Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning Wellington Heights topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears strong neighborhood support but defers rezoning request at 1626 Fifth Avenue SE

Cedar Rapids City Council
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A public hearing on a request to rezone 1626 Fifth Ave SE to allow neighborhood commercial uses drew neighborhood backing for a small deli or coffee shop but council members raised concerns about spot zoning, traffic, long-term uses and site constraints and elected to defer final action pending more information.

Seth Gunnerson, the city's zoning administrator, presented a request from BB Properties LLC to rezone 1626 Fifth Avenue Southeast from TR1 (traditional residential single unit) to TML (traditional mixed use limited) to allow small-scale neighborhood commercial uses. Gunnerson noted the parcel is approximately 1,770 square feet and that the TML district limits businesses that derive more than half their revenue from alcohol or tobacco.

Applicant Brad Bergeson said he has talked with potential local business operators and neighborhood leaders and emphasized the building has been vacant for roughly 20 years. "So we're pushing 20 years that this building's been doing nothing but sitting there," Bergeson said, urging support for reinvestment.

Neighborhood leaders, including Eric Gutschemit (Wellington Heights Neighborhood Association) and John Sladek, spoke in support, citing efforts to address retail leakage and to fill a neighborhood food access gap. Gutschemit said the neighborhood does not want a vape shop or liquor store and noted prior support from the association.

Several council members expressed caution. Concerns included the potential for spot zoning, the absence of a specific tenant or use, traffic and trash handling, and long-term control of the site if ownership or use changes. Councilmember Meyer explicitly asked whether a specific use is required for rezoning; staff said it depends on the questions the council has about impacts and that lacking a defined use makes it harder to assess traffic and disruption.

Council members and staff agreed to collect more information and recommended bringing additional specifics about access, trash/dumpster locations and likely traffic before any reading or vote. No final reading or adoption occurred at the June 10 meeting; staff will work with the applicant to provide more information and return the item for consideration.