated with bacteria that is transferable and
potentially harmful to humans and domestic animals?
2) If the 11 homeowners are going to be responsible for maintaining the borrow pit, what
is the governance structure that will be put into place to ensure this responsibility is
honored?
a. Who will be the management company contracted to collect homeowner association
fees, arrange contracts for mowing, landscaping, fertilizing, weed and pest control, and
conduct regular testing and inspection of the site?
b. If there is not a third party management company, who will be the point of contact for
concerns?
c. If the homeowners do not uphold the expectations, will the only recourse be to involve
the city to step in? How is this accomplished? Will it be via a lawsuit?
d. What is the amount of the monthly homeowner's fee for these 11 lots? Who will
collect and manage these funds?
CAROL FAILOR
From: NOEL ANDERSON
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:15 PM
To: MAYOR CLARK; MICHELLE WEIDNER; SUZY SCHARES; COUNCIL MEMBERS;
MICHELLE WESTPHAL
Cc: ARIC SCHROEDER; PLANNING STAFF; CAROL FAILOR; ERIC THORSON; DENNIS
GENTZ
Subject: FW: Nottingham Third
Attachments: Jan 12 issues and ordinances.docx; Nottingham neighbors concerns.docx
All — FYI (see attached).
Michelle — can you get a copy to Ron Welber.
The Planning and Engineering Department staff will answer all of the questions as requested.
Thanks,
Noel
Noel Anderson
Community Planning & Development Director
City of Waterloo
715 Mulberry Street
Waterloo, Iowa 50703
Phone 319.291.4366
Fax: 319.291.4262
Cell: 319.290.6357
Websites:
City — www.cityofwaterlooiowa.com
Brownfields - www.thenewwaterloo.com
"Can't fail is arrogance. Won't fail is confidence."— Lord John Roxton
From: Wendell Lupkes[mailto:wlupkes@vjengineering.com]
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 4:21 PM
To: NOEL ANDERSON; ARIC SCHROEDER
Subject: FW: Nottingham Third
Gentlemen,
Please find attached the information regarding concerns with the proposed Nottingham Third Addition, as requested by
City Council at the December 15th meeting.
Wendell Lupkes, L.S.
VJ Engineering
From: wilupkes@mchsi.com [mailto:wjlupkes@mchsi.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2014 10:43 PM
To: wlupkes
Subject: Nottingham Third
1
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-15
RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN
SECTION 11-3-2(C) PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL,
SECTION 11-3-3(D) APPLICATION PROCEDURE AND
REQUIREMENTS AND A WAIVER TO THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN SECTION 11-4-
4(A) DEFERRAL OR WAIVER OF REQUIRED
IMPROVEMENTS AS IT RELATES TO THE APPROVAL OF
THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF NOTTINGHAM
THIRD ADDITION.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
that the variance to the requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance in Section 11-3-2(C) Preliminary Plat Approval, Section
11-3-3(D) Application Procedure and Requirements and a Waiver to
the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance in Section 11-4-
4(A) Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements, as it relates
to the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Nottingham
Third Addition, be and the same is hereby approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th dayf January, 2015.
rnest G.
ATTEST:
parol Nemmers
Deputy City Clerk
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-16
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WATERLOO, IOWA, APPROVING THE 11 -LOT
PRELIMINARY PLAT AND NECESSARY DOCUMENTS OF
NOTTINGHAM THIRD ADDITION IN THE CITY OF
WATERLOO, BLACK HAWK COUNTY, IOWA.
WHEREAS, on this 12th day of January, 2015, at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, the
11 -lot Preliminary Plat of Nottingham Third Addition, Waterloo,
Black Hawk County, Iowa, was presented for approval, and
WHEREAS, said Preliminary Plat has been previously submitted
to and has been approved by the Waterloo City Planning,
Programming and Zoning Commission, and
WHEREAS, said Preliminary Plat has been considered and
should receive approval of this Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA, that the 11 -lot Preliminary Plat of
Nottingham Third Addition, Waterloo, Black Hawk County, Iowa, be
and it is hereby approved and the Mayor and Deputy City Clerk of
the City of Waterloo, Iowa, are hereby authorized and directed to
certify and affix their signatures to said resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
ATTEST:
Deputy City Clerk
nest G. Clark, Mayor
CERTIFICATE
I, Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Waterloo,
Iowa, do hereby certify that the preceding is a true and complete
copy of Resolution No. 2015-16, as passed and adopted by the
Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, on the 12th day of
January, 2015.
2015.
Witness my hand and seal of office this 12th day of January,
Deputy City Clerk
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-17
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WATERLOO, IOWA, APPROVING THE 11 -LOT FINAL
PLAT AND NECESSARY DOCUMENTS OF NOTTINGHAM
THIRD ADDITION IN THE CITY OF WATERLOO, BLACK
HAWK COUNTY, IOWA.
WHEREAS, on this 12th day of January, 2015, at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, the
11 -lot Final Plat of Nottingham Third Addition, Waterloo, Black
Hawk County, Iowa, was presented for approval, and
WHEREAS, said 11 -lot Final Plat has been previously
submitted to and has been approved by the Waterloo City Planning,
Programming and Zoning Commission, and
WHEREAS, said 11 -lot Final Plat has been considered and
should receive approval of this Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA, that the 11 -lot Final Plat of Nottingham
Third Addition, Waterloo, Black Hawk County, Iowa, be and it is
hereby approved and the Mayor and Deputy City Clerk of the City
of Waterloo, Iowa, are hereby authorized and directed to certify
and affix their signatures to said resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
ATTEST:
Caro NePrs
Deputy City Clerk
hest G. Clark, Mayor
CERTIFICATE
I, Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Waterloo,
Iowa, do hereby certify that the preceding is a true and complete
copy of Resolution No. 2015-17, as passed and adopted by the
Council of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, on the 12th day of
January, 2015.
Witness my hand and seal of office this 12th day of January,
2015.
)14*NIOCA
SEAL Carol Nemmers
Deputy City Clerk
Coversheet Page 1 of 1 �(�
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC to rename existing
Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
City Council Meeting: 1/12/2015
Prepared: 12/9/2014
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
ci Shelley Court Attachements Backup Material
SUBJECT: LLC to rename existing Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
Submitted by: Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning &
Development Director
Recommended Action: Approval.
Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises,
Summary Statement:
Transmitted herewith is the request by Robin Hood Enterprises,
LLC to rename existing Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC is proposing to rename existing
Crusade Drive to Shelley Court. The street will serve a new
pending residential development consisting of 11 lots.
Expenditure Required: N/A
Source of Funds: N/A
Policy Issue: Land Use and Economic Development
Alternative: N/A
Background Information:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the request and
recommends approval of the renaming of existing Crusade
Drive to Shelley Court.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
of the request with a vote of 6-0 at their December 2, 2014
meeting.
http://waterloo.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/Coversheet.aspx?ItemID=484&MeetinglD... 1/12/2015
Coversheet Page 1 of 1
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC to rename existing
Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
City Council Meeting: 12/15/2014 -
Prepared: 12/9/2014
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
in Shelley Court Attachements
Type
Backup Material
SUBJECT: Resolution approving the request by Robin Hood Enterprises,
LLC to rename existing Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
Submitted by: Submitted By: Noel Anderson, Community Planning &
Development Director
Recommended Action: Approval.
Summary Statement:
Transmitted herewith is the request by Robin Hood
Enterprises, LLC to rename existing Crusade Drive to Shelley
Court.
Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC is proposing to rename existing
Crusade Drive to Shelley Court. The street will serve a new
pending residential development consisting of 11 lots.
Expenditure Required: N/A
Source of Funds: N/A
Policy Issue: Land Use and Economic Development
Alternative: N/A
Background Information:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the request and
recommends approval of the renaming of existing Crusade
Drive to Shelley Court.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
of the request with a vote of 6-0 at their December 2, 2014
meeting.
http://waterloo.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/CoverSheet.aspx?ItemID=3 3 3 &MeetinglD... 1 /5/2015
REQUEST
APPLICANT(S):
GENERAL
DESCRIPTION:
IMPACT ON
NEIGHBORHOOD:
VEHICULAR &
PEDESTRIAN
TRAFFIC
CONDITIONS:
RELATIONSHIP TO
RECREATIONAL
TRAIL PLAN:
SURROUNDING
LAND USE/ ZONING
HISTORY FOR SITE
AND IMMEDIATE
VICINITY:
BUFFERS
REQUIRED/ NEEDED:
DEVELOPMENT
HISTORY:
FLOODPLAIN:
PUBLIC /OPEN
SPACES/ SCHOOLS:
UTILITIES: WATER,
SANITARY SEWER,
December 2, 2014
Request by the Robin Hood Enterprises to rename a portion
of public street Crusade Drive as Shelly Court.
Claassen Engineering, 2705 University Avenue, Waterloo,
Iowa 50704.
Robin Hood Enterprises is requesting to Rename a portion of
public right of way from Crusade Drive to Shelly Court, and no
existing homes are addressed off of Crusade Drive.
The request would not appear to have a negative impact on
the area.
There would not be a negative impact on vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in the area, as the request is just to change
the name of Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
The Shaulis Road Trail is located a quarter mile to the south
of the proposed plat.
North- "B -P" Business Park District- currently in crop
production.
East- "R-1"- One & Two Family Residence District- single
family dwellings.
South- "A-1" Agriculture District- farmstead with livestock
West- "R-3, R -P" Planned Multiple Family District- drainage
way & single family homes
The site is zoned "R-1" One and Two Family Residence
District and has been since the adoption of Ordinance 4720
on September 15, 2004 when it was rezoned from "A-1"
Agricultural District.
The request would not require any buffering by ordinance
standards.
The single family residences to the north have been built
within the last 10 years. The home located on the ag property
to the south was constructed in 1934. The homes to the west
were constructed in the 1970's.
The proposed street to be renamed is not located within a
special flood hazard area as indicated by the Federal
Insurance Administration's Flood Insurance rate Map
Community Number 1901300284F, dated July 18, 2011.
Prairie Grove park is located across W 4th Street to the east
of the proposed subdivision.
The proposed street renaming will not have any impact on
Renaming Crusade Drive to Shelly Court- Page 1 of 2
N
STORM SEWER,
ETC.
RELATIONSHIP TO
COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN:
STAFF ANALYSIS —
ZONING
ORDINANCE:
STAFF ANALYSIS —
SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE:
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
December 2, 2014
utilities.
The Future Land Use Map designates the area in question as
Mixed Residential. This request would be in compliance with
such designation. The site is located within the Primary
Growth Area as designated on the Growth Area Map within
the Comprehensive Plan.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the naming of the
street, and found there to be no conflicts with the proposed
name of Shelly Court and recommends that the name be
approved.
No subdividing of land is required for this request.
Therefore, it is staffs recommendation that the street
renaming be approved for the following reason(s):
1. The Engineering Department has reviewed the request
and concurs with the renaming of Crusade Drive as
tl 4; Shelly Court, as it does not conflict with any other
street names and recommends approval.
Renaming Crusade Drive to Shelly Court- Page 2 of 2
arming, Prc>lgraxx mingand Zoning Cain
October 14, 2014
Portion of Street to be Rena
"Shelley Court"
Street Renaming
'Shelley Court
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
WATERLOO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
715 Mulberry Street • Waterloo, IA 50703 • (319) 291-4312 Fax (319) 291-4262
City Engineer • email: city.engineer@waterloo-ia.org
September 8, 2014
Aric Schroeder
City Planner
715 Mulberry St.
Waterloo, IA 50703
RE: RENAMING PUBLIC CRUSADE DRIVE TO SHELLEY COURT
Dear Aric:
The Engineering Department has received a request to rename the existing public street known
as Crusade Drive to Shelley Court. The location of Crusade Drive is from that portion of William
Drive northwesterly of Luxley Drive and then going southwesterly 155.00 feet. Crusade Drive is
legally described as being located in Tract "B" Nottingham Heights Addition.
The plan is to extend Crusade Drive southwesterly into the proposed Nottingham Third Addition
and rename it Shelly Court. Currently there are no addresses that have been issued off of
Crusade Drive. _sr"2i1' a L7n �0 {in�i�gyn�{ it ;na-pkt
Therefore, the Engineering Department recommends that public Crusade Drive be renamed
Shelley Court.
Sincerely,
63:6(k—/
Eric Thorson, PE
City Engineer
Cc: Steve Walker, Draftsman
01-3-14-
Efi SA411;/
e4tSisrr 5.cf,,,-df,,,
ter Sko-asiCe,r
�
�JGc iJi7`Gr.. 0. -77,41 '.t�jXls%1
CITY WEBSITE: www.cityofwaterlooiowa.com
WE'RE WORKING FOR YOU!
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
REQUEST:
APPLICANT(S):
GENERAL
DESCRIPTION:
IMPACT ON
NEIGHBORHOOD:
VEHICULAR &
PEDESTRIAN
TRAFFIC
CONDITIONS:
RELATIONSHIP TO
RECREATIONAL
TRAIL PLAN:
SURROUNDING
LAND USE/ ZONING
HISTORY FOR SITE
AND IMMEDIATE
VICINITY:
BUFFERS
REQUIRED/ NEEDED:
DEVELOPMENT
HISTORY:
FLOODPLAIN:
PUBLIC /OPEN
SPACES/ SCHOOLS:
UTILITIES: WATER,
SANITARY SEWER,
December 2. 2014
Request by the Robin Hood Enterprises to rename a portion
of public street Crusade Drive as Shelly Court.
Claassen Engineering, 2705 University Avenue, Waterloo,
Iowa 50704.
Robin Hood Enterprises is requesting to Rename a portion of
public right of way from Crusade Drive to Shelly Court, and no
existing homes are addressed off of Crusade Drive.
The request would not appear to have a negative impact on
the area.
There would not be a negative impact on vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in the area, as the request is just to change
the name of Crusade Drive to Shelley Court.
The Shaulis Road Trail is located a quarter mile to the south
of the proposed plat.
North- "B -P" Business Park District- currently in crop
production.
East- "R-1"- One & Two Family Residence District- single
family dwellings.
South- "A-1" Agriculture District- farmstead with livestock
West- "R-3, R -P" Planned Multiple Family District- drainage
way & single family homes
The site is zoned "R-1" One and Two Family Residence
District and has been since the adoption of Ordinance 4720
on September 15, 2004 when it was rezoned from "A-1"
Agricultural District.
The request would not require any buffering by ordinance
standards.
The single family residences to the north have been built
within the last 10 years. The home located on the ag property
to the south was constructed in 1934. The homes to the west
were constructed in the 1970's.
The proposed street to be renamed is not located within a
special flood hazard area as indicated by the Federal
Insurance Administration's Flood Insurance rate Map
Community Number 19013CO284F, dated July 18, 2011.
Prairie Grove park is located across W 4th Street to the east
of the proposed subdivision.
The proposed street renaming will not have any impact on
Renaming Crusade Drive to Shelly Court- Page 1 of 2
STORM SEWER,
ETC.
RELATIONSHIP TO
COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN:
STAFF ANALYSIS —
ZONING
ORDINANCE:
STAFF ANALYSIS —
SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE:
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
December 2, 2014
utilities.
The Future Land Use Map designates the area in question as
Mixed Residential. This request would be in compliance with
such designation. The site is located within the Primary
Growth Area as designated on the Growth Area Map within
the Comprehensive Plan.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the naming of the
street, and found there to be no conflicts with the proposed
name of Shelly Court and recommends that the name be
approved.
No subdividing of land is required for this request.
Therefore, it is staff's recommendation that the street
renaming be approved for the following reason(s):
1. The Engineering Department has reviewed the request
and concurs with the renaming of Crusade Drive as
Shelly Court, as it does not conflict with any other
street names and recommends approval.
Renaming Crusade Drive to Shelly Court- Page 2 of 2
City of Waterloo Planning, Programming and Zoning Commission
October 14, 2014
Portion of Street to be Renamed
"Shelley Court"
Street Renaming
"Shelley Court"
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
WATERLOO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
715 Mulberry Street • Waterloo, IA 50703 • (319) 291-4312 Fax (319) 291-4262
City Engineer • email: city.engineer@waterloo-ia.org
September 8, 2014
Aric Schroeder
City Planner
715 Mulberry St.
Waterloo, IA 50703
RE: RENAMING PUBLIC CRUSADE DRIVE TO SHELLEY COURT
Dear Aric:
The Engineering Department has received a request to rename the existing public street known
as Crusade Drive to Shelley Court. The location of Crusade Drive is from that portion of William
Drive northwesterly of Luxley Drive and then going southwesterly 155.00 feet. Crusade Drive is
legally described as being located in Tract "B" Nottingham Heights Addition.
The plan is to extend Crusade Drive southwesterly into the proposed Nottingham Third Addition
and rename it -She -Fly -Court. Currently there are no addresses that have been issued off of
Crusade Drive: -.*'''" 'l
Therefore, the Engineering Department recommends that public Crusade Drive be renamed
Shelley Court.
Sincerely,
Eric Thorson, PE
City Engineer
Cc: Steve Walker, Draftsman
CITY WEBSITE: www.cityofwaterlooiowa.com
WE'RE WORKING FOR YOU!
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Prepared by Carol Nemmers, Deputy City Clerk, City of Waterloo,
715 Mulberry Street, Waterloo, IA 50703, (319) 291-4323.
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-18
RESOLUTION RENAMING THE EXISTING PUBLIC
STREET KNOWN AS CRUSADE DRIVE LOCATED FROM
THAT PORTION OF WILLIAM DRIVE NORTHWESTERLY
OF LUXLEY DRIVE AND THEN GOING SOUTHWESTERLY
155.00 FEET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BEING
LOCATED IN TRACT "B" NOTTINGHAM HEIGHTS
ADDITION, TO SHELLEY COURT, IN THE CITY OF
WATERLOO, BLACK HAWK COUNTY, IOWA.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
that the existing public street known as Crusade Drive located
from that portion of William Drive northwesterly of Luxley Drive
and then going southwesterly 155.00 feet, legally described as
being located in Tract "B" Nottingham Heights Addition, be and
the same hereby renamed Shelley Court.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January, 2015.
ATTEST:
4116.e-
Carol
Ne ers
Deputy City Clerk
(%;"
Ernest G. Clark, Mayor
)tz a T,O 'T O
ONO 'sa3Pq S AznS
'STOZ
'Az2nupr 3o A2p u4T sT-T aoT33o 3o Tees pup pupa Am ssau;iM
'STOZ 'Azpnu2r 30 Alp u4ZT auq uo '2MoI 'ooTzaq2M 30 AgT3 aq; 3o
TTouno3 auq. Aq pagdop2 put passed s2 '6T-STOZ '0N uozqnTosaE 30
Adoo agaTdwoo pup anal. 2 sT buTpaoazd aqq. ;2q4 Agazaq op
'2MoI 'ooIzag2M 30 A4T3 a'I 30 xzaTO AgTO 'sazegog Azng 'I
3ZK3I3I Z2i3O
3110
zoA2N ')Iz2T3 •O gsauz3
/102 /
)f,1 -1T3 A;TO
'saz2uog Azng
STOZ 'A.zxnu2r 3o A2p ugZT sT'-1Q3IdOQK (INV Q3SS`dd
•uoTgnTosaz pips oq sazng2ubTs .tTaq xz332 put A3zgzao oq
pa.oazzp put pazT.zoggn2 Agazag azp '2MoI 'ooT.za42M 3o AgT3 aq. 3o
)fzaT3 AgTO pup .zoA2Y1 aq . pup panozdd2 Agazag sT qT put aq '2MoI
'A.uno3 7[M2H 310eTE '00Tzag2M 'u0T4TppV 4sJT,3 sag2gs3 auz0144M2H
30 gpId Az2UTUITTazd 40T-17 9114 42114 'KMOI '00'IEELVM 30 ALIO
3HI 30 'IIONIIOO ALIO 3HI X 03n'IOS32i II 32 '323033E3HI 'MON
pup pazapzsuoo
•TTouno3 sTgq 3o T2nozdd2 anTaoaz pTnogs
uaaq spu g2Td A[PuTuITTazd 'DTP's 'SK3d3HM
pup 'uozssTunuo3 buzuOZ put buTmwelbozd
'buTuu2Td AgT3 ooTzagPM agq Aq panozddp uaaq s2q put o;
pa;;zuigns ATsnoTAazd uaaq s2u 42Td A2uTuiTTazd PT2s 'SFZ32i'3HM
pup
'T2nozdd2 3o3 pa;uesazd 52M '2MoI 'A;unoO NMPH 3[o2T2 '00Tza;pM
'uoT;TppNY gszTJ sa;2;s3 auzoq;MPH 30 g2 -Ed Az2uTwITazd ;oi
-17 au4 '2M0I '00Tza42M 30 A4T3 auk. 30 TTounop A;z3 ag4 30 buTgaaw
zpTnbaz 2 ;p 'STOZ 'Azxnupr 30 Alp u4ZT szu; uo 'SK32i3HM
FIMOI 'xINIlOO NMKH N3K'I2 '00'IEEIVM 30 ALI3
3H1, NI NOI LIQQ'd IS21I3 S3 LVIS3 3N"d0HIM`dH
30 SLN3NIlOOQ A2iVSS2O3N (INV LL Id AEVNINI'I32id
LO'I-r 3HI JNIAO dd`d 'VMOI 'OOT233ZKM 30
AIIO 3H 1 30 ZIONIlOO ALIO 3HI 30 NOII0'IOS323
6T-STOZ 'ON NOILn'IOSa
'SZS-T6Z (6TS) 'SOLOS KI 'ooTzagPM ';aaz;S AzzagTnN STL
'ooTza;pM go A;zO 'xzaTO A;TO A;ndaQ 'szaunuaN Toz2O Aq paz2dazd
N eTO AgTO
OND 'sea ?S Azn
aoAaN '){aaTO *9 gsau
'STOZ 'Alenuef 4 p u4ZT sT1-14 Q2ZdOQK (INV Q3SSKd
•panoadde Agaaau sT
auzes auq- PUP oq '00'OSZ'6Z$ ;0 quawAed P .toj '00'000'ST$ Jo
qunowe agq. uT spung anT;uaouT pue 00'0SZ'bT$ 3o qunouir asPq auq.
uT 'quauzdoTanap oTuzouooa spaIMo4 3{aoM aoJ STOZ A3 aoj aou2TTTK
AaTTan axpaO aa4P93O auk o4 squawked oiq Jo gsaTg auk TEuq.
' IMOI 'OO'I2i3ZKM 3O XLIO 3HJ 30 'IIOMf1OO 3HI AE Q3A`IOS323 II 3H
00' 0SZ'6Z$ 30 INf1ONK 2141 NI '3ONKITIK X3'IIVA
23VQ3O 213ZK323O 3HZ OZ S T O Z A3 2303 SZN3NXKd
OMI 30 IS23I3 3HI 0MIAO23dd\ NOISIl'IOS321
OZ-CTOZ '0N NOIIfYIOSE21
'SZS-T6Z (6TE) 'SOLOS KI 'ooTaagPM 'gaaa4S AaaagTnN STL
'ooTaaJ2M go 'qT3 'xaaTO AlTO Agndao 'saammaN Toae3 i q paaPdaad
�{ TO
-aT0 AL
3
N3 'saa4140s AznS
aoAPW '3{aeTO •0 ;soul
STOZ 'AaPnuer ;o APp u4ZT sT1-14 Q3IdOQK QNV Q3SSVd
•eMoI 'ooTaaTTM
Jo AgTO auq. go gTeuaq uT awes agq. agnoaxa O. pazTaoq ne 3{aaTO
AgTO pue aoAeN eq pup 'panoadde Agaaaq ST GUMS agq. pup aq 'emoI
'ooTaa;eM go ALTO auq- puu. 'aTTTn-430gTTO 'A4T3 aqaode7 'aTepsueA3
'uogaa3{unQ 'uospnH 'sITe3 aepaO go saTTTo aq 'Aq.unoO 3{MeH
3{oeT2 uaamgaq pue Aq 'AqunoO 3[MeH 3{oeT2 uT saTouabe buTgedTaTgaxd
Tie oq aaquaO suoTgeoTununuo0 Aqa;eS oTTgnd pamepTTosuoO aqq. uzoa;
saoTaaas suoT;eOTunuzuioo pup uo;edsTp ao; 'STOZ 'ZT Aa2nuPr peqPID
quauzaaabV 38Z suoTgeoTununuo0 Agages °TTgnd paqepTTosuoO au; gpuq.
'KMOI 'OO'I2i3I\M 30 ALIO 2HI 30 'II0Nf1OO EHL AS Q3A'IOS32I LI 32
' 2i0AKW AH IN3W332i0K
38Z QIVS 30 NOII002X3 JNIIO321I0 QNB' !KMOI
'3'I'IIAL22E'IIO 30 AIIO (INV !KMOI 'ALIO 3J OdV'I
30 AII3 !KMOI '3'IKQSNKA3 30 ALIO !VMOI
'NOI233?INIIQ 30 ALIO !VMOI 'NOSQf1H 30 ALIO
VMOI ' S'I IK3 2iJQ3O 30 AIIO ! AINf1OO }IMKH }IOF[Ig
HIIM IN3W332i0K 38Z SNOIIKOINIIHNOO AL33FIS
OlIEEDd Q3LKQI'IOSNO3 JNIAO23ddK NOIIMOS321
TZ-STOZ 'ON MOIIII'IOS3E
'SZSf7-T6Z (6TS) 'SOLOS KI 'ooTaageM 'gaaagS AaaagTnys STL
'ooTaag2M ;0 ' TO '3{IaT3 AqT3 AgndaQ 'saaun GN Toap3 Aq pat daad
aoAei '{aeTO '0
NaaTO I TO
ONO 'saaeL S AznS
gsaua3
' STOZ 'Aa2nu 'p
P 44ZI sTuq Q3IdOQK (INV QSSS Id
•paTTJ puP
paATaoaa aq puoq aouPuaquTPui aeaA-omq eq TELT; 'VMOI 'OO'1233IKM
30 ALIO SHI 30 'IIONf1OO 3HZ Ag Q3n'TOS32I 2iSHIE03 II SE
•panoaddP Agaaaq auzrs au -4 pue act aoue;daoov
go uoTqepuawwo0aE pue uoTgaidwoO go a4eoz;T eO eq; 4P144
'FZMOI 'OO'12 EIVM 3O AIIO 3HZ 30 'TI3Nf1OO 3HZ Ag QSA'IOSS23 II 3g
•PMoI 'ooTaaqpM go AgT0 auq- uT 'LLL '0N goeaquoO 'uz2aboad
APTaaAO pue 1TedaE 3[oaQ abpTag bIOZ 'A'3 auq 144TM uoTgoauuoo uT
'SO'SSZ'SLf'I$ 3o gsoo Tego; P qe aoqeT pauzaogaad pue sTezaaquuz
uTugaao pagszuang 'eMoi 'ooTaagPM go AgT3 aq. u4TM -40eaquo0 aapun
seu 'eMoI 'samTaO go •DUI 'seTeToossI puP aauiPID 'S°d3233HM
'QNOE S3NKN3INIKN 2i`dSA-OMI
JNIII3 QN`d SNIAI3O321 QN`d '>I23OM 3HI ONIIdSOOK
'LLL 'ON IOK2IINOO INVE90Ed AK'T2i3A0 QN`d
2iIVd323 ?IOXQ S9QI23g vIOZ 'A'3 3HI 2303 'VMOI
' S3WI2iO 30 ' 3NI ' SSIKIOOSSK (INV 22SNFZ2i0 Ag
Q3HSIN2ifl3 S'IKI233IKW QNV NEOM OI SK 3ONKId3OYK
30 NOIIKQNSWW003E SHI SNIAOEddV NOIIfl'TOSS23
ZZ-STOZ 'ON NOII0IOS32i
'SZS-T6Z (6IS) 'SOLOS KI 'ooTaagPM 'qaaagS AaaagTnW SIL
'ooTaagem 30 AqT3 'x.IaTO ' T3 AgndaQ 'saaunuaN ToaeD Aq paaPdaad
Mtaa
ON3 'seaPq
3 ALTO
s AznS
IS3IIV
aoApw '
aeIO 'J ;saua3
SIOZ 'AaenuPf P �ZI sT1-14 Q3IdOQK (INV Q3SSKd
•panoadde Agaaau sT pup act 'suoT4P0TJToads
auq uT pagTaosap aaMoN ubnoH PaaV apTM TTEE uasgooef
(I) auO go aseuoand ogq '1 T' uoTgouncuoo uT 100'00S 16 go ;unouze
egq uT 'eMoJ 'uogsuttof go sNaaMgans oq pTq go paPMP egq buTnoadde
pup panTPM act AoTTod buTppTq puP buTaeau oTTgnd auk geuz
�KMOI 'OOz233,IKM 30 =ZIO 2E1 30 'II0Nf1O3 3H]1 22 03A`IOS323 .II 32
'00'00S1617$ 30 JNnOWV 3HL
NI '2i3MON HJmO2i V2EV 30IM IIS2i N3SHO3KP (I)
3NO 30 3S`dHO2ifld 3HI HZIM NOIIONOPNOJ NI 'KMOI
'NOISNHOP 30 SN 2M323f1s 01, CIE 30 O WMK 30
NOIIVON3NN0032i CNV A3I'IOd JNIQQIE CNV JNI2i`d2H
OIlgnd 31-1Z JNIAIFZM JNIAO21ddW NOIIn'IOS32i
ZZ-17IOZ '0N NOIIfl'IOS32i
'EZE17-I6Z (6IZ) 'SOLOS KI 'ooTaaThM ';aaags AaaegTnN SIL
'ooTaagpM go AlTO '3IaeT3 AVM Agndec 'saemmeN Toapo Aq peaPdaad
aoAeN
'f TO '0 4sauaH
.SIOZ 'Aaenup jo
u4ZI sTu4 QHZdOQFZ QNK QHSSKd
•eMoI 'ooTaa4eM go ' T3 au4
go gTegaq uT GUMS atiq agnoaxa oq pazzaoggnP aogoaaTQ gaod1Tv aqq.
pue 'paaoadde Agaaaq sT aures atp pue aq 'emoI 'ooTaa;PM Jo AMMO
au4 puP (w3) uOT4La4STUTUIp`Q' UOT4UTtW Teaapaz 914.4 uaaMgaq pup
Aq 'gaodazld TPuozbaE ooTaagPM aqq. qs aabuassed paueidua aad og•f$
ssn pup asodwT o- '00'I96'96$ go qunouir auq. uT 'SIOZ 'ZI AaPnuSf
P 10 I-bIOZ :ON uoTJPOTTddV (32d) abaeg0 A4TTT0P2 aabuassPd 4Pq4
'`dMOI 'OOT21HLVM 30 ALIO HHZ 30 'IIONI100 HHZ Ag QHArIOSH2i ZI Hg
' 2i0ZDH2iIQ
Z2 0d2IIK AE NOIIV3I7lddI QIKS 30 NOI,Lf10HXH
ONIZ3H23IQ (INV NOI LK2i3SININQK NOLLKIAV rIK23HQH3
HHZ HZIM I-bIOZ :ON NOILVOlrlddV (Oa(3) H92iVH3
ASIrIIOFZ3 23HONHSSFZd ONIA023dd`d NOII0rIOSH23
D'Z-SIOZ 'ON NOIIIYIOSH23
'£Z£b-T6Z (6I£) '£OLOS KI 'ooTaageM '4aaags Aa ecru -I1 STL
'ooTaag2M go ' T3 'xa9TO ' T3 And 'szaunuaN Toze3 Aq pazedaza
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
City Council Meeting: January 12, 2015
Prepared: January 6, 2015
Dept. Head Signature: Eric Thorson, PE, City Engineer
# of Attachments:
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 - $158,579.15 INCREASE
F.Y. 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM
Contract No. 777
CRAMER AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Submitted by: Jamie Knutson, P.E., Associate Engineer
Recommended City Council Action:
Staff has reviewed this Change Order and recommends that the Mayor be authorized to sign it on
behalf of the City.
Summary Statement
Transmitted herewith is Change Order No. 5 in the increased amount of $158,579.15. This is the
accumulated amount of adjustments from original to final quantities that were determined
necessary during the construction of the project, which results in an increase to the total project
cost.
Expenditure Required
Source of Funds Local Option Sales Tax Funds
Policy Issue N/A
Alternative N/A
Background Information
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
City Council Meeting: January 12, 2015
Prepared: January 6, 2015
Dept. Head Signature: Eric Thorson, City Engineer
# of Attachments:
SUBJECT: F.Y. 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM
CITY CON TRACT NO. 777
ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
Submitted by: Eric Thorson, P.E., City Engineer
Recommended City Council Action:
It is recommended that this project be accepted.
Summary Statement:
I report that Cramer and Associates, Inc., of Grimes, Iowa, has completed the F.Y. 2014
BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM, Contract No. 777 in accordance with
the plans and specifications. The total cost of the contract was $1,473,233.05.
Expenditure Required
Source of Funds Local Option Sales Tax Funds
Policy Issue N/A
Alternative N/A
Background Information:
Cc: Rudy Jones, Community Development Director
Pauline Closson, Engineering Department
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES
3505 Easton Ave. • Waterloo, IA 50702 • (319) 291-4553 Fax (319) 291-4523
CITY OF WATERLOO
Council Communication
City Council Work Session: 01/12/15
Prepared: 01/06/15
Dept. Head Signature Larry N. Sv' h'
# of Attachments: 1
SUBJECT: FY2014 Belt Filter Press Addition Contract #869
Submitted by: Larry N. Smith
Recommended City Council Action: Approval of request to prepare plans,
specification, form of contract, etc. and to set date of bid opening as February 12, 2015
and hearing as February 16, 2015 for the FY2014 Belt Filter Press Addition, Contract
#869
Summary Statement: This is necessary to add a third belt press
Expenditure Required: Approximately $2,000,000
Source of Funds: Sewer Bonds
Policy Issue
CITY WEBSITE: www.cityofwaterlooiowa.com
WE'RE WORKING FOR YOU!
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
A. COM
January 6, 2015
Mr. Larry Smith
Water Pollution Control Facilities
3505 Easton Avenue
Waterloo, Iowa 50703
Subject: FY 2014
Belt Filter Press Addition
Water Pollution Control Facilities
City Contract No. 869
AECOM #60300979
Dear Larry,
AECOM 319-232-6531 tel
501 Sycamore Street 319-232-0271 fax
Suite 222
Waterloo, Iowa 50703
www.aecom.corn
Enclosed please find one (1) copy of the plans and specifications for the above -referenced project. We need to
get this on the agenda for approval by the Council so we can start the bidding process.
We intend to advertise it through Questcdn.com, which allows the Contract Documents to be downloaded by
prospective bidders and avoids a lot of delays from the printing process. We have been using it successfully in
our recent projects.
If we could get it approved at the January 12, 2015, meeting, we could accept bids on February 12, 2015, and
hold the Public Hearing and take action on the Contract on February 16, 2015. We could delay an extra week if
you think it would be beneficial.
We hope this is adequate for your needs at this time. If you have any questions or need anything further in this
matter, please let us know.
Yours sincerely,
Robert E. Bamsey,
Enclosures: As Noted
c: Ms. Suzy Schares (w/enclosures)
P:\60300979\300-Communications\1-6-15 Is Belt Press P&S for Council Action.docx
Letter of Transmittal
TO: Waterloo Pollution Control Operations
3505 Easton Avenue
Waterloo, Iowa 50702
WE ARE SENDING YOU:
ElAttached ❑ Prints
❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Change Order
❑ Copy of Letter
ACOM
DATE: January 7, 2015
JOB ID NO.:
ATTENTION: Mr. Larry Smith
RE: Waterloo Easton WPCF Belt Press Addition
❑ Under separate cover via
❑ Plans ❑ Samples
the following items:
❑ Specifications
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
2
Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Above -Referenced Project
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
❑x For approval
❑ For your use
❑ As requested
❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Approved as noted Cl Submit copies for distribution
❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ For Bids due 20
❑ Prints returned after loan to us
REMARKS: Upon your review and approval, please return one (1) executed supplemental agreement for our files. We look forward to
continuing to work with the City of Waterloo on this project.
COPY TO: Suzie Schares (w/enclosure) SIGNED:
If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.
501 Sycamore Street, Suite 222 • P.O. Box 1497 • Waterloo, Iowa 50704-1497 • (319) 232-6531 • Fax: (319) 232-0271
COUNCIL MEETING
January 12, 2014
Address/Business
Topic
Wendell Lupkes
4862 W. 4th Street
Preliminary/Final Plat Nottingham
Mike Young (Lawyer)
3151 Brockway Rd
Preliminary/Final Plat Nottingham
Bill Claassen (Developer)
Preliminary/Final Plat Nottingham
Rick Young (Developer)
Preliminary/Final Plat Nottingham
Kevan Cortright (Dev)
Preliminary/Final Plat Nottingham
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
To: City Council Members
Re: Notice of Severance
CITY HALL 715 MULBERRY STREET 50703
Department Library
Today's Date: 12/29/2014
Effective Date: 12/26/2014
Employment Date: 2/3/2004
Job Title/Classification Diversity Services Coordinator
This is to report that the employment of Claudia Rivera
with the City of Waterloo has been severed by reason of:
❑ Retired
Disability Related ❑ No ❑ Yes
LI Resigned
❑ Termination
❑ Other
In accordance with City Policy, it is requested to allow payment which consists of the following:
Benefits
Total Hours
(x) Hourly Rate
Total Payout
Vacation -Accrued
107.26
$ 24.76
$ 2,655.76
Vacation -Current
10
$ 24.76
$ 247.60
Usable Sick Leave
(x) 25%
$-
Frozen Sick Leave
(x) 60%
$
Personal Hours
$
Comp Time Pay
12.02
$ 24.76
$ 297.62
Unscheduled Leave
20.5
$ 24.76
$ (507.58)
Other Pay
8
$ 24.76
$ 198.08
Total Payment $ 2,891.47
Comments: "Other Pay" is birthday holiday. Claudia owes 20.5 hours of sick leave fora total of $507.58.
Approved by
Human Resources'
Routing:
Original to Human Resources by Department
Human Resources will forward original to City Clerk (Copy in Personnel File)
Clerk's Office will forward copy of approved form to Department and Human Resources
Council Agenda Date: (- ! I' ❑ Accruals ['Status Q9
Date
Date
Updated 6/28/11
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
CHANGE or EXTRA WORK ORDER NO. 5
PROJECT: F.Y. 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM CONTRACT NO. 777
Date Prepared: December 15, 2014 AMOUNT: $ 158,579.15 INCREASE
TO: CRAMER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
, Contractor
You are hereby ordered to make the following changes from the plans and specifications or perform the
following extra work on your contract dated November 18, 2013
A. Description of change to be made or extra work to be done:
ADJUSTMENTS QUANTITIES FROM PLAN TO FINAL
(SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR DETAILS)
Reason for ordering change or extra work:
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENTS FROM PLAN TO FINAL AS DETERMINED BY ACTUAL
PROJECT CONDITIONS
C. Settlement for cost of work to be made as follows:
COMPENSATION MADE THROUGH BID ITEMS ON PROGRESS PAYMENTS
TOTAL INCREASE = $ 158,579.15
CRAMER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONTRL TOR
BY:
APPROVED:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
12Pr(Y TITLE: /rj %f'
Date
gtitlAn)-11
City Engineer Date
7/7/5/2-ei
Mayor Date
City ClerkDate
Page 1 of 1
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SU M MARY.xlsx
F�2��!�E D�KR��R�D��
�����
- -
- QUANTITYADJUSTMENTSUK4K8ARY
'
PLAN
-Y
CRAMER
FINAL
F|N�'P�
COST +/-
N1 NO.
----- - DESCRIPTION - - -
UNIT
UNIT COST
QTY
CrrY
TOTAL
1
REMOVALS
1
$72,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
2
� RALCOMISCELLANEOUS
CY
25.5
$
25.5
0.0
$0.00
3
--------LB
REINFORCING STEEL,
_
450
$2.00
450
0.0
$0.00
_-_
4
-----
DECK REPAIR,
SY
905
�17D0J
'
1�8�S
'~---_-
683.5
$116,195.00
----
DECK REPAIR,
SY
90.5
$300.00
14.1
(76.4)
($22,920.00)�
6
----
STEELE�TRUS|ON]0NTVV�HNEDPR�NE
LF
312
�14�8U
312.7
0.7
$98.00
7
NEOPRENE GLAND
LF
312
.
�127
O.�
��4.5O
-----
8
CONCRETERE9A|R
SF
309
$11S.�0
3S3.38
4�38
$5,1O�7O
�
----
9
FU8N|8HTEWYPORARY8ARR|ERRA|L
LF
2450
$4.50
2256
(194.0)
($873.00)
10
----
INSTALL TExHPORARYBARRIER RAIL
IF
4900
$2.50
4512
.D)
(]��
($970.00)
-- 11 ----/NPO-----
_
CU�H|ON�FURNISH AND |N��LL
EACH
6
$900.00 6
0.0
$0'
12
BR|QGEAPPROACH, R%'26
SY
4
1303.4
$190.001507.6204.2
$����8DO
, .
13
_
NDARD NON REINFORCED PAVING, PCC, 7 INCH, C-4
SY
30
$10000
$1.50
92.5
7746.8
62.5
(0.9)
$6i250.00
($1.35)
14
LONGITUDINALGROOV|NG|NDON[RETE
SY
7747.7
--
15
REMOVAL OF
SY
1333.4
_
$15.00
16801
c
266.7
$4,000,50
16
----
8ARR|[RRA|�RE'45
LF
SO
$160.00
4687S
_--__'
(3.125)
($500.00)
__
17
---'
SIDEWALK REMOVAL
SY
77
$2.00
55.2
(21.8)
($43.60)
18
SIDEWALK,6|N[H
SY
77
$50.00
55.2
(21.8)
($1,090.00)
----------------
19
DETEcTABLE WARNING SURFACE
SF
24
_ $70.00
20
Nl)
(+80'0=)
---20
8R|----'|LR`PA|K'CONGER STREET BRIDGES
.
LS
1
$11,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
21
RES RAILAND STRAIGHTEN RAIL
LS
1
$5,000.001
0.0
$0.00-------
22
----'-
PAVEMENTPW�RK]N��
STA
35
$110.00
55.59
20.59
$2,264.90
23
---- _
MOBILIZATION
L�
1
�11��OOU'�
$110,000.00
��
1 � 0.0
$�DO'
-----
24
----- ----
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1
$25,000.00
.
- 1r 0.0
$0.00
-----
10
REMOVEM-4
SY
75
$148.00
75
0.0
S0L00
----'
1002
----
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1$2,007.50
1
0.0
.
$0.00
-
1003
4001
----
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
STA
12.5
$99.00
3.6
(8.9)
($881.10)
'----
4TH ST.
LS1
1
$550.00
0.0
$0.00
----
4002
----'
SIGN RENTALFOR4TH S[TRAFF|CCONTROi
DAY
5
$49.50
5
UO
.
$0.00
4003
-------- ----1
4TH
SETUP AND�EK8OVET0�FF|CCONTROL'ST.
LS
1
�3�7
_- '5O
0.0
$0.00
----TOTAL BASE BID
$145,175.55
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SU M MARY.xlsx
12/1
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xIsx
F.Y 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY
CONTRACT NO. 777
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY
PLAN
CRAMER
FINAL
FINAL - PLAN
COST +/-
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QTY
UNIT COST
QTY
QTY
TOTAL
ALTERNATE A
OPTION 2
L
25.2
DECK OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -0 PCC)
SY
7090.4
$40.00
7117.1
26.7
$1,068.00
26.2
BRIDGE APPROACH OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -0 PCC)
SY
190.1
$40.00
193.2
3.1
$124.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE A
$1,192.00
TOTAL BASE + ALTERNATE A OPTION 2
$146,367.55
2001
4TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL BEARING PADS, CLEAN & PAINT ROCKERS
EACH
10
$2,400.00
14
4.00
$9,600.00
2002
CONGER ST. BRIDGES -CLEAN AND PAINT BEARING PADS & ROCKERS
EACH
28
$1,900.00
28
0.00
$0.00
2003
5TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL 3" RAIL, 2 POSTS AND MISC. HARDWARE
LS
1
$9,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3001
MOBILIZATION
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3002
PAVEMENT REMOVAL
SY
90
$18.00
116.2
26.20
$471.60
3003
BARRIER WALL REMOVAL
LS
1
$900.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3004
BARRIER WALL RECONSTRUCTION
IF
30
$210.00
31
1.00
$210.00
3005
NEW PAVEMENT, RK -23
SY
90
$250.00
116.2
26.20
$6,550.00
3006
EXCAVATION, CLASS 10
CY
10
$35.00
38.7
28.70
$1,004.50
3007
CLEAN/RESEAL JOINTS
LF
150
$6.00
148
(2.00)
($12.00)
3008
PLOWABLE MORTAR
SY
30
$250.00
10.75
(19.25)
($4,812.50)
3009
SEEDING
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3010
MANHOLE ADJUSTMENT
EACH
1
$800.00
0
(1.00)
($800.00)
3011
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1
$3,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
ITEMS 3001-3011 ARE FOR WORK AT MLK/LANE
SUBTOTAL CHANGE ORDERS 2 AND 3
$12,211.60
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,163,182.55
TOTAL INCREASE
$158,579.15
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
$13,745.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
$86,950.00
CHANGE ORDER NO.3
$49,620.00
PAYMENT
SUMMARY
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4
$1,155.00
ESTIMATES 1-16
$1,399,570.12
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5
$158,579.15
RETAINAGE
$73,661.59
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,473,231.70
TOTAL PAID
$1,473,231.70
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xIsx
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
CHANGE or EXTRA WORK ORDER NO. 5
PROJECT: F.Y. 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM CONTRACT NO. 777
Date Prepared: December 15, 2014 AMOUNT: $ 158,57915 INCREASE
TO: CRAMER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
, Contractor
You are hereby ordered to make the following changes from the plans and specifications or perform the
following extra work on your contract dated November 18, 2013
A. Description of change to be made or extra work to be done:
ADJUSTMENTS QUANTITIES FROM PLAN TO FINAL
(SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR DETAILS)
Reason for ordering change or extra work:
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENTS FROM PLAN TO FINAL AS DETERMINED BY ACTUAL
PROJECT CONDITIONS
C. Settlement for cost of work to be made as follows:
COMPENSATION MADE THROUGH BID ITEMS ON PROGRESS PAYMENTS
TOTAL INCREASE _ $ 158,579.15
CRAMER & ASSOCIATES INC.
CONTRACTOR
BY:
APPROVED:
% 2-7(14? TITLE: P" 5/C er=-�
Date
gitj�C %1)
City E
.
APPROVED:
eer
ATTEST:
!4//s -
Date
Mayor Date
City Clerk" Date
Page 1 of 1
/3/2-40/ ----
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
F,Y 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY
CONTRACT NO.
777
_______
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY
_
PLAN
CRAMER
FINAL
FINAL - PLAN
COST +/-
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QTY
UNIT COST
QTY
QTY
TOTAL
REMOVALS
LS
1
$72,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
25.5
$1,900.00
25.5
0.0
0.00
__1
2
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, MISCELLANEOUS
CY
$0.00
3
REINFORCING STEEL, EPDXY COATED
LB
450
$2.00
450
0.0
905
$170.00
1588.5
683.5
$116,195.00
4
DECK REPAIR, CLASS A
SY
5
DECK REPAIR, CLASS B
SY
90.5
$300.00
14.1
(76.4)
($22,920.00)
312
$140.00
312.7
0.7
$98.00
STEEL EXTRUSION JOINT WITH NEOPRENE
LF
312.7
0.7
$24.50
7
NEOPRENE GLAND INSTALLATION AND TESTING
LF
312
$35.00
SF
309
$115.00
353.38
44.38
$5,103.70
8
CONCRETE REPAIR
(194.0)
($873.00)
9
FURNISH TEMPORARY BARRIER RAIL
LF
2450
$4.50
2256
(388.0)
($970.00)
10
INSTALL TEMPORARY BARRIER RAIL
LF
4900
$2.50
4512
$900.00
6
0.0
$0.00
_
11
TEMPORARY CRASH CUSHION, FURNISH AND INSTALL
EACH
6
SY
1303.4
$190.00
1507.6
204.2
$38,798.00
12
BRIDGE APPROACH, RK -25
13
STANDARD NON REINFORCED PAVING, PCC, 7 INCH, C-4
SY
30
$100.00
92.5
62.5
$6,250.00
$1.50
7746.8
(0.9)
($1.35)
14
LONGITUDINAL GROOVING IN CONCRETE
SY
7747.7
$4,000.50
15
REMOVAL OF PAVEMENT
SY
1333.4
$15.00
1600.1
266.7
50
$160.00
46.875
(3.125)
($500.00)
_
16
BARRIER RAIL, RE -46
LF
77
$2.00
55.2
(21.8)
($43.60)
17
SIDEWALK REMOVAL
SY
SY
77
$50.00
55.2
(21.8)
($1,090.00)
18
SIDEWALK, PCC, 6 INCH
20
(4.0)
($280.00)
19
20
DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE
SF
24
$70.00
BRIDGE RAIL REPAIR - CONGER STREET BRIDGES
L5
1
$11,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
$0.00
21
RESET RAIL POST AND STRAIGHTEN RAIL
LS
1
$5,000.00
1
0.0
35
$110.00
55.59
20.59
$2,264.90
22
MARKINGS
STA
PAVEMENT
LS
-• 1
$110,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
23
MOBILIZATION
1
0.0
$0.00
24
TRAFFIC CONTROL
L5
1
$25,000.00
$140.00
75
0.0
$0.00
$0.00-
1001
REMOVE AND REPLACE MEDIAN, 8"PCC, M-4
SY
75
1
$2,007.50
1
0.0
1002
1003
TRAFFIC CONTROL - MEDIAN CROSSOVER
LS
3.6
(8.9)
($881.10)
PAVEMENT MARKINGS REMOVED
STA
12.5
$99.00
_
1
$550.00
1
0.0
$0.00
4001
4TH ST. BRIDGE - PROFILOGRAPH
LS
5
0.0
$0.00
4002
SIGN RENTAL FOR 4TH ST. TRAFFIC CONTROL
DAY
5
$49.50
0.0
$0.00
_ 4003
SETUP AND REMOVE TRAFFIC CONTROL - 4TH ST.
LS
_ 1
$357.50
1
$145,175.55
TOTAL BASE BID
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
12/12/2014
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
F.Y 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY
CONTRACT NO. 777
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY
PLAN
CRAMER
FINAL
FINAL - PLAN
COST +/-
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QTY
UNIT COST
QTY
QTY
TOTAL
ALTERNATE A
OPTION 2
25.2
DECK OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -O PCC)
SY
7090.4
$40.00
7117.1
26.7
$1,068,00
26.2
BRIDGE APPROACH OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -O PCC)
SY
190.1
$40.00
193.2
3.1
$124.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE A
$1,192.00
TOTAL BASE + ALTERNATE A OPTION 2
, $146,367.55
2001
4TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL BEARING PADS, CLEAN & PAINT ROCKERS
EACH
10
$2,400.00
14
4.00
$9,600.00
2002
CONGER ST. BRIDGES -CLEAN AND PAINT BEARING PADS & ROCKERS
EACH
28
$1,900.00
28
0.00
$0.00
2003
5TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL 3" RAIL, 2 POSTS AND MISC. HARDWARE
LS
1
$9,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3001
MOBILIZATION
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3002
PAVEMENT REMOVAL
SY
90
$18.00
116.2
26.20
$471.60
3003
BARRIER WALL REMOVAL
LS
1
$900.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3004
BARRIER WALL RECONSTRUCTION
LF
30
$210.00
31
1.00
$210.00
3005
NEW PAVEMENT, RK -23
SY
90
$250.00
116.2
26.20
$6,550.00
3006
EXCAVATION, CLASS 10
CY
10
$35.00
38.7
28.70
$1,004.50
3007
CLEAN/RESEAL JOINTS
LF
150
$6.00
148
(2.00)
($12.00)
3008
FLOWABLE MORTAR
SY
30
$250.00
10.75
(19.25)
($4,812.50)
3009
SEEDING
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3010
MANHOLE ADJUSTMENT
EACH
1
$800.00
0
(1.00)
($800.00)
3011
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1
$3,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
ITEMS 3001-3011 ARE FOR WORK AT MLK/LANE
SUBTOTAL CHANGE ORDERS 2 AND 3
$12,211.60
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,163,182.55
TOTAL INCREASE
$158,579.15
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
$13,745.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
$86,950.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
$49,620.00
'PAYMENT
SUMMARY
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4
$1,155.00
ESTIMATES 1-16
$1,399,570.12
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5
$158,579.15
RETAINAGE
$73,661.59
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,473,231.70
TOTAL PAID
$1,473,231.70
J
12/12/2014
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
CHANGE or EXTRA WORK ORDER NO. 5
PROJECT: F.Y. 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY PROGRAM CONTRACT NO. 777
Date Prepared:
December 15, 2014 AMOUNT: $ 158,579.15 INCREASE
TO: CRAMER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
, Contractor
You are hereby ordered to make the following changes from the plans and specifications or perform the
following extra work on your contract dated November 18, 2013
A. Description of change to be made or extra work to be done:
ADJUSTMENTS QUANTITIES FROM PLAN TO FINAL
(SEE ATTACHED SUMMARY FOR DETAILS)
Reason for ordering change or extra work:
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENTS FROM PLAN TO FINAL AS DETERMINED BY ACTUAL
PROJECT CONDITIONS
C. Settlement for cost of work to be made as follows:
COMPENSATION MADE THROUGH BID ITEMS ON PROGRESS PAYMENTS
TOTAL INCREASE
CRAMER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
_ $ 158,579.15
CONTRACTOR
BY:
APPROVED:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Z-(()-4 TITLE:
Date
City En•ineer
7d/
Date
i/.3/.gid/J
Mayor Date
o.Q<D J -I3 -J5
City Clerk Date
Page 1 of 1
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
F.Y 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY
CONTRACT NO. 777
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY
PLAN
CRAMER L FINAL
FINAL - PLAN
COST -1-1-
TOTAL
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QTY
UNIT COST
QTY
QTY
1
REMOVALS
LS
1
$72,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
2
STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, MISCELLANEOUS
CY
25,5
$1,900.00
25.5
0.0
$0.00
3
REINFORCING STEEL, EPDXY COATED
LB _
450
$2.00
450
0.0
$0.00
4
DECK REPAIR, CLASS A
SY
905
$170.00
1588.5
683.5
$116,195.00
5
DECK REPAIR, CLASS B
SY
90.5
$300.00
14.1
(76.4)
($22,920.00)
6
STEEL EXTRUSION JOINT WITH NEOPRENE
LF
312
$140.00
312.7
0.7_
$98.00
312.7
0.7
$24.50
7
NEOPRENE GLAND INSTALLATION AND TESTING
LF
312
$35.00
$115.00
353.38
44.38
$5,103.70
8
CONCRETE REPAIR
SF
309
2256
(194.0)
($873.00)
9
FURNISH TEMPORARY BARRIER RAIL
IF
2450
$4.50
LF
4900
$2.50
4512
(388.0)
($970.00)
_ 10
11
INSTALL TEMPORARY BARRIER RAIL
_
TEMPORARY CRASH CUSHION, FURNISH AND INSTALL
EACH
6
$900.00
6
0.0
$0.00
12
BRIDGE APPROACH, RK -25
SY
1303.4
$190.00
1507.6
204.2
$38,798.00
13
STANDARD NON REINFORCED PAVING, PCC, 7 INCH, C-4
SY
30
$100.00
92.5
62.5
$6,250.00
14
LONGITUDINAL GROOVING IN CONCRETE
SY
7747.7
$1.50
7746.8
(0.9)
($1.35)
15
REMOVAL OF PAVEMENT
SY
1333.4
$15.00
1600.1
266.7
$4,000.50
($500.00)
16
BARRIER RAIL, RE -46
LF
50
$160.00
46.875
(3.125)
55.2
(21.8)
($43.60)
17
SIDEWALK REMOVAL
SY
77
$2.00
55.2
(21.8)
($1,090.00)
18
SIDEWALK, PCC, 6 INCH
SY
77
$50.00
19
20
DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE
SF
24
$70.00
20
(4.0)
($280.00)
LS
1
$11,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
BRIDGE RAIL REPAIR - CONGER STREET BRIDGES
21
RESET RAIL POST AND STRAIGHTEN RAIL
LS
1
$5,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
35
$110.00
55.59
20.59
$2,264.90
22
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
STA
LS
1
$110,000.00
1
0.0
$0.00
23
MOBILIZATION
1
0.0
$0.00
24
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1
$25,000.00
1001
REMOVE AND REPLACE MEDIAN, 8"PCC, M-4
SY
75
$140.00
75
0.0
$0.00
1
$2,007.50
1
0.0
$0.00
1002
TRAFFIC CONTROL - MEDIAN CROSSOVER
LS
1003
PAVEMENT MARKINGS REMOVED
STA
12.5
$99.00
3.6
(8.9)
($881.10)
1
$550.00
1
0.0
$0.00
4001
ST. BRIDGE - PROFILOGRAPH
LS
5
$49.50
5
0.0
$0.00
_4TH
4002
SIGN RENTAL FOR 4TH ST. TRAFFIC CONTROL
DAY
0.0
$0.00
4003
SETUP AND REMOVE TRAFFIC CONTROL - 4TH ST.
LS
1
$357.50
1
TOTAL BASE BID
$145,175.55
12/12/2014
1 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
ICE
12/12/2014
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
F.Y 2014 BRIDGE DECK REPAIR AND OVERLAY
CONTRACT NO. 777
QUANTITY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY
PLAN
CRAMER
FINAL
FINAL - PLAN
COST +/-
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QTY
UNIT COST
QTY
QTY
TOTAL
ALTERNATE A
OPTION 2
25.2
DECK OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -O PCC)
SY
7090.4
$40.00
7117.1
26.7
$1,068.00
26.2
BRIDGE APPROACH OVERLAY (CLASS HPC -0 PCC)
SY
190.1
$40.00
193.2
3.1
$124.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE A
$1,192.00
TOTAL BASE + ALTERNATE A OPTION 2
$146,367.55
2001
4TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL BEARING PADS, CLEAN & PAINT ROCKERS
EACH
10
$2,400.00
14
4.00
$9,600.00
2002
CONGER ST. BRIDGES -CLEAN AND PAINT BEARING PADS & ROCKERS
_ EACH
28
$1,900.00
28
0.00
$0.00
2003
5TH ST. BRIDGE-REM/REPL 3" RAIL, 2 POSTS AND MISC. HARDWARE
LS
1
$9,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3001
MOBILIZATION
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3002
PAVEMENT REMOVAL
SY
90
$18.00
116.2
26.20
$471.60
3003
BARRIER WALL REMOVAL
LS
1
$900.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3004
BARRIER WALL RECONSTRUCTION
LF
30
$210.00
31
1.00
$210.00
3005
NEW PAVEMENT, RK -23
SY
90
$250.00
116.2
26.20
$6,550.00
3006
EXCAVATION, CLASS 10
CY
10
$35.00
38.7
28.70
$1,004.50
3007
CLEAN/RESEAL JOINTS
LF
150
$6.00
148
(2.00)
($12.00)
3008
FLOWABLE MORTAR
SY
30
$250.00
10.75
(19.25)
($4,812.50)
3009
SEEDING
LS
1
$2,500.00
1
0.00
$0.00
3010
MANHOLE ADJUSTMENT
EACH
1
$800.00
0
(1.00)
($800.00)
3011
TRAFFIC CONTROL
LS
1
$3,750.00
1
0.00
$0.00
ITEMS 3001-3011 ARE FOR WORK AT MLK/LANE
SUBTOTAL CHANGE ORDERS 2 AND 3
$12,211.60
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,163482.55
TOTAL INCREASE
$158,579.15
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
$13,745.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
$86,950.00
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
$49,620.00
PAYMENT SUMMARY
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4
$1,155.00
ESTIMATES 1-16
$1,399,570.12
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5
$158,579.15
RETAINAGE
$73,661.59
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
$1,473,231.70
TOTAL PAID
$1,473,231.70
I
12/12/2014
2 of 2
777 QTY ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY.xlsx
ARIC SCHROEDER
From: ARIC SCHROEDER
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 1:50 PM
To: MAYOR CLARK; COUNCIL MEMBERS
Cc: SUZY SCHARES; NOEL ANDERSON; ADRIENNE MILLER; ERIC THORSON; DENNIS GENTZ;
rick@youngphc.com; 'Wendell Lupkes'; 'gluterek@mchsi.com'; 'Tim Jamison'
Subject: Responses to concerns/questions to Nottingham Third Addition
Attachments: Compiled Responses to Opposition Documents for Nottingham Third Addition
01-09-15.pdf; Opposition Documents 1 - 4.pdf; Tract B Illustrative Concept house and
barn 01-07-2015.pdf; Nottingham Subdivisions Lot Comparison 01-07-15.pdf
Mayor and Council,
Attached is the consolidated responses to the concerns/questions that have been submitted regarding the proposed
Preliminary and Final Plat of Nottingham Third Addition that is on the January 12, 2015 agenda of the City Council.
Items submitted are broken out into seven different documents, and the response attachment goes through each
document one at a time providing a response to all issues/concerns raised in the document. For the first four
documents, in my response attachment I have only summarized the issues/concerns from the documents and did not
insert the entire opposition documents. A copy of those four documents, as submitted by the opposition, is the second
attachment to this e-mail.
For documents five, six and seven, because they were provided in a Word Document format and because
issues/concerns contained color graphics, I decided the best approach was to copy and paste each document into my
response document, and then directly insert responses into the opposition documents, putting all of my responses in
green and underline so that it would be clear what wording was the staff response.
Also, the applicant has provided an illustrative concept for how Tract "B" would be developed with a single family home
and horse barn, because the opposition documentation called into question the plan for and future use of Tract
"B". The illustrative concept plan is the third attachment to this e-mail.
A fourth and final attachment provides a spreadsheet comparing the lot sizes of the proposed subdivision to existing
subdivisions in the neighborhood, because the opposition documentation calls into question the average lot size of the
proposed lots compared to existing and questions the method by which staff calculated an average lot size for both the
proposed lots and the lots in the existing subdivision. The spreadsheet looks at the lots as originally platted, but then
also looks at "current lots" in the neighborhood subdivision, which takes into account lots that have been split and
combined with adjoining lot, and then looks at the current lot size when several extra unplatted tracts of ground that
two property owners (Naylor and Matoon) have purchased. The standard method for calculating an average is to
calculate the mean, which is calculated by adding up all of the lot sizes and then dividing by the number of lots. But
based on comments from the opposition documentation, we have also calculated an "average" by looking at the
"median", "mode" and "Midrange". There is obviously differences based on which method of calculation is used, and if
you are just looking at lot size as originally platted or not...but it is staff's opinion that the proposed lots are generally
similar and not out of character with the lots in the existing subdivisions.
In summary of all responses, staff re -affirms that the proposed plat is in conformance with all regulations and
ordinances with the minor exception of the Subdivision Ordinance requirement that a final plat be submitted and
approved after the preliminary plat has been approved, and a variance has been requested to this provision. Similar
variance requests have routinely been granted with other subdivision requests.
1
It has been requested that hard copies of these documents also be provided, so a set of the attachments will be placed
in your mailbox at City Hall.
Please let me know if anyone has any questions regarding any of the opposition documents or the staff responses, or if
anyone needs any additional information.
Respectfully,
AR1C A. SCHROEDER
City Planner
City of Waterloo Community Planning and Development
715 Mulberry Street
Waterloo, IA 50703
Phone: (319) 291-4366
Fax: (319) 291-4262
www.ci.waterloo.ia.us
2
CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
715 Mulberry Street • Waterloo, IA 50703 • (319) 291-4366 Fax (319) 291-4262
NOEL C. ANDERSON, Community Planning & Development Director
Responses to Opposition Documents for Nottingham Third Addition
Individuals opposed to the request for the Preliminary and Final Plat of Nottingham Third Addition have submitted
multiple documents detailing their concerns, including the following documents titled: 1) Nottingham Third Addition —
Protection of future owners, Preservation of community, Protection of quality of life and Defense against Profit Driven
Developers 14 Oct 2014, 2) Tract "E" Subdivision Ordinance, 3) Tract "B" Subdivision Ordinance, 4) Borrow Pit (Detention
Pond), 5) Nottingham Neighbors Position — 15 Dec 14, 6) Nottingham Third Addition Issues and Ordinances, and 7)
Existing Nottingham neighbors concerns. The following provides a staff response to the issues raised in these
documents.
1. Nottingham Third Addition — Protection of future owners, Preservation of community, Protection of quality of life
and Defense against Profit Driven Developers, 14 Oct 2014
Page one of the submitted documentation recites the Purpose of the Zoning Ordinance as adopted by Ordinance 3196,
and indicates what is not the purpose. It should be noted that Ordinance 3196 was adopted on 2/22/82 as an
amendment to Ordinance No. 2479, the then effective Zoning Ordinance of the City of Waterloo. The amendment
added the purpose section to the Zoning Ordinance. The City of Waterloo Zoning Ordinance No. 2479 was repealed in
its entirety upon the adoption of a new Zoning Ordinance No. 5079 on 10/17/11, although the new Zoning Ordinance
also has the purpose section. The submitted documentation does not recite all provisions listed in the purpose section.
As an example, the purpose to "encourage the most appropriate use of land" was omitted. The last two items (No. 10
and 11) of the submitted documentation that refer to conflict of interest and business conduct are not wording from the
purpose section.
Also, it should be noted that the request is for the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Nottingham Third
Addition, a proposed subdivision. Subdivision of land is regulated by the City of Waterloo Subdivision Ordinance No.
2997. The request does not involve a change in Zoning, and the site has been properly zoned for the proposed use (a
residential subdivision) since the rezone of the property from "A-1" Agricultural District to "R-1" One and Two Family
Residence District with adoption of Ordinance 4720 on 9/15/04. It should be noted that the same rezone on 9/15/04
was what allowed for the development of many of the opposition's lots. At the time of that rezone, the developer
provided a proposed conceptual full build -out site plan which shows lots in the area proposed to be platted. The City of
Waterloo Subdivision Ordinance No. 2997 also has a purpose section that is similar to the Zoning Ordinance. The
opposition letter does not indicate how the request is not in compliance with any of the provisions of the purpose
section (of either Ordinance).
Page two and three of the submitted documentation lists 11 "main points". Responses to these points are as follows:
1. Water flooding on proposed lots — A picture was provided showing a snow melt/rain flood event and has
existing and proposed property lines approximately drawn onto the picture. It is indicated that areas should not
be approved to be part of the plat because they have/will flood. Where homes would be located on the
proposed lots are not within a Special Flood Hazard Area as indicated by the Federal Insurance Administration's
Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted July 18, 2011. The areas in question are around 10' higher than the 100 -year
base flood elevation indicated on the flood maps, and over 20' higher than low lying land on the west side of
1
Prescott's Creek near the adjoining Southland Park Subdivision. Any flooding in the area was caused by local
drainage runoff from the existing developed areas due to a heavy rain or snow melt event. Localized flooding
from heavy rain or snow melt events are common throughout the City and do not indicate that an area should
be classified as a Special Flood Hazard Area or be restricted for development. The applicant has indicated that if
the plat is approved, the storm sewer from the existing subdivision that currently outlets into the area of
concern in the open field behind the existing lots would be extended all the way to Prescott's Creek and a well-
defined drainage channel will be developed for runoff crossing Tract "B", which will help address this situation
depicted in the picture. It is often assumed that undeveloped land drains better than developed land; however
the development of land with stormwater management controls can better control how drainage is managed
and can actually improve overall drainage of an area.
2. Street extension to parcel "N" — It is indicated that the owner of parcel "N" wants the road to connect to the
property line and it is indicated that the road should be a standard 31' wide. The road is proposed to be 28'
wide, which does meet minimum City requirements. It was previously indicated that the now owner of parcel
"N" did not want the road to be extended through this area which is why the owner purchased parcel "N" from
the developer and necessitated a permanent cul-de-sac for the proposed subdivision. Based on indication that
the owner of parcel "N" now does want the connection, the developer has changed the proposed preliminary
and final plat to show the right-of-way being extended to the northerly property line of the proposed plat for a
future extension of the road between the cul-de-sac and the north property line.
3. Tract "B" — It is indicated that tract "B" does not have the ability to connect to sewer other than if a connection
is made to the Prescott's Creek trunk sewer to the west. The applicant and applicant's engineer have indicated
that tract "B" would be able to be served by existing sewer in the subdivision, possibly by gravity sewer, but
alternatively it could be served by the existing sewer utilizing a grinder pump, which utilization of a grinder
pump system is not prohibited by the City of Waterloo, and other homes in the area utilize grinder pump
systems, so it would not be uncommon if a grinder pump were utilized.
4. Sanitary Sewer—This appears to be a restate of the issue identified in #3. See response in #3 above. The overall
layout and design of the subdivision is a continuation of the existing subdivisions utilizing the existing sewer line
that was designed and intended to serve the entire area, with only one Tract that may potentially need to utilize
a sewage ejection system (grinder pump), which is allowed by Ordinance and not uncommon to the community
or area.
5. Borrow Pit (Dirt) — It is indicated that the sole purpose is to reduce cost of road, not as "retention pond". Fill
material taken from the detention/retention pond will be used to elevate the grade of the proposed road and
lots, however it is not the sole purpose, as inclusion of a detention/retention facility is mandated by the
Stormwater regulations of the City of Waterloo contained within Title 8, Chapter 4, Stormwater Management
Program of the City of Waterloo Code of Ordinances. It is questioned if the volume and depth have been clearly
defined. This detail is typically provided after plat approval when the detailed construction plans are submitted,
and is not required to be submitted prior to plat approval and it is typical and standard practice that the
construction plans are not submitted until after approval of a subdivision. Despite this, the applicant has
submitted additional details that provide dimensions, volume and depth. It is indicated that the drawings show
that the detention/retention facility will be located "far into the floodway". The facility will extend into the
floodway, and is not prohibited from doing so. It is indicated that this facility requires Iowa DNR approval. I had
indicated that IDNR approval was not required and have confirmed that with the IDNR. Please find attached an
e-mail from Bill Cappuccio with the IDNR indicating that no additional approvals for the creation of the
retention/detention pond are required and noting that they have no objections to the City of Waterloo issuing a
floodplain development permit. In a phone conversation with Mr. Cappuccio he noted that from the IDNR's
2
perspective, it would not matter what the purpose of an excavation was (detention/retention facility, borrow
pit, commercial mining and extraction, etc.), as their review of an excavation is limited to ensuring that fill
material does not get placed within a floodway and that an excavated area will not cause an adjoining channel
to divert into the excavated area.
6. New land owners maintenance responsibilities — It is indicated that the City has turned down an offer to own
tract "C". This is incorrect, the City was never offered to own tract "C" where the detention/retention facility
would be located, as maintenance of such facilities are the requirement of the owner of the property that the
facility serves, which is initially the developer and later the owners of the lots, typically through a homeowners
association. All new subdivisions are mandated to provide such facilities, and this is not an undue burden on the
owners. Purchase of a lot in the subdivision is voluntary, so if an individual feels that the requirement to
maintain such a facility is an undue burden, then they shouldn't purchase a lot in such a subdivision. However,
given that the facilities are mandated to meet Federal EPA stormwater management requirements under the
Clean Water Act, for the City of Waterloo to grow and see new residential subdivisions, homeowner
maintenance of such facilities will have to be accepted. It is indicated that there should be clearly defined
guidelines of inspection and maintenance for the owners to follow and the City engineer to approve. Past
practice has been to ensure the wording is provided in the deed of dedication of who (typically a homeowners
association) owns and is responsible to maintain. We have not required further details on how it is to be
maintained or inspected. A similar detention facility (also located in a floodplain) was recently approved by the
City Council as part of the approval of the preliminary and final plat of Audubon Heights Fourth Addition located
about a Y2 mile to the east along Shaulis Road.
7. Final Plat document — It is indicated that if construction plans have not been reviewed and fully signed off by the
City Engineer, then the plat should be removed from the agenda. This is incorrect, as construction plans are not
required nor have they typically been submitted until after a plat is approved.
8. Lot sizes — It is indicated that data in the staff's information is misleading, including that the staff information
states the minimum parcel is 17,250 sf, but indicates the "land owners with houses minimum size is actually
20,250" and that the "real average is 31,500 sf", and suggests that the minimum lot size for the proposed
subdivision should be 20,000 sf or greater and an average of 31,000 sf. It is unclear how the indicated minimum
and average were arrived at, but it would appear to include area where a lot owner has bought all or part of an
adjoining lot or an additional tract of unplatted land. The intention of the staff analysis of lot size was to
compare the lot sizes as lots were originally platted, and not combined lots or parcels. Lots 2 and 4 of
Nottingham Addition were plated as 17,250 sf and are the smallest lots in the existing subdivisions. The
proposed lot sizes do not appear to be significantly different than the lot sizes as platted in the existing
subdivisions, and on average, are 467.5 SF larger, with the smallest lot proposed being 546 SF smaller than the
smallest platted lots in the existing subdivisions.
9. Staff Recommendation is Inaccurate in several areas — It is indicated that the staff recommendation and
conclusion of compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance "is completely inaccurate and indicated the staff are
either not aware of the entirety of the subdivision and zoning ordinances of the City of Waterloo, or have
chosen to ignore certain sections in favor of the developer". This statement is incorrect and without any
supporting documentation to indicate what requirement(s) are not being met. Staff is aware of the entirety of
the Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance and are not choosing to ignore any sections, and staff
would reaffirm our conclusion that the requested plat is in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. The only
variance to the requirements of the Ordinance is to the provision requiring submittal and approval of the final
plat to occur after approval of the preliminary plat, a requirement that is routinely granted variance by the
3
Council and simply allows for both plats to be reviewed and approved at the same time, not impacting the intent
or purpose of the regulations.
10. 40 Day action limit — It is indicated that the Committee (Commission) has 40 days to approve, conditionally
approve, or deny development proposal. This is partially correct in that the Subdivision Ordinance provides for a
40 day time limit for the Commission to act on a Preliminary Plat after the date of the regular meeting of the
Commission at which a Preliminary Plat was first presented (11-3-2(C) of the Code of Ordinances). No such
limitation is provided for a Final Plat, although 354.8 of the State Code provides for a 60 day time limit. The plat
(preliminary and final) was originally presented to the Commission at their September 9th, 2014 regular meeting,
where it was tabled to the October 14th, 2014 regular meeting (within the 40 days). After the Attorney's Office
legal opinion was provided that attempted action at the October 14th meeting was not valid due to a loss of a
quorum of the members of the Commission and staff's determination that the request would need to go back
before the Commission for action, the applicant voluntarily withdrew his request from the November 4th
agenda. Therefore, when the applicant re -submitted the requests for the December 2"d, 2014 regular meeting,
this started a new time limit. The time limits are for the benefit of the applicant of a requested subdivision, and
354.10 of the State Code provides for an applicant who is aggrieved due to failure of the governing body to
approve or reject a subdivision plat within 60 days to appeal to district court. Adjoining property owners are not
listed as an aggrieved party that can appeal due to a plat not being acted on within a statutory time limit.
11. Legal Issues — It is indicated that a violation of the Subdivision Ordinance is a legal violation, subject to criminal
penalty. This statement is correct; however there is no violation of the Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to the
proposed plat.
2. Tract "E" Subdivision Ordinance
This document highlights sections of the Subdivision Ordinance, marking in red sections that the opposition feels that
the proposed subdivision is not compliant/consistent with the requirements. It should be noted that the Subdivision
Ordinance was adopted as Ordinance No. 2997 on 11/20/78. The Ordinance has subsequently been codified into the
City Code of Ordinances and is now Title 11 of the Code. As part of that codification, the section numbers and letters
where changed and the order of some sections were changed to match the numbering and lettering style of the City
Code of Ordinances. The opposition's documentation sites the old numbering and lettering system. In my responses, I
have listed the section number/letter that the opposition has sited, as well as provided what the proper reference to
that section now is. Responses to these points are as follows:
2.3 Final Subdivision Plats (now 11-3-3) — It is highlighted that the final plat is supposed to be submitted "following
the approval of a preliminary plat" and "be accompanied by the contract and waivers". The City has routinely
accepted plats that submit both the preliminary and final plat at the same time and Council has routinely
issued a variance to this provision. This does not speak to any concerns of the plats themselves, just the
process/timeline that they get submitted/approved, which approving both at the same time does not affect
the intent or purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance regulations. And the applicant has submitted contract and
waiver documents.
3.4 Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements (now 11-4-4) — It is highlighted that the City Council may defer
or waive the provision of any or all such improvements. The applicant is committing to construct all
improvements, except for improvements in Tract "E", which are requested to be waived. As discussed above
in a previous response, the applicant is proposing, and City staff is in acceptance with the installation of a
permanent cul-de-sac at the end of the northerly extension of the proposed road serving the plat. Because
the opposition has indicated that the owner of parcel "N" to the north now wants the ability for a road
connection to the south, the applicants have added Tract "E", which is being dedicated as public right-of-way
4
for a future public road connection. There is not a need for the improvements in Tract "E" to be built at this
time, and they can be built if and when development to the north occurs and a connection to the road in the
proposed subdivision is desired.
4.3 Roads (now 11-5-3) — It is highlighted that proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the
tract to be subdivided, but the section also notes "unless" provisions whereby a road would not have to be
extended to the boundary line, including "unless in the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such
extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing
layout or the most advantageous future development or adjacent tracts". As noted, the proposed Tract "E" is
to allow for the potential of a future road connection to the north, and road improvements within Tract "E"
are not needed at this time.
3. Tract "B" Subdivision Ordinance
This document highlights sections of the Subdivision Ordinance, marking in red sections that the opposition feels that
the proposed subdivision is not compliant/consistent with the requirements. It should be noted that the Subdivision
Ordinance was adopted as Ordinance No. 2997 on 11/20/78. The Ordinance has subsequently been codified into the
City Code of Ordinances and is now Title 11 of the Code. As part of that codification, the section numbers and letters
where changed and the order of some sections were changed to match the numbering and lettering style of the City
Code of Ordinances. The opposition's documentation sites the old numbering and lettering system. In my responses, I
have listed the section number/letter that the opposition has sited, as well as provided what the proper reference to
that section now is. Responses to these points are as follows:
1.12 Resubdivision of Land (now 11-1-11) — It is highlighted that whenever a subdivision shows lot(s) that are more
than one acre, that the Commission and Council may require that such parcel allow for the future opening of
streets and the ultimate extension of adjacent streets. The key word here is that the Commission and Council
"may" require, and staff has determined that it would not be advisable for an extension of a public street
through Tract "B", and do not feel that it would provide for the most advantageous development of either
Tract "B" or the adjoining land owned by Mr. Lupkes.
2.2 Preliminary Plat (now 11-3-2) — It is highlighted that an overall development plan shall accompany a
preliminary plat which is being submitted for only a portion of the land which is owned by the requestor and
could be subdivided in the future. The key wording here is "being submitted for only a portion of the land".
The proposed plat is not being submitted for only a portion of the land, and includes all land owned by the
applicant in this area, therefore there is no conflict with this section.
4.2 Lot Improvements (now 11-5-2) — It is highlighted that were lots are more than double the minimum required
area for the zoning district, the Plan and Program Commission may require that such lots be arranged so as to
allow further subdivision and the opening of future streets where they would be necessary to serve such
potential lots. The key word here is that the Commission "may" require, and staff has determined that no
differing lot arrangement is necessary, and Tract "B" is arranged so as to allow further subdivision and the
opening of a future street.
4.3 Roads (now 11-5-3) — It is highlighted that no subdivision shall be approved unless the area to be subdivided
shall have frontage on and access from an existing street or a street shown upon a plat approved by the Plan
5
and Program Commission and recorded in the County Recorder of Deeds' Office. All lots in the proposed
subdivision, including Tract "B", have at least 60' of street frontage along the proposed public street Shelley
Court, which meets all requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. It is highlighted that proposed
streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided, unless prevented by topography
or other physical conditions or the most advantageous future development or adjacent tracts. This provision
does not require that all boundary lines must have a street extended to them, and simply provides that if a
street is being proposed to be extended within a vicinity of a boundary line, that it should generally be
extended all the way to the boundary line. There is no proposed street that extends through Tract "B" and
therefore there is no conflict with this section. Even if the section were interpreted differently, the key word
here is "unless" where it reads "unless in the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension is
not necessary or desirable...". Staff has determined that it is not necessary or desirable for either the
development of Tract "B" or the adjoining land owned by Lupkes to have a street extended through it.
4.6 Sewerage Facilities (now 11-5-6) — It is highlighted that where a public sanitary sewerage system is reasonably
accessible the applicant shall connect with same and provide sewers accessible to each lot in the subdivision.
Sewer will be available to all lots in the subdivision, including Tract "B", from the existing sewer line located
within the proposed Shelley Court. Sewer service to Tract "B" may require utilization of a sewage ejection
system (grinder pump), which is allowed by Ordinance and not uncommon to the community or area.
6.2 Words and Terms Defined (now 11-2-2) — A portion of the definition of "Frontage" is highlighted, however
there are no conflicts with this definition. The definition of "Lot" is highlighted, however there are no conflicts
with this definition. Portions of the definition of "Resubdivision" are highlighted, however there are no
conflicts with this definition.
4. Borrow Pit (Detention Pond)
This document highlights sections of the Zoning Ordinance, marking in red sections that the opposition feels that the
proposed subdivision is not compliant/consistent with the requirements. The documents includes references to Zoning
Ordinance Chapter 30, Other Permits, and Zoning Ordinance Chapter 33, Duties and Responsibilities of the City Planner
or Official Designee. Responses to these points are as follows:
10-30-1 (B) Flood Plain Development Permit — It is highlighted that a Flood Plain Development Permit issued by the
City Planner or designee shall be secured prior to initiation of any flood plain development (any manmade
change to improved and unimproved real estate, including but not limited to...grading...excavation...). I concur
that a Flood Plain Development Permit will be required for the grading and excavation work that will occur
within the floodplain, but there would not appear to be any issues with issuance of a Flood Plain Development
Permit, and it does not need to be issued at this time. A representative with the IDNR has already noted their
concurrence with the project noting that they have no objection to the City granting a Floodplain
Development Permit for the proposed project.
10-30-1 (B)(3) — It is highlighted that all uses or structures in the Floodway, Floodway Fringe, General Flood Plain,
and Shallow Flooding Districts requiring Special Permits shall be allowed only upon application to the City
Planner or designee, with issuance of the Special Permit by the Board of Adjustment. The opposition has
6
indicated their interpretation that this section requires the use (the use being grading and excavating within a
floodplain) to obtain Special Permit approval, however this is an incorrect interpretation of the section. The
key words here are that such uses "requiring Special Permits". This section is just noting that if a use requires
Special Permit, that the use shall only be allowed upon application for such a Special Permit, and approval of
such a Special Permit by the Board of Adjustment. This section does not require that the use obtain a Special
Permit, it would have to be otherwise listed as requiring a Special Permit, which per the determination of the
City Planner, it has been deemed that the proposed use (grading and excavating within the floodplain) does
not require issuance of a Special Permit. It is also highlighted that where required, approval of the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources shall precede issuance of the Special Permit by the Board of Adjustment. As
it has been determined that no Special Permit is required, there are no conflicts with this provision. Even if it
were determined that a Special Permit by the Board of Adjustment were required, the IDNR has already
provided documentation on their concurrence to the project.
10-30-1 (D) Iowa Department of Natural Resources- Required Developmental Approval — Prior to this section of the
Ordinance it is indicated that uses within a floodplain that require issuance of a Variance or Special Permit
must also be approved by the IDNR. This section lists other uses/projects that require IDNR approval. The
ninth use/project listed is highlighted, which is Excavation on the floodway of any stream draining more than
two (2) square miles. As previously noted, a representative with the IDNR has already noted their concurrence
with the project noting that they have no objection to the City granting a Floodplain Development Permit for
the proposed project.
10-33-1 (A) — It is highlighted that it shall be the responsibility of the City Planner or his or her official designee
to...Review all flood plain development permit applications to ensure that all necessary permits have been
obtained from Federal, State or local governmental agencies. I concur that a Flood Plain Development Permit
will be required for the grading and excavation work that will occur within the floodplain, but there would not
appear to be any issues with issuance of a Flood Plain Development Permit, and it does not need to be issued
at this time. Therefore there is no conflict with this section.
5. Nottingham Neighbors Position —15 Dec 14
This document is a 14 page document including text and graphics. I have inserted the document below, trying to maintain all
formatting, font, and font color as provided in the original document. Staff responses are provided in green. The first two
pages of the document are text that indicates a summary of seven main points, and then go into further detail of each of the
seven main points. The third page is text that provides unnumbered statements/opinions and then recites the City of
Waterloo Goals. Pages 4-8 are marked as "Appendix A- Visual Exhibits". Page 9 includes a list of 17 communities that
supposedly do not allow for "retention ponds/pits" to be built in floodways or floodplains and provides a story of a "past
retention pond horrific experiences" by Phyllis Doulaveris. Pages 10-14 are marked as "Appendix B- Legal Requirements"
with what the opposition believes to be violations highlighted in red. The above listed page numbers were for reference to
the original document submittal and do not match up with the below inserted document with responses, as inclusion of
responses has lengthened the document. The document with staff responses in gen are as follows:
Nottinaham Neighbors Position — 15 Dec 14
Concerning Nottingham addition proposal from Robin Hood Enterprises
7
Summary of main points: (any one of these is reason enough to defeat the development proposal)
1. City Ordinance violations in ordinances; Tract E, Tract C, Tract B Staff has reviewed the request and
ordinances and re -affirm that there are no violations.
2. Floodway Borrow Pit special permit required, IDNR & Board of Adjustment The detention facility does
not require a Special Permit or Board of Adjustment approval. IDNR concurrence has been obtained.
3. Liability of Borrow Pit, cost of upkeep and dangers The detention facility will have minimal maintenance
required by the homeowners. The facility will be dry most of the time and typically only require periodic
mowing.
4. Waterloo Liability and future costs, precedence of other subdivisions The City of Waterloo does not
take on any liability for the detention facility. There is an ordinance in place that stipulates responsibility
and mitigation of issues required to bring properties back into compliance, should the need arise.
5. Neighborhood safety & existing home owner property value decrease Providing hiqh-end buildable lots
with a standard and mandated detention facility will not affect neighborhood safety or affect existing
home values.
6. Future owners of proposed lots excessive burden: financial, flooding and liability The homeowner
association will be responsible for maintenance of the detention facility which will require periodic
mowing. Through proper grading of the lots, surface water that has been seen in the past will drain
properly to the detention facility and then to the creek. The lots themselves will not be in the flood zone
and are at low risk of having water problems.
7. Need to fully define Tract "B" by multiple ordinance sections, Violations and cost to neighbors In the
deed of dedication, Tract "B" will contain a single family home with the option for a horse barn and
fencing. All other material neighborhood covenants will apply, and the tract is not in violation of any
ordinance.
1. List of City Law Violations in ordinances based on latest proposal: (see Appendix)
1. We have included new legal references for your consideration. That was not in our previous arguments
or documentation. So your inputs on legal opinions to date probably did not consider the new ones we
now present. All violations are highlighted in RED, in the appendix section. All responses are
highlighted in GREEN on the appendix section.
2. Floodway Overlay District — Use Regulations, see appendix No violations or issues
3. Required to extend the street to boundary Subdivision Ord. 4.3(1)(c)(vi) No violations or issues.
4. IDNR & Board of Adjustment approval required. Zoning Ord. 10-22-2 B-4 &7 IDNR approval has been
obtained, Board of Adjustment approval is not required.
5. Sewer to be extended to all lots, Tract B future development, Subdivision Ord. 4.6 (2)(a) Sewer is
extended to all lots, and use of a sewage ejection system (grinder pump) is not precluded by any
ordinance.
6. Waterloo would be unique in Iowa's largest 25 cities that would allow a detention pond in a floodway or
flood plan. Many cities allow detention facilities in a floodwav or floodplain (see appendix).
2. Floodway Borrow Pit Special Permit Requirements
1. Borrow Pit is so named in this document as it best describes the true reason for it existence. It is vastly
larger than the requirements of a 12,500 cf. The reason for this is a major cost savings estimated to be
greater than $75K. The huge amount of volume will be created to use as fill dirt for the proposed road.
Only less than 3% of this is to meet city requirements. This is only one of the cost avoidance designs in
the proposal by Robin Hood Enterprises. The enormous size has many severe consequences for the
City, current surrounding land owners, children and future land owners described late in this document.
No documentation has been submitted as to how the detention requirement would be only 12,500 cf.
The applicant's engineer (a professional civil engineer licensed in the State of Iowa) provided detailed
plans and calculations for the proposed detention facility, which have been reviewed by the City of
Waterloo Engineering staff who concur with the plans and have noted that the proposed detention only
slightly exceeds the minimum required (less than 15% over minimum). Also no documentation has
been submitted as to the stated $75K savings, which would not appear accurate based on the
8
proposed detention facility being only minimally sized above minimum detention requirements.
2. Borrow Pit location in floodway makes functionality as a detention pond unsustainable for the long term.
It will require ever increasing levels of maintenance due to debris and erosion. The detention facility
will easily be maintained with primarily lust periodic mowing. The location of the facility partially within
the floodwav is not prohibited by any ordinance.
3. Borrow pit location in floodway requires I DNR approval prior to consideration by Board of Adjustment.
Any excavation (regardless of the purpose of the excavation) in the floodwav of a stream draining more
than 2 square miles requires approval of IDNR. Approval from the IDNR has been obtained.
3. Borrow Pit future costs, liability and dangers to future land owners
1. Debris deposits re -occurring frequently incapacitates outlet pipe. Continuous maintenance costs plus
the storm pipe lot 7 & 8 to creek In comparison to similar detention facilities, maintenance has not been
an issue.
2. Agricultural flooding will include farm chemicals, danger to children and wildlife. Any flooding regardless
of location may contain elements that are unhealthy for human contact. Children should be
discouraged from playing in any flood water regardless of location.
3. Change in vegetation in bottom of pit, reed canary grass, cattails, etc. impedes the functionality of
borrow pit. The detention facility will be planted with grass and contain tile that will ensure the bottom of
the detention area drains properly.
4. Pond was found to be growing Cyanobacteria which is harmful to humans and pets. The detention
facility will remain dry most of the time and is very unlikely to prow bacteria due to the limited amount of
time water will be standing. This would not be comparable to a pond that permanently holds water.
5. Required work required to correct problems, cost $131,000. See response to #4 above.
6. 11 unsuspecting homeowners are inheriting a potential major danger and cost burden. There is little to
no danger of living in close proximity to a detention facility. Homeowner maintenance will primarily
consist of mowing the area periodically.
7. No structure to ensure safety & integrity of borrow pit. The detention facility is safe and will have a slight
grade with no sharp drop-off points, and a depth of less than 24".
8. The larger the pit the greater the probability of problems and dangers and financial burden. The facility
is designed to meet minimum requirements, with minimal amount of extra storage capacity (less than
15%).
9. Developers need to take more responsibility, in writing No response needed.
10. 58 children are in immediate proximity open to the dangers of the pit. The detention facility is safe, will
not contain standing water for the most part, has no sharp drop-off points, and has a depth less than
24"
11. Additionally agricultural pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers chemicals from over a 10 acre area will
contaminate the water and land area. Any agricultural runoff can contain chemicals and should not be
used for recreation when there is standing water from time -to -time.
12. 11 unsuspecting homeowners are inheriting this large financial burden. The City is responsibility for
protecting us from things like this. The homeowner association will be responsible for the maintenance
of the detention facility which consists primarily of periodic mowing, and would not be a large financial
burden.
4. City of Waterloo liability and future costs
1. City will be liability in court and for sure in public opinion for the things that will happen here. The
dangers citied above. The detention facility is safe as stated above, and will not create increased
liability for the City.
2. Consider the likelihood of the new unsuspecting land owners not knowing how and if they need to
perform maintenance. The burden will eventually fall on the city. The maintenance of the detention
facility will need to be clearly spelled -out in the homeowners association bylaws. The City has an
ordinance in place to mitigate any potential problems with the detention facility.
3. Why not just expect the new land owners to just turn the entire tract C over to the city and letting the
9
city deal with all the issues and liability. The City has no intention of accepting any conveyance of Tract
„C„
4. At least every other year flooding will fill the pit, minimum annual cost will be $1,000 for debris removal
to $10,000 for outlet pipe repairs, then erosion and vegetation repair $5,000. The figures stated here
are the opinion of the author of the concern. The licensed professional civil engineer on the project
does not believe that the above costs are likely.
5. The pit will become non-functional due to agricultural debris (corn stalks) after flooding. Effectively
negating the value of a detention pond and creating the various dangers mentioned above with the
value negated. Should debris be found in the detention facility, it should be removed to allow periodic
mowing maintenance to continue.
6. It is in the flood way and it will always be there to deal with. No response needed.
7. After Robin Hood Enterprises sells the last lot and dissolves, the land owners and City will be left
holding the financial and liability responsibilities. The homeowners association will be responsible, this
is the appropriate method and is common in every new subdivision. Similar facilities have been
approved, including recent approval of a facility for Audubon Heights 4th Addition less than 1/2 mile to the
East along Shaulis Road that is also located within a floodplain, and several recent residential
subdivisions within the City of Cedar Falls have constructed detention facilities within or partially within
a floodway, including: 1) Fieldstone First Addition, 2) Lexington Heights Fifth Addition, and 3) Lakewood
Hills Addition.
8. Approval of this enormous borrow pit in the floodway will create a dangerous precedent for the future.
The detention facility is a safe way to deal with periodic water events. The facility is in compliance with
all requirements, and the proposed facility is less than 15% larger than the minimum required.
5. Neighborhood safety and loss of value to current surrounding property owners
1. The loss in property value of the 11 lots and surrounding neighbors will more than offset the financial
gain to the city. Providing an inventory of buildable lots will support the growth of neighborhoods an
sustain home values in the area. Indication from assessment and real estate experts is that area
property values will increase based on the development of new homes in the area.
2. When the outlet becomes blocked, reed and cattails will become the dominate species. Thus becoming
nonfunctional and become a wetland, and becomes impossible to remove debris. Unless additional
cost are expended to remove the vegetation. The detention facility will be planted with grass and
mowed on a periodic basis. Additionally, the facility will have tile that will aid in keeping the area dry
following water events.
3. In the 5 year state, it will be an eyesore, breed raccoons, opossums, skunks & burrowing rodents. The
properly maintained detention facility with gradual slopes and less than 24" depth will appear to look
more like a lawn and would not be a good habitat for mammals, reptiles or birds.
6. Future owners excessive burdens: Financial, Liabilities, Flooding, Upkeep
1. When a major flood event cuts a new channel through the borrow pit, this will be a major cost to repair,
similar to the $130,000 expense from a past experience. The detention facility will be planted with
grass and will not substantially erode during high water events. The IDNR has reviewed the proposed
facility specifically for is proximity to Prescott's Creek for concerns that the creek could cut a new
channel into the detention facility and the IDNR has indicated their concurrence with the project.
2. This level event has occurred 3 times in the past 5 years. Heavy rain/snow melt events causing
localized flooding can and does occur throughout the City and is not a valid reason to deny a particular
development. With proper grading and drainage, the impact is limited. The cited picture dated 3/10/14
shows a snow melt event with surface runoff from the first major snow melt at the end of that winter.
The surface water runoff problems in this area will be significantly improved with the final continuation
of the grading and installation of the storm water collection system that will be included in the proposed
subdivision.
3. Side of borrow pit closest to Prescott Creek has a 3 -foot drop in 30 feet, from existing ground to bottom
of the pit. An erosion problem every time Prescott Creek leaves its banks. A 10 to 1 slope is NOT an
10
excessive slope that will lead to erosion, and is significantly less slope than along the flood control
levees, which are generally a 3-1 slope and many of which are maintained in a mowable grass
condition and do not experience erosion problems.
4. Z No response needed.
7. Tract "B" needs to be fully defined and within the City's legal requirements
1. Preliminary plat must have "concept plan" for future ordinance; Subdivision Ord. 2.2 (1) (e) This is a
misinterpretation of the Ordinance. The referenced section of the Ordinance only requires such a
concept plan if the proposed plat is being submitted for only a portion of the land which is owned by the
requestor, which is not the case with this request as the proposed plat includes all land in this location
owned by the requestor. As an example, when the opposition's land was platted, this area was not
included in the plat, and the then applicant was required to provide a concept plan for development of
the entire area. That concept plan is very similar to the layout of the proposed subdivision, generally
showing lots where they are now currently being proposed. This issue was already addressed in a
response to document 3) Tract "B" Subdivision Ordinance. Tract "B" is well defined. It has definitive
boundaries, a designated building line, adequate easements, and is restricted by the Deed of
Dedication to adhere to a majority of the covenants that will apply to the other lots in the proposed
subdivision. The reason that not all covenants will apply is because of the larger size of Tract "B" and
its proximity to an adjacent property with barns and horses, the slightly different restrictions will allow
this property to also have horses, a barn and out buildings as well as fencing for horses. The applicant
has provided an illustrative concept of how Tract "B" might be developed with a single family home and
horse barn (see attached).
2. Street are to be extended to boundaries when re -subdivided to the most advantageous or adjacent
future tracts (Lupkes) Subdivision Ord. 4.3 (b) (vi) This is a misinterpretation of the Ordinance. The
referenced section of the Ordinance provides an "unless" that does not require extension to boundary
line in all instances, and the section does not require that all boundary lines have a street extended to
the boundary, it just requires that if a street is being proposed to be extended within the vicinity of a
boundary line, that it should generally be extended all the way to the boundary line. The intent of this
provision is to avoid landlocked sections of land. No landlocked sections of land will be created as a
result of Tract "B", as the Lupkes property has approximately 700' of frontage on West 4th St.
Development of Lupkes property with lots fronting W 4th St would be very typical to other lots that have
been developed along W 4th St. This issue was already addressed in a response to document 3) Tract
"B" Subdivision Ordinance
3. Want the city council to require, as allowed in section Sub Div. 1.12 (2) & 4.2 (2), to allow for future
street extension to Lupkes property. See Appendix for layout. The Council may choose to require, but
are not obligated to do so by any requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. It is staffs determination
that it does not appear to be the most logical development pattern for either the applicant's land or Mr.
Lupkes' land. The proposed layout shown in the appendix utilizes both the applicant's land (Tract "B")
and Mr. Lupkes' land. The applicant is not proposing to develop Tract "B" as shown in the appendix,
and the proposed layout of the lots makes no sense and is of no benefit to Mr. Lupkes' or a future
owner of Mr. Lupkes' land unless Tract "B" were incorporated into Mr. Lupkes' property.
4. Planning for this track needs to include sanitary sewer system. At Dec Planning & Zoning meeting staff
stated they would not require this sewer connection for only 1 or 2 lots. Proper planning of future
development of Tract B in conjunction with Lupkes property would create 8 high end residential lots,
enough to justify a connection to Prescott Creek trunk sewer. There is no justification for a requirement
for the applicant to make a sewer connection to Prescott's Creek. Mr. Lupkes or a future owner of Mr.
Lupkes' property would have the ability to make such a sewer connection if determined to be in the best
interest for the development of the Lupkes property. Suggesting that the current applicant be required
to make such a connection that would predominantly be of no benefit to the applicant and
predominantly be of significant benefit to the owner of the Lupkes property would appear to be
questionable.
5. For future development of the Lupkes property in the future, the road and sewer extensions need to be
11
determined and made part of the preliminary plat process for the benefit of the adjacent property and
the clear understanding of the obligations of a future owner(s) of Tract B. This should be part of the
"Planning" actions & deliverables for the future as defined in the Planning & Zoning Department's
charter, mission and purpose. Adjacent property (Lupkes) will be damaged if street right of way on tract
"B" is not well defined as to future development and commitment for street and sewer extensions
included in Deed of Dedication. Also to be clearly spelled out before any approvals and clearly in writing
before any future property is sold, to any unsuspecting future buyer. The Lupkes property will not be
damaged by approval of the layout of the plat as currently proposed, and the owner of this land would
have opportunity and responsibility to make such a sewer connection. The proposed street connection
makes no sense unless the owner of Lupkes property also purchases Tract "B" and incorporates it into
the development of both properties. Approval of the plat as proposed does not preclude Tract "B" from
being incorporated into a different development and a street connection made through it, as it has 60' of
frontage along the proposed street, Shelley Court.
This borrow pit/detention is going in areas new for Waterloo; no development has previously planned storm
detention in the floodway. There is no validity to this statement, detention facilities are not prohibited from
locating within a floodway. The City of Waterloo does have examples where detention facilities have been
located within or partially within a floodway, including: 1) Tower Park (a commercial subdivision), 2) 2515
Cyclone Dr, Mauer Eye Center, 3) 3730 MLK Jr Dr, Ferguson Enterprises, 4) 2680 Sergeant Rd, O'Neal
Metals, and 5) 2815 WCF&N Dr, Hydrite Chemical.
Storm detention requirement for residential subdivisions is less than 2 years old, and use this opportunity to
solidify the proper approach instead of allowing it because it is not currently covered. Detention facilities are
not prohibited from locating within a floodway. To deny a plat because you do not think a detention facility
should be allowed in a floodway when the Ordinance does not prohibit it would be contradictory to the
regulations.
If you do not believe our legal arguments and don't believe there is no legal reason to deny, was that the case
with Summerland? This is the wrong things to approve and we believe you know this in your hearts. The
subdivisions are not comparable, and no documentation of how the proposed development will be detrimental
have been provided.
Then look to the Sunnyside South situation that was recommended for approval and we know how that turned
out. All because developer and City pushed forward despite valid objections. No response needed.
This is all about greed. The financial burden and risks should be fully shouldered by the developer, who is the
only one profiting from all this. Not the future land owners, the neighbors and the City. No response needed.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WATERLOO, IOWA,
REGULAR SESSION TO BE HELD AT THE HAROLD E. GETTY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Monday, December 15, 2014
5:30 p.m.
CITY OF WATERLOO GOALS
1. Support economic development efforts that attract, retain and create quality jobs resulting in a
diverse economic base and increased population.
2. Continue to support implementation of the Downtown Master Plan.
3. Facilitate and promote the development of housing options to meet the needs of current and
future Waterloo citizens.
4. Develop a customer -centered service delivery approach.
12
5. Seek additional opportunities to share services and resources with other government entities.
6. Collaborate with statewide elected officials to reduce the burden on local property taxes.
7. Address the changing public workforce needs in Waterloo.
8. Enhance and protect a diverse, family-oriented community where neighborhoods are safe and
well maintained. We are asking you to protect neighbors safety from the enormous dangers of
the borrow pit, the coming hazards and dangers we described for our heath and the children in
the area. Reduce the maintenance requirements and costs by subjecting it to the minimum
requirements. Protect future lot owners from the flooding seen on lots 8,9, 10 and tract B.
Require in writing firm maintenance requirements for addition land owners of borrow pit and have
this clearly explained to potential purchasers. This is an opinion statement, and staff believes that all
concerns have been addressed.
9. Enhance the quality of place opportunities for the citizens of our community.
Appendix A- Visual Exhibits These diagrams are inaccurate and misleading, and approximately show the
entire area proposed to be graded around the proposed detention facility, but the actual area of the detention
facility is significantly smaller than the areas depicted below.
Perspective view from above William and W 4th to give scale of borrow Pit
13
Perspective view from above W Shaulis and W 4th to give scale of borrow Pit
Many, many times larger than required
Actual Flooding in 2013 Previous submittal gave indication that the picture was taken on March 10,
2013, which was a significant snowmelt event, not untypical in many areas throughout the City.
Lots 8, 9, 10 and Tract B
14
See next page graphic Bold RED Line for area flooded as seen in photos above
15
Red Line
indicates 2013
flooded area
1 �3..yF1Pa-
T
V
�.ST6T
F17►P�'�`�,�-,DFFE�T. 6T �T7-20M
Fg1'A �
PEA
oF tor
xTw-3uuFUT
f.
Red Line
indicates 2013
flooded area
Lots 8, 9, 10 and
Tract B
Phi
1 DM
^OD ZONE A
(57.x'
ND
So t1.►, d
P. k
Subdi c.ut,n,
Trac
IN Y
▪ M S.
i 35!'.
— t
geAma
:�y',,
.4 Sq. 49030
F1S
Lots 8, 9, 10 and Tract B should
not be allowed to build upon.
New unsuspecting home owners
must be protected
ti
,02-2°`
DT.
IALend
coo " -134"
•
,.. DENO1
..a._. _ INOI
DENO1
DENOT
DENO'
DENO?
DENO
DENOT
DENO'
- DENO1
(UNEE
- DENOT
- DENOT
A
(C O2 - DENOT
- DENOT
17
Tract B must have provision for
street extension to Lupkes
property future development & be
properly defined before approval
The following towns DO NOT allow for retention ponds/pits, etc. to be built in floodways or floodplains;
Below response are based on Planning Staff calling the listed City to ask about ability for retention/detention
facilities to be located within the floodwav or to be located within the floodplain.
1. Ames allowed
2. Bettendorf not allowed, but indicated that
their ordinance does not state that it is not
allowed
3. Cedar Falls allowed
4. Cedar Rapids allowed
5. Clive allowed in floodplain, not floodway
6. Coralville allowed, and would set extra
restrictions to be sure the area was
"Naturalized" (additional plantings etc.) and
oversized to accommodate flooding when it
occurs.
7. Council Bluffs did not respond
8. Davenport originally indicated allowed but
discouraged, now indicate not allowed, but
indicated that their ordinance does not state
that it is not allowed
9. Dubuque allowed in floodplain, not floodway
although the ordinance does not appear to
prohibit them in a floodwav
10. Fort Dodge did not respond
11. Johnson (presumed to mean Johnston) did
not respond
12. Marion don't allow "retention" ponds but
detention ponds are not prohibited in
floodplain, but discouraged, not allowed in
floodwav
13. Marshalltown allowed
14. Mason City did not respond
15. Muscatine allowed (follow the Iowa Storm
Water Manual and would allow in both)
16. Sioux City originally indicated allowed, now
indicate not allowed
17. West Des Moines allowed in floodplain but
berm needs to be above 100 -year, not
allowed in floodwav
19
Past Retention Pond Horrific experiences Phyllis Doulaveris — Current resident of Nottingham
Addition
I am a former resident of a large housing development that was built on property dependent on a
similar size retention pond. In 2005 the retention pond failed. During routine maintenance the pond was
found to be growing Cyanobacteria which can be harmful to humans and pets.
This was traced to a failure of the retention pond's infrastructure which had allowed the bacteria to
grow. The pond, to the naked eye, looked perfectly normal. It was through routine testing that the water
was found to be contaminated.
The failure required the pond to be drained, work was performed that required digging and tiling and
piping work was performed, the pond's structure was then tested, and refilling allowed to occur. The
cost of these repairs was $131,000 which was paid via a special assessment levied to each
homeowner.
This neighborhood is very different from what Robin Hood Enterprises is proposing to you. My former
neighborhood had strong covenants, a third -party management company that set fees and collected
the monthly Home Owner Association (HOA) fees. HOA fees ranged from $225-325 per month based
on the size of your property. A portion of those fees were used to maintain the retention pond by
mowing grass, treating weeds and pests and landscaping to preserve the aesthetics of the community.
The 11 unsuspecting homeowners are inheriting a potential train wreck. There is no management or
governance structure in place that will maintain, test and ensure the safety, integrity, cleanliness and
upkeep of this retention pond. He developers will assure you the homeowners will maintain it, however
they have no plan in place to ensure that happens or if the pond fails there's a funding mechanism to fix
it.
I am also concerned about the safety of having this pit in our backyard. In the immediate surrounding
neighborhood there are AT LEAST 58 children under the age of 15. That's only children that are in the
area immediately accessible to this pit. The eleven proposed homes will realistically add 20-30 more
children to the mix. The proposed detention facility will be less than 24" deep with gradual sloping sides
and designed so that it does not permanently hold water, and is mandated to meet stormwater
management requirements, and would not be comparable to such a large facility that was designed to
permanently hold water.
Accidentally swallowing retention pond water is dangerous. In addition, simply touching your mouth
before washing hands after touching this pond water may result in the transmission of parasites.
Because retention ponds are not tested and treated with chemicals or kept safe from environmental
factors, their water often contains parasites. Parasites such as Giardia and Cryptosporidium live in
human and animal intestinal tracts and may result in intestinal distress.
Retention ponds may become contaminated with dangerous bacteria, such as E. coli, that can result in
devastating health effects in humans. Symptoms include an array of health issues, such as diarrhea
and neurological problems. Often the result of infected runoff from pet or nearby animal fecal matter,
bacteria is transmitted when someone comes into contact with contaminated water. In addition, the
pond scum, algae -like growth that occurs in ponds is called cyanobacteria. Contact may result in
rashes or severe illness.
Whether pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers or any other chemicals are used on land or plants in the
nearby surrounding area of a retention pond, the water runoff will contaminate the water. Not only is
this a hazard to humans, but successfully determining whether a pond is chemically contaminated is
often impossible without the use of professional services.
The most serious danger associated with retention ponds is the risk of drowning. Though children are
always the greatest concern, ponds may also be a danger to adults and pets. In addition, retention
20
ponds pose a liability to the owners who become responsible for accidents and illnesses caused by
retention ponds on their property. The proposed detention facility will be less than 24" deep with
gradual sloping sides and designed so that it does not permanently hold water, and is mandated to
meet stormwater management requirements.
Appendix B- Legal Requirements
10-28-4 SPECIAL PERMITS, APPEALS, AND VARIANCES. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
The Board of Adjustment is hereby established which shall hear and decide:
(i) applications for Special Permits upon which the Board is authorized to pass under this Ordinance,
No Special Permit is required for grading or excavation within a floodway or floodplain.
(ii) appeals; and (iii) requests for Variances to the provisions of this Ordinance; and shall take any other
action which is required of the Board.
A. Special Permits,
Requests for Special Permits shall be submitted to the City Planner who shall forward such to the
Board of Adjustment for consideration, after recommendation of the Commission. Such requests shall
include a site plan in accordance with Section 10-5-1(Q) and information ordinarily submitted with
applications as well as any additional information deemed necessary to the Board of Adjustment.
The following provisions shall apply:
1. Purpose: The development and administration of this Ordinance is based upon the division of the
City into Zoning Districts, within which Districts the use of land and buildings and the bulk
requirements and location of buildings and structures in relation to the land are substantially
uniform. It is recognized, however, that there are certain uses which, because of their unique
characteristics, cannot be properly classified in any particular District or Districts without
consideration in each case of the impact of those uses upon neighboring land and of the public
need for the particular use at the particular locations. Such uses are typically publicly operated
or affected with a public interest, or uses private in nature, but of such an unusual nature that
their operation may give rise to unique problems with respect to their impact upon neighboring
property or public facilities. There are no issues with this section.
2. Initiation of Special Permit: Any person having a freehold interest in land, a possessory interest entitled to
exclusive possession, or a contractual interest which may become a freehold interest of an exclusive
possessory interest, either of which is specifically enforceable, may file an application to use such land for
one (1) or more of the Special Permitted uses provided for in this Ordinance in the Zoning District in which
the use(s) are permitted.
3. Authorization: For each application for a Special Permit, the City Planner or designee shall prepare and file
with the Board of Adjustment findings and recommendations, including the recommended stipulations of
additional conditions and guarantees that are deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest.
4. Standards: No Special Permit shall be granted by the Board of Adjustment unless such Board shall find:
a. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the Special Permit will not be detrimental to or
endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare;
b. That the Special Permit will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property already
permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood;
c. That the Special Permit will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the
surrounding property for uses permitted in the district(s);
d. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being
provided;
e. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to
minimize traffic congestion in the public streets; and
f. That the Special Permit shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the District
in which it is located, except as such regulations may, in each instance, be modified by the Board of
21
Adjustment.
5. Conditions and Guarantees: Prior to the granting of any Special Permit, the Board of Adjustment shall
stipulate such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance, and
operation of the Special Permit as is deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to
secure compliance with the Standards specified in Subsection (4) above. In all cases in which Special
Permits are granted, the Board of Adjustment shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem
necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being complied with.
6. Denial of Special Permit: No application for a Special Permit that has been denied wholly or in part by the
Board of Adjustment shall be resubmitted for a period of six (6) months from the date of denial, except on
the grounds of new evidence or proof of change of conditions or of the request found to be valid by the
Board of Adjustment.
7. Revocation of Special Permit: In any case where the use under an approved Special Permit has not been
established or construction commenced within one (1) year after the date of granting thereof, the Board
may act to revoke the Special Permit, causing it to be null and void. In any case where the use under an
approved Special Permit has been established but ceases for any reason for a period of more than one (1)
year, the
Board may act to revoke the Special Permit. Also, any person authorized to initiate a Special Permit may
request that an approved Special Permit be revoked. Action to revoke an approved Special Permit shall
follow the same process as action to initiate a Special Permit. Any Special Permit so revoked shall not be
considered a legal non -conforming use.
B. Appeals. [Ordinance 3973, 9/27/93]
Appeals to the Board may be taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, department, board or
bureau of the City of Waterloo affected by any decision of the City Planner or designee. Such appeal
shall be taken within a reasonable time as provided by the rules of the Board by filing with the City
Planner or designee and with the Board of Adjustment a notice of appeal specifying the grounds
thereof. The City Planner or designee shall forthwith transmit to the Board all papers constituting the
record upon which the action appealed from is taken. An appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of
the action appealed from, unless the City Planner or designee certified to the Board, after notice of
appeal shall have been filed with him, that by reason of the facts stated in the certificate a stay would,
in his opinion, cause imminent peril to life or property. In such case, proceedings shall not be stayed
other than by a restraining order which may be granted by the Board or by a court of record on
application of notice to the City Planner or designee, and on due cause shown. There are as of vet no
appeals submitted based on any decision of the City Planner.
10-4-2 CLASSIFICATION OF FLOOD PLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICTS. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
In order to classify, regulate and restrict the location of trades and industries and the location of
buildings designed for specific uses, to regulate and limit the height and bulk of buildings hereafter
erected or altered, to regulate and limit the intensity of the use of lot areas and to regulate and
determine the area of yards, courts and other open spaces within and surrounding such buildings within
established flood prone areas, the City of
Waterloo, Iowa is hereby divided into four (4) classes of flood plain `overlay" districts. The use, height
and area regulations are uniform in each class of said district, and the districts shall be known as:
"F -W" Floodway (Overlay) District
"F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District
"F -P" General Flood Plain (Overlay) District
"S -F" Shallow Flood (Overlay) District There are no issues with this section.
10-4-3 FINDING OF FACT. [Ordinance 3487, 6/15/87]
A. The flood hazard areas of Waterloo are subject to periodic inundation which can result in loss of
life and property and health; and, safety hazards, disruption or commerce and governmental
services, extra ordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the
tax base; all of which adversely affect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community.
22
B. These losses, hazards and related adverse effects are caused by (i) the occupancy of flood
hazard areas by uses vulnerable to flood damages which create hazardous conditions as a
result of being inadequately elevated or otherwise protected from flooding (ii) the cumulative
effect of flood plain construction in flood flows, which causes increases in flood heights and
flood water velocities.
C. This Ordinance relies upon engineering methodology for analyzing flood hazards which is
consistent with the standards established by the Department of Natural Resources.
10-4-4 DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
With the exception of the Flood Plain(Overlay) Districts, the boundaries of these districts are indicated upon the
Digital Official Zoning Map of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, which map is made a part of this Ordinance. Said Digital
Official Zoning Map of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, and all the notations, references and other matters shown
thereon shall be as much as a part of this Ordinance as if the notations, references and other matters set forth by
said map were all fully described herein. Said Digital Official Zoning Map is on file in the office of the City Planner,
at the City Hall of the City of Waterloo, Iowa, and shall bear the signature of the Mayor attested by City Clerk,
under the certification that this is the official Zoning Map referred to in this Section of the Zoning Ordinance. The
Digital Official Zoning Map shall show all amendments or changes and shall indicate the date of each amendment
or change. It shall be the responsibility of the City Planner or designee to see that the Zoning Map is kept current
at all times. [Ordinance 4795, 12/12/05]
10-4-5 ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICIAL FLOOD PLAIN ZONING MAP. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Black Hawk County, City of Waterloo, Panels 19013C0158F, 0159F,
0166F, 0167F, 0168F, 0169F, 0180F, 0186F, 0187F, 0188F, 0189F, 0193F, 0194F, 0215F, 0281F, 0282F,
0283F, 0284F, 0291 F, 0292F, 0301 F, 0302F, 0303F, 0304F, 0306F, 0307F, 0308F, 0309F, 0311F, 0312F,
0316F, 0317F, dated July 18, 2011, which were prepared as part of the Flood Insurance Study for Black Hawk
County, is (are) hereby adopted by reference and declared to be the Official Floodplain Zoning Map. The flood
profiles and all explanatory material contained with the Flood Insurance Study are also declared to be a part of
this Ordinance. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
10-4-6 PURPOSE OF FLOOD PLAIN (OVERLAY) DISTRICTS. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
These Flood Plain (Overlay) Districts are to provide special regulations and restrictions to flood hazard
areas in the City of Waterloo. It is the purpose of these flood plain provisions to promote the public
health, safety and general welfare and to minimize public and private damages due to flooding in
specific areas of the community. The basic purpose and objectives of this Ordinance may also be
identified by the following:
1. To protect human life and health;
2. To minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
3. To minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally
undertaken at the expense of the general public;
4. To minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric,
telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard;
5. To require uses vulnerable to floods to be protected against flood damage at the time of initial
construction;
6. To help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of
special flood hazard so as to minimize flood blight areas;
7. To ensure potential buyers are notified that property may be in an area of special flood
hazard and that those who occupy said area assume responsibility for +heir actions;
8. To reserve sufficient flood plain area for the conveyance of flood flows so that flood heights and
velocities will not be increased substantially;
9. To assure that eligibility is maintained for property owners in the community to purchase flood
insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program.
10. Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety or property in times of flood or
which cause excessive increases in flood heights or velocities. There are no issues with this
section. Opposition's perceived issues are based on opinions that staff does not agree with.
23
[Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
10-4-7 INTERPRETATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
Where uncertainty exists with respect to the boundaries of the various districts, except for the Flood
Plain (Overlay) Districts, as shown on the Official Zoning Map accompanying and made a part of this
Ordinance, the following rules apply:
1. The district boundaries are either street center lines or alley center lines, unless otherwise shown.
[Ordinance 3595, 11/7/88]
10-22-1 REGULATIONS.
The regulations set forth in this Chapter and those contained in Chapter 5 shall apply in the Floodway
and Flood Plain Districts.
A. General Regulations.
1. Lands to Which Ordinance Applies. This Ordinance shall apply to all lands within the
jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo which uses the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) as a basis for
establishing the flood plain zoning districts. These districts are shown on the Official Zoning Map
as being the boundaries of the Floodway, Floodway Fringe, General Flood Plain and Shallow
Flooding Overlay Districts. Within these districts, all uses not allowed as Principal Permitted
Uses or permissible as Conditional Uses are prohibited unless a Variance to the terms of this
Ordinance is granted after due consideration by the Board of Adjustment. There are no issues
with this section. The City Planner, as provided by the authority of the Zoning Ordinance, has
determined that grading and excavation for a detention facility are a Principal Permitted Use in
both the "F -W" Floodway (Overlay) District and the "F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District. It
is permitted in the "F -W" Floodway as determine that it is "such other open -space uses similar in
nature to the above uses", as it is similar to "Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking
areas play areas". It is permitted in the "F -F" Floodway Fringe because the District allows "All
uses within the Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District shall be permitted to the extent that they are
not prohibited by any other ordinance (or underlying zoning district)". Such a use is not
prohibited by any other ordinance or underlying zoning district.
[Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
2. Rules for Interpretation of District Boundaries. The boundaries of the Floodway, Floodway Fringe,
General Flood Plain and Shallow Flooding Overlay Districts shall be determined by scaling distances on
the Official Flood Plain Zoning Map. When an interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the
boundaries, the City Planner or official designee shall make the necessary interpretation. The Board of
Adjustment shall hear and decide appeals when it is alleged that there is an error in any requirement,
decision, or determination made by the City Planner or designee in the enforcement or administration of
this Ordinance. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
3. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. It is not intended by this Ordinance to repeal, abrogate or impair
any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this Ordinance imposes greater
restrictions, the provision of this Ordinance shall prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this
Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only.
4. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood protection required by this Ordinance is
considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on engineering and scientific methods of
study. Larger floods may occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man-made or
natural causes, such as ice jams and bridge openings restricted by debris. This Ordinance does not imply
that areas outside the flood plain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from
flooding or flood damages. This Ordinance shall not create liability on the part of the City of Waterloo or
the Board of Adjustment or an officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance
on this Ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made there under.
10-22-2 "F -W" FLOODWAY (OVERLAY) DISTRICT.
A. Principal Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted within the Floodway (Overlay)
District to the extent they are not prohibited by other ordinance (or underlying zoning district) and
provided they do not requirr placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or other obstruction, the
24
storage of materials or other equipment, excavation, or alteration of a watercourse. It is a
misinterpretation of the Ordinance that any excavation is prohibited in the floodway. The above
reference to excavation is intended to be connected to a watercourse... i.e. an excavation of a
watercourse is precluded as a Principal Permitted Use, or an alteration of a watercourse is precluded
as a Principal Permitted Use. Interpretation of the Ordinance that any excavation whatsoever within the
floodway is precluded as a Principal Permitted Use is illogical and inconsistent with other provisions,
including the below provision where it more clearly states "excavation or alteration of a watercourse"
under the Conditional Uses section. The provision currently is unclear due to a typo inclusion of a
coma after the word excavation.
1. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture,
viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and crop harvesting.
2. Industrial -commercial uses such as loading areas, parking areas, airport landing strips.
3. Private and public recreational uses such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges, archery
ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and nature
preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, target ranges, trap and skeet
ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking and horse riding trails.
4. Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas play areas.
5. Such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses. Per the determination of the
City Planner, the use is permitted under this provision.
B. Conditional Uses.
The following uses which involve structures (temporary or permanent), fill, storage
of materials or equipment, excavation or alteration of a watercourse may be permitted only upon
issuance of a Special Exception Permit by the Board of Adjustment. Such uses must also meet the
applicable provisions of the Floodway District Performance Standards. Note that there is no coma
between excavation or alteration of a watercourse in this section.
1. Uses or structures accessory to open space uses.
2. Circuses, carnivals, and similar transient amusement enterprises.
3. Drive-in theaters, new and used car lots, roadside stands, signs, and billboards.
4. Extraction of sands, gravel, and other material. There are no issues with this section. The
City Planner, as provided by the authority of the Zoning Ordinance, has determined that grading
and excavation for a detention facility are not to be regulated as "Extraction of sands, gravel,
and other material", therefore no Special Permit under this provision is required.
5. Marinas, boat rentals, docks, piers, wharves.
6. Utility transmission lines, underground pipelines.
7. Other uses similar in nature to the Principal Permitted and Conditional Uses described
herein which are consistent with the Floodway District Performance Standards and the
general spirit and purpose of this Ordinance. There are no issues with this section.
C. Performance Standards. All Floodway District Uses allowed as a Principal Permitted or
Conditional Use shall meet the following standards:
1. No use shall be permitted in the Floodway District that would result in any increase in the 100 year flood
level. Consideration of the effects of any development on flood levels shall be based upon the assumption
that an equal degree of development would be allowed for similarly situated lands.
2. All uses within the Floodway District shall:
a. Be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage.
b. Use construction methods and practices that will minimize flood damage.
c. Use construction materials and utility equipment that are resistant to flood damage.
3. No use shall affect the capacity or conveyance of the channel or floodway or any tributary to the main
stream, drainage ditch, or any other drainage facility or system.
4. Structures, buildings and sanitary and utility systems, if permitted, shall meet the applicable performance
standards of the Floodway Fringe District and shall be constructed or aligned to present the minimum
possible resistance to flood flows.
5. Buildings, if permitted, shall have a low flood damage potential and shall not be for human habitation.
25
6. Storage of materials or equipment that are buoyant, flammable, explosive or injurious to human, animal or
plant life is prohibited. Storage of other material may be allowed if readily removable from the Floodway
District within the time available after flood warning.
7. Watercourse alterations or relocations (channel changes and modifications) must be designed to maintain
the flood carrying capacity within the altered or relocated portion. In addition, such alterations or
relocations must be approved by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR).
8. Any fill allowed in the floodway must be shown to have some beneficial purpose and shall be limited to the
minimum amount necessary.
9. Pipeline river or stream crossings shall be buried in the streambed and banks or otherwise sufficiently
protected to prevent rupture due to channel degradation and meandering or due to the action of flood
flows.
Floodway: The channel of a river or stream and those portions of the flood plains adljoining the
channel, which are reasonably required to carry and discharge flood waters or flood flows associated
with the Regulatory Flood, so that confinement of flood flows to the floodway area will not result in
substantially higher flood levels and flow velocities. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
Floodway Fringe: The land adjacent to a body of water between the Floodway and the outer
(landward) limits of the flood as defined by the Regulatory Flood as delineated on the official flood plain
zoning map. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
6. Nottingham Third Addition Issues and Ordinances
This document is a 9 page document. I have inserted the document below, trying to maintain all formatting, font,
and font color as provided in the original document. Staff responses are provided in green. The document
highlights "three major concerns", marking in red sections that the opposition feels that the proposed subdivision is
not compliant/consistent with the requirements. The document with staff responses in green are as follows:
Nottingham Third Addition
Issues and Ordinances
The following are three major concerns that affect the existing adjacent property owners, and
the future owners of Nottingham Third Addition. There is a brief narrative in blue explaining the
areas of concern and how the existing ordinances address the concerns. The applicable
ordinance sections are in black, with specific applicable points highlighted with red text.
1) Detention Pond
The proposed detention pond is intended to fulfill the function of storm water detention as
required by the City of Waterloo in order to comply with EPA's Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (MS4) regulations.
The detention pond is to be a dry detention basin, with inlet and outlet piping sized to retain
storm water for an extended period, but less than 24 hours. It is to be a privately owned and
maintained impoundment with infrastructure to receive, store, and release storm water
collected by the public street and storm water system. Further, it is subject to inspection and
citation by the City of Waterloo for violation of the storm water detention requirements. The
functionality of these detention facilities are required to be maintained despite "normal"
26
deterioration of the system by storm water runoff from the public street and storm sewer
system, and in this case, also the flooding effects of Prescott Creek. The required
infrastructure and its ongoing maintenance requirements, clearly show it is not consistence
with the Floodway Overlay District conditional use 4, Extraction of sands, gravel, or other
materials. As such, this use is not a principal permitted use nor a conditional use nor any "uses
similar in nature to the Principal and Conditional Uses listed herein" in the Floodway (Overlay)
District, and therefore is "prohibited unless a Variance to the terms of this Ordinance is granted
after due consideration by the Board of Adjustment" There are no issues with the floodplain
regulations. The City Planner, as provided by the authority of the Zoning Ordinance, has determined
that grading and excavation for a detention facility are a Principal Permitted Use in both the "F -W"
Floodwav (Overlay) District and the "F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District. It is permitted in the "F-
W" Floodway as I determine that it is "such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses",
as it is similar to "Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas play areas".
10-4-2 CLASSIFICATION OF FLOOD PLAIN OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
In order to classify, regulate and restrict the location of trades and industries and the location
of buildings designed for specific uses, to regulate and limit the height and bulk of buildings
hereafter erected or altered, to regulate and limit the intensity of the use of lot areas and to
regulate and determine the area of yards, courts and other open spaces within and
surrounding such buildings within established flood prone areas, the City of Waterloo, Iowa is
hereby divided into four (4) classes of flood plain "overlay" districts. The use, height and area
regulations are uniform in each class of said district, and the districts shall be known as:
"F -W" Floodway (Overlay) District
"F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District
"F -P" General Flood Plain (Overlay) District
"S -F" Shallow Flood (Overlay) District
10-4-6 PURPOSE OF FLOOD PLAIN (OVERLAY) DISTRICTS.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
These Flood Plain (Overlay) Districts are to provide special regulations and restrictions to flood
hazard areas in the City of Waterloo. It is the purpose of these flood plain provisions to
promote the public health, safety and general welfare and to minimize public and private
damages due to flooding in specific areas of the community. The basic purpose and objectives
of this Ordinance may also be identified by the following:
1. To protect human life and health;
2. To minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects;
3. To minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally
undertaken at the expense of the general public;
4. To minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains, electric,
telephone and sewer lines, streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard;
5. To require uses vulnerable to floods to be protected against flood damage at the time of
initial construction;
6. To help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas
of special flood hazard so as to minimize flood blight areas;
7. To ensure potential buyers are notified that property may be in an area of special flood
hazard and that those who occupy said area assume responsibility for their actions;
27
8. To reserve sufficient flood plain area for the conveyance of flood flows so that flood heights
and velocities will not be increased substantially;
9. To assure that eligibility is maintained for property owners in the community to purchase
flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program.
10. Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety or property in times of flood
or which cause excessive increases in flood heights or velocities.
CHAPTER 22
FLOODWAY AND FLOOD PLAIN DISTRICTS
10-22-1 REGULATIONS.
The regulations set forth in this Chapter and those contained in Chapter 5 shall apply in the
Floodway and Flood Plain Districts.
A. General Regulations.
1. Lands to Which Ordinance Applies. This Ordinance shall apply to all lands within the
jurisdiction of the City of Waterloo which uses the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) as a basis for
establishing the flood plain zoning districts. These districts are shown on the Official Zoning
Map as being the boundaries of the Floodway, Floodway Fringe, General Flood Plain and
Shallow Flooding Overlay Districts. Nithin these districts, all uses not allowed as Principal
Permitted Uses or permissible as Conditional Uses are prohibited unless a Variance to the
terms of this Ordinance is granted after due consideration by the Board of Adjustment. There
are no issues with this section. The City Planner, as provided by the authority of the Zoning Ordinance,
has determined that grading and excavation for a detention facility are a Principal Permitted Use in both
the "F -W" Floodway (Overlay) District and the "F -F" Floodway Fringe (Overlay) District. It is permitted
in the "F -W" Floodway as I determine that it is "such other open -space uses similar in nature to the
above uses", as it is similar to "Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas play areas".
10-22-2 "F -W" FLOODWAY (OVERLAY) DISTRICT.
A. Principal Permitted Uses.
The following uses shall be permitted within the Floodway (Overlay) District to the extent they
are not prohibited by other ordinance (or underlying zoning district) and provided they do not
require placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or other obstruction, the storage of
materials or other equipment, excavation, or alteration of a watercourse.
1. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries,
horticulture, viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and crop harvesting.
2. Industrial -commercial uses such as loading areas, parking areas, airport landing strips.
3. Private and public recreational uses such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges,
archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and
nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, target ranges, trap and
skeet ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking and horse riding trails.
4. Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas play areas.
5. Such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses.
B. Conditional Uses.
The following uses which involve structures (temporary or permanent), fill, storage of materials
or equipment, excavation or alteration of a watercourse may be permitted only upon issuance
of a Special Exception Permit by the Board of Adjustment. Such uses must also meet the
applicable provisions of the Floodway District Performance Standards.
1. Uses or structures accessory to open space uses.
28
2. Circuses, carnivals, and similar transient amusement enterprises.
3. Drive-in theaters, new and used car lots, roadside stands, signs, and billboards.
4. Extraction of sands, gravel, and other material.
5. Marinas, boat rentals, docks, piers, wharves.
6. Utility transmission lines, underground pipelines.
7. Other uses similar in nature to the Principal Permitted and Conditional Uses described
herein which are consistent with the Floodway District Performance Standards and the general
spirit and purpose of this Ordinance.
Also, this detention pond use is not listed as a principal permitted use or any "open space uses
similar in nature to the above uses" in the "F -P" General Flood Plain (Overlay) District, and
therefore is "prohibited unless a Variance to the terms of this Ordinance is granted after due
consideration by the Board of Adjustment" There are no issues with this section. The "F -P"
General Flood Plain (Overlay) District applies to areas identified on the official Federal Insurance
Administration's Flood Insurance Rate Map as a "Zone A", which is an unstudied stream. Prescott's
Creek is a studied stream, and does not have any "F -P" General Flood Plain (Overlay) District
associated with it in the vicinity of the proposed plat..
While a detention pond involves excavation to construct, a detention pond is not "substantially
uniform" with the use of land in the General Floodplain district, and therefore requires a special
permit after the IDNR determines whether it is partly or wholly within the floodway or floodway
fringe. There are no issues with this section; the property is not located within a "F -P" General Flood
Plain (Overlay) District.
10-22-4 "F -P" GENERAL FLOOD PLAIN (OVERLAY) DISTRICT.
A. A. Principal Permitted Uses.
The following uses shall be permitted within the General Flood Plain (Overlay) District to the
extent they are not prohibited by any other ordinance (or underlying zoning district) and
provided they do not require placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or other
obstruction; the storage of materials or equipment; excavation; or alteration of a watercourse,
unless approved as herein stated. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
1. Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries,
horticulture, viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming and crop harvesting.
2. Industrial -commercial uses such as loading areas, parking areas, and airport
landing strips.
3. Private and public recreation uses such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges,
archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and
nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, target ranges, trap and
skeet ranges, hunting and fishing areas, hiking and horseback riding trails.
4. Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas and play areas.
5. Such other open -space uses similar in nature to the above uses. [Ordinance
5049, 6/20/11]
B. Conditional Uses.
Any use which involves placement of structures, factory built homes, fill or other obstructions;
the storage of materials or equipment; excavation; or alteration of a watercourse may be
allowed only upon a determination by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) to
determine (1) whether the land involved is either wholly or partly within the floodway or
floodway fringe and (2) the 100 year flood level. The applicant shall be responsible for
providing the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) with sufficient technical
29
information to make the determination. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
In addition, since a detention pond is not "substantially uniform" with the use of land in the
Floodway Fringe or General Floodplain district, and because of their unique characteristics,
are of such an unusual nature that their operation may give rise to unique problems with
respect to their impact upon neighboring property, and therefore also requires a special permit.
This is a misinterpretation of the Ordinance, as the use is a Principal Permitted Use in the Floodway
Fringe District, and the General Floodplain District is not applicable to this property, as that is not the
flood zone designation of this property.
10-28-4 SPECIAL PERMITS, APPEALS, AND VARIANCES.
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
The Board of Adjustment is hereby established which shall hear and decide:
(i) applications for Special Permits upon which the Board is authorized to pass under this
Ordinance;
(ii) appeals; and
(iii) requests for Variances to the provisions of this Ordinance; and shall take any other action
which is required of the Board.
A. Special Permits.
Requests for Special Permits shall be submitted to the City Planner who shall forward such to
the Board of Adjustment for consideration, after recommendation of the Commission. Such
requests shall include a site plan in accordance with Section 10-5-1(Q) an information
ordinarily submitted with applications as well as any additional information deemed necessary
to the Board of Adjustment.
The following provisions shall apply:
1. Purpose: The development and administration of this Ordinance is based upon the division
of the City into Zoning Districts, within which Districts the use of land and buildings and the
bulk requirements and location of buildings and structures in relation to the land are
substantially uniform. It is recognized, however, that there are certain uses which, because of
their unique characteristics, cannot be properly classified in any particular District or Districts
without consideration in each case of the impact of those uses upon neighboring land and of
the public need for the particular use at the particular locations. Such uses are typically publicly
operated or affected with a public interest, or uses private in nature, but of such an unusual
nature that their operation may give rise to unique problems with respect to their impact upon
neighboring property or public facilities.
Floodway: The channel of a river or stream and those portions of the flood plains adjoining the
channel, which are reasonably required to carry and discharge flood waters or flood flows
associated with the Regulatory Flood, so that confinement of flood flows to the floodway area
will not result in substantially higher flood levels and flow velocities. [Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
Flood Plain: The relatively flat area of low lands adjoining the channel of a river, stream, or
watercourse which has been or may be covered by floodwater.
30
2) Tract "E"
Parcel "N" was created by the developer with Planning Department approval without any
access provision(s) other than across the side yard of the existing residence. While the
creation of Tract "E" allows for the future extension of a public street, it does riot immediately
provide access to Parcel "N" from the proposed street. Language should be added to the Deed
of Dedication allowing for vehicular access (agricultural equipment) across Tract "E", and a
field entrance included in the construction plans for the public street, or a blanket access
easement across Tract "B" and Tract "C" should be added to the Deed of Dedication to provide
access to Parcel "N" as it currently exists and for it's existing and anticipated use as
agricultural until it is replatted. Staff is in disagreement with this assessment. If the owner of Parcel
"N" felt it was necessary to have access to Parcel "N" by means other than across Lot 3 of Nottingham
Heights Addition, which is currently owned by the owner of Parcel "N", then the owner should have
negotiated such an access easement as part of the acquisition of Parcel "N". The City's sole
responsibility is to determine the need for future street connections, not providing private access
easements across private land. Tract "E" will be dedicated as right-of-way to the City of Waterloo for a
future street connection, and if the owner of Parcel "N" decides that such a street connection would be
beneficial, they will have the option for extending a public street as such.
A street is normally to be extended to the boundary of the tract (to Parcel "N") to provide for
future access and allow for future development, unless it is not "necessary or desirable for the
coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous
future development or adjacent tracts". Prior to signing the final plat the developer is to pay the
City the cost of extending street to boundary line, or provide contracts and waivers to guaranty
extension, if City decides the street is not needed at this time. The Deed of Dedication as
submitted shifts the burden to the adjacent landowner for the cost of extending the street,
since the extension is only being deferred until such time that the current or future owner of
Parcel "N" requires the street extension for any use other than it current agricultural use. Since
Parcel "N" is already zoned R-1, a waiver of the financial obligation of the developer is
contrary to Subdivision Ordinance Section 3.4(2), and without documents for financial
guarantees in place, it is premature to consider the final plat. Staff is in disagreement with this
assessment. A waiver of the financial obligation is not contrary to Subdivision Ordinance Section
3.4(2), and alternatively if it is determined that the financial obligation should not be so waived, then it
would be staffs recommendation that the plat be modified to its previous state eliminating the existence
of Tract "E", as it was the intention of the owner of Parcel "N" to acquire it to prevent such a road from
continuing through the area, necessitating the permanent cul-de-sac layout. A street is "normally" to be
extended to the boundary line when it makes sense for the development of the land in question and
land abutting the site, but is not required to do so in all instances. In the proposed cul-de-sac design,
there is no reason to require the street to be extended to the boundary line, but the developer is
providing the right-of-way for the option of a future road extension.
Subdivison Ordinance
SECTION 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND DESIGN
4.3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) Proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided,
31
unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions, or unless in the opinion of the
Plan and Program Commission such extension is not necessary or desirable for the
coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous
future development or adjacent tracts.
SECTION 3. ASSURANCE FOR COMPLETION AND MAINTENANCE OF
IMPROVEMENTS
3.4 Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements
(1) The City Council may defer or waive at the time of Final approval, subject to appropriate
conditions, the provision of any or all such improvements as, in its judgment, are not requisite
in the interests of the public health, safety and general welfare, or which are inappropriate
because of inadequacy or lack of connecting facilities.
(2) Whenever it is deemed necessary by the City Council to defer the construction of any
improvements required herein because of incompatible grades, future planning, inadequate or
lack of connecting facilities, or for other reasons, the applicant shall pay his share of the costs
of the future improvements to the local government prior to signing of the final subdivision plat,
or the applicant shall file contracts and waivers regarding completion of said improvements
upon demand of the City Council.
SECTION 2. SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROCEDURE AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Plats
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. Following the approval of a preliminary plat the
applicant, if he wishes to proceed with the subdivision, shall file with the Waterloo Plan and
Program Commission an application for final approval of a subdivision plat. The application
shall:
(g) be accompanied by the contract and waivers if required, in a form satisfactory to the
City attorney and the City Engineer.
3) Tract "B"
As part of the preliminary plat procedure, Tract B is required to be included in an overall
development plan which would show how it could be re -subdivided in the future, with the street
being extended to the boundary of the tract, unless in the opinion of the Plan and Program
Commission such extension not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the
subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development. This
planning is required for conformity with the surrounding existing, proposed, and future
residential areas. This was answered above, and the overall development plan is not required
because the requestor is includinq all land that they own in the request. As an example, when the
opposition's land was platted, this area was not included in the plat, and the then applicant was
required to provide a concept plan for development of the area. The concept plan is very similar to the
layout of the proposed subdivision.
32
The potential future re -subdivision must be outlined within a development plan for Tract "B",
both for lot and street layout. Any sub -divider of Tract "B" must be responsible for the cost of
extending the street as shown on an approved development plan, or provide contracts and
waivers to guaranty completion of the street adjacent to Lot 9 and Lot 10, and to provide those
lots with exemption from possible street assessment. This was answered above, and the overg
development plan is not required because the requestor is including all land that they own in the
request.
The developer of Nottingham Third Addition has agreed that Tract "B" is to be restricted to
single family residential in the restrictions for Nottingham Third Addition. However, a re plat of
Tract "B", even if not subdivided, would replace and supersede any restrictions contained in
Deed of Dedication for Nottingham Third Addition with new covenants and restrictions, which
would allow for the possibility of multiple duplexes constructed on Tract "B" (minimum lot size
of 10,000 sq.ft.) More than one single family home or duplex on a single lot would require approval of
a Special Permit by the Board of Adjustment after recommendation by the Planning Commission,
Since the Waterloo Zoning Ordinance does not have an R -SF, Residential, Single Family
zoning district, in order to guaranty that the agreed restriction of only single family housing on
Tract "B" would still be in force after re -platting, a resolution would be need to be approved by
the City Council accepting the development plan for Tract "B", defining the proposed lot layout,
minimum lot area, and maximum lot numbers, responsibility for street extension, and restating
that nothing other than single family housing will be allowed on Tract "B", even if it is re -platted
and new covenants are written. Staff is in disagreement with this assessment. All property in the
proposed plat is zoned "R-1" One and Two Family Residence District. Any portion of the proposed
subdivision or any adjoining subdivision zoned "R-1" is subject to the potential to be rem- latted and
restrictions prohibiting duplexes removed. There is no need that Tract "B" be singled out with some
sort of special provision providing an exclusion for something that is permitted by the current zoning of
the property.
Subdivision Ordinance
SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.12 Resubdivision of Land
(2) Procedure for Subdivisions Where Future Resubdivision is Indicated.
Whenever a parcel of land is subdivided and the subdivision plat shows one or more lots
containing more than one acre of land and there are indications that such lots will
eventually be resubdivided into small building sites, the Waterloo Plan and Program
Commission and City Council may require that such parcel of land allow for the future
opening of streets and the ultimate extension of adjacent streets. Easements providing for
the future opening and extension of such streets may be made a requirement of the plat.
2.2 Preliminary Plat
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. The applicant shall assist the Planning Staff in
filing an application for approval of a preliminary plat. The applicant shall:
33
(e) An overall development plan shall accompany a preliminary plat which is being
submitted for only a portion of the land which is owned by the requestor and could be
subdivided in the future.
SECTION 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND DESIGN
4.2 Lot Improvements
(2) Lot Dimensions.
Lot dimensions shall comply with the minimum standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Where
lots are more than double the minimum required area for the zoning district, the Plan and
Program Commission may require that such lots be arranged so as to allow further
subdivision and the opening of future streets where they would be necessary to serve such
potential lots, all in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and these regulations.
4.3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(a) Frontage on Improved Streets. No subdivision shall be approved unless the area to be
subdivided shall have frontage on and access from an existing street or a street shown
upon a plat approved by the Plan and Program Commission and recorded in the County
Recorder of Deeds' Office. Such street of highway must be suitably improved as required
by the highways rules, regulations, specifications, or orders, or be secured by a contract
required under theses subdivision regulations, with the width and right-of-way required
under these subdivision regulations of the Official Street Plan. Where the area to be
subdivided is to utilize existing street frontage, such street shall be suitably improved as
provided herein above.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) Proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided,
unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions, or unless in the opinion of the
Plan and Program Commission such extension is not necessary or desirable for the
coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous
future development of of adjacent tracts.
4.6 Sewerage Facilities
(2) Residential Districts. Sanitary sewerage systems shall be constructed as follows:
(a) Where a public sanitary sewerage system is reasonably accessible the applicant shall
connect with same and provide sewers accessible to each lot in the subdivision.
SECTION 6. DEFINITIONS
34
6.2 Words and Terms Defined
Frontage. The side of a lot abutting on a street or way and ordinarily regarded as the front of
the lot, but it shall not be considered as the ordinary side of a corner lot.
Lot. A tract, plat, or portion of a subdivision or other parcel of land intended as a unit for the
purpose, whether immediate of future, of transfer of ownership or for building development.
Resubdivision. A change in a map of an approved or recorded subdivision plat if such change
affects any street layout on such map or area reserved thereon for public use,or any lot line;
or if it affects any map or plan legally recorded prior to the adoption of any regulations
controlling subdivisions.
7. Existing Nottingham neighbors concerns
This document is a 3 page document. I have inserted the document below, trying to maintain formatting and font
(this document did not have color) as provided in the original document. Staff responses are provided in green. The
document highlights three areas of concern, listing multiple questions within each area. The document with staff
responses in green are as follows:
Existing Nottingham neighbors concerns
Safety Issues
The city planning staff answered a question about chemical and bacterial dangers of the proposed
retention/detention pond by stating they have had no problems with similar ponds in subdivisions
surrounded by housing developments. How is that comparable to a pond in a hayfield, in a floodway
where agricultural chemicals will drain into that area frequently? Those opposed to the request would
appear to suggest that the request should be denied based on their opinion that there will be problems
with the operation and maintenance of the detention facility, including suggested chemical or bacterial
contamination. The detention facility is mandated by City ordinance, is not prohibited from being
located within a floodplain or floodway, and no substantiating documentation has been submitted to
conclusively prove that the detention facility will be such a hazard. An otherwise legal plat with a legal
(meeting all requirements) detention facility should not legally be denied on the basis that in the opinion
of some they think it will become such a hazard. The City of Waterloo does have examples where
detention facilities have been located within or partially within a floodway, including: 1) Tower Park (a
commercial subdivision), 2) 2515 Cyclone Dr, Mauer Eye Center, 3) 3730 MLK Jr Dr, Ferguson
Enterprises, 4) 2680 Sergeant Rd, O'Neal Metals, and 5) 2815 WCF&N Dr, Hydrite Chemical.
Examples of more recent residential subdivisions within the City of Cedar Falls that have constructed
detention facilities within or partially within a floodway include: 1) Fieldstone First Addition, 2)
Lexington Heights Fifth Addition, and 3) Lakewood Hills Addition. There have been no known health
or safety issues reported as a result of any of these facilities, many of which are located in close
proximity to agricultural land where it is likely, according to the opposition's assumptions, that flood
water would cause agricultural chemicals to drain frequently.
The size of the retention pond has been stated by Mr. Young and Mr. Claussen to be of various sizes and
depths depending on the presentation. What are the exact dimensions of the proposed pond? Detailed
construction plans have not yet been submitted and are not required until after approval of a plat, but the
proposed detention pond is generally shown on the preliminary plat. By scale of the proposed detention
35
facility on the preliminary plat, it is approximately 100' wide by 530' long, and less than 2' deep. Most
of the ones in subdivisions are small, symmetrical and add to the decorum of the area. How will a long
narrow channel that is 18" deep not just be a trench? It is not a long narrow channel and will not have
steep slopping sides, so is not a trench. The proposed approximate dimensions are not untypical to other
detention facilities. What are the standards for the requirements? There are only standards for volume
and outlet control, not for geometrics (width, length, depth, slope, etc.) of a detention facility. The only
number that they ever committed to is the volume of the pond, but that will change dramatically by the
depth which has been stated to be several feet, only 3 feet and most recently 18". This needs to be clear
and we don't think a long trench is appropriate or safe.
What disclosures will be required to the potential new homeowners regarding the retention pond? The
restrictive covenants of the deed of dedication address the detention facility.
When there is flash flooding from Prescott's creek, how will a long trench hold enough water to capture
the flood waters and storm drainage from the surrounding neighborhood? The detention facility is not
intended or required to detain floodwater from Presscott's Creek. During any time period that the
detention facility is flooded from Prescott's Creek it will no longer detain additional drainage, however
this will typically be relatively infrequently and for relatively short periods of time, and is not different
than other detention facilities that potentially can flood. Mr. Young stated to the planning commission
that appropriate tile and grading will eliminate the risk from the houses, but also wanted the
homeowners adjacent to tract B and lots 10 and 11 to pay half the cost to grade the area of natural
drainage. How can the council and neighborhood be assured that appropriate grading and drainage will
work rather than just cause more backup in the slew along lots 10, 11 and tract B. The applicant has
hired a professional civil engineer who prepared a grading plan and is indicating that the subdivision
will adequately drain. Engineering has revised the proposed plan and concur that it would provide
adequate drainage. Detailed construction plans will still have to be submitted for review and approval.
How will enforcement of maintenance of the pond and new plat be accomplished before all the lots are
sold? The restrictive covenants of the deed of dedication.
Has the Iowa DNR been contacted by the city planning staff to ensure that a retention pond in the
floodway is permissible, safe and approved? Yes, approval was indicated in a November 13, 2014 e-
mail from Bill Cappuccio with the IDNR. We understand Mr. Young has not done that despite being
informed that one of the neighbors was denied being able to build a pond on their own property by the
DNR.
Mr. Young told the planning/zoning commission that the water table was low in the neighborhood.
Living at the highest point in the neighborhood, our sump pump runs all spring through mid -summer
and much of the fall. Building our house caused standing water in the neighbors' yards behind us. Tiling
fixed it, because there was a lot of flat land in the proposed area to dump the water into. How do we
assure more existing neighbors don't have water issues as these houses are built in the natural drainage?
The applicant has hired a professional civil engineer who prepared a grading plan and is indicating that
the subdivision will adequately drain. Engineering has revised the proposed plan and concur that it
would provide adequate drainage. Detailed construction plans will still have to be submitted for review
and approval. The preliminary plat shows a defined drainage way to accommodate drainage in this area,
with a crossing that will have culverts designed to carry the 100 -year storm event.
Property values
There was a lot of discussion at the planning/zoning commission about the lot sizes in the new plat. Mr.
Young presented data that the average size of the lot was similar to the other plats in the neighborhood,
however, three or four of the 11 plats are quite large. What is the mean lot size and how does that
compare to the other plats in the neighborhood? Mean is typically synonymous with average. Staff has
prepared a spreadsheet of the lot sizes of the proposed lots and existing neighborhood, showing several
36
methods to calculate the average (mean), and have also compared the "median" "mode" and
"midrange", which are different methods of calculating an average (see attached). Staff would reaffirm
our previous assessment that the proposed lot sizes do not appear to be significantly different than the lot
sizes as platted in the existing subdivisions. What is the smallest lot size and how does it compare to the
other plats? The smallest lot size in the proposed subdivision is 16,704 SF, and the smallest lot size in
the existing subdivisions is 17,250 SF, although there were two lots that were 17,250 SF and both have
been split or combined with adjoining lots, making the adjusted smallest lot size in the existing
subdivisions 19,500 SF. Average size is as potentially misleading as the volume of a retention pit.
The tax abatement for the city of Waterloo has helped a lot with sales of new homes, but has made it
harder to sell existing homes. With a limited market for larger homes in Waterloo, what will the city
council do to help existing home owners maintain their property values? It is the City's opinion that the
new construction of homes will help maintain and increase existing property values of a neighborhood.
With documented evidence of water issues through lots 9, 10, and tract B, and probably lot 8 as well,
what reassurance will the public and council have that the developers will grade and tile the new area to
ensure those houses and yards are not subject to water damage? It is not realistic or reasonable to
attempt to ensure that any house (in this or any other area of town) will not be subject to any water
damage. The applicant's engineer has prepared a grading plan that is properly designed to provide
adequate drainage. After approval of the preliminary and final plat, the applicant's engineer will prepare
detailed construction plans, which must also be approved by the City Council. Staff will inspect the
construction of the development for conformance to the construction plans. What recourse will existing
and new homeowners have when those areas have water issues? If a homeowner feels that they have
water issues caused by a violation of Iowa drainage laws, they have the right to file legal proceedings
with a Court of Law.
At least 15 of the 22 existing homeowners signed the petition presented to the planning/zoning
commission despite the fact that only 6-7 houses will be directly affected by the water drainage issues
with grading changes. Why does the council want to dismiss the valid concerns of so many neighbors
and such a high percentage of the neighborhood? The Council must always weigh the concerns of the
abutting neighbors with the submitted plans of a request to determine how applicable City Codes and
regulations apply to each request. It is the opinion of staff that all concerns are being properly addressed
in the proper platting, grading, and development of the land.
Legal/Protocol Issues
The city planning department recommends approval, but the planning/zoning commission denied
approval. How often do they disagree? It is not extremely frequent, but is not unusual. Staff does not
have data that tracks how many occurrences or the frequency of those occurrences. How often does the
city council go against the planning/zoning commission's recommendation? It is not extremely frequent,
but is not unusual. Staff has limited data that partially tracks this, and in the last ten years staff found
approximately 15 instances where the City Council voted contrary to the Planning Commission's
recommendation.
We have documentation that Cedar Falls does not allow retention ponds in floodways, yet the city
planning staff stated that they do. Several other communities (22 of the largest 25) told us directly they
do not, yet the city planning staff claimed they do. What documentation does the staff have to prove they
are correct? Staff attempted to call and speak to staff from the 17 cities noted in the documentation
submitted by the opposition, and have a spreadsheet with details of those that we were able to speak
with. How can you reassure the public and the council that the staff is correct when conflicting
information is presented? What documentation does the opposition have to prove they are correct? The
above comments indicate that they "have documentation that Cedar Falls does not allow retention ponds
in floodways", yet they have not provided any documentation to us, and representatives of Cedar Falls
37
(Planning Department and Engineering Department) have indicated that detention facilities are allowed
in the floodway. In addition, a very cursory review for recent residential subdivisions with detention
facilities located in a floodway within Cedar Falls uncovered at least three, including 1) Fieldstone First
Addition, 2) Lexington Heights Fifth Addition, and 3) Lakewood Hills Addition.
The ordinance is very clear about requiring approval from the board of adjustments for excavating and
construction (even a city required retention pond) in a floodway. Why does the city planning staff think
the council and this project is not bound by the rules and laws established? This is a misinterpretation of
the Ordinance, and in a previous response above, it is detailed why the Ordinance does not require
approval from the Board of Adjustment.
A council member at the hearing implied that disapproving a housing development because of safety,
legal and existing property owners concerns would be making Waterloo more anti -business. How is
protecting the public (a legal obligation of the planning/zoning commission and the reason they voted
no) anti -business? As a small business owner, I don't think carte blanche to allow business to do things
that jeopardize the public is pro-business. No response needed. Doesn't the city council have to ensure
the platting is safe, maintains property values for existing neighbors and adds to the attraction and
growth of Waterloo not detracts from it? Yes, and it is staff's determination, per the rules and
regulations that are in place to safeguard the public, that the proposed plat does.
The developers stated there is a pent-up demand for $500k plus homes in Waterloo.
1) How many home sales exceeding 500K have closed in Waterloo in the past year? This is not a staff
responsibility to have this information. Further, it would not appear completely relevant, as the request
is for the development of land for new home construction and would not be completely comparable to
existing home sales.
2) What is the average time on market for 500K plus homes? This is not a staff responsibility to have
this information.
3) What is the basis for making this statement? This would be for the applicant to respond to.
With regard to storm water retention/detention ponds:
1) What measures has the city put into place for the regular inspection and testing of these facilities to
ensure they are not contaminated with bacteria that is transferable and potentially harmful to humans
and domestic animals? There are currently no requirements for regular inspection of drainage facilities.
2) If the 11 homeowners are going to be responsible for maintaining the borrow pit, what is the
governance structure that will be put into place to ensure this responsibility is honored? The deed of
dedication.
a. Who will be the management company contracted to collect homeowner association fees, arrange
contracts for mowing, landscaping, fertilizing, weed and pest control, and conduct regular testing and
inspection of the site? This is not information we have nor would we require, but I assume the answer is
that there will not be a third party management company, and it would appear to be very untypical to
have such a third party management system.
b. If there is not a third party management company, who will be the point of contact for concerns? This
is not information we have, but presumably it would be the president of the home owners association.
c. If the homeowners do not uphold the expectations, will the only recourse be to involve the city to step
in? How is this accomplished? Will it be via a lawsuit? If there are violations of City requirements, the
City could step in to require compliance. If issues do not involve violations of City requirements, then if
a complaining party does not get satisfactory resolution from the home owners association, then yes,
presumably the recourse would be via a lawsuit.
d. What is the amount of the monthly homeowner's fee for these 11 lots? This is not information we
have or would require, but presumably it would be an amount set by the home owners association. Who
will collect and manage these funds? Presumably it would be the home owners association.
38
Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information regarding any of the responses.
Respectfully,
Aric A. Schroeder,
City Planner
39
NottinghamT
rd Addition - Protection of future owners, Preservation of community, Protection of
quality of life and Defense against Profit Driven Developers
14 Oct 2014
Purpose - Ordinance 3196 "Zoning Ordinance" shall be to promote
1. Health
2. Safety
3. Morals
4. Order
5. Convenience
6. Prosperity
7. General Welfare
8. Conserve and Protect the Value of Property (Current & future owners,
taxpayers)
9. Facilitate the adequate provision of
a. Transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements.
10. Recognize the conflict of interest of individuals and corporations that seek to
gain financially (developers, survey agents of developers, etc. ) vs. the stated
purpose of Ord 3196 to protect the health, and property value of current families living
in the area.
11. Conduct ALL business FULLY within the city Zoning Ordinance and legal
requirements.
What is Not the purpose:
1. Be sympathetic to profit driven developers or overlook the ordinances or laws
2. To approve anything that comes before the commission
3. To show prejudices or leniency to corporations, LLC, or individuals, but to rule approve
or dismissal based on presented evidence & testimony.
4. Not provide 3rd, 4th, limitless multiple chances for approval
5. To have committee personal active with conflicts of interests
6. Believe developers data & survey inputs w/o question
7. To provide opportunities for companies or individuals to be profitable
Petition to Not approve/ Reject Nottingham Third Addition
• 27 signatures
What is our purpose here on earth, if not to help each other, protect each other from harm, to care for each other?
God respects private property, free enterprise. He does not condemn private ownership or making money or the profit
motive. What He consistently condemns throughout His Word is greed, selfishness, acquiring wealth through dishonesty
and lack of full disclosure, unfair exploitation of others, the use of wealth and power and influence to gather more for
yourself at the expense of others.
1
Main Points
1. Water flooding on proposed lots (see pictures on page 4 of this handout)
a. Pictures clearly show flooding on lots #8, #9 and #10 and on Tract "B"
b. Protect the future land owners, health, safety, welfare and property value by denying
these areas for approval.
2. Street extension to parcel "N"
a. Future connection to Ranchero Rd, New street to be standard 31" wide
b. Parcel owner wants for road to connect to property line & full width
3. Tract "B"
a. Does not have the ability to connect to a sewer. Should not be approved.
b. City ordinance 29 & 30 states any tract has to have ability for sewer before approval.
C. Needs language in Deed of Dedication and on face of plat(s) that no development shall
occur on Tract B unless a connect is made to Prescott Creek trunk sewer
d. Needs language in Deed of Dedication and on face of plat(s) that no development shall
occur on Tract B unless it is single family homes on lots of 20,000 sf., consistent with
neighborhood.
4. Sanitary Sewer
a. Existing sanitary sewer is within 100' of property
b. City engineer has declined lift stations in Nottingham additions
c. Primary purpose of Prescott creek sanitary sewer trunk line was to provide this ability,
which cost the city several $Millions.
d. Developer is required by subdivision ordinance to connect to it, it is just of the cost part
of doing business
e. Not be able to pass the financial burden on to each individual property owner, and
require them to have a lift pump in each home.
5. Borrow Pit (Dirt) (see page 5 for pictures)
a. Sole purpose is to reduce cost of road, not as "retention pond"
b. Has the volume and depth been clearly defined? No evidence.
c. Limited on depth due to ability to drain at 870' elevation
d. Has city engineer been given calculations for required volume
e. Has he approved it?
f. Drawings show this is far into the floodway
g. Requires Iowa DNR approval
6. New land owners maintenance responsibilities
a. City has turned down the offer to own Track "C", for reason of maintenance costs,
developer is dumping it on future owners
b. Future land owners would have no expertise on this or what they are buying into or how
to inspect or maintain it.
c. Undue burden on property owners with potentially significant continual costs of
maintenance
d. Need clearly defined guidelines of inspection and maintenance for owners to follow.
(Refer to currently used document provided in another Iowa city. Pages 6-8 in this handout)
e. Requires City engineer approval before committee's approval of plans
2
7. Final Plate document
a. If construction plans has not been reviewed and fully signed off by the City engineer, it
needs to be removed from the agenda.
8. Lot sizes
a. Data in the staffs information is misleading.
b. States existing Nottingham minimum parcel is 17,250 sf. Land owners with houses
minimum size is actually 20,250. And real average is 31,500 sf.
c. Therefor minimum size lot should be 20,000 or greater and an average of 31,000 sf to
maintain the character & property value of the existing owners of proposed addition.
9. Staff Recommendation is Inaccurate in several areas
a. "The plat is in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance with minor exceptions that do
not appear to negatively affect the intent of the Subdivision Ordinance." is completely
inaccurate and indicated the staff are either not aware of the entirety of the subdivision
and zoning ordinances of the City of Waterloo, or have chosen to ignore certain
sections in favor of the developer.
10. 40 Day action limit
a. Committee has 40 days to approve, conditionally approve, or deny development
proposal
11. Legal Issues
a. Violation of Waterloo subdivision ordinances is a legal violation
b. Subject to criminal penalty
c. No DNR approval
d. No repeat of Summerland Farms addition with major water issues
3
4
.. _... a-.�:w.
5
0
Fes? 11,410:)s
1
amt
slice Sv.L:t
. 10% change each year.
Example of clearly defined guidelines of inspection and maintenance for owners to follow
Prepared by: Wendell Lupkes, L.S., VJ Engineering, 1501 Technology Pkwy, Suite 100, Waterloo, IA 50613 (319)266-5829
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR AGREEMENT
AND PERMANENT EASEMENT
This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the Nottingham Third Addition
Homeowners' Association, (hereinafter "Owner") and the City of Waterloo, Iowa (hereinafter "City"):
WHEREAS, Owner desires to construct a storm water management facility on Tract "C" of
Nottingham Third Addition, Waterloo, Black Hawk County, Iowa, which will require approval of the
City, and
WHEREAS, a Maintenance and Repair Agreement is required pursuant to Section 27.408 of
the City's Code of Ordinances, and
WHEREAS, a permanent easement over said Tract C is required, and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth the terms and provisions of said Agreement as
required by said Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between the parties as follows:
1. Owner will construct a storm water management facility on its property, which is legally
described as follows:
Tract "B", Nottingham Third Addition, Waterloo, Black Hawk County, Iowa.
2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is the Detention Basin Operation and Maintenance Plan for
this project.
3. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is the Maintenance Schedule for the facility.
4. Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC, as owner of Tract "C" of the Real Estate, for itself and its
successors and assigns, hereby grants to the future owners of all lots which comprise the real estate
legally described on Exhibit C attached hereto (the "Benefitted Property"), and to the City of Waterloo,
Iowa (the "City"), as owners of the streets to be dedicated to the City, and the stormwater facilities
over which the City is granted perpetual easements, all as described in the Deed of Dedication of the
real estate described on Exhibit C, a permanent easement over, upon, under and across Tract "C" of
the Real Estate, for the collection and detention of stormwater from all of the lots, streets and other
parts of the real estate describe on Exhibit C. This easement shall be perpetual in nature, shall be a
covenant which runs with the land which comprises the Benefitted Property and with Tract "B" of the
Real Estate, shall inure to the benefit of the future owners of all lots which comprise the Benefitted
Property and to the City, and shall be binding upon Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC, and its grantees,
transferees, successors and assigns, including without limitation, Nottingham Third Addition
6
Homeowners' Association as potential future owner of said Tract "C". Robin Hood Enterprises, LLC
may add additional real estate to the Benefitted Property upon written consent of the City, in which
case the perpetual easement granted herein shall thereafter inure to the benefit of the future owners
of lots which comprise the additional real estate, and to the City with respect to streets dedicated to
and easements granted to the City with respect to such additional real estate.
5. The City shall have a permanent access easement for purposes of inspection of the
facility as designated in the legal description set forth above.
6. The Owner shall be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the facility, and
shall make records of the installation, maintenance and repairs, and shall retain said records for at
least twenty-five years or until the facility has been reconstructed. These records shall be made
available to the City during any City inspection, and shall be submitted to the City at other reasonable
times upon request.
7. If the Owner or any other responsible party fails or refuses to meet maintenance or
repair requirements, and if the facility is not a danger to public safety or public health, the City shall
provide the Owner or responsible party with reasonable notice to correct the violation in a timely
manner. In the event that the facility becomes a danger to public safety or public health, the City shall
notify the Owner or responsible party in writing that upon receipt of the notice, the responsible party
shall have two days or such additional time as circumstances may require to maintain and/or repair
the facility. If the violations or non-compliance have not been corrected by the Owner or responsible
party in a timely manner, the City may assess, jointly and severally, the cost of the work shall be a
lien on the facility, or shall be assessed to the benefited property as a lien to be collected in the same
manner as property taxes.
8. Attached hereto as Exhibit D are forms to be utilized with regard to
inspection/maintenance of the facility.
9. In consideration of approval by the City of the foregoing agreement and attached
Exhibits, Owner accepts the responsibilities set forth herein and agrees that the same shall be
binding upon its grantees, transferees, successors and assigns.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereinto subscribed their names to this agreement.
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
By
)
Addition Homeowners' Association
This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of , 2014
by , as of the
Nottingham Third Addition Homeowners' Association.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
City of Waterloo, Iowa
By
Buck Clark, Mayor
STATE OF IOWA )
COUNTY OF BLACK HAWK )
This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of , 2014
by Buck Clark, Mayor of the City of Waterloo, Iowa.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
8
SECTION 2.
PROCESS
Tract "E"
Subdivision Ordinance
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROCEDURE AND APPROVAL
2.3 Final Subdivision Plats
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. Following the approval of a preliminary
the applicant, if he wishes to proceed with the subdivision, shall file with the
Waterloo Plan and Program Commission an application for final approval of a
subdivision plat. ;
(g) e accompanied by the contract and waivers if required, in a form satisfactory
to the , attorney and the City Engineer.
SECTION 3. ASSURANCE FOR COMPLETION AND MAINTENANCE OF
IMPROVEMENTS
3.4 Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements
(1) The Gity Council may defer or waive at the time of Final approval, subject to
appropriate conditions, the provision of any or all such improvements as, in its
judgment, are not requisite in the interests of the public health, safety and general
welfare, or which are inappropriate because of inadequacy or lack of connecting
(2 Whenever it is deemed necessary by the City Cnunril to defer the construction of
any improvements required herein because of incompatible grades, future planning,
inadequate or lack of connecting facilities, r for other reasons, the applicant shall pay
his si la' e 01 the costs ot the tuture improvements to the local government prior to
signing of the final subdivision plat, or the applicant shall file contracts and waivers
regarding completion of said improvements upon demand of the City Council.
SECTION 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND
DESIGN
4.3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) ,)roposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the trari
subdivided unless prevented by topoaraphv or other physical conditio,, , or unless in
the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension is not necessary or
desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with the existing layout
Lk 1,10SL advainageous tuture ueveioprnent cii ol aLijacent ttaots
Tract "B"
Subdivision Ordinance
SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.12 Resubdivision of Land
(2) Procedure for Subdivisions Where Future Resubdivision is Indicated.
p 1 'di Id sSuoavideo ant. kSI 104'.'
t 11.e lots containing more than one acre of IoiJ d I It, there are indications
that _uch lots will eventually be resubdivided into small building sites, tin
Waterloo Plan and Program Commission and City Council may require that
such parcel of land allow for the future opening of streets and the ultimate
extension of adjacent str, . Easements providing for the future opening and
extension of such streets may be made a requirement of the plat.
2.2 Preliminary Plat
(1) Application Procedure and Requirements. The applicant shall assist the
Planning Staff in filing an application for approval of a preliminary plat. The
applicant shall:
(e) An overall development plan shall accompany a preliminary plat which
is being submitted for only a portion of the land which is owned by the requestor
and could be subdivided in the future.
SECTION 4.
DESIGN
REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND
4.2 Lot Improvements
(2) Lot Dimensions.
Lot dimensions shall comply with the minimum standards of the Zoning
Ordinance. 4here .1 tore than doubk minink,Iii re uirea or
the zoning district, the Plan and Program Commission may require that such
lots be arranged so as to allow further subdivision and the opening of future
strec when- ,old be necessary to serve such potential lots, all in
compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and these regulations.
4.3 Roads
(1) General Requirements.
(a) Frontage on Improved Streets. No subdivision shall be approved
unless thr to be ll have frontage on and access from an
existing street or a street shown upon a plat approved by the Plan and
Program Commission and recorded in the County Recorder of Deeds' Office,
Such street of highway must be suitably improved as required by the
highways rules, regulations, specifications, or orders, or be secured by a
contract required under theses subdivision regulations, with the width and
right-of-way required under these subdivision regulations of the Official Street
Plan. Where the area to be subdivided is to utilize existing street frontage,
such street shall be suitably improved as provided herein above.
(c) Topography and Arrangement
(vi) Proposed streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be
subdivided, unle,“ ^o• 1 -0'4,1graph% mr physic lf , or
unless in the opinion of the Plan and Program Commission such extension is not
necessary or desirable for the coordination of the layout of the subdivision with
the existing layout or the most Jon I,
4.6 Sewerage Facilities
(2) Residential Districts. Sanitary sewerage systems shall be constructed as
follows:
a) Where a public sanitary sewerage system is reasonably accessible the
applicant shall connect with same and provide sewers accessible to each lot
in the subdivision.
SECTION 6. DEFINITIONS
6.2 Words and Terms Defined
Frontage. The side of a lot abutting on a street or way and ordinarily regarded
as the front of the lot, but it shall not be considered as the ordinary side of a
corner lot.
Lot. A tract, plat, or portion of d subdivision or other parcel of land intended as
a unit for the purpose, whether immediate of future, of transfer of ownership or
t•nr building development
Resubdivision. A change in a map of an approved or recorded subdivision plat
it such change affects any street layout on such map or area reserved thereon
for public use, or hy lot ; or if it affects any map or plan legally recorded prior
to the adoption of any regulations controlling subdivisions.
Borrow Pit (Detention Pond)
ZONING ORDINANCE
CHAPTER 30
OTHER PERMITS
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
10-30-1 PERMITS.
B. Flood Plain Development Permit.
iood Plain Development Permit issued by the City Planner or designee flail Lk,
secured prior to initiation of any flood plain development (any man, -
improved and u,unimnrnved real estate, inc+udinq but not limited to buildings or other
structures, mining, filling, grading, paving, xcavatior or drilling operations), including
the placement of factory -built homes. [Ordinance 5049, 6/20/11]
1. Application for a Flood Plain Development Permit shall be made on forms supplied by
the City Planner or designee and shall include the following information: [Ordinance
3973, 9/27/93]
a. Description of the work to be covered by the permit for which application is to be
made.
b. Description of the land on which the proposed work is to be done (i.e., lot, block,
tract, street address or similar description) that will readily identify and locate the work to
be done.
c. Indication of the use or occupancy for which the proposed work is intended.
d. Elevation of the 100 -year flood.
e. Elevation (in relation to North American Vertical Datum 1988) of the lowest floor
(including basement) of buildings or of the level to which a building is to be
flood -proofed.
f. For buildings being improved or rebuilt, the estimated cost of improvements and
market value of the building prior to the improvements.
g. Such other information as the City Planner or designee deems reasonably necessary
for the purpose of this Ordinance.
2. Flood Plain Development Permits issued on the basis of approved plans and
applications authorize only the use, arrangement and construction set forth in such
approved plans and applications and no other use, arrangement or construction. Any
use, arrangement, or construction at variance with that authorized shall be deemed a
violation of this Ordinance and shall be punishable as provided within this Ordinance.
The applicant shall be required to submit certification by a professional engineer or land
surveyor, as appropriate, registered in the State of Iowa, that the finished fill, building
floor elevations, flood -proofing, or other flood protection measures were accomplished
in compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance prior to the use or occupancy of any
structure.
3. N ., or structures in the Floodway, Floodway Fringe, General Flood Plain, and
Shallow Flooding Districts requiring Special Permits shall be allowed only upon
application to the City Planner or designee with issuance of the Special Permit by the
Board of Adjustment Petitioners shall include information ordinarily submitted with
applications as well as any additional information deemed necessary by the Board of
Adjustment.
Where required approval of the IowaDepartment of Natural Rem frees 91170 precede
issuance of the Special Permit by the Board of Adjul,. [Ordinance 3973, 9/27/93]
D. Iowa Department of Natural Resources - Required Developmental Approval.
i'ermit (Conditional Uses), approval by the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) is required for. but not limited to, the following
types of project. [Ordinance 3973, 9/27/93]
1. Bridges, culverts, temporary stream crossings, road embankments in or on floodway
of any river or stream draining more than two (2) square miles.
2. Construction, operation and maintenance of channel alterations on any river or
stream draining more than two (2) square miles.
3. Construction, operation and maintenance of dams and impounding structures in the
following instances:
a. Any dam designed to provide permanent storage in excess of eighteen (18) acre-feet.
b. Any dam which has a height of ten (10) feet or more and is designed to temporarily
store more than five (5) acre-feet at the top of dam elevation, or impounds a stream
draining two (2) or more square miles.
4. Construction, operation and maintenance of any levee or dike along any stream or
river draining more than two (2) square miles.
5. Waste or water treatment facilities on the flood plains of any river or stream draining
more than two (2) square miles.
6. Construction, operation and maintenance of any sanitary landfill located on a flood
plain or floodway of any river or stream draining more than two (2) square miles at the
landfill site.
7. Construction, operation and maintenance of any pipeline crossings on any river or
stream draining more than two (2) square miles.
8. Stream bank protective devices as follows:
a. Stream bank protective devices along any river or stream draining more than one
hundred (100) square miles.
b. Stream bank protective devices along any river or stream draining between two (2)
and one hundred (100) square miles where the cross sectional area of the river or
stream channel is reduced more than three percent (3%).
9. dram
10. Boat docks located on any river or stream (other than a lake) other than exempted
non -floating boat dock.
CHAPTER 33
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY PLANNER OR OFFICIAL
DESIGNEE
[Ordinance 3393, 6/10/85]
10-33-1 INFORMATION TO BE OBTAINED OR MAINTAINED.
A. It sI it; ic: :ycii the Lity Harmer or his or her official designee to:
(Ordinance 3973, 9/27/93j
1. Review all flood plain development permit applications to ensure that the provisions
of this Ordinance will be satisfied.
2. .erit permit applications to ensure that all necessary
permits have been obtained from Federal, State or local governmental agencies.
0
1
Proposed Nottingham Final
Nottingham Addition as platted
Current lots in adjacent subdivisions
with Naylor & Mattoon extra lots
Lot #
SF
Lot
Size(Square Feet
Nottingham Addition 4
17,250
1
37,113.01
Nottingham Addition 3
19,934
23,475.0
23,475.0
2
26,798.0
2
17,250
27,750.0
27,750.0
3
23,549.0
3
18,000
20,250.0
20,250.0
4
25,551.0
4
17,250
Nottingham Second Addition 1
23,250
5
16,704.0
5
19,500
19,500.0
19,500.0
6
19,000.0
9
37,613.0
Nottingham Second Addition 6
24,750
7
22,800.0
Nottingham First
Addition
Lot #
SF
8
24,207.0
1
23,250
23,250.0
23,250.0
9
37,613.0
2
45,212
33,600.0
33,600.0
10
42,773.0
3
34,253
34,200.0
34,200.0
11
22,800.0
4
40,778
35,205.5
35,205.5
33,225
Nottingham first addition 3
34,253
Nottingham Heights 5
40,250
Nottingham first addition 4
Average
27,173.5
Nottingham Second
Addition
Slze(Square Feet
Mean
1
23,250
23,250.0
23,250.0
17,250; 23,250; 25,500
Midrange
2
28,900
28,900.0
28,900.0
Average:
27173.53
25,500
25,500.0
25,500.0
Tract"B"
116,448.004
25,500
25,500.0
25,500.0
Avg with Tr "B"
34,613.00
5
24,667
24,236.0
24,236.0
6
24,750
24,750.0
24,750.0
7
28,050
28,050.0
28,050.0
8
26,350
26,350.0
26,350.0
Nottingham Heights
1
25,875
25,837.5
25,837.5
2
24,545
25,488.0
25,488.0
3
24,960
30,500.0
124,590.0
4
33,225
121,532.4
181,645.4
5
40,250
40,280.0
40,280.0
6
22,985
22,984.0
22,984.0
Average
26,706
31,381.3
38,390.5
Definitions:
Mean: The "mean" is the "average" you're used to, where you add up all the numbers and then divide by the number of numbers.
Median: The "median" is the "middle" value in the list of numbers. To find the median, your numbers have to be listed in numerical order
Mode: The "mode" is the value that occurs most often. If no number is repeated, then there is no mode for the list.
Midrange: the quantity obtained by adding the largest and smallest values and dividing by 2
Nottingham Subdivisions 1.7.2015
Nottin ham Addition
Proposed Nottingham Final
Nottingham Addition 2
17,250
5
16,704.0
Nottingham Addition 4
17,250
6
19,000.0
Nottingham Addition 3
18,000
7
22,800.0
Nottingham Addition 5
19,500
11
22,800.0
Nottingham Addition 1
19,934
3
23,549.0
Nottingham Heights 6
22,985
8
24,207.0
Nottingham first addition 1
23,250
4
25,551.0
Nottingham Second Addition 1
23,250
2
26,798.0
Nottingham Heights 2
24,545
1
37,113.0
Nottingham Second Addition 5
24,667
9
37,613.0
Nottingham Second Addition 6
24,750
10
42,773.0
Nottingham Heights 3
24,960
Lot #
SF
Nottingham Second Addition 3
25,500
Nottingham Second Addition 4
25,500
Mean
27,173.5
Nottingham Heights 1
25,875
Median
24,207.0
Nottingham Second Addition 8
26,350
Mode
22,800.0
Nottingham Second Addition 7
28,050
Midrange
29,738.50
Nottingham Second Addition 2
28,900
Nottingham Heights 4
33,225
Nottingham first addition 3
34,253
Nottingham Heights 5
40,250
Nottingham first addition 4
40,778
Nottingham first addition 2
45,212
Lot
Slze(Square Feet
Mean
26,706
Median
24,960
Mode
17,250; 23,250; 25,500
Midrange
31,231