Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-17 TransciptionPage 1 Council Present: Botchway, Cole, Dickens, Mims, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton Staff Present: Frain, Monroe, Andrew, Dilkes, Voparil, Ford, Yapp, Havel, Sovers, O'Brien, Reinhart, Campbell, Ralston, Boothroy, Bockenstedt Others Present: Simpson (UISG) Review of the Allen Homes Project involving the City Hall Parking Lot: Throgmorton/ All right, so we're gonna begin our, uh, City Council work session of January 17, 2017. The first item tonight is review of the Allen Homes project involving the City Hall parking lot. Wendy Ford, it looks to me like you're gonna speak at the start, is that right? Frain/ I'm actually gonna walk you through this, and Wendy's gonna correct me whenever I say anything that's, uh (laughter) not factual, and she's gonna drive the ..... the slide show here. So, this is a project that should be somewhat familiar to you all. It's, uh, discussions have really dated back, uh, over a year now, uh, on this property. Um, we did bring up the aerial here, and I asked Wendy to overlay the 100 -year flood and the 500 - year flood plain, uh, just to show that while this is a .... a vacant piece of land, or a surface parking lot, there are some, uh, complications, uh, when it comes to, uh, developing that land, and ... uh, those complications, um, certainly would apply to any private, uh, project, as well as a .... a public project. Um, as you know, the City's already taken a number of steps to advance, uh, these conversations. That includes a Comp Plan change, a rezoning, and the execution of a Conditional Purchase Agreement for this City -owned land, uh, that is needed to .... to make this project work. Um, before I get too far, I want to thank, uh, Jesse and .... and his team. Uh, they've been working hard for a very long time to try to find a .... a solution here, and it has not been easy. Um, Jesse has been carrying this property at his expense for, uh, several months, and, uh, has also invested quite a bit in professional services to, uh, again try to, uh, bring forward, uh, a workable solution, uh, for the City. The purchase agreement that Council executed was conditioned on a future, uh, development agreement. The initial term of that, uh.... uh, purchase agreement expired at the end of the calendar year, so December 31 s`. Uh, I have the authority to extend that, I believe, up to four months, and in conversations with, uh, Jesse and .... and his team, uh, we agreed to extend it another month. Uh, but I think it's safe to say we're at a point in time, uh, where it's, uh, some decisions need to be made, um, and .... and we felt that, uh, now is a good .... as good a time as any to bring the Council back into this, uh, discussion. I don't have exact numbers, um, to present to you tonight. Uh, we're not at the stage where, uh, we could produce a development agreement, uh, tomorrow, um, but I think I .... I know enough about the numbers to give you a general framework and tell ya exactly what it's gonna take, urn .... uh, to .... to accomplish this. And what I plan to present to you tonight, I think, is, urn .... kind of the .... um, the best case for the City, assuming our goal is, uh, preservation of this church, and that's really what we've been working at. If the number one goal is .... is preserving the church here, what is the ... the, uh, the most effective way, uh, that the City can partner to accomplish that goal. Really This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 2 what we're looking from.....from, for you tonight, and what Jesse and his team need to hear, is ... if you're comfortable with this general framework, and I think, um ..... uh, he'd like a .... a strong sense of whether you're comfortable with the general framework or not. Um ..... again, it's a .... um, it's .... the longer the conversation goes, the more it's costing him. It's not really costing the City anything to ... to, uh, to continue these conversations, but Jesse needs to, uh, make a decision on where to go with this property. So, um ... we're gonna present this framework to you, and ... if the answer is yes, there seems to be a .... a good majority of you that are comfortable, then ... um, our efforts gonna be, uh, in, um, moving from conceptual numbers to a development agreement, as .... as soon as we can with Jesse and his team, and if the answer is no, you're not comfortable with the general framework that we're gonna present, then ... um, it's .... it's very likely that the, uh, purchase agreement that we have, um, will expire at the end of this month, and Jesse will explore, um, other options for development of the property, uh, that don't involve any City partnerships. Okay? So I want to walk you through the original concept, and, um, let you know why I don't believe the original concept, um, is going to work financially, and then I'll present ya with what, uh, we're creatively calling `plan B' and, um ... uh, let you know what that will, uh, will look like, and that's really what we want your feedback on. So the original project here, um, this shows you the, uh, parking garage that would be built over the City surface lot. The fire truck lanes of the fire trucks, after returning from a call, would enter in off of Van Buren, and drive through to new, uh.... uh, bays there, that would allow them to .... to.....to, um, not have to back in on Gilbert. Um, we originally, uh, conceived two floors of office above that fire station for City use. Uh, that could be Fire administration, that could be any number of uses, but we felt that, uh, it was important to .... to explore that, and then, uh, apartments above that. If you want to move to the next slide, urn ... this shows you the Gilbert frontage with the church there. Um, and uh, a very conceptual rendering of, uh, what the, uh, the bays, the office, and that, uh, residential piece above the parking deck would look like. I can tell you, um, this concept is several months old and Jesse and his team have developed, uh... um ... um, they've put more into the, uh, architecture and design work, um .... uh, based on some of your comments at .... at, uh, our .... our past meetings. Okay, and there's the overall site plan, um, the component that we haven't talked about yet are the townhome liners. You'll see the darker brown, um ... along Iowa Avenue and Van Buren. Those, uh, townhomes would be used to .... to screen the parking ramp, and um, it's a four-story, uh, townhome unit with 12 units there. Um, and this is the ... kind of the rough details, uh, financial details and ... and this is why I don't think that this concept works, but, um, again, what the City would be getting — the fire truck bays, two floors of office, um, what we're proposing is that we would purchase six units of affordable housing, and I'll get into that a little bit more with the `plan B,' and then the developer would, um .... uh, provide six units, um, as well, and that, uh, those 12 units under this scenario would get us to 15% affordable housing. Uh, we would, uh, achieve preservation of the church, which would include a .... a designation, uh.... uh, to ensure that preservation, and then the parking structure, which the City would own under this scenario, would... would allow us to maintain the approximately 118 spaces that we have in the surface lot. In order to accomplish this, again, these are very rough numbers. Um .... uh, but we would have to take the proceeds from the land sale. So we had the land appraised. It's $3.3 million is what the appraisal was, um, we would get that $3.3 million and have to invest it right This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 3 back into the project. We would have to take 100% of the available tax increment financing, uh, and put that back into the project, and then we'd have to come up with, uh, roughly $8.8 million of our own money, uh, to pay for those improvements, and of course we don't have that, uh, budgeted, and if we wanted to budget for that, um, that would be competing directly with, um, everything that you've seen in your capital improvement plan, uh, that we just reviewed with you. Uh, on top of that, the, um .... uh, 1.08 million would be for the purchase of a .... of the six affordable housing units that I, uh, talked about earlier. Uh, that would come out of a separate pot of money. If you recall, when we presented the affordable, uh, housing action plan to you, oh, back, uh, last, uh, last summer, urn .... we mentioned that the Housing Authority, uh, does have a, uh, significant balance that, uh, has been building from the sale of. ... of past affordable housing units. Those dollars are.....must be spent on the acquisition of new affordable housing units, and this would certainly be a .... a case in which we could use some of those dollars, uh, to, uh.... um, buy into this project. Uh, the nice thing about, um, the City buying the, uh, affordable housing units is one, those are affordable, uh, in perpetuity. We own those. Those don't expire at the end of a .... a TIF agreement, uh, or 15 or 20 years down the road. Um, and it also provides some upfront, uh, capital, um, in the, uh, development, uh, project. Uh, so ....that's the City outlay, the 3.3 million from the proceeds, all of the TIF, and the, uh, 8.8 million in cash, and then even if you found that acceptable, the developer has a gap of about 5 million. So it's pretty far out of reach to achieve everything that we wanted to in this project. So we quickly, uh.... uh, came to that conclusion. We had to turn to `plan B' and again, our .... our, um, conversations were what can we scale back in order to achieve the .... the preservation of the church, knowing that's a .... a very, um ... high priority for the Council. And, uh, I ... the .... the biggest change is .... is, um .... looking at that parking deck and .... and instead of having it be publicly owned, it....it goes to privately owned. And that takes a big chunk of the capital, uh, off of our side of the table and pushes it on Jesse's side of the table. Um, and, uh, so what we'd be looking at is, uh, going to a private deck over there, um .... and converting the top floor of that deck to residential units, and so you see, uh, the .... the yellow line circling the top deck there, as originally conceived that was parking and that would have to go to residential units. Uh, those residential units provide more income for the developer. They help shrink that gap. Uh, but at the same time there's a sacrifice because the spaces that we would .... the spaces that are being lost by the removal of that deck, urn .... uh.... would be City spaces that we would ... we would have relied on. I want to talk a .... again, um, what this plan B looks like and there's only one more slide after this, which is.....justs a pros and cons I think will give you kind of the high level stuff that you need to indicate to, uh, comfort level here, but under this reduced, uh, scenario or plan B, uh, we still achieve the, uh, space for future fire truck bays. Um, I do want to, uh, point out that, um, there .... there will be a cost to make these bays usable. So, in addition to what I'm gonna, uh... uh.... um, outline for you, um, next, uh, keep in mind that, um, the improvement that we would get is not a .... a fully famished fire station. It's .... it's more of a vanilla box in that we would have to come back in, uh, with our own capital project and improve that space, and connect it to the existing fire station. So these two buildings aren't connected, um, at the outset. So, that would be a future capital investment the City would need to make. So we do have the fire truck bays. Um, I .... I failed to mention in the previous slide that we would give up the commercial piece. Instead of City -owned This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 4 commercial it would go to, um, one floor of commercial that the developer would own, and then the developer would convert, uh, and I say commercial. I mean, uh, commercial office, um, and then one floor would go to residential. Residential market is obviously stronger, uh, and provides greater return for the developer. And then, uh, we would also, uh, still achieve affordable housing. Uh, we still propose that, um, the City purchase six units of affordable housing, um, and because there's an increase in the number of units when we're converting that parking deck top floor to residential units, when we take that 15% ratio to meet the affordable housing goal, uh, in the .... in the TIF, uh, policy, that pushes it up from six units to nine units that .... that the developer would provide. So, six units of City -owned affordable housing, City purchased affordable housing, and nine units of developer -owned and managed, uh, affordable housing. And of course, um, this does achieve preservation of the church. The City resources to accomplish this include, um, us, uh... returning the proceeds from the land sale, so we would get a check for $3.3 million and, uh, through the development agreement, that 3.3 would be, uh, reinvested back into the project. Uh, we would need to take, uh, likely, uh, 100% of the TIF for the maximum time period allowed, which would be 20 years, and uh, provide that to the developer, uh, to ... uh, fill the .... the project gap. You see that's the 8.8 million. If we had to break out that 8.8 million, uh, you can attribute roughly $2.2 million to the purchase of the fire truck space, the fire truck bays, or the, um .... and the rest of the 6.6 million would go to the overall development, uh, gap. There's three components to the development gap. Um, one is just the standard residential piece that the developer would own and maintain. Second would be the church, uh, the .... the gap in the, uh, church, um, and the developer's proposing to not just preserve the church, but to invest back in the church to make it a marketable property. So, looking at what accessibility needs, uh.... uh, what accessibility improvements are needed, an elevator, um, and some of those other minor improvements to get it to a state where he can market it and find a .... a user for that property. And then there's the affordable housing, uh.... uh, gap. Um, the affordable housing gap is there because, um, when .... when we look at that $1.08 million to purchase those six units, that's a ... a $180,000 per unit. That actually doesn't cover the cost of. ... of constructing those units. So there's a .... there's a gap there, um, roughly speaking I believe the .... the cost is, urn ... somewhere about $210,000 per unit, and so what we're suggesting here is that, urn ... you could save a .... a greater portion of those affordable housing funds that we have for .... for other projects in the community and push some of that cost of acquisition onto, uh, the gap, uh, which would be paid, um, in part, uh, by the TIF. So I know that's fairly complicated. We can ... we can break that out for you if it would be helpful, but um .... the bottom line is it's the sale of the land. Those proceeds get invested back in the project and, um, the maximum amount, the maximum TIF, um, available would be reinvested back into the project. On top of that, the 1.08 million from our affordable housing funds, um, those are from the Housing Authority, uh, dollars, and then under this scenario, it's a private, uh.... parking deck and we would have to lease spaces from Jesse, and that's built into his proforma, and urn ... that is roughly $32,500 a year, and that would be ongoing expense for the City, uh, for ... roughly 40 parking spaces, and that number may need to go up a little bit. We still need to refine that, um .... but what we're.... what we did is we took our .... we have 118 spaces roughly back there now and we looked at what are the .... what are the really the critical needs, what do we need to park in this, uh.... uh, in this lot here. It's between 40 and 50, um, and so we would have This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 5 to lease those back, uh, to the developer, and those are primarily.... they are our public safety vehicles, our squad cars, things that can't be put into the deck, uh, without impacting our operations. All right, I'm going to end on this slide and we can certainly recap, and this is, uh, very high level, but we wanted to just kind of lay out a general pro/ con list from ya, so on the positive side, uh, you're achieving the goal of preserving the church. You're adding 15 units of affordable housing to the downtown market. Uh, you are providing space for a future fire, uh, expansion, expanding the City's tax base. Uh, this does not require any cash lay from our .... our current reserves or operations. Again, it's the sale of the proceeds and the TIF that the City's investing, and then it activates the street frontage, uh, primarily along Iowa Avenue and Van Buren there. On the cons list, if you will, um, we are giving up a City asset. Uh, that parking, um, lot, urn ... if we were to maintain that, um, we could do any number of things with that down the road. So we're losing that flexibility. It could be used for, uh, future public improvements, uh, expansion of City facilities, or it could be used, um, for private development in the future. But certainly once you make that decision to sell it, you can't take that back. Um, we would not have any City -owned parking, uh, on that space. Now there is some... space directly, I'm pointing behind me here, between .... if you can think between New Pi and .... and City Hall here, uh, those spaces aren't a part of this, so there would be, um, some limited parking that we would, uh, maintain, uh, in that lot. But .... but, um, the piece that's for sale, again we would lease back for that. The fire station piece, as I mentioned, um, is not .... it's not gonna be a situation where it's move -in ready. You're gonna have to, um, budget for a pretty significant capital expense. I can't tell ya what that is, but it's measured in, uh, millions, not hundreds of thousands. It's likely a .... a few million dollars to, uh, get that connection in place and to fit out those bays. It does increase pressure on our two surrounding decks. Um, I don't think it's anything that, um, you know, is a.... is a deal breaker for us, but you all hear concerns about, uh, parking in those facilities, and we'll essentially be moving, um.....uh, the difference of the 118 spaces that we have now and the 40 that we would lease back into either the Chauncey Swan or the, uh, Tower Place deck, and it commits all of the tax increment financing. So we wouldn't have any tax increment financing direct, uh, that's uh.... urn .... produced by this project to help us offset the cost of the fire station ... uh, or any, um, other improvements on this particular site. So that's, um, that's the high level piece there. We can get into some of the greater details here. Um, Jesse Allen and his team are here, can answer some questions, uh, if you have them, but ... I think now's the time for you all to .... to take the discussion. Cole/ Geoff, I (both talking) Oh, go ahead! Mims/ Well I was gonna say, I was really excited when we first saw this proposal, and the idea of, you know, being able to do something a little more efficient with this lot out here. Um, and the opportunity, um, to preserve the church, and, you know, get some more residential downtown and that sort of thing. I was concerned from the beginning about the, you know, the efficiencies, if you will, um, of the .... getting the drive-through bays going through underneath the parking ramp. It just didn't seem very .... to be a very, um, efficient proposal from a .... from a capital, uh.... aspect in terms of what it was going to cost us. Um, when I look at the two different plans, A and B, and look at the pros and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 6 cons.....it just seems to me that the City is giving up an awful lot for .... for what we're getting with ... just a considerable amount of expense, I mean in the millions upon millions of dollars, urn ..... and I .... I don't see that we're getting the .... I don't think we're getting enough back for the significant amount of money that we're spending. Do you remember, Geoff, anywhere near off the top of your head what Fire Station #4 cost us? Fruin/ I ... I do not. Mims/ I'm sorry, I should of (both talking) Fruin/ .... um .... I don't know (several talking) Botchway/ Didn't you mention that in our discussion around, um, kind of the rollback, and what a fire station would cost? Fruin/ That's more the operations of a fire station (several talking) You know, if we were building a new fire station right now and I had to take a shot in the dark, I'd probably say 3.5 to 4 million. Mims/ I was thinking 4 million for Fire Station #4. It was kind of the number that .... that I had in the back of my head. So when I look at these numbers, and .... it doesn't even include the build -out of the fire station. We still have multiple millions, 1, 2, 3, whatever million more to build that out, um.....and we've given up any flexibility with this land. Urn .... I think we're gonna have lots of opportunities for more affordable housing downtown and in the Riverfront Crossings District, um, in the near future, and I know the preservation of the church is important, but I cannot in good conscience sit here with these kinds of numbers, um, and support this plan. It just...it's way, way too expensive (several talking) Botchway/ Susan, both plans? Mims/ Either one. Botchway/ Okay! Mims/ Either one. It's way too expensive for the City. Cole/ Geoff, I have a question on the tax increment financing. Um, why can't we increase the tax increment financing instead of using the affordable housing piece? Is there an upper limit that prevents us, cause my preference would be that it would be .... the tax increment financing would .... would finance the gap, and then would use the affordable housing dollars somewhere else. Fruin/ So right now .... we're tannin' up already against the .... the 20 -year maximum TIF period, so that we can't go beyond 20 years even if we wanted to (both talking) Cole/ Okay, the number prevents you. Okay (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 7 Fruin/ Yeah. So .... (both talking) Cole/ It's a structural (both talking) Fruin/ We can't ... we can't do that, and it's, um .... it's better on the developer side if the City purchases those units. If we start to peel back, uh, and say, um, you know, let's say we only want to purchase two, or we don't want to purchase any and we want the developer to provide all that, that's gonna push the gap, uh, high enough to where we're gonna need more than 20 years. Essentially the project doesn't become feasible at that time, and the same goes for the fire station. If...if you had in your mind, well maybe we can make this a little bit better by just not doing the fire station component, um, that's gonna be a deal breaker too. Um, because that's money out of the hand, um, of the, uh, developer. It ends up pushing his gap, uh, up higher and we don't have the years to play with on the TIF. You'd have to get into really using district -wide, uh, TIF, and at that point it's not a project -based TIFd.... TIF anymore. You're usin', um, a greater amount of increment. Cole/ Well I guess for my comment I am gonna support plan B. Um .... I agree, it does cost a lot of money, but as I look at, first of all the process that we've gotten to this point is that the developer did come to us in December, in January the preliminary concept, and we communicated to them that they were on the right track. Um, I understand that this is an enormously expensive process, that this is an incredibly intricate jigsaw puzzle that Geoff and the developers have come together to try to finance, um, the developer was trying to address some very emotional issues — a preservation of historic structure, which I think the community really does value. Um, a public facility that we will be able to use for a core infrastructure for our fire department. Um, we are getting the affordable housing units. I am concerned about using that mechanism to finance a project, but .... I'm incredibly impressed with what you did and the developer did in trying to come up with a solution, and so I .... I don't think we can nitpick one variable that we don't like, um, to ... to undo the project. Um, so I'm gonna be supportive of this. I think you're on the right track and ... and frankly .... the other thing that has nothing to do with this, and I know that this had no reason whatsoever, the fact that the developer did allow this space to be used for the homeless. I know this had no part of that. You were just doin' it cause it was the right thing. Um .... you know, I would like to see that, um .... and I .... and I just really appreciate the creative solution making in this particular process. So I am going to be supportive of plan B. Throgmorton/ I .... I think it'd be helpful not to stake out positions yet. I mean there might be some other factors to consider and I ... I for one would like to hear what the other factors are, but I hear what you're sayin', Geoff. (both talking) Cole/...so far. Throgmorton/ (both talking) I hear, Rockne, I hear what you're sayin'. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 8 Taylor/ On that line, Jim, I had a question as far as the connection of the fire department and the new fire department. Currently is there not, there's an alley there, isn't there? The Police Department uses, they have their vehicles at the ready to go, as well as the parking lot — they use a lot of that space. So I would have concerns about their readiness to, uh, to do their job, um, differently. They'd have to figure out a different means of. ... of exiting quickly, and I ... I'm not sure where that space would be if we're taking up the parking lot and we don't have the alley anymore. Fruin/ Yeah, so we would, uh, as .... as part of our lease with the developer, we would be getting the, um, spaces that allow for the quickest access out of that deck. So those lower level spaces, um, and, uh, essentially....when that .... when that connection is made, all that police traffic then would be exiting out onto Van Buren, as opposed to exiting out to ... to Gilbert right now. Botchway/ Wendy, can you go back to the previous slide? Sorry. Okay (mumbled) So I just had a couple questions. As far as, you know, there's a commer... Geoff, you just mentioned, and maybe just you can answer this as well. You just mentioned the fact that commercial is ... or residential is more .... uh.... there's more money there than commercial. Is there any reason why there is an addilal ... additional residential, and so those two.... sounded like there were two, um, office levels in the original project. Now we split it to one floor residential, one floor commercial. Is there any reason why that didn't then.... Fruin/ I believe in .... Jesse, you can step up if I .... if I misstate this but, um, one of the levels.... cannot, uh, be built to a residential standard because it, urn .... uh.....there's some window requirements that they .... they can't meet, so we have to keep one ... that first level commercial, um, otherwise I think the developer would switch it to residential. Is that accurate? Throgmorton/ Geoff, with regard to the affordable housing, uh, part of this, yesterday, uh, you and I chatted briefly about, uh, payment in lieu of providing the, uh, the affordable housing on site. Is that possible, and would it make any difference financially? Fruin/ Did you .... did you take a look at the .... the TIF policy? I don't think our TIF policy, um... uh, permits the .... the fee in lieu of. I think that's a possibility. We did not have the time to explore that with the developer. Urn .... I'm not sure .... I'm not sure it's gonna make a huge different, even if it....it can be allowed, but, um, we haven't explored that. Throgmorton/ I ... I guess I was wondering if it makes a difference to, uh, receive a one-time payment in lieu of, providing the .... the housing on site while the developer also can rent the spaces on site and can have a continual stream of, uh, of income from those spaces. Fruin/ Yeah, I ..... I think in this case because we're .... we're pushed up against that 20 year, um... that upfront capital is so important to this project. If ... if. ... if Jesse, uh, had to buy out... pay a fee in lieu of those affordable homes, I think that's gonna, um, derail things, uh, on the front end of this. Uh, he'd have to come up with those capital dollars, and if This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 9 the cost is .... roughly $210,000 a unit, if that's where we're at right now, and the fee in lieu of would be based on that number, um, at 15 units, I think it's gonna shoot a hole in it. I mean we're to the point right now where pulling out the 2.2 million from the fire station, or pulling out the 1.08 from the affordable housing, those upfront dollars, puts the project in ... in jeopardy. Botchway/ So, I guess I would say I'm .... I'm generally supportive of the concept. Um, you know, I think that, um, you know, Jesse the developer and, you know, you and your work, Geoff, as well has really tried to figure out how this could fit. Um ... I would agree with Susan. I mean, there's a lot of money on the table right now, um, from the City's standpoint and that makes me .... you know, a little bit concerned, especially since we just had our budget session and we talked about some of those issues. Uh, I will say that I'd like to see this through a little bit longer. I know that kind of puts you in a bind. Um, but, you know, I .... I want to definitely hear answer, um, Jim's answer, and there's some other questions that I have, that are more .... kind of. ..... not procedural, but more kind of minute questions that I don't necessarily know (mumbled) could be answered right now cause we're just talkin' about overall, general support for the concept of the project. Um, so ... again, for me, and I think ... again, I'm generally supportive, but there's, again, some questions I have about the dollars, um, but I would say at this time I would....I would like to see us move forward. Throgmorton/ Well I'd say I'm concerned about the .... uh, the price tag, and since we've considered, or seen plan A and plan B, uh, that inevitably makes me wonder about plan C (laughter) uh, and I know you and Jesse have talked about this a lot. I don't know the details but I know that that's occurred. And, uh, you know, it does make me wonder if there is, uh, some other .... uh, solution that could be found. I .... I don't know, and if we... if we're literally up to a .... a drop -dead date, uh, which I would understand, given... Jesse's financial concerns. Uh, that makes things, uh, makes me feel different about it, but I ... I would like to, uh, find out if it's possible to invent a plan C. I .... I really like the initial concept. Fruin/ (both talking) We've .... we've (both talking) Throgmorton/ ....see what we can do. Frain/ We've tried to kick around plan C, D, E, and maybe we were at F at one point (laughter) um, but .... the.....where we're at now, um, you can't .... we can't take anything out to improve our financial picture without killing the ... the financial picture on ... Jesse's side. Throgmorton/ But I think in fact there is a plan C, so let me see if I'm correct in stating this. Plan C would be ... the City retains control of its parking lot, and Jesse can do what he wants with the church. And with.... whatever other property he owns right there in ... in that, uh, at that corner. Am I right? I mean that is a plan C. Mims/ (several talking) ...the default if we don't (several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 10 Throgmorton/ So I mean we need to know that (laughs) that's... that's the default! Frain/ Yeah. Absolutely! And .... that's where we're at now. If there's not .... if there's not a... a really strong feeling conveyed to the Council, or conveyed by the Council tonight to the ... to the development team and to ... to staff here that this is ... this framework's acceptable. The numbers may shift a little but... the.... the framework's acceptable, then again I think ... I don't believe the purchase agreement gets extended. I think that expires at the end of this month and Jesse starts to explore other options. And at that point, we're not involved in the discussions until it comes time for any legislative approvals that he may need to facilitate whatever project he comes up with. Mims/ I have to believe that .... if the church weren't a part of this, we wouldn't hesitate two seconds to say .... that this is not a good use of taxpayer money. I really believe that. I mean, the ... the cost is so high for what we're getting that I can't believe that we would ... it would take us five minutes to agree as a Council that we weren't going to move forward. So the question becomes.....how many millions of taxpayer dollars do we spend to save one historical structure in this community. I can't do it. Botchway/ But, Geoff, walk me back through .... where.....you have the 5.6 million in TIF, right? Frain/ Correct. Botchway/ We have (both talking) Frain/ Which is generated by the project. Botchway/ Generated by the project, with 3.3 million given back from the land sale. Frain/ Correct. Botchway/ So that eats up that 2.2 and 6.6, right? Frain/ Yep. Yep. Botchway/ Where's (several talking) Mims/ ...have to come up with millions to finish the fire station! Cole/ We need that anyway, don't we? Mims/ Not right now (several talking) Frain/ No, I don't... the... the bays are not integral to the fire department operation. They've been operating without the ... the pull-through bays for ... for decades. They're.... they're nice to have, and....and certainly when we build new, that's an essential component in the design. Um ... but the fire station is operating without them. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 11 Botchway/ Susan, I think you make an important point. I mean I think that that's kind of where... for me it's resting on, I mean, you're right. I would have ... we would have a different conversation, and I would potentially have a different answer or a different feeling, um, as far as my support for this project. You know .... I mean I remember saying, and I know you were here, Jesse, that you know we .... we felt good. We knew there was gonna be .... or at least I felt I knew there was gonna be some type of considerable money back from that standpoint. I don't feel comfortable going back on that, knowing that, um, you know, I stated that and I feel ... that we need to ... to look at this, I mean, from a .... from a Council standpoint, I mean, we're talkin' about, I mean, historic preservation, and you're right, this is one project, and so I do think abut the fact that, you know, putting millions of dollars into one project and how you could disperse that over multiple projects is problematic, but .... you know, this is (both talking) Oh, go ahead! (both talking) Mims/ What I ... what I would say to you, Kingsley, is .... I agree with what you said in terms of I think all of us, myself included, were very supportive of this concept when it came forward. I really liked the idea of the concept. I did have concerns about the efficiency of putting these drive-through bays underneath the ramp. But until we actually saw the dollars, I don't think we were in a position to make a more hard and fast decision. It ... it's easy to sit up here and say we agree with ... with the premise of something, or the idea, or the general design, and I did! I .... I'm with you! I totally agreed with it. I like the idea! But now, you know, when .... when you start lookin' at the dollar signs, and it's way over what we would pay for a brand-new, state-of-the-art fire station, we basically lose all the money that that land is worth, which is a lot .... and.....and then we're spending another whatever, 1, 2, $3 million to actually outfit the bays and make it a functional, new frrepla... fire department, or fire station, all because of one building, and I .... I can't, I don't think that's fair to the taxpayers of this city. Thomas/ I think it's more, I personally view the project as more than simply about the church, in terns of its, urn ... you know, the ... the value that this project brings. I think it (clears throat) for me was an example of a project which, uh, began to address issues of context, the ... the relationship to Iowa Avenue, the fact that we were filling in a parking lot with a ... with an actual use. Uh, it...it seemed to address the .... the issues that we've been struggling with regarding how to build out at the ... the edge of the downtown core. So, I think those principles still are in place with this project. Um, I think we are facing ... we are in a situation which we, I think the City has faced before, where we ... show some, uh... you know, support for a project and then we get the price tag and that ... that is an issue. Um, I think it's partly an issue with the process, but ... urn, the ... the financing will be rebated. It's not an upfront loan to the developer. I think that's critical, that's consistent with our policy, with regard to TIF. Uh, it seems to me to still be an excellent project for that particular location. Um, I'm .... I'm struggling with this question of the fire station bays (laughs) um ... you know, how that, is there .... is there a plan C for the fire station bays? Um ... but, I .... I do think overall, I don't know that we could get a better project for this location. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 12 Frain/ (several talking in background) ...clarify one ... one point real quick. Um .... when you look at the proceeds from the land sale, the 3.3, and we're .... we're acquiring the fire truck bays for 2.2. So there's $1.1 million difference there, urn .... and that 1.1 is going to pick up the gap in the affordable housing component, cause remember I said we're not paying the true cost of that. And it's also payin' for some of the church gap. Not all of the church gap, but the majority of..of the church gap. So, um, I just want to clarify because there ... some would classify that as upfront. Um, because we are taking some of those sale proceeds and directly giving those ... those back. It's not your traditional upfront TIF, but there are upfront.... cash, there is an upfront cash transaction to the developer, uh, that helps fill some of the private gap, which is the church gap. Throgmorton/ So I ... I, in principle I ... I never like making an important decision based on oral information provided at one meeting, uh, which is not a critical statement. It's like I feel very uncomfortable making that kind of decision based on oral input at one moment in time. So, if it's at all possible, I would like to see this decision deferred for two weeks. I .... I don't know if it's possible, Jesse, but .... I believe we need time to reflect, talk with a few people, come back in two weeks from now and say yeah or nay, uh, and be clear about it and no....no goin' back. Uh, if necessary, I mean if we're forced to make a decision tonight, we'll make it, but .... if we can get two weeks, with a firm decision coming on February the 7a', that's what I would prefer. Botchway/ Geoff, does that mean an extension of the, uh (both talking) Frain/ It .... it is, uh, and that's three weeks because there's an extra Tuesday, um.... Throgmorton/ All right. Frain/ ...in January, so that would require the developer to ... extend the .... the purchase agreement, um .... another month or ... at least another 10 days or so. Dickens/ Unless we did a special meeting on that Tuesday. At the end of the month. Botchway/ Would that be enough time? Frain/ Well that ... that's a better question for the development team. You know, again, the cost of pushing the conversation further, nothing for us. It's all .... it's all to the development team. (several talking) Dickens/ What would it take to get the .... the information on what additional costs there would be for the station? Is that a longer process than.... Fruin/ Well, we could ... we could try to ballpark somethin', um, but.... uh.....it's.... it's hard because when you're lookin' (both talking) Dickens/ ....but you're retrofitting basically (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 13 Fruin/ ...retrofitting, you're breakin' down a wall of our existing station, uh, we have generators, uh, that support this building between, um, the fire station and where these future bays would be located. You know, it's gonna take a lot of engineering to .... to figure out how you relocate those generators. I'm just not sure we could give you anything very ... that's very accurate. Cole/ I guess I feel like we have to fish or cut bait. I mean we came a year ago, um, and gave very clear direction to the developer that we wanted to preserve the church. We didn't know the numbers. I think that's fair, um, but in some ways I feel like we're, you know, Lucy with Charlie Brown and the football, uh, there's been a year now where he's then financed this, um, we now get this and now we're not really sure based upon the cost. I think we all knew that it would probably be in the millions to preserve it. This is a signature church, and I do think that there's significant value there. Um, and I view plan B as an incredibly creative solution that probably took a lot of time to put together, and I think if we would start unraveling ... I don't like the affordable housing piece of it. I wish that weren't there, but I view that as part of a piece of a very intricately constructed puzzle that I think we should move on. I think we have the decision and I think we should move on it. So ... I guess I'd like to decide tonight and give the signal that we want to do it! Throgmorton/ Well the real question is, is whether there's any, uh, whether deferring for ... either to the, I don't know, the last Tuesday of. ... of January, or.....to our first meeting in February, whether that's even viable from the developer's point of view. If ..if it's not, well, we'll make a decision tonight. Cole/ (mumbled, speaking away from mic) Throgmorton/ Good evening, Jesse. How are you? Allen/ Good evening. Guys, I just wanted to kind of put my two cents in here.... Throgmorton/ Sure! Allen/ ...and kind of a little bit of the background. As the developer, um, we kind of turned this in .... in last July, and it kind of took us a while to get all the numbers and everything to the City and workin' through the third party, um, NDC. Um, we came to a conclusion in late November that this wasn't viable for us, or for you guys, so with ... with staff and ... and Geoff we quickly put together what we call plan B, and I know that all of you guys weren't involved in the entire project or process, but we've kind of put our best foot forward here to make this current project work. Um, when we rezoned this project about a year ago, um, we, uh, we kind of went into this with the, uh... um, all the creative solutions and designs that .... that, uh, you guys all see before you, and we wanted to kind of do this plan B as a, um, kind of an attribute so that we wouldn't have to go redo a lot of the rezoning requests that we did. So .... um, kind of I guess my take is what I'm hearin' from you guys is you need a little more time. Um, I value your answers and your decision-making skills because I want a real answer that, hey, we're gonna support this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 14 and I want you guys to talk to your friends, your neighbors, um, different committees. I .... I'd like to kind of propose that we can iron this up by the end of the month, if it's possible, so we don't have to extend with ... with the City Manager, uh, purchase agreement. If that's viable that would give you guys some time, um, to talk to me or to talk to your neighbors, and .... and to staff, to get the answers you need to kind of come back to me in a couple weeks and say that, uh, this is gonna work or it's not. And then that would, you know, move us forward. Throgmorton /Two weeks from now is the 31". Uh, is that viable? Allen/ Yeah! Fruin/ That's o ... okay for me. Throgmorton/ So if...if, I'm not sayin' our Council has decided (laughs) to do this. I'm just tryin' to see if this hypothetical works out. So, hypothetically we could scheduled a special meeting focusing only on this topic, uh, for Tuesday the 315`. And we would understand that, uh, we would make a firm decision, uh, yes or no, plan .... plan B or plan C, which is, you know, the default. Uh, what do the rest of you think of that? Botchway/ Yes. Thomas/ Good idea. Dilkes/ I just .... I wanna.... I want to make sure we're clear on this, because I think we have the ... uh, it extended until February I". Um .... so.....I don't know. Joe, I'd like to get your thoughts on that. We'd have to ... we're gonna extend it after that Council meeting if we have to or .... again, because we would have to ... there's contingencies we won't have met. Holland/ Obviously this project needs to move ahead. I think what Jesse's really looking for is... something he feels firm enough from the City that he could proceed on plan B and if it's not plan B, to think about what plan C is, because I don't think there really .... he came to this project with the idea plan A was going to go forward, and .... I think there's a whole lot of thinking .... I don't see a problem extending it, if two weeks from tonight the Council says yes we're behind this, make it work. I think equivocation, well, some like it, some don't; maybe this way or maybe that way doesn't work for somebody who's putting millions of dollars into projects. So I think .... it needs to be fairly firm whatever that answer is two weeks from now, but if it's a firm yes, and I don't see a problem extending it for a little while to satisfy the other contingencies and get it closed. Throgmorton/ Well, I .... thanks for the flexibility. I don't know that we could commit to a firm yes. I think what we could .... you tell me if I'm wrong. We could commit to a....uh, commit to a firm yes or we can't do it therefore the developer's free to proceed with the property he owns. You know, I .... seems to me that's the choice that we face. I ... was I clear, Jesse? I hope I was. Yeah. So .... uh, scheduling a special meeting on the 31st This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 15 would be okay, given that? Okay. I think that's what we've decided to do. Okay. Thanks for your flexibility and thank you for the great work you've done on the winter shelter. Yeah (several talking) Fruin/ Yeah, what time.....what time would you prefer that meeting to start? (several talking in background) Throgmorton/ Uh (several talking) I .... I personally can do 5:00 so .... is 5:00 okay? Jesse, is 5:00 okay with you? All right. 5:00 P.M. on the 31", special meeting focusing only on that topic. Dickens/ And if you could maybe lay out the .... the total dollars where..... Fruin/ Where those dollars .... how those dollars are being allocated to different components of the project? Dickens/ Right. Fruin/ Sure, we can do that, and I will explore the fee in lieu of question more. I apologize for not having that tonight. Um.... Dickens/ ....just a ballpark for .... I know you can't.... Fruin/ For the fire station? Dickens/ Fire station. Fruin/ Sure. We'll ... we'll do our best. Botchway/ Geoff, we would have to do that irregardless. Or regardless. Fruin/ Yeah, essentially if we get the .... if we get the okay to proceed, uh, on this project, urn .... we'll be .... we'll have to in fairly short order hire, um, a architect to assist with us to make sure that what's built on the ... on their side, the.. the bays, um is done son in a way that's easily to connect to our existing facility. So, um, we'd have to get right on ... on that. Holland/ I'd just like to make a suggestion. I think it would be helpful, uh, for everyone, I know certainly on our side of this, if...if you have questions, if you can put those in writing, so that we can prepare for that meeting. And it helps you think through the process having to put it down on paper, it really helps us address the concerns .... the specific concerns the Council has. Throgmorton/ Sure. Thank you, Joe. Dickens/ Should we send those through Geoff? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 16 Frain/ That's fine. I can share `em with the development team. Throgmorton/ Good suggestion! All right. I think we need to move on to our next item. Thank you for comin', and hope we can work it out. Make a decision for sure though! Okay, so we're gonna move to the next item, which is a discussion of traffic control plans for Dubuque, the intersections of Dubuque and Washington, and Linn and Washington. Geoff, are you going to talk about that? Discussion of traffic control plans for Dubugue/Washington and Linn/Washington [IP #4 of 1/12/17 packet] Frain/ I sure can! Um, there's a, uh, memo in your packet, um.....that describes, uh, essentially how we've ... uh, where we are today and .... and, uh, what your options are. Um, we have Engineering staff here that can provide some more detailed information as well. Um, we've had, uh, fairly extensive conversations in the planning stages for the, um, Washington Street project. Um, certainly as .... as the memo indicates, um, I think the ... we, the staff believes that, uh, the ... traffic can be adequately managed by a stop sign, or, um, signals. Uh, there are pros and cons to each approach. Obviously stop signs, um, are a .... a less expensive, um, option, uh, both initially upfront and, uh, over the ... the life of the signals. Um, and they tend to provide, um, the .... uh, a stop sign would .... would be less intrusive into the streetscape, creates some better, more aesthetic view sheds. Um, we opted for the signals, urn .... uh, for a couple of reasons. One was to, um, more, uh, I think ... better manage what we frequently see downtown, which is large volumes of pedestrians crossing at one time. Whether that's a ... a time in which a class gets out or a special, um, e ... event or a .... a football weekend or homecoming weekend, whatever it may be, um, any time you have large groups of pedestrians crossing, um, sometimes it...at stop signs, it can be hard for vehicles to find a gap in pedestrians and .... and you can start to see them creeping out a little bit into the intersection, trying to kind of push their way through the intersection a little bit. So, one we felt that was safer, and then two, urn ... uh, there's a lot of conversation, uh, in the traffic engineering world about, uh, audible notifications at signals where you have high pedestrian volumes, uh, the U.S. Access Board, which provides guidance on disability issues, um, has recommended that, uh, audible notifications become standard in all new signals and retrofits in signals, and in... and I think general thought is eventually that will be the case. It's not a ... a hard requirement now, um, but as we looked at all the signal improvements, or intersection improvements that were slated for downtown, we felt that there was an opportunity to provide, um, a really good network of audible notifications that could accommodate those with visual disabilities. So those... audible notification, uh, accommodations have already been set up at, urn... Washington and Clinton. They haven't been activated yet, but the infrastructure's in place and they will be activated. Um, and then looking ahead, we have intersection improvements at Burlington, at Madison, um, at, urn .... uh, College and Clinton, as well, and again, we're just kinda thinkin' about the .... the pedestrian crossing network that we can create there. We have ordered the signals already as part of the project. That was roughly $115,000 worth of expense. Um, we believe that one of the sets could be repurposed, uh, to the, uh, College and Clinton intersection when we, uh, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 17 tackle the pedestrian mall project. Uh, the other traffic signal set, um, would hold for a .... a, either, you know, we part it out and ... and use it for repairs, um, our .... our downtown signals are powdercoated black, which we don't do elsewhere in the community, so it's not a case where we have a whole lot of geographic options on where we can ... can drop those, uh, signals. So that would be a cost that we would just have to... to eat if you will. Um, the cost to make the change is ... is pretty much a ... awash. Um, there are, uh, footings in place and some improvements have been in place to accommodate the signals, even though they're not installed. We'd have to take those out and ... and do some sidewalk repairs. Uh, but we also would save, uh, roughly an equal amount on the installation costs. So essentially it would be a positive change order. We're not paying someone to go ahead and install those signals as part of the project. I think that summarizes where .... how.....how we came to our conclusion in the planning phases, uh, but again I want to stress that, urn .... if the Council believes that stop signs are a better approach, um, then .... uh, we do believe that traffic can be adequately managed, uh, by those. Our traffic, uh, engineers did do a quick, kinda quick and dirty warrant test out there, urn .... and, um....on the Linn Street intersection, none of the, uh, traditional warrants were met, so basically we ... we check for different criteria. Um, and there weren't any warrants that would, uh, push us to signalization there, if. ... if we didn't do so for, uh, the reasons I outlined earlier. At the, uh, Dubuque intersection, um, the pedestrian volume at peak times was enough to meet a signalization warrant. Um, none of the other eight criteria, is that right? There's nine criteria? Uh, none of the other nine ..... none of the other eight, uh, criteria were met: In that kind of quick and dirty analysis. Thomas/ Maybe I'll start since I was the one who initiated this, uh, request to discuss this. (clears throat) You know, as I mentioned, uh, earlier, uh, you know, I .... I had noticed after the project on Washington Street was more or less reaching a conclusion, and the temporary stop signs were up, that the, um, the flow at the two intersections seemed, uh... to actually be improved because of the .... the way in which, um, you know, the drivers had to come to a full stop at both intersections, uh... there .... there weren't really long delays for either pedestrians or drivers with the stop signs. Uh, furthermore as Geoff mentioned, the cost issues, uh, with the stop sign, and granted we're not, um, you know, we're not benefiting now, but over the life cycle, once the time comes to replace those signals, we'll be facing that ... that same cost again. (clears throat) But what I did do, which I think is important in ... in terms of evaluating the ... the decision here was I ... I did check in, uh, with Nancy Bird and Mark Ginsberg. You know, I told `em, look, I'm ... I'm not going to take this to Council if...if you don't support it. And so Nancy did speak with her executive committee, uh, they supported looking into it. Uh, the full board meets on the 26a', so we don't have that information. She did also speak with, urn ... Harry Olmstead, who said that (clears throat) with respect to persons with physical disabilities, such as people in wheelchairs, the elderly, uh, they would benefit from the stop signs because you .... you have more time to cross. There's no limit on the time you cross with a stop rather than a signal. I also looked at the intersections at Jefferson and Madison, which is where you cross at the IMU and, urn .... uh, Washington and Madison, where you have the, uh, main library at the University. Those are all stop intersections, and I would say have even more complexity than the two at, um, on Washington at Linn This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 18 and Dubuque. So .... in an ideal world I would, as I initially said in my memo to you, we would test the idea, you know, that, um, we'd .... we'd leave the stop signs in place and see in different... whether at peak periods and... and the more normal periods how things work, urn .... but I do .... my ..... my sense now that I would want verified by that is that it... they're cheaper to install and furnish. They're safer and better for the downtown. I think it actually helps the feel of the downtown at those locations to do that. Um, so again I ... if..if we can, I would suggest we, urn ... give it a little bit of time just to test the concept. If not I would support going with the stop signs. Dickens/ I'll agree with you, uh.... having lived basically on that corner of Washington and Dubuque for over 40 years (laughter) every day watching people walking across there, uh... the speed of traffic is much more manageable, you know, when the lights, people would rush ... the speeds would head over 30 miles an hour. Uh, I have not noticed ... I mean the traffic is much more calm. It's much easier to walk across that corner and the next corner down at, uh, Linn Street and, uh, Washington Street. I have not seen ... really any angry (laughs) uh, vehicles or pedestrians for that part. Most people seemed to ... seemed to like the fact .... you get up to the corner, if it's a pedestrian starts walking out, that car stops. And, uh, as far ... you know, it's only been a couple months, and we really are kind of in a quieter time, but ... the students have come back today, and ... I haven't seen any .... anything that would change my mind that the .... the stop signs are a better option for these two streets. I'm not convinced up on ... up on Clinton Street because it's four lanes. It .... it does take longer to get through there. Uh, College Street, I would still keep the signal that you could stop, but uh, for Washington and Dubuque, and Linn Street and Dubuque, it seems to .... seems to be working. So would like to give it time to (several talking) play out. If it doesn't, we have those signals that can be put there. Taylor/ (several talking) ....agree. I would think we do need a little more time because a lot of that time was .... the construction was involved and so there wasn't as much traffic and now there's more normal flow through there and just from your personal observation, and uh, I ... I"m more of a fan of stop sign also, just seeing on a day-to-day basis the number of folks who race through a yellow light to get through and ... and that ... that happens, and if you have that volume of pedestrians there, that's... that's not safe. Botchway/ Pauline, I feel like you're personally talking about me (laughter and several talking) I'm joking! I'm joking! (laughter and several talking) Um .... so .... for me, I would disagree, and this has taken a lot of hard thought, um, at least from my standpoint, simply because, um, you know, I actually think that it has gotten better. Now there's a couple of caveats that I threw in there that I .... I think that, again, I think that as you're advocating for more time, you're thinking about it as well, one being the fact that that construction, in general, has stopped a lot of flow ... flow and so, um, you know, before there was a considerable amount of traffic. Now there is none. Um, and even as I was going through, I still thought it was weird just by, you know, going through that area that I've gone through a lot of times, it just hasn't picked up speed, and so....I understand the time argument and I'm .... I'm kinda willing to .... to be okay if. ... if that was the only concern. You know, going back to the audible, urn .... uh.....you know... signals, I ... I can't .... I can't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 19 bypass that piece. Um, you know, and it .... you know one of the things rested on the ... on the, our discussion around the complete streets project. And so we .... we had a long conversation with, uh.....uh, a community that talked about, you know, our thoughts on complete streets. We have, you know, multiple conversations about complete streets, and the thought is is that we are, you know, building a more walkable city, not necessarily for the people that may be there at the particular time, but for the future. Um, you know, and so from.....from my standpoint, as I think about, um, the changes that we're making and we've already made, uh, at Clinton and Washington, you know, we're thinking about the future and thinking about, um, you know, the fact that we need audible signalization for, um, a variety of different people. Um, not too long ago, maybe a year ago, we participated in a conversation with the, I believe it was the Ukrainian delegation. And, you know, they were talking about, um.....they didn't necessarily talk extensively, but they mentioned the fact that, um, you know, of audible signalization as something that, um, was discussed briefly there and it's something that, you know, I've talked about previously, not necessarily at the Council table. I can't .... I can't jump over that. Now, if there is an alternative to that, I ... I'd be willing to listen and have a different conversation on. Um, but .... um.....you know, the .... Harry's thoughts on, you know, it being a stop sign and it .... taking a little bit longer, um, to get through there and allowing for a little more time to get through there. I would agree and disagree. I mean we could change the signalization to allow for more time. Um, as I was thinking about the, um, Madison, Jefferson interchange, urn .... I was thinking about yes, that is difficult stop. Um, and... it does get somewhat hit or miss. I mean there's been some accidents with some buses over there. Um, and people. And so I would .... for me, again, and I know that seems like we're creeping up on numbers here. I would, um, feel comfortable with the signalization, and .... and that being a key piece, um, from a .... a disability standpoint. Throgmorton/ I personally support, uh, testing the stop sign idea for Dubuque and Washington, for that intersection. I'm less supportive of, uh, doing it at the Linn and Washington Street intersection. And I want to say that, uh, a few days ago, I heard, uh, two sightless people, blind people, talking about the difficulties of navigating streets. And .... I learned from them that... basically one-tenth of 1% of all people are blind, which for Iowa City would equate to roughly 70 people, give or take. Uh, and I also, uh, rode on the mall bus part way at least with a .... a school age man, a young boy, who .... uh, he was blind and he said he wanted to speak in a Council meeting, but he was nervous, so I said, `oh, come to the next meeting. I'd be happy to make you feel comfortable and you can speak.' Uh, but he told me that with regard to intersections, he feels really uncomfortable at intersections if there's not some kind of audible sound that tells him, uh, when to cross and when not to. So, I think the Linn and Washington Street is different enough, that intersection is different enough from Dubuque and Washington for me to favor stop signs at one, at least testing `em, and not at the other. I don't know what the rest of you think. Mims/ See it's interesting because.... until you had said that, for me based on what I perceived to be the pedestrian volume down there, with the pedestrian mall, I would have said I'd favor having the signals at Dubuque and Washington, and stop signs (laughter) and trying the stop signs at Linn and Washington, because .... I mean, you can come down there and there's people going onto, coming off the ped mall and it's.... basically non-stop This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 20 pedestrian. Geoff, I have a question. When .... if this whole discussion hadn't come up, when were the signals going to be installed? Fruin/ Um .... Scott jump in if I'm incorrect. I think the ones on Dubuque would have been installed already, um, probably within the, you know, couple weeks ago, and then, um, the Linn Street ones would be in the .... in the spring when it warms up a little bit, cause there's some additional footing work that needs to be completed there. Mims/ I'd be willing to delay the installation till the end of the spring semester and revisit it. Give us a full semester with student pedestrian traffic down there. I'm .... I'm assuming we could let those signals sit in storage still then ... till then? Fruin/ Yeah. Scott, if you want to come up. I guess the question I would have is ... (both talking) they're kinda half done right now, and do we .... do we leave `em in that state for an entire semester and keep the .... the fences up and the temporary stop signs, or how .... how could we achieve (both talking) Sovers/ Yeah, I think we can .... we can leave the temporary stop signs up. I think the complication is going to be is, um, our... current contract with the contractor, they're gonna want to close out that. Mims/ Okay. Sovers/ So we may have to close it out and do potentially a separate project to install those... would be our other option. Mims/ Which is then.....probably gonna cost us a whole bunch more or.... Sovers/ Probably. Throgmorton/ When would the contractor want that, his contract, or her contract, closed out? Sovers/ Um, they're probably going to finish up their work probably in the spring, uh.....April timeframe. Throgmorton/ Could use that as a deadline. Mims/ Would it .... would it be feasible to push back the installation to within a couple of weeks of when their con ... they'd be ready to close out their contract, or does that just mess up their work schedule? Sovers/ We can .... we can touch base with them and see what their work schedule's like. Um... I know they are planning on installing the signal at .... at, um, Dubuque and Washington, like Geoff said, uh, this winter. Um, cause all the underground work is done. They can ... they can do everything above ground, um, of course the .... the Linn Street needs to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 21 wait till ... we've got a couple more footings to put on the east side of the intersection, but.... urn.... so we have to factor that in to how, um, how that plays out in the spring. Dickens/ But those could be put in and then .... capped if they need be, if we decide not to use `em, but they could finish their project up. Sovers/ Yeah! Dickens/ That portion of it, and just .... all that would be left would be to add the signals on top. Sovers/ Yep! Could do that! Botchway/ (several talking) So before we move forward, real quick since I see Kent in the audience, is there a way that we can get some counts or data on this, cause I feel .... I mean I ... I obviously feel pretty comfortable, think that I'm right on everything I view, but (laughter) there could be some different data out there that may change my particular perspective, and on top of that, the nighttime, and so we've really talked about how well it's easy to travel during the day, but one of my reasons that I didn't mention was night as well, and that's .... that is a little problematic for me as far as, you know, just going down, um, going through the downtown, and especially as it relates to as we move into the spring, cause there's more people walking at night, how that plays a role. Sovers/ Sure! Yeah, so the data that we used when we did the warrant analysis that Geoff had mentioned, kinda the quick, uh, analysis was from the downtown traffic model project. So it's very fresh data. The issue with the data is it's only peak hour, so it was morning, noon, and night. What we don't have is all the hours between. When we typically look at data for vehicles is that's the ... those are the hours that are most important. However, with pedestrians, it has a lot to do with class times, with other functions and so forth, so that's the data we have. Um, we can collect data between now and I think the timeframe that you are all describing, uh, pretty easily. Um, so I think if we want more data, if we need more data, um, we should be able to accommodate. Throgmorton/ Would we feel comfortable doing basically what Susan suggested, meaning test the stop signs basically until ... until some point in the spring, uh, and you have to tell us exactly what that date would be, and then come back to us with a .... a decision date (both talking) Dickens/ (mumbled) Mims/ Yeah, I don't think we're gonna get more than a couple months probably (both talking) Sovers/ .....yeah, and I think that's good. Mims/ Give us a little bit better idea (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 22 Cole/ Because... ultimately it's going to be an empirical question. Um, the other thing is is I think we really need to encourage the public to let us know either way, so hopefully we can communicate to the public to give us that feedback too. Simpson/ Yeah, I was gonna say, um, you can talk about timeline and stuff, but my first impression right now is that students would probably appreciate having the signal, um, thinking about, urn ... people who are blind. I personally have a friend who, um, can't see very well, um, and also the hearing impaired, and I think that's definitely a priority for students. So, urn .... the signal especially at Linn and Washington, um, and then I think the configuration of the curb at, um, Dubuque and, um, Washington is a little bit, uh, better for crossing for pedestrians anyway, so ... the stop sign could work there (several talking) Throgmorton/ Yep, so we could check with various people over the next couple months. Cole/ Uh huh! Throgmorton/ Okay? Fruin/ Okay, so we'll .... we'll hold off. We'll come back to you, um .... when it's to the point where we can't.... Mims/ Wait any longer! Fruin/ ...wait any longer. Um .... are .... are you wanting staff to do outreach to various constituent groups or .... what are you expecting from us when we return to you? Mims/ (several talking) Just give us the deadline! Throgmorton/ Yeah. Dickens/ You know, if something's written very nicely in the newspaper by one of our newspaper, uh, reporters back there (laughter) that we will .... we will, uh, hear from our constituents generally or people will find us and let us know their feelings, so.... Botchway/ I would say .... the headline being "Terry Hates Signalization" (laughter) Throgmorton/ Unfortunately Andy just walked back in the room and he didn't hear that (several talking) so he'll have to check with his colleague at his right. Okay, so we're clear about that. All right, good deal. Uh, so the next item is clarification of agenda items. I have one item I really need to bring up with you, pertaining to the School District, but I need to step out for just a minute, so if y'all have something minor to talk about, a relatively minor, for two minutes (laughs) that'd be good, or we can take a two -minute break. Thomas/ Just take a break! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 23 Throgmorton/ Be right back! (BREAK) Clarification of Agenda Items: Throgmorton/ Thank you for your patience. So in your late handout, the stuff we get in our manila packet, is an email from me to you, which I hope you all have had a chance to see. It concerns, uh, Horace Mann Elementary and the School Board's facilities master plan process. An attachment to it was, uh.... Chris Lynch's January 10th memo about the September bond referendum. So, as that email indicates, I need to brief you about what has happened since the School Board met on January 10th. And what actions Geoff and I have taken over thexast several days in response. So, I'll try to do this pretty quickly. On December the 5 , John Thomas, Geoff, Ron Knoche, and I met with Steve Murley to discuss the District's preliminary ideas about FMP related improvements at Mann Elementary. The meeting resulted from a series of conversations Geoff and Steve had between October 18 and November 13. After the School Board's January 10th work session, we began hearing reports that City government was dragging its feet and delaying those improvements at Mann. We didn't know why those reports were coming out. hi an email, Steve ... uh, Geoff wrote Steve or talked to Steve, in an email that Steve sent Geoff on January the 14th, Steve reported that John Thomas and I had "opposed" several specific aspects of the District's preliminary plan for expanding Mann's footprint. What I need to tell you is that Steve's understanding of what transpired at that December 5 meeting differed quite a bit from John's, Geoff's, and my understanding. It was our understanding that we were asked to meet with Steve so that he could describe their preliminary ideas for Mann and hear our preliminary responses. And Susan, you would of attended except you know there was (both talking) Mims/ ....eye surgery, yeah.... Throgmorton/ We don't need to talk about. It was our understanding that Steve was seeking our input, and we provided it. At no point did we indicate or mean to indicate that we were staking out a take it or leave it position. We left the meeting understanding that Steve would have his building staff investigate the feasibility of our suggestions, while City staff would investigate the feasibility of providing on -street parking or using nearby surface parking for some of Mann's needs. We further understood that Steve and Geoff would schedule a meeting in the near future to further discuss what they had learned and what could be done. That did not happen. I don't ..... I don't know why. In retrospect I can see that we and Steve should have agreed to produce a very short written statement about what School and City staff would do and when we would get back together. At no point did John or I indicate that we were speaking for the Council as a whole. Moreover, I fully support, and I understand John does as well, the District's desire to make additions and modifications to Mann within the currently planned IMP timetable. So, I understand that Geoff spoke with Steve Murley earlier this morning, and I'm wondering, Geoff, if This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 24 you can give us a hint, at least, about what Steve said and... how.... how we might be able to proceed. Fruin/ Well .... well, the bottom line is we both concluded that it would be good to get, um .... a, uh, Council representative, uh, a Board representative, uh, and Steve and I in the same room and just to ... make sure that everybody's on the same page going forward. It ... it doesn't do a whole lot to figure out where any type of miscommunication happened, uh, at the previous meeting, but ... um, Steve was going to check with, uh, I believe the, um, try to find two Board members, uh, I imagine the President and Vice President, uh, check their availability and he will send that to me. I'll communicate that, uh, to you and I think it would be good to have two representatives from the City Council at that meeting. Throgmorton/ Okay. Good deal, cause we .... we know we want to resolve this in a timely and mutual—mutually agreeable way. It's really crucial! Susan, if you can participate (both talking) Mims/ Yeah, I would very much like to! (both talking) Throgmorton/ ....we've asked you in the interim to be our sort of joint representative. On a related topic, uh, this morning I .... as part of that email, I sent you a copy of Chris Lynch's January l0a' memo to the Board in which he recommended that a 75 to 95 million GO bond be presented to the voters rather than the current proposal of 194 million. So I want you to know I had a lengthy conversation with Chris last Friday, uh, Chris Lynch that is, and during that conversation learned that the Board intends to decide next Tuesday night what to present to the voters in September. So .... uh... I mean, this... this is difficult, you know. I don't know what we would recom.... you know, if we're gonna weigh in, we should weigh in, but I don't know how .... if we can figure out how to do that. I understand that there's Chris, uh, Chris' proposal and I understand that there is another .... uh, I don't know, letter circulating, trying to get, uh, various people to support doing the full bond. I haven't seen it yet, at least hasn't been sent to me is what I mean to say. It hasn't been sent to me yet. So (laughs) what to do (both talking) Mims/ Well ... well I think it's .... I think it's difficult. I was involved in a meeting over the weekend, um, with a group of people who are gearing up, very much, to try and .... and encourage the Board to go for the full bond. Um, and the ... the emphasis there, you know, from their perspective is .... that the minute you start breaking this apart, you run a risk on a lot of things. Um, you end up with bond fatigue. You might get the first bond passed and then you don't get the second bond passed or people whose projects are in the last part of the bond, at the second bond, refused to vote for the first one because they're afraid their projects aren't going to get done. Um, you know, this .... there was tens of thousands of people hours went into this whole facility master plan, and... the.... the perception of a lot of people and, as I say, they're starting to gear up very quickly, is that we need to keep moving on this. There's no, um, there's no certainty that the SAVE legislation will pass to extend the .... the income tax ... or the sales tax revenue that the District has been using. Um, that when you look at the School tax levy that we have in this District, it's one of the lowest in the state. Um, and this would allow us to, you know This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 25 really try and get our schools up to a reasonable, uh, level in terms ... I mean, a lot of them that still don't even have air conditioning, and you look at how many days we lose because of lack of air conditioning, um, there will be ... one of their bonds is coming off at the same time that this new one would go on. So the increase in ... in their tax levy is not as significant as it would seem. Um, I think they're looking at like $1.63 per month per $100,000 valuation I think is ... is what it is. Urn .... per 100,000. (several talking) I'll have to double check (mumbled) but it's .... it's really not going to increase it, I mean ... it's doable, and I think certainly for Iowa City residents, they're looking at the same time as we're making some significant inroads in decreasing ours. So .... I think given the fact that they're trying to make a decision, uh, next Tuesday night, and we .... I know you sent this late packet, but I'm not sure what .... since we didn't have it on our agenda tonight, if we can officially decide anything tonight (several talking) Um, I've got that information from that group. I will be sharing it with each of you individually and if you are willing to sign as individuals, not as necessarily representatives of this Council since we can't make a Council decision, um, then .... let you decide if you support that. I ... I will come out very strongly supporting, uh, the whole bond. I think it's.....I think it's absolutely (both talking) Cole/ 200 million. Mims/ Yeah, I think it's absolutely essential for the well being of our District, um.... Throgmorton/ Yeah, I'm .... I'm very conscious of how very little time we have, uh, here. I .... so I'd just like to say 30 seconds worth here. I think the topic deserves a very thoughtful discussion on the part of this Council. My sense is that, uh, Chris Lynch's proposal is imminently reasonable. Uh, I don't see it as being in direct conflict with the FMP. It's a judgment call about what .... what's the best course of action to take, and I wish we had ... could really discuss it in a thorough kind of way, so that we knew what our Council really thought as a Council. Cole/ When are we gonna weight in, I mean that is part of our strategic plan. March, I mean (both talking) Mims/ Well I think (several talking) Cole/ ....cause I mean that will be the initial proposal and then we'll make a response about whether (both talking) Mims/ Well, unfortunately I think given the timeframe with what has happened, because it's my understanding they need to make a decision because they have to get bond language written fairly rapidly, um, you know for the fall, in terms of what their timeframe is. Cause it's gotta be pretty specific language that goes in that bond language. Dilkes/ You know I think you need to .... if you want to talk about this, you need to put it on an agenda. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 26 Mims/ Okay! Tbrogmorton/ Yeah. Dilkes/ Um, I think the subject of Mann is on the agenda properly, but I think we're beyond that. Throgmorton/ Yeah, okay, so um .... perhaps individuals could write. We don't have time within the next week to do it as a Council. Cole/ So who would be the two that would meet then, Susan and who else? Throgmorton/ With regard to Mann, Susan and me. Cole/ Okay. Perfect! Throgmorton/ Okay, thank you! It's now 20 till. We probably should take a break and return to our work session after the meeting. Um, and we'll return to the Info Packet discussion. don't think I'll let ... we'll take so .... I don't think that will take so much time, but still we need to give ourselves a short break here. Cole/ Okay. Throgmorton/ All right. Thank you! (BREAK) :�4Nvgr Information Packet Discussion IDec�mb�e>f 121: Tbrogmorton/ Now we have, uh, some business to clean up with regard to our work session. Do we need to take a short break? Mims/ I think all we have is Info Packet (several talking) Throgmorton/ ...much to do. Mims/ So, unless people have lots of questions on, I don't (several talking and laughing) We've talked about the traffic control. Botchway/ Um.... Mims/ I thought the Michigan ban on banning plastic bags was... disturbing, as we're seeing more states try to limit what cities can do. Throgmorton/ Yeah, it's going around. Fruin/ Yeah, it's not just Michigan. It's happenin' all around us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 27 Mims/ Yeah. And I thought the buff ..the article on Buffalo being the first city to bid minimum parking is ... did I steal that from you Rockne? I'm sorry! Cole/ I was going to talk, I felt pressure, so (laughter) I was going to be quiet for once! (laughter) Mims/ Um, well I found it really interesting, I mean I just found it really interesting, but we've talked about cities of various different sizes and coming at things maybe a little different order in terms of how they're doing things, but .... I mean it just hit on so many different pieces of getting rid of the parking, theoretically more affordable housing but really the concern about gentrifying and not actually having the affordable housing. Just ... lots of pieces that I think we can look at and ... that we need to be considering as we're making changes like to form -based code downtown and .... and looking at the parking study that we'll be getting back. So, it was ... it was an interesting (both talking) Cole/ We do need to shrink it at some point, but that'll be part of the... Mims/ Yep! Throgmorton/ (several talking) ....hand signals there. I was trying to get Jake's attention to see if he wanted to say anything, but ... uh, I ... I want to mention one thing. I used to swim out at UCLA, you know, when I wasn't workin' on my dissertation. Don Schupp was one of my professors out there, so (laughs) it's always a great pleasure to see him quoted, cause anything havin' to do with parking (several talking) He's the guy! Botchway/ Um, IP 5, when are we talking about .... um .... reduce ... achievable goal reduce disproportionately. I thought we said February and then I didn't think we were going to do it at the February 71h meeting and then.... Fruin/ Well, the 7`h you picked the budget. Botchway/ Right. Fruin/ We really cannot delay that, so, um .... we could have it, uh, have it on for the 2151. Botchway/ Okay! Fruin/ Uh.... Botchway/ I just wanted to.... Mims/ I thought we were going to give the new Chief a little bit of time anyways to get his feet on the ground (several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017. Page 28 Fruin/ ...depends on what your expectations for that meeting will be. I don't think Chief Matherly's gonna be able to .... to come in and lay out a plan for you, you know, and have diagnosed the situation here, but I .... I do think it would be healthy, um .... to .... to maybe have a general discussion about your expectations and .... and maybe even to get... get on the same page in terms of some definitions, arrests and charges, and what is it that you want us to see, uh, or want us, you know, what data should we be compiling and presenting. So I think maybe just a shared understanding should be our goal for the 2155 if we want to go there. Throgmorton/ Yeah. Botchway/ I think Susan made that point as we were talking about what it means, so yeah. No, definitely! Throgmorton/ Sounds good, and uh, I think we're all very much looking forward to, uh, our new Chief joining us on Monday morning at 8:00 A.M.! Mims/ Bill says `so am I!' (laughter) Cole/ We like Bill. We really like Bill! (laughter) Throgmorton/ Okay, anything else in that Info Packet? Gosh, no! So there's nothing else to discuss, but we can go! Okay. We're done with the work session. Thank you everybody! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of January 17, 2017.