Cedar Falls council adopts multiple land‑use and code changes, debates new land‑use permit fee

The Cedar Falls City Council on Monday, Oct. 20, approved a slate of land‑use and code changes — including an amendment to the city's multi residential urban revitalization plan, a rezoning on Main Street, updates to the city building code and a clarified land‑use permit requirement — while debating whether the $45 land‑use permit fee should be charged to homeowners.

Why it matters: The council's actions affect property redevelopment, building‑rule enforcement and city permitting processes that shape how homeowners, developers and businesses build and alter property in Cedar Falls. Several votes passed unanimously; the land‑use permit ordinance prompted the most public concern and a split council vote on second reading.

The meeting opened with a staff announcement that the new community natatorium (a shared city/school facility) is open; the city contributed nearly $9,000,000 to the project, staff said. From there the council moved into a series of public hearings and ordinance votes.

Shane Graham, staff, said the council earlier adopted the Cedar Falls multi residential urban revitalization plan in March and presented amendment No. 1 to add a single property at 4711 University Avenue (a former extended‑stay hotel being converted to studio apartments) to the urban revitalization area so remaining, not‑yet‑completed work on the conversion could be eligible for tax abatement. "Any of that work that was completed prior to adoption of the urban revitalization plan is not eligible for any tax abatement," Graham said, adding that only remaining work would qualify.

Jamie Castle, staff member, presented proposed minor amendments to Chapter 7 of the city code covering building regulations. She summarized edits that include a clarified definition of "sleeping room" (a room usable for sleeping that contains a closet and a door that can be closed for privacy), moving stormwater discharge requirements into the building code language, and an explicit reference to the National Electrical Code the city enforces. "We are required by the state to follow whatever [the NEC] has adopted," Castle said, explaining why the ordinance text was updated to reflect the 2023 code that staff has been enforcing.

During public comment on the code matter, Bob Manning representing the Home Builders Association asked that any future requirement to install an electric‑vehicle charging outlet be presented as a cost to the buyer rather than mandated for all new homes. "We fully support making it mandatory for the contractor to present the cost to the customer," Manning said, and said the association would monitor the 2026 code cycle.

On federal grant reporting, Melissa Ding, Community Development staff, presented the city's FFY 2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for Community Development Block Grant activities covering 07/01/2024 through 06/30/2025. Ding said the report had been published for public comment and reviewed by the Housing Commission, and the council approved submission to HUD.

The council also approved a land‑use map amendment and rezoning for property at 2309 and 2323 Main Street. Tom Weintraub, staff, said the applicant proposes a mixed‑use building with two commercial units on the ground floor and residential units above; the College Hill vision plan calls for this corner to act as a pedestrian‑ and bike‑oriented gateway. The council changed the land‑use designation from "high density residential" to "neighborhood commercial and mixed use" and approved rezoning the identified parcel from R‑4 (multiple residential) to C‑2 (commercial).

A pending development agreement with River Place Properties 2 L.C. was continued to Nov. 3 so staff and the developer could finalize details.

The most contested item was an ordinance clarifying when a land‑use permit is required (a consolidation and clarification of existing cross references in the zoning and building code). City staff, including Chris Seavey, said the proposal chiefly collects existing, scattered references into a single code section to make the requirement easier to find and apply. "This is just a clarification of what our current practice entails and what the code currently requires," Seavey said.

Several council members and members of the public said they support centralizing the rule but objected to the accompanying $45 flat fee on land‑use permit reviews, particularly when homeowners also obtain building permits. Craig Fairbanks, a resident, and other commenters urged that the city absorb routine checks into normal services or provide a reduced fee when a building permit is already issued. "I'm not necessarily against the land use itself. I am against the fee," Fairbanks said.

Attorney Terry Rogers told the council that political signs remain exempt from regulation on First Amendment grounds and that the proposed ordinance is constitutional as written. The council approved the land‑use permit ordinance on second consideration after extended debate; council members signaled staff would review fee policy separately.

Other ordinance votes: the council approved amendments related to accessory dwelling units and revised parking requirements for studios and one‑bedroom units in multi‑unit buildings. It also approved a contracts resolution with Diamond Doctors of Iowa LLC to reconstruct infields at Birdsall Park, confirmed two appointments to boards and commissions, and passed code updates to align city fireworks rules with state law and to clean up the code language describing the mayor's duties.

Ending note: Council members noted remaining follow‑ups: staff will return with any fee‑schedule changes if the council decides to revisit the $45 land‑use review charge; the rezoning approval will be followed by site‑plan review if the applicant proceeds; and the River Place development agreement will return Nov. 3.

Votes at a glance

- Amendment No. 1 to Cedar Falls Multi Residential Urban Revitalization Plan (add 4711 University Ave) — approved, roll call: all members voting aye (7‑0). - Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 3097 (designate area for revitalization) — approved on first consideration (vote recorded as unanimous). - Ordinance amending Chapter 7 (building code edits, stormwater language, NEC adoption) — approved on first consideration (unanimous). - Resolution approving submission of the FFY24 CAPER (CDBG) to HUD — approved (unanimous). - Future land‑use map amendment for 2309 & 2323 Main St (high density residential → neighborhood commercial/mixed use) — approved (unanimous). - Rezoning 2309 Main St from R‑4 to C‑2 — ordinance approved on first consideration (unanimous). - Continued public hearing/development agreement with River Place Properties 2 L.C. — continued to Nov. 3 voice vote (motion carries). - Ordinance No. 3,125 (clarify land‑use permit requirement) — approved on second consideration; roll call reported 5 yes, 2 no (5‑2). Council asked staff to review fee schedule separately. - Ordinance No. 3,126 (accessory dwelling unit rules) — approved on second consideration (unanimous). - Ordinance No. 3,127 (parking requirements for studios/one‑bedroom units) — approved on second consideration; roll call reported 6 yes, 1 no (6‑1). - Contract with Diamond Doctors of Iowa LLC for Birdsall Park infield reconstruction — approved (unanimous). - Appointments to boards/commissions (Rosa Druker, Human Rights Commission; David Hartley, Planning & Zoning reappointment) — approved (unanimous). - Ordinance updating fireworks rules to align with state law — approved on first consideration (unanimous). - Ordinance updating mayoral duties/code cleanup — approved on first consideration (unanimous).