Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-09-17 TranscriptionPage I Council Present: Cole, Mims, Salih, Teague, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton Staff Present: Fruin, Monroe, Andrew, Dilkes, Fruehling, Seydell-Johnson, Nagle- Gamm, Ralston, Bockenstedt, Hightshoe, Havel, Knoche, Reichart Others Present: Lenkaitis, Wu (UISG); Stockman, Austin (Telecommunications Comm.) Joint meeting with Telecommunications Commission: Throgmorton/ All right so I'm gonna open our Iowa City City Council work session for Tuesday, September the 17th, 2019. We have three topics we wanna get through before we turn to our agenda items. So let's see how well we do on that. The first topic is a joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission, and I understand that two of the Commissioners cannot be here tonight. So I'd like to welcome Adam Stockman and Andrew Austin to, uh, our joint meeting, and also thanks Ty Coleman, staff (mumbled) member. Not staff member (laughs) staff person (laughs) assigned to the Commission for joining us. So I also wanna thank the Commission for its very thoughtful and thought- provoking.... short memo, if you will, providing recommendations to us and... enabling us to discuss possible futures and responsibilities for the Commission. So I wonder if, Adam, perhaps you, or the two of you together, could briefly recap the essence of that recommendation that you provided to us. Stockman/ Yeah! Sure thing. I feel that we're kind of at a ... a point with the Telecommunications Commission where we need to decide one of a couple things, uh, really what's the, kind of what's the purpose of this commission moving forward. Uh, with the expiration of the ... of Mediacom's, uh, franchise agreement with the City, the .... the charge for this commission is kind of less clear, um, and we haven't had a whole lot to do (laughs) so one of the things that we looked at in this recommendation, which actually kind of pre- dated, uh, my membership on the Commission and .... and Andrew's as well is just to look at, um, you know, kind of do we just disband the committee, or the commission, and... and kind of go on our ways, or do we essentially look at, uh, whether or not, um, municipal broadband is something Iowa City wants to investigate, and really our proposal is not .... is not necessarily the full-blown investigation into it. It's kind of looking into whether we should really invest resources and the kind of fully going after mun...... municipal broadband. So.... Austin/ Um, I'd just like to build on that slightly. Uh, taking a look at the proposal here to form the Municipal Broadband Advisory Board, there's, uh, sort of clear guidelines as to what we would actually be doing, or what this, uh, board would actually be doing, and uh, I know one of the concerns was the use of City resources, looking at something, um, that has already been investigated in the past. So, some of these guidelines will help to limit the use of City resources. Uh, it's almost investigating whether we should devote City resources to investigating municipal broadband as a possibility. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 2 Throgmorton/ Great! Thanks. It's a helpful summary. You know we did have a brief conversation about this, uh, in our last work session, right, well, Rockne, you weren't here and .... uh, weren't able to participate in that discussion, if I remember correctly (laughs) you know, time passes. Uh, but the discussion was pretty brief and the essence of it was we wanted to have a conversation with you so that we could figure out what would really be the best thing to do. So, I think we've all read the .... I'll call it a memo, we all ... we've all read it and now we've got a brief recap of it. I wonder if any of you, uh, Council Members would like to begin by asking any questions or expressing any...... thoughts about what direction we oughta be moving. Rockne? Cole/ Yeah. So this was actually sort of a topic that has interested me for quite a while. I'm sure many of the residents in the community as well. Um, you know, municipal broadband is, and broadband service in general, is something that we as Councilors get a lot of complaints about, you know, in terms of the private service, without commenting on any particular provider. It is something that from time to time people say gosh! You guys really should have that or you should at least explore it. Of course usually are not really aware of what the price tag of a full-blown out system would look like. They can cost.... I know Dubuque has evaluated for example and it can cost tens of thousands of dollars, so it is a very significant, uh, investment. That said, there are communities throughout the state of Iowa that have investigated this. So I think when you had talked about investigating the prospect of investigating, I .... I don't think that's, um, redundant in the sense that an actual formal study, and this would likely have to be a decision on the part of the next Council, would cost substantial resources. I know at one point I think Geoff had maybe said, you know, $60,000, something along those lines. Very .... very significant amount of resources. But in terms of this advisory capacity, in terms of preliminary information, um, to the extent that there are other, uh, cities that are willing to share, um, what they have learned in terms of implementing. It's my understanding the muni, uh, Cedar Falls does have an active municipal broadband, is my understanding, and I think there are other municipalities that do as well, um, that .... that would be relatively low cost, um, in terms of just time, and it would seem to fit consistently with what your concern is is that sort of one task is sort of, um, you know, becoming unnecessary at this point, given the expiration of the recent, um (mumbled) essentially sort of mandate of what you guys were doing. So I would really like to explore that, and if you... investigate those cities, um, talk to them that have implemented, uh, maybe talk to cities like the City of Dubuque and.... and..... and learn from what some of their preliminary studies have indicated. Um, then the future Council can indicate, hey, we either wanna move forward in a more formal way and actually get some details, um, and once we get those details, uh, we can decide which direction we wanna go, and by the way, I don't think that doing the study commits us to go any direction. It .... it may be that after doing that study that they say, hey, we should continue on the path that we were already on, um, but I think it's incredibly important to make sure that we have the top-notch municipal broadband, or broadband service that we can get, and also secondly that we're really focused on the equity piece of it, because I think that is another part of it in terms of access. Um, broadband is becoming a service, much like water, electricity. It's sort of a baseline utility as opposed to a luxury. So at least for my two cents, um, I would like to the extent there's support on the rest of Council to, um, offer the .... the task force an opportunity to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 3 investigate what other cities have done, um, and to come back and make a recommendation into the future as to whether (mumbled) more formal study would be worthwhile, so that we can get a clear picture of which direction the City should go. Throgmorton/ What do the rest of you think? Mims/ Well, when I looked back at what we talked about, I don't know, two or three years ago, I can't remember exactly when it was, um, it was clear from a lot of the literature that we saw at that point that, uh, basically the cities who had done this already have fiber in the ground because they already had their own power system, and that was what tended to make it even remotely affordable for them, and for communities who did not already have fiber in the ground, based on having their own power plant, I mean it literally was probably over $100,000,000, um, to implement. We now are in the process of getting a second provider in the community, so we have more competition, which hopefully will improve the quality, um, and the outreach within the community, and so to me .... the.... the likelihood of this even fitting on our radar because of the extreme dollars, um, is probably very, very, very, very unlikely, and so it doesn't really make sense to me at this point to have people even spending their time on it. Throgmorton/ How bout the rest of you? Taylor/ I just had a question. On the two-page memo it just mentioned forming the board but further on in discussion with your commission itself, uh, you threw out a number of possibly 10 people. Where did you come up with....with that number? Stockman/ Uh, out of the air. Taylor/ Out of the air (laughs) okay! (laughter) Stockman / Um, no it was, uh, that was based on a, uh, Ty, which .... which commission... or which, uh.... Coleman/ I wanna say the Climate Action Committee, uh, proposal, something like that. Stockman /It was based on an already ex ... already existing committee, um, just as a .... a starter. Austin/ Um, I did wanna briefly address the, uh, the issue of the potential very large cost of this project. Um, very recently, maybe within the last year or two, there have been a lot of developments in certain technologies, such as wireless -mesh networks, which could potentially reduce the cost of a project like this, uh, ten -thousand fold (laughs) uh, if you're talking about, you know, digging up, uh, to put in fiber as opposed to simply using wireless technology. So of course that's something that would have to be investigated, uh, which is, you know, one of the reasons we might want to consider an advisory board, uh, just because of that .... that improvement in technology. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council session of September 17, 2019. Page 4 Thomas/ Yeah, I'm .... I'm at this point I think, um, because there are so many questions, uh, and possibilities that are associated with this, I'm .... I'm inclined to support the kind of preliminary analysis phase that you're considering. I mean just in my brief today looking at the, um, on the web on ... on this matter, it sounds like there are quite a few municipal broadbands just in the state of Iowa, uh, Indianola has one as well, um....so it certainly suggests to me an investigation. Uh, I .... I think I would add, uh, one .... one concern I might have in terms of the .... the board members would ... be to make sure that labor is represented. I didn't see that. I think that would be an important piece of this. Uh, and looking forward also the question of equity, because that ... that seems to be a major issue in terms of, um, one reason I think cities are considering it is making sure that there's equal access and ... and subsidies that would be available, um, to ... to low-income households. But I .... I think to me there's just enough there to warrant, uh, preliminary investigation. Throgmorton/ So I'd like to ask y'all a question, maybe Ty can weigh in on this too. I'm wondering who really would do the pre.... preliminary study. Are we talking about four people in the Telecommunications Commission, or .... I know there's reference in your memo about appointing a new board or .... an advisory board of some kind, to actually do that work, and I'm wondering if. ... if (laughs) you know, what kind of study are you imaging would be done by a small number of people who probably have other things to do in their lives? Stockman / No it's a valid point, and I think that, uh, um, back to Mr. Cole's comments about, you know, other .... other cities have already done this, and I think reaching out to people that helped, either helped get that off the ground or, uh, people that are currently involved with those other municipal broadbands, just calls to them, just to kind of pick their brains a little bit. I think it can start as simple as that, and that's something I think that ... the.... the commission as it stands right now could definitely do is just kind of reach out to those people and....and try and just get some of those very basic questions answered of, you know, ballpark costs, you know, what are some of the newer technologies that, uh, that could dramatically reduce those costs, um, but really just to ... just to start that investigation, and if it .... if it builds from there to a point where it does warrant being a, you know, a 10 -person special commission that's formed or something like that, or special board that's formed, then .... then so be it, but if it, if that preliminary investigation reveals that it's just, that it .... that it isn't feasible, then we're not really out anything. We're out, you know, four people's time that are looking for something to do right now. So.... Throgmorton/ Okay. I .... I wanna present a little bit of my own thinking about this, without coming to some firm conclusion yet, and what I'm gonna say is consistent with what I said in our last meeting. Uh, this is not high on my agenda, and it's not part of our strategic plan to commit any staff resources or Council mental energy and political capital and all that kind of stuff.....to extending broadband services, uh, through municipal means. So ... I ..... I don't think we should take it up this year as the Council, in terms of what the Council does, and I don't think we oughta dedicate staff time to that either. I can be persuaded that it would be worthwhile to have the Commission conduct a .... a.....a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 5 relatively, you know, very preliminary study that is done by the Commissioners .... with their own resources and a modest amount of help from Ty, but you know I mean he's got stuff to do also, and if that's what we're talking about, I might ....well be able to support the idea, but I won't go beyond that. So .... I wonder what the rest of ya think. Teague/ When we're talking about .... well I appreciate you all comin' and makin' the suggestions, so thanks for bein' here today. Um .... the advisory board I think, you know, could be a possible good idea, just to get some preliminary information. Um .... you know, the Mayor does make great points about staff dedication time and .... and, um.....the ability for us to pull it off financially. Um, but .... you know, this is no longer a ... um, a luxury. It's somethin' that people, you know, rely on every day, and so .... I am more inclined to definitely support some type of a preliminary, urn.... information on this. I'm not exactly sure if, you know, to go (mumbled) extreme as the advisory board because potentially we can get enough information from the Commissioners that can give us some type of a indication, if we need to go to the next step, which would be an advisory board to then research if we will bring in staff resources to go further. So, urn .... I think it's a .... I appreciate you all presentin' it because, um, it is somethin' that within our community people do struggle with, um, financially and even the, you know, services itself, but I don't wanna be critical, because the services, um, many appreciate, many love, and so it is not about, um .... any .... criticizin' services that are ... that are existing by any means. It really is just lookin' at if the City, um, could provide it for our local folks. Salih/ For me I really think... first thank you of course for coming out here, but I really think this is really good idea, and uh, but when it come to the cost and everything, but just to talk about the service itself, it will be really good because I know lot of people, he doesn't want to criticize company that ... who existing, but I will because I have a lot people who come to me and saying that they give us this price and after one year the price jump like $30 or $40 more, which is people in this community low income cannot provide internet that for like $90 a month or $100. I think maybe if the City done it it will be cheaper for the community, but of course we need to know a lot of informations and maybe, as Rockne said, we need to (unable to understand) how things being done and if we (mumbled) financially can accommodate this or (mumbled) staff as they said, but this is will be great if it happen. Throgmorton/ I follow up with a couple other questions.... I'm sorry (both talking) just a couple questions for clarification. Uh, Andrew, you mentioned, uh, this innovative wireless technology. Could you give me the language again? Austin/ Sure. It's, uh, wireless mesh technology. It's, uh, being used by a few private companies in larger cities. I know of one in New York City, uh, and then a couple sort of collective groups, uh, formed in different communities. It's very early -on emerging, but it has, uh, the potential to very much drastically reduce the cost of implementing something (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 6 Throgmorton/ Great, thanks, and I'm also wondering about the fact that there is a second provider that is extending service, broadband service, throughout the community. Does, how does that influence your thinking? Austin/ Well I think competition is great, uh, within the internet service business, especially because, uh, many companies are notorious for providing bad service until the minute a competitor comes in. Um, this would open up the potential to add competition where there's still only one provider in Iowa City. Uh, specifically some of the technologies that we might investigate, such as wireless mesh, would allow individuals who live in apartment buildings or, uh, different situations where they don't have any control over their internet service, uh, you know, if they could put an antenna on their window, then now they do have a second provider and they do have that accessibility to competition, which would really, uh, just put the pressure on the private companies to deliver a much better quality of service, lower price, urn .... better equity. Salih/ I just .... Jim, you .... you keep saying two provider. Century Link is not consider with them or what? You know, there is three provider or two? Throgmorton/ Well I don't know, Ty, what's the answer to that? Coleman/ Yeah, I think you could consider Century Link a .... a broadband provider. They have some limitations in certain areas, whereas Mediacom is more likely to have the same offering across the town. Salih/ Yeah, Mediacom is cover everywhere but Century Link, and even ImOn is now just for business and the southeast side of city but it's not everywhere. Yeah. Throgmorton/ Yeah. Great. Mims/ Just curious about your comment about like people in apartment buildings and stuff. Will that ... do you know at this point.....that wireless mesh technology, is that something that like an individual would be able to purchase to tap in where there is not—where they're not hardwired in? Austin/ Sure, so, urn .... from the amount of research that I've done, which is admittedly small, uh, the way that the technology works on a very basic level, you have antennas that would be set up by the City, uh, and then consumers could purchase a sort of receiver kit, uh, and they just set that up, uh, where there's a line of sight to one of the larger antennas and they would be able to self -install it, uh, set it up all on their own, and then, you know, there's no need for wiring through buildings that people may not own or to dig up anything - Mims/ So would the private companies be able to set up those antennas so people could connect to the private companies with the wire mesh? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 7 Austin/ There are private companies that provide it. Um, not in Iowa City, but it is a very new technology that's starting to emerge in some of the larger metropolitan areas. Mims/ So as soon as one offers it the others will (mumbled) (laughs) Throgmorton/ Pau ... Pauline, did you wanna say something? Taylor/ I was just gonna say from the discussion it sounded as though, uh, these folks on the Commission have already started steps towards looking into this. They have ... (mumbled) two steps ahead of us on a lot of the knowledge on this. So I .... I see that as a plus and, uh, since it would potentially be short-term, it sounds like, just investigating this, um, and they've proposed it to be a period of one year, um, I think it's appropriate to .... to form the, or let them continue as a .... advisory board, cause I kinda see .... see it as an extension of the cable franchise, just a different venue, um, so L....I would be in favor of it. Throgmorton/ Anybody else wanna say anything? Do y'all have any questions for us? Austin/ Are you looking at, um, just expanding the role of the Telecommunications Commission then? Throgmorton/ What I'm hearin' is support for the Commission conducting a preliminary study to determine whether a more full-blown study would be worthwhile. That's what I'm hearing. Yeah. Salih/ Yeah. Throgmorton/ Yeah, so .... I think (several talking) where's our City Attorney staff. I think this is compatible with the existing..... task of the .... of the Telecommunications Commission. I don't know, I can't see Eleanor (several talking) Sorry, Eleanor, there's so many people out there I couldn't see you! Dilkes/ Uh, I mean it's pretty focused on cable TV, but could probably stretch it enough for that. Throgmorton/ All right, that's what I was hoping to hear (laughter) Cole/ Well .... and just one final comment. I ... you know, what do we have to lose here? I think it's just information and .... and the very valuable time of the Commission. So I don't mean to, you know, minimize that, but you do have a little change in mission a little bit so I'm comfortable that there's no taxpayer dollars now that are going to be expended. We'll get (mumbled) investigation and at that stage a future Council would be able to say, hey, we wanna commit to a more formalized study. Salih/ Uh huh. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 8 Mims/ I'm fine if it's just the Commission doing it for now, trying to gather more information to bring back to us. I don't think we need to go through the steps of setting up a 10 -person advisory board right now. Throgmorton/ I don't either. Do y'all wanna give us a time table, you know, an approximate time table, like we could ask you to return to us in three months, six months.... Stockman / Just under -promise and over -deliver, let's say six months. Throgmorton/ All right (several talking) preliminarily we'll say you'll return to us in six months with your findings. You know that you're short one person on the Commission. We have an appointment to make tonight. Uh, given what has (mumbled) here tonight, uh, we'll appoint a person so you'll have five people on the Commission. At least that's certainly what I expect to have happen tonight. Okay! Anybody else wanna say anything? Thomas/ I, again, along with others, thank you for posing this. It seems to be a nice initial step to consider some options. Throgmorton/ Okay. Good deal! Thanks so much for coming. Thanks for your efforts on the part of the Commission. Stockman/ All right, thanks for your time! (several talking) Throgmorton/ Thanks for you coming, Ty! Coleman/ Thank you. Consideration of a Climate Commission: Throgmorton/ All right! I think we now can move on to .... our next topic was .... which is consideration of a climate action commission. And as we all know, staff presented us with a draft resolution for consideration. Seems to me the key questions before us are three. First, how many members should the commission.... how many members should be on the commission. Second, what shall its composition be. And third, what its purview should be. The staff has offered answers to these and a few other questions. So my thinking is we can just move through 'em one by one. I don't hear any objections so we'll be going with the first one, about the number of members on the commission. So the staff doesn't really recommend, it just lays out .... there are seven as a possible number. I personally think seven is too few, but the 13 we had on the Climate Action Steering Committee is too many (laughs) So .... too few, too many, somewhere in between is a nice number and oughta be an odd number probably. I'm inclined toward nine, but I'd be curious to know what y'all think. Salib/ Eleven. Throgmorton/ Eleven, there's a possibility. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 9 Thomas/ I like the number nine. Mims/ I do too. Throgmorton/ Well that's because both of you lived through the Beatles, you know, "Number 9," the song "Number 9" (laughter and several talking) Salih/ .....when I said I 1 I really think about diversity on the.... diversity and knowledgeable. Sometime you will find somebody who like could be provide the diversity, but he's not really knowledgeable about the issues. That's why just adding those people will help so they can educate the community, you know, that they don't know anything about (mumbled) That's why I say 11. Throgmorton/ Okay. What do the rest of you think? Teague/ (mumbled) um, Maz (clears throat) statin' 11, immediately 11 came to my mind. So I would just stick with 11, for .... for my response. Taylor/ Think 11 is good with, uh ,it said that one would be Mid Amer ...it'd actually be nine, and then the two, the Mid American and the U of I, cause from the list of interested, uh, people for partnership, it's really lengthy, and as Maz said, cause as I mentioned before, I would like to see a healthcare professional on there too, with their background in healthcare and the effects of climate control on .... on health. So I .... I think nine (both talking) Throgmorton/ (both talking) The challenge with regard to diversity of all kinds is pretty big, so ... we're not gonna be able to get everybody on this committee that we think would be appropriate. So we just need to have that in the back of our minds .... as we proceed. Uh, Rockne (both talking) Cole/ ...to that point, I think that's why I think I 1 does make sense. I always have concerns with ....there is sort of that Goldilocks number we're looking for. If it becomes too big, I think it gets a little too unwieldy, but if it's too small it doesn't really have the technical expertise as well as the diversity I think that we wanna have on it. So I think to your point, Jim, it is true, it's always going to be a challenge, but this gives us just a little extra cushion to ensure that we do have that, um, because I think we need to have that balance with the .... with the equity, as well as the expertise, um, because our goal is to get that reduction and get that technical advice. So I'm with 11. Throgmorton/ Anyone else? Okay, I'm hearing 11. Fruin/ So nine at -large and .... are you comfortable with the two.... appointments and ... and how we have that structured (both talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 10 Throgmorton/ I don't know if the others would at -large. That's really a question about the composition, but def two, I mean if y'all agree that one would be a Mid American representative and another would be a University of Iowa representative. Salih/ Yes. Throgmorton/ Okay. Fruin/ And so we're clear on the University, we're talking someone that the University administration would appoint, not just somebody affiliated that the Council would appoint. (several responding) Wu/ And then would the City have any overview on how the University appoints this person to the commission? No. Okay. Throgmorton/ (both talking) All right (both talking) Taylor/ I believe a student was listed under the list of possible others. Throgmorton/ Yeah, and in the Steering Committee, a student, there was a student representative (several talking) Wu/ ...just like to make sure that's repeated again, this time around. Throgmorton/ Maybe it will, maybe it won't, because we're got a lot of diversity to try to cover (several talking in background) So the Steering Committee, uh, that had 13 members included five members from the general public, an architect, an undergraduate from the University of Iowa, and representatives from the University, uh, administration; Kirkwood; Homebuilder's Association; the Chamber of Commerce; Procter and Gamble; and Mid American. So if the commission has l l ....so we need, uh.... well if the commission has 11 members, two of whom would be from Mid Am and the U of I, that leaves nine. So I would suggest that, uh (mumbled) that six be drawn from the general public, just as a preliminary proposal. Dilkes/ Can I just make one clarification? Um, so the .... the earlier committee was ... the, the resolution actually specified where the people were gonna come from and then staff worked to find those people. So it's not .... they weren't, the actual people were not appointed by Council. In this case we're gonna have applications. Throgmorton/ Yeah, that's not quite true. Cause the public members.... were people who voluntarily submitted applications and there were like 45 applications, but the others, like from Kirkwood and Procter and Gamble and so on, companies or whatever, appointed their own people. Dilkes/ Okay. So you envision that same thing happening here? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 11 Throgmorton/ For the public members? Uh, that's what I would strongly (both talking) Dilkes/ ...for the others? Cause that's not how the resolution's set up. Throgmorton/ However many others (both talking) Dilkes/ ...make that decision. Throgmorton/ Yeah, that's what I was imagining. (several responding) Cole/ So six and then the five of the technical positions (mumbled) Throgmorton/ In addition to the (several talking) So there'd be three representatives from.... entities, not the general public. All right so one way to proceed possibly would be to have a representative from either Kirkwood or the School District. So one representative from .... from an educational institution. And then maybe one from .... um .... either the Chamber or the Homebuilder's Association. And one from....I.....I don't know (laughs) was, my notes are based on the number nine so (both talking) Fruin/ My suggestion would be that you .... you really focus on what you think.... what type of, uh, background you really need on the commission. Um .... you know, if you do an either or, that's.... that's really tough for us to .... do we go to Kirkwood? Do we go to the School District? Both would probably be interested in participating. Um, we can target when... when open applications come up, we can .... we can target and we can encourage people with certain professions or backgrounds to apply. But you know from staff, when we drafted this we felt it was absolutely essential, given our green gas.... greenhouse gas emissions study, that Mid Am and the University be there. As we looked at the others, we kind of said, yeah, it'd be great if we had this, this, and this, but we could envision any number of, uh, collections of ...of folks over the years that may have those .... those backgrounds. So I would say is there anybody other than the University and Mid Am that absolutely has to be represented that you want. For example, maybe a Homebuilder, but..... Cole/ Could we maybe give then for these slots sort of staff discretion, so six .... would it be possible to do six that come up to Council and that we would choose, and then three would come where Council would, I'm sorry, where staff would make the recommendation, um, or selection. Is that what you're getting at, Geoff? Or no, am I (both talking) Fruin/ No, I'm comfortable with Council making all the appointments. I think if. ... if you just want designated seats, like we've talked about for UI and MidAm, just be very specific on what you want. Um .... I wouldn't....it gets troubling with an either or type of situation, at least from my standpoint. Dilkes/ So what staff is recommending in here is that those two positions were necessary, and so they will be appointed by their entities. And then we will seek applicants, you know, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 12 telling as we seek applications, these are important attributes that we're looking for, etc., etc., along with diversity, and then Council would appoint the remainder. Frain/ It's kind of, you know, we do this with HCDC. You may have remembered, uh, a staff memo last time we had appointments to HCDC where we say, you know, it'd be great to have somebody that has a banking background or affordable housing background. We don't require that, and if you don't get those applications, you can move forward with another appointment, but when staff is promoting a vacancy, we can .... we can target those, uh.... uh, those backgrounds. Dilkes/ I mean you may very well be faced with the decision is it more important to have this expertise or is it more important to have that, this diversity, and you can make those judgments as you appoint those other .... uh, nine. Throgmorton/ Yeah, I think Mazahir was exactly right — we need to have a mix of people who have knowledge that's relevant, but also .... ex .... experience and .... and backgrounds and experiences that reflect the diversity of our community. So somehow we need to blend those two things together. I'm not wedded to my suggestion to have only six public members, but .... I ..... I think it is important to get what I just described. Teague/ I think, um Pauline mentioned like healthcare and, um, you know, havin' a healthcare provider on this, uh, commission. I wonder if we don't get into categories of what we're looking for, and as we get the applications in, we are considerin' who's already on there, um, and their expertise, and try to figure out who might be good, because we .... we're sitting here trying to figure out what expertise might be good, and there could be somethin' we're not thinkin' about, and then if we have that earmarked, then naturally we wouldn't be able to go with that individual and so .... my thought is to kind of not have it earmarked. Yes, the University and, um, and MidAm, definitely have them earmarked, but the others, just kind of, you know, receive the applicants and then make decisions from there as Council. Mims/ I would agree, Bruce, I .... I think plus when you start getting the staggered terms, you k now, as different people go off and you can see what they've accomplished and how the dynamics work and what their suggestions might be, you know, I think it could change over time what you really want that make-up to be. Um, so I think if we .... if we're gonna go with the 11 and have the two set with the University and Mid American and just have the other nine at -large, uh, I think as we're making those appointments, like you said, we've got ideas in the back of our minds in terms of various expertise we think is important, uh, diversity representation in the community is important, and we kind of look at all those pieces as we do the appointment. Throgmorton/ So I noticed that there are two members of our Climate Action Advisory Board in the room, John and Matt. Matt, you're Chair or whatever, right, of the board. So could you come up for a second. I'm just wondering if. ... if you could tell us how many .... if you will active members there currently are on the Advisory Board cause according to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 13 what the staffs recommended to us, they will automatically go onto this new commission, unless of course they don't want to be. That'd be different. Krieger/ Yeah, right now I think there are seven that are active members. Um, I think in our recommendations that we had given to, um, staff it was ..... we were looking at nine of the board. I think 11 is a .... is a great number too. Um, but I think we also listed that ... a list of backgrounds or expertise, that would be good to have on there. Uh, expanding a little bit on what was originally on the original Steering Committee, knowing that, um, you know, we .... we had sort of missing voices as part of that development, um, and so that was one of the reasons we listed some additional ones, but I .... i agree with the approach that, you know, leaving that open, uh, to be able to kind of pick as you need it, as you change over time, right? We want this to kind of be a lasting document over the period of the many years that we're looking at for this effort, and so that gives you the flexibility to be able to do that without having to be tied down too much. Throgmorton/ Great, thanks. That's helpful, Matt. So we haven't gotten to this point yet, but uh, I just referred to it, and that is that .... the current members of the Advisory Board would automatically go on this commission, unless any one of them chooses not to. So that'd be seven. There'd be two from the organizations we've already mentioned. So that's nine, so we'd really only be seeking two new appointees, initially. And then we'd do the staggered term thing, assuming everybody agrees to that (mumbled) Salih/ How diversity is the seven now? Krieger/ I think that's actually hard to determine, because we don't all know each other's personal backgrounds and the expertise that you're bringing to that. So where did they grow up? What are their personal experiences? We know the background professionally, um, that we're bringing the expertise side of it, but to .... to the table, um, so .... in that way I think I would also say that we've been at this for about two years now, I think having some additional new people, fresh faces to supplement those that have already been on there is .... is great, um, I would also say that of the seven that we have, um, at least one would fulfill the requirement that you need for one of those two, um, you know, that's up to those organizations to appoint, but in that seven, one is already.... represents one of those organizations, Mid American, so, um, there's six more right now that would be representing other kinds of backgrounds. Salih/ Sure. Thank you. Throgmorton/ Okay, I think I'm hearing support for .... that, basically having .... a sort of open- ended invitation for people to apply for the vacant positions, and there'll be some language in the, uh, invitation to apply about.... seeking people with appropriate background knowledge and experience, and then also representing the diverse components of the community. Okay, so .... the third point in the staffs recommendation to us is .... well we've sort of just been talking about that any active member of the Climate Action Advisory Board who is interested in serving on the commission would be This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 14 appointed as an ini.... as an initial member, even if not gender balanced. So, Eleanor, the implication is that this commission would be gender balanced? Dilkes/ Well your policy says that, um, all.....you'll seek gender balance on all, um. .... regardless of whether it's required by the State. This would be specific to this commission. Throgmorton/ Okay. So are you folks agreeable with that recommendation? (several responding) Okay. Mims/ Given particularly that it only, am I correct in this, Eleanor, that this only refers to the initial appointments, correct, as we .... as people's terms expire and we reappoint, would this still be under our gender balance? (mumbled) I mean I'm assuming it would be cause the only .... unless I missed something, the only place I'm seeing the not gender... potentially not gender balanced is under that number three, in terms of the active members of the Climate Advisory Board interested would be appointed as initial members. (several talking) Monroe/ The resolution draft earlier before you hit the numbered components cites, um, cites the appointment of these members initially without regard to gender balance. Mims/ Okay. Monroe/ So that currently as it stands would be not.... completely imbalanced in either direction. I think it's, you know, maybe five and two, something like that. Mims/ Okay. I mean I think that's, I think it's important starting out to have a core group of people who've been involved and really have an understanding of where we're at after this two years, and then as we move forward, moving it more towards that gender balance, if it isn't at the beginning. (several talking) Throgmorton/ Okay, let's move on to the next recommendation. So the fourth was city residency is preferred, but members are not required to be Iowa City residents as long as they are residents of Johnson County and meet the requirements set forth in paragraph two, wha... whatever that is. So, hmm, I think .... I think .... well, go ahead, Maz! Salih/ No, go ahead! Throgmorton/ I was just gonna say I think members from the general public should be Iowa City residents, but I guess that doesn't fit with this ... what we, our discussion now. So I .... I .... I think they oughta be Iowa City residents. It's true for almost every other commission (several talking) Salih/ ...for the Mediacom, for the Mid American Energy and University (several talking) have to say that. Yeah. Maybe for the rest of the commission yes. Cole/ Do we have any other commissions where non -Iowa City residents serve? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 15 Dilkes/ Uh, CPRB I believe can have a .... if, can have a non-resident. Throgmorton/ Yeah, with the Board of Appeals or something like that. Dilkes/ No, I don't (both talking) Throgmorton/ ...or board? Dilkes/ I don't think so. CPRB's the only one that's coming to mind. I think .... I don't know what the residency is of the current members, um, so we .... we should, we'd have to look at that issue. Throgmorton/ John or Matt, do either of you know the answer to that? Krieger/ I can't recall everyone on the commission, but there is at least one. So.... Throgmorton/ Who is not a resident or is a resident? Krieger/ Correct! Not a resident. Throgmorton/ Well whatda y'all prefer to do? Dilkes/ I think the reason, perhaps it's obvious that residency was exp... expanded here was because of the need or the desire perhaps to have certain expertise on the commission.;;; you might not find in Iowa City. Taylor/ Would .... would we be able to grandfather this one person in then if they were a previous member and we're saying previous commission members (several talking) that would be acceptable. Salih/ Or just limited number, one number or so for the outside Iowa City. But Johnson County. Monroe/ I think I can expand on Eleanor's comment as well. Um, it is kind of a representation of whatever, uh, skills and expertise this person could bring to us, if they live .... if they live in Johnson County but run a business or own a business that is conducted primarily in Iowa City, and they're concerned about whatever it is that happens here, I think it's addressing those kinds of. ... scenarios. If there's an emeritus professor, if there's a whatever the case may be, that .... that could fall into that category, I think that was the thought. Mims/ Given .... given the kind of expertise that we're looking for for probably the bulk of the people on here, I'm comfortable to have it written that city residency is preferred. Typically I would be exactly where you are, Jim, that if it's going to be a city commission it should be a city resident, but we're asking here for a number of these positions, um, to have some pretty specific expertise, and I think that's something that as a Council now This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 16 and going forward can be looked at, you know, that balance of residents versus non- residents, business in the community. Maybe they don't live in the community but they work in the community. They have key set of knowledge that would be really beneficial, I ... I think the Council could look at that. So I'm .... I mean my initial reaction was the same as yours. I had it marked in my text here, but given that it's written that it's preferred but we could look beyond that if we felt we needed to, I'm .... I'm comfortable with that. Cole/ Well especially too, I think eventually, even though this would be maybe way off into the future, who knows. Maybe at some point this could morph into a regional commission. We don't know. That's beyond the charter of what we're doing now. But obviously, um, greenhouse gas reduction is .... is something that does cross city lines, and it is something that we are going to need regional buy -in. So I think to the extent that we have that expertise beyond our borders. Um, normally I would be opposed to that. I think we do need to have the Iowa City buy -in, um, but it really is. It's .... it's a .... it's a regional problem, um, so I think this could at least give us, and to your point, Susan, the expertise. Um, we don't wanna close people off who wanna serve, um, so I like the preferred concept, uh, subject to the qualifications. Taylor/ I do like that wording also, preferred. I'm more comfortable with it. I ... I agree, Jim, it... nice to have it, uh, say Iowa City required, but since it says preferred, not required, then I'm okay with that. Teague/ I would ditto everything everyone has said. So... Throgmorton/ Okay, I think y'all got clear guidance on that. The next item is, uh, has to do with the terms. So member terms shall be three years, with a two year two term limit, and the initial term shall be staggered in length, with three members appointed for ...well, with.... yeah, not three members but.... some, urn ..... (both talking) Mims/ ...be adjusted, because (both talking) four and three. Throgmorton/ (both talking) Yeah. Yeah, so ... you can figure that out. I think, uh, would y'all agree that we should stagger the initial appointments (several responding) Three year terms, you'd agree with that? (several responding) No, uh, no more than two consecutive terms. All right. Um, another part of that recommendation from the staff is that the representatives from Mid American and the University will govern their own appointments and not be subject to term limits. Mims/ I would agree. (several responding) Throgmorton/ Okay! Got that. (several talking in background) All right, the next part is the commission may form working groups and/or sub -committees on specific topics and issues to achieve substantive proje... progress on action areas of the climate action and adaptation plan. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 17 Mims/ Yes! Throgmorton/ (several responding) Yes. (mumbled) disagreement with that. Okay. Seventh, the climate action shall basically do the following: advise the City Council on climate issues; research and analyze and promote climate actions with particular attention to equity; educate and engage with the public on climate action and the City's climate and sustainability goals; assist City staff, City Council, and members of the community with implementing approved initiatives that support the City's climate and sustainability goals, including the climate action and adaptation plan, and any related or updated plan thereafter; and then .... I'm not sure what's going on with the last recommendation. There seems to be a typo of some kind, cause there are like two D's. So the (both talking) the ....the last part, recommend that Council updates the action plan. That... that's not supposed to be in there, right? Mims/ Yeah, it would be E. Monroe/ It's separate. So (both talking) Throgmorton/ Separate, should be E? Monroe/ Correct. Throgmorton/ Okay, so E, recommend to City Council updates to the climate action and adaptation plan. Okay, do those sound like.....a....... a good set of tasks for our admirable commissioners? (laughs) Salih/ Uh huh! Throgmorton/ Okay. Very good! And the last is the committee, or commission, shall adopt bylaws which it deems necessary and advisable for the conduct of the business of the commission. All right, I'm seeing a lot of nodding heads. Dilkes/ And just as a reminder, those go to the Rules Committee of Council and then come to the Council for approval. Throgmorton/ Right, and we do have a Rules Committee, don't we? (several talking) I don't remember who's on it (laughter) Couple of you are the Rules Committee! (several talking and laughing) Mims/ Would I be correct that staff would kind of give them a draft set of bylaws to start with? Okay. Thank you. Salih/ Okay. Throgmorton/ All right, very good! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 18 Salih/ I just wanna ask, what the kind of staff support would be available for the commission? Fruin/ Well, um, right now it would be through either the City Manager's office or through Brenda Nations. Um, in November we need to deliver our 100 -day report to you and that will outline our plan for a new staff position that would probably be thrown in that mix too and support the commission. So, still workin' the details out on that, but, uh, I don't think that'll be an issue. Salih/ Great! Throgmorton/ All right, does any other Council Member wanna mention anything else on this topic? Cole/ Jim, I think one of the commissioners (both talking) Throgmorton/ John? Come on up! Fraser/ Appreciate very much, um, the discussion tonight. One thing I'd like to volunteer that we have discussed at great length, and I, uh, represent this. Um, I'm an old white guy, and I had some questions to my fellow, uh, committee members about whether I should hang in there, which I would prefer to do, or make room for, uh, more diversity. I was very concerned about that, and didn't wanna leave, but what I warm stress is we all agree that we really need to work on the diversity, and the working groups that we're going to be putting together will reflect that. We're very, very conscious of the fact, equity and diversity are really, really important, and I just want everyone to understand that we are thinking in those terms. That's key. We also had a lot of discussions about whether we wanted a commission or wanted to remain flexible, if you will, in the roles that we were in, and I think we all agree that we kinda like this, uh.... accountability partner philosophy and I'm not here to suggest how we operate, but we wanna be held accountable. Uh, we like the credibility that we'll have with the public, being commissioners rather than volunteers, and uh, we're ready to dig in and work really hard on this, and I just want that to be communicated. Accountability, hold us accountable! I won't mention that we'll hold you accountable. (laughter) That's a given. Thank you very much. Really appreciate it. Mims/ Just remember, you're still a volunteer commission. There's no pay! (laughter) Fraser/ I thought I was getting paid! (laughter) Throgmorton/ (several talking and laughing) ...paid big bucks! Thanks, John. So on the first point that John mentioned, I'd like to note that the resi... the recommendations that came from the staff also said that the commission would have the ability to draw upon other people who are not members of the commission to help with these working groups and sub -committees, or not sub -committees, but working groups that would be helping the commission. So they can draw from all sorts of people from outside. Okay! Bravo! All This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 19 right, I think we can move on to our third item, which is a presentation on bike lanes for South Dodge and South Governor. I was right, it's Kent Ralston! Hi, Kent. Presentation on Bike Lanes for Dodge/Governor: Ralston/ Good evening! Good evening, uh, Kent Ralston, Transportation Planner. Uh, thank you for allowing me the time to discuss the Dodge Street and Governor Street bike lanes, uh, with you this evening. Uh, I wanted to first just quick provide some background and information on the project, just so we're all aware of what's occurring and then move from there. Uh, as you all know, the bike master plan was adopted back in 2017 and identifies both Dodge and Governor Streets, between Burlington and Bowery, as candidates for dedicated bike lanes. Uh, staff did hold a neighborhood meeting, um, on August 7th to discuss the merits of the project. Uh, the meeting was very well attended. Uh, I estimate maybe 75 to 80 participants. Uh, so many so that we filled this room and actually had to use the Dale Helling conference room as well. Uh, the crux of the project is that approximately 40 on -street parking spaces are contemplated to be removed, uh, on each corridor, depending on how the project goes. Um, we actually split into two groups at our August 7th meeting. Uh, one group was residents, because we had so many we had to break up anyway. Uh, we had one group in here that was for essentially the residents of Dodge and Governor, and then we had another groups for folks that were just interested in bike lanes but maybe didn't reside on one of those two corridors. Uh, I will say, uh, just before we get started that there wasn't a lot of opposition to the removal of parking on Dodge Street. There were a few, certainly, uh, but when we discussed removing parking on Governor Street there was a vast majority of participants that did not want to remove parking. So just keep that in mind as we ... we move forward. Mims/ But can I interrupt you and just ask the question.... how many of those buildings on South Dodge between Burlington and Bowery are rental and primarily student housing, where they may very well have been out of town in August and were just not ... been aware of the meetings. Ralston/ Right. Uh, good question. I don't know the .... I don't know the answer, but I do know that when we reverted Governor Street, south of Burlington, back to two-way years ago, we had done some research and of all of those, uh, units, I think if it wasn't 100% rental, it was close. There might have been a few owner occupieds then and I assume it's the same now. Uh, I will say that we did mail letters to the property owners as well as the residents. So if the residents weren't here, the prop .... I ..... I would assume that the property owners would speak for them, if. ... they needed the off-street parking, because essentially if they don't have the parking, they might not be able to over -occupy unit, they might not be able to make as much money on their unit. So that was sort of my logic behind that. Uh, the reason for doing it when we did was just keep the project moving. Mims/ (mumbled) Thank you. Throgmorton/ Kent, following up on that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 20 Ralston/ Uh huh. Throgmorton/ If I understood correctly, you said that on South Dodge as well as South Governor there are roughly 40 parking spaces on -street? Ralston/ On each corridor, correct. Throgmorton/ Yeah. So do you have any sense about how, what the vacancy rate turns out to be throughout the day? Ralston/ We don't know throughout.... well, we .... we don't know for sure because they're not marked spaces. So we estimate that there's about 40 spaces that would be removed, right? There's no actual meters or .... or parking stalls that are delineated. So we estimate 40 stalls on each street. Uh, we did a morning, noon, and night observation on a couple different days, and I would say it's mostly full, most of the time. So .... I'm gonna say 80 to 90% occupied at all times, and I think you'll see that pretty much any time you .... you travel those corridors. Little less maybe so for Governor, uh, but certainly Dodge is pretty much bumper -to -bumper. Throgmorton/ Okay. Thanks! Ralston/ Certainly! Uh, somethin' else to keep in mind that came up at the public meeting quite a bit and has come up, uh, throughout the conversation is that on -street parking has to be maintained for Bethel AME Church and that came through a special exception that was granted when they did the addition to their building, uh, a number of years ago. Um, so it's something like 12 or 13 on -street spaces have to be maintained for them. So that's something that we .... we just all need to keep in mind, uh, as we go through the project. And then lastly there was a memo in your info packet, uh, from last week, uh, outlining again some of this background, and then we provided six potential options that were discussed either at the public meeting, uh, and then certainly by staff, uh, subsequent to the public meeting. So just to orient yourselves a little bit, um, with the project location. Uh, this map comes directly out of the bike master plan. Uh, it's a little bit hard to read, but what I wanna point out is that the area .... if I can find my cursor here .... in red is the project location area (mumbled) all familiar with I'm sure, uh, but just to .... to kind of point out a few other things in context. Uh, this would be Dodge Street coming in and .... and ending or terminating at Kirkwood, and then of course this is, uh, Governor Street here. Uh, Burlington on this map would run right north of the project location area. Uh, there's a number of related projects that I wanna bring to your attention too that .... that sort of, um, are, well, they're directly related to this project. Uh, one is that there are existing bike lanes on Governor Street now, buffered bike lanes, north of Burlington that I'm sure you've all seen. Um, there are also planned buffered bike lanes for Dodge, essentially from Prairie du Chien at the north end of town, uh, again all the way to Burlington Street, to match what we did on Governor. Uh, we're hopeful that that will happen yet this fall, but it sort of depends on how .... how this conversation goes. Uh, there's also a four to three -lane conversion, so this'd be similar to what we've done now on Mormon Trek, Clinton, and First Avenue in Iowa City. Uh, there's a four to three -lane This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 21 conversion on this section here of Dodge Street that we'd also like to complete this fall, if possible, and again depends on how .... how that conversation goes. That would include bike lanes as well. So.... Mims/ So that's from Bowery down to Kirkwood. Ralston/ Correct. Mims/ Okay. Ralston/ So if. ... if we were to add a bike lane on Dodge Street, we would essentially have a continuous, uh, bike lane all the way from North Dodge all the way to the terminus of Dodge Street at Kirkwood. Throgmorton/ So from a bicycling point of view, Kent, you're saying that these segments are crucial for north/south connection... for bicyclists. Ralston/ They are. They are, and .... and they're a little bit different. The southbound connection's a little bit different because Governor of course terminates north of the tracks, um, but we can kind of get into that a little bit later too. I've got some information to share. Uh, the last thing I warm share that's a sort of related project is I think regardless of. ... if we added a bike lane to this section of Dodge, we would like to, uh, revert that section of Dodge back to two-way traffic, just like we did on Governor Street years ago. Um, it was intended to be done years ago when we actually reverted Governor Street back, but there was a little bit of worry with the First Avenue grade separation project that we actually needed that southbound movement. So it sortof just sat on the back burner, um, but we would like to do that regardless, and that actually would not of really affect .... it really has no affect on the bike project, so to speak. It's just something we would also like to clean up at the same time as the four to three -lane conversion, at the same time as the .... the bike lanes north of Burlington. So all these interconnected projects. Uh, in case you haven't seen'em in a while, I just wanted to show you what these corridors actually look like. Uh, Governor Street's obviously on the left, Dodge Street's on the right. Um, they are both 31 -feet wide and the reason why we, sort of the crux of the projects is removing parking, which was in the bike master plan, is because in 31 -feet wide you can't have, uh, very .... you can't accommodate a .... a parking lane, two through travel lanes, and a bike lane. There just isn't enough, uh, pavement width between the curbs. Uh, as far as options for discussion, uh, these were in your memo in the info packet, but I wanted to quickly, uh, discuss each of them tonight as well. Um, and again, each of these were discussed, uh, at the public meetings and subsequently by ....by staff. Uh, the first is to eliminate on -street parking and implement buffered bike lanes on each corridor, which is, uh, represented in the bike master plan. Uh, the second option would be to only eliminate parking on Dodge Street, uh, but add .... and then add the buffered, or the, uh, bike lane, excuse me, but then add, uh, pavement markings and signage on Governor Street, and I'll touch base on that a little bit later. Uh, the third is to reduce each corridor to one travel lane and implement buffered bike lanes, which could retain parking. So this is a little bit, uh, different. This isn't something we have in Iowa This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 22 City, but if you took .... if you only had one travel lane in each direction, then you could retain the parking and have a .... a bike lane. Um, number four is widen each corridor and implement bike lanes and retain parking. So if we widen the corridors from 31 -feet, we could of course accommodate then a parking lane and ... and bike lanes, as well as the travel lanes. Uh, number five is something we've not done in Iowa City, but it's done elsewhere in the country, is providing a shared parking/bike lane on both corridors. This'd be where you have a bike lane during a certain part of the day, and then you allow parking in that same space, uh, during the evenings and on weekends, that sort of thing. Uh, and then the sixth option is sort of the no -build solution, which is essentially to retain the current configuration and not eliminate the parking. So quickly, uh, I just wanted to run through each one of these. Uh, number one is to eliminate the on -street parking and implement buffered bike lanes on each corridor. Uh, I say here that it fulfills the bike master plan to the full extent, which ... which it would. Uh, it obviously provides continuity and existing and planned north/south facilities, which we sort of already discussed. Um, it would .... and image here on the right is actually the buffered bike lane, uh, that was implemented this summer on Governor Street, north of Burlington. So that would be essentially what we would be looking at implementing on both Dodge and Governor Streets. Um, this would require the removal of 40 parking stalls, approximately 40 parking stalls, on each corridor, like we already discussed. Um, it would I think create hardships for neighborhood residents, uh, with limited off-street parking availability. I think that's, uh, certain probably more so, um, on Governor, but certainly on Dodge as well. I can touch base on that in a minute. Uh, and it would require accommodations for the church as we've .... we've already discussed. Uh, the second is to, uh, eliminate on -street parking and implement the buffered bike lane on Doge and just use pavement markings and signage on Governor. Uh, I say here that it would fulfill a portion of the goals of the bike master plan, because it's obviously a sort of hybrid approach. Um, it would allow a continuous southbound bike lane pretty much from Prairie du Chien all the way to Kirkwood, uh, with those related projects that we already talked about. Um, it would then of course provide shared lane arrow markings and bike signage on Governor. That would essentially, uh, provide at least some help to bicyclists as they move for .... as they move northbound, uh, across Burlington and they get in the buffered bike lane. Uh, again this would re .... re, this would require removal of approximately 40 on -street spaces on Dodge, but retain the parking on Governor. Um, it ..... I think instead of saying could create hardships, I think it would create hardships for, uh, Dodge Street residents, um, but again I think it would impact, uh, those folks on Dodge less than it would Governor, uh, and I've got some.... some slides I'd like to show you here in a minute. And then I say that Dodge is arguably the more important corridor. Uh, it has twice the daily traffic volumes as does, uh, Governor Street at this point in time. Um, and it also provides access south of the tracks, which Governor doesn't. So you've got Summit on one side that provides access south of tracks, and you've got Dodge, but Governor of course terminates at, uh, just south of Bowery. Uh, the third option is to reduce each corridor to one travel lane and implement buffered bike lanes, uh, while retaining parking. Uh, the image here I believe is from, I think it's from Burlington, Vermont. Uh, whether or not we would use bollards is to be debated, uh, but that's essentially what it would look like. You'd have a....a travel lane, one through travel lane, uh, parking, and then of course you'd have the bike lane as well. Uh, I say that it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 23 would fulfill the goals of the bike master plan because it would, uh, it provides the continuity for north/south on -street facilities, uh, it maintains parking on each corridor, which, um, which is certainly the crux of the project. Uh, it would re .... necessarily revert Governor back to a northbound, just one single northbound, uh, through lane. So years ago it was two northbound through lanes and we changed that to a two-way corridor, and this would of course turn it back into a one -lane, uh, street, because you'd have Dodge Street one -lane southbound and then Governor one -lane northbound. So it sort of flip- flops, uh, what we had previously done in that neighborhood. Cole/ Kent, could you comment on the impact on speed, I mean the whole critique of the one lane (mumbled) have two lanes one way, there was a real increase in speed. What's the research show with one lane? Ralston/ I honestly don't know. I ..... I suspect that, urn .... I don't know, to be honest. I really don't. I don't know that this is .... this isn't used in .... in.....very often, I would think or very extensively. Um, we could do the research on it. I .... it probably wouldn't have a huge effect. I think it would be close to what it is today probably, but I don't know that for certain. Um .... and then the, uh, the last thing I said was it would require further traffic engineering analysis, primarily on how to connect these at the north and south terminus. So, you know, you've got two lanes, Dodge Street coming southbound at Burlington, two lanes northbound, and then at Bowery you've got the same issue, where we'd have to work on how exactly, uh, get the lanes to line up appropriately and that sort of thing. It's obviously not been designed yet. Uh, four is to, uh, the fourth option is to widen each corridor and implement bike lanes, uh, while retaining parking. Uh, it would obviously fulfill the goals of the bike master plan. Uh, it provides that north/south continuity. Uh, however, it would require a capital improvements project, uh, a real rough ballpark cost estimate, uh, that the engineering group put together is about $400,000 for, uh, that includes both corridors, but again that's really ballpark. It's not been .... it's not been designed. Could be more. Could be less. Um.... Mims/ I'm gonna assume there'd be a lot of trees we would lose too. Thomas/ (mumbled) was related to my question is how .... how wi.... how much wider are we talking? Ralston/ So, uh, that's a good question. It would be 34 feet minimum, but probably 36 feet would be what we would want, if there's the room available. Yeah. (both talking) ....34 would be the absolute minimum, because I think you've only got 33 foot between the curbs then. We always measure back-to-back. Um, probably 36 feet would be what we would want, and I say that especially on .... Dodge, because it's a transit route and I'm guessing even through the new transit study that's being worked on now, I would guess that it remains a transit route. Uh, Governor is not, probably wouldn't be again because it doesn't have the, uh, continuity north to south. So I don't know for certain, but I would say 36 is what we would shoot for and, uh, I .... I honestly don't know how many trees would be removed and that sort of thing yet, but it would certainly have some impact. Uh, and then the last thing obviously just requires further traffic engineering analysis This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 24 because, uh, we haven't designed it and... for all those things I just mentioned. Uh, the fifth is what I mentioned earlier, um, this option's not been used in Iowa City but has been used elsewhere in the United States, is to provide a shared parkingibike lane. Uh, and we can do this on both corridors. Uh, I say fulfills a portion of the goals of the bike master plan, because it would sort of (mumbled) for certain period of the day. Uh, it does provide some continuity north/south. Um, it would provide a painted, dedicated area that could be used for bikes during what I would say is the busiest commuting hours, maybe between 8:00 and 5:00, and it would allow for on -street parking in the evenings and on weekends, um, similar to other locations where we have parking issues in town, where we have, uh, restrictions between Monday through Friday to 5:00. Um, would obviously require some on -street accommodations for the Bethel Church, um, and I had mentioned we had not used this in Iowa City, but it is used elsewhere. And then last is sort of the no -build solution, where we essentially would mark both corridors with, um, Iowa City bikeway signage and, uh, on -street pavement markings. Uh, you .... you may have noticed we've started to use this .... this blue sign actually will be popping up throughout town. This is sort of the new signage we're using when we don't have space for on -street accommodations, uh, for those locations that are in the bike master plan. So these are sort of what we're calling the Iowa City bikeway, and these will typically be used with directional signage, um, that you've seen around town, giving the distance and time to places. So we would, this is sort of the no -build solution, like I said, but we would be able to provide some accommodation. Uh, it just leaves that gap, uh, between, especially on Dodge Street, between Burlington and Bowery. Uh, we .... after the public meeting, uh, and after meeting with, uh, staff from Public Works, Engineering, and the City Manager's office, uh, we do think option two is probably our best foot forward at this time, and that's to eliminate the parking and implement the buffered bike lane on Dodge, uh, but this .... then provide the pavement markings and the signage for Governor. Um, we say that for a few reasons. Uh, again I think the southbound.... Dodge bike lane provides a lot more continuity than the Governor would, and I've got a slide to show you in a minute. Um, it would .... and then we'd provide some accommodation on Governor. Um, we would require the removal of approximately 40 on -street spaces on Dodge, which is .... which is gonna create some heartburn for some folks. Uh, however, I would argue that removing parking on Dodge is again not as important as, uh, there is not quite a big a deal as removing parking on Governor Street. Um, Dodge has paved alleys with more off-street parking than does Governor Street, and these are a few slides that show sort of the difference between the two, if you're not familiar. Uh, these are the Dodge Street alleys, uh, both looking south. So on either side of Dodge Street there's an alley that accesses essentially all the properties, uh, they're both paved, and there's just gobs of parking back there, primarily because they're multi -family buildings and they need a lot of parking. Uh, this is what the alleys on either side of Governor Street look like, looking south. So it's almost, I mean they're sort of a night and day difference between what the two look like, um, Governor Street's obviously more single-family homes, uh, whether they're owner occupied or rental I couldn't say for sure, um, but parking is much more difficult and in sections I would say that they're gravel at best, uh, almost dirt in some sections. Uh, there's also some topography, some vertical topography in there, so I think in the winter it would be, uh, difficult, and that's what we heard from the public during the meeting. Uh, a few more things. I mentioned Dodge I think is arguably more This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 25 important travel corridor. Uh, this image is just sort of try and show, um, what I mean by that, and when you look at actual connectivity, we all .... the red is the railroad tracks, uh, this is Burlington Street, you can see, and this is Kirkwood. Um, I mean again you've got this continuity on Dodge Street that runs all the way to Kirkwood, and we can provide that .... that bike lane, I think, if we remove the on -street parking, which is what we're recommending. Uh, really if you're coming from the east side, or even the south of Kirkwood, most .... most folks are probably going to use Summit Street, and once you get to Bowery if you're northbound, it's sort of six of one, half dozen of the other whether you stay on Summit Street or whether you cut over and use Governor Street. The .... the whole idea behind the bike master plan, recommending bike lanes on both Dodge and Governor, is because we've kind of got this one-way loop that we've always had, and we would just of course have that one southbound bike lane and then one northbound, uh, bike lane is sort of the idea. So that's where that comes from, but arguably I think Summit probably provides better connectivity. So that's sort of the impetus for where, uh, where staffs coming from with our recommendation. Uh, I would .... the.....the ADT, the average daily traffic on Governor Street, I'd mentioned is twice as much. The average daily traffic on Governor is 2,400 a day and on Dodge it's about 4,800 a day. So almost exactly twice the amount of traffic. Uh, again, probably more important to have bike lanes where there's more traffic, where you can actually feel a little bit safer, have some protected area, where on Governor at 2,400 vehicles a day, you're going to feel a little bit safer as it stands today. Cole/ What about speeds on those respective streets? I ... I think the two-way has been great for Governor. Ralston/ Yeah, it....it has. Then we did a follow-up study after we reverted it back to two-way, so this has been a number of years ago. I think it shaved off a few mile -an -hour, not as much as we would have liked it to. Um, I think it was as much to do with neighborhood feel, to be honest, and feel like you're less on a highway. Um .... but the....there was a slight reduction, is my recollection. Mims/ When you talk about the, uh, average daily traffic, one of the recommendations in here was to go to one lane of traffic on each of the streets. So looking at just Dodge, not Governor, um .... is going to one lane of traffic with the count of 4,800, is that a feasible, reasonable way to go? Ralston/ Yeah, I think it is. I mean we would certainly want to look into that, given that direction, but I think it would be sort of mid -block. What we would need to look at is the intersections how to ... how to connect those with the roadway north and south, because they're gonna be so much different. You've .... you would, if we move forward with the road diet south of Bowery, we'd have a three -lane section, uh, you know, that you'd be... that you'd have to, uh, essentially line up with, and then north of Burlington you've got the two. So you've got two to one to three. So it's just a matter of how those line up, uh, but I think in capacity terms, yeah, I think there's enough capacity there. Mims/ Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 26 Ralston/ To be determined, but I think that's my inclination. Thomas/ Do we know on Governor, it's, uh, you were saying 2,400 vehicles a day. Ralston/ Uh huh, correct. Thomas/ Do we know .... you know, is it equally north and south, split 50/50 or what ... what's the split? Ralston/ Yeah, the split when we did that study years ago after we reverted it was certainly more northbound. Uh, I think again because you can only continue northbound north of Burlington, and had been that way for as long as I can remember, a northbound one-way. So I think that's sort of folk's natural inclination is to do that, um, but I don't know the split, but I certainly was weighted more heavily northbound than southbound. And I... and I assume it's still that way today. I'm almost certain it is. Thomas/ So one potential benefit of. ... of eliminating the southbound lane, going to one-way one lane only on Governor would be a reduction in the southbound traffic. You wouldn't have that. But we don't know what its number is. Ralston/ True. Yeah. I'm almost certain it's less than the northbound, but I don't know what the exact split is. We would look into that, certainly. Teague/ Where are the alley pictures? Um, on Dodge Street? I'm assumin' that you're showing where the apartments are, and not like the single-family homes, as well as duplexes. Ralston/ Right. Teague/ Because .... I would assume that they don't have as much parking at those sites. Ralston/ Yeah. I think that's true, um, primarily the single-family homes have been split up in such a way now that most of them have .... uh.....most of them have, I would say, adequate parking. I don't know that that's true, but they have more than a few spaces, most of them, and what you'll see, if you drive through those alleys, is that there's a lot of, uh, impromptu parking, and I think, you know, we could see a little bit more of that with a reduction in on -street parking on Dodge, but you have to remember too that, um, Dodge Street's really two blocks. You know, it .... there's no inter.... inter -bisecting street. Really we're talking about two long city blocks. So really we're only talking about removing 20 spaces over the, you know, in one block, and 20 spaces in one block essentially, um, doesn't sound quite as bad when you look at it that way. But if you do drive down the alley, um, even for the single-family homes that are left, I .... I think they have adequate parking. It seems like they almost have more parking than they probably need. Um, which may be over -occupancy or other issues, but.... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 27 Throgmorton/ Well y'all might have more questions for Kent, but for now, what I would suggest we do is focus our attention on South Governor first in terms of figuring out what to do. Uh, bec... the two segments, South Governor and South Dodge, are just different. So .... we could focus on South Governor, see what .... what we get to and then assuming (laughs) we are able to come to a decision about it, turn to South Dodge. Okay? All right, so uh, what does..... anybody wanna start off on South Governor? Mims/ Sure! For me on South Governor, um, I'm not in favor of getting rid of the parking. I think the residents along there were very, very strongly outspoken about the .... the problems that that would cause them in terms of, you know, the condition of those alleys, the, you know, coming down from .... on steep onto the street, the lack of parking, sometimes in cases of elderly, uh, individuals and .... and those kind of issues. So I'm not, um, in support of removing the parking on Governor. I'm open to whether we just do the shared markings or whether we eliminate the southbound lane and make it one bla... one lane of traffic and a dedicated bike lane. I .... I'm really open to either one of those. I guess my strongest point is I don't think we can, um, eliminate that parking. I think it's gonna cause a lot of hardship to a lot of residents along there. Taylor/ I agree. We've heard over and over again that parking is such a premium in the community, and especially those areas close to downtown, and 40 spaces is quite a few, uh, to be eliminating. So, uh, I would be in favor of leaving the parking on Governor. Throgmorton/ My inclination is to agree that we should not get rid of that parking, for all sorts of reasons that y'all articulated, but I think we need to have a dedicated bike lane, sharrows are inadequate from a bicyclist point of view. They're just inadequate. So, can.....can we come up with something that accomplishes both? So.... Mims/ Yeah, get rid of the southbound lane. Throgmorton/ Get rid of the southbound lane. So, you know (both talking) Thomas/ I'm okay with that. Uh.... you know it does seem .... what I tend on both streets to wanna give priority to is parking (laughs) and the bike lane, uh, and if. ... if we .... if we need to adjust on travel lanes, to me that's a less.... assuming as Kent said terms of traffic volume we're okay, um....then it seems to me we can.....you know, we can go with closing down one of the traffic lanes and allowing dedicated parking (both talking) Throgmorton/ ....definitely true with regard to Governor. I'm not sure it's true with regard to Dodge. Cole/ I don't recall (several talking) Oh, go ahead! Throgmorton/ Maz? Salih/ Okay. Yeah, I'm also not in favor of like taking the parking away, or eliminating it. You know for me like option two and three is really good, providing shared lane arrow, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 28 pavement marking on Governor Street, and also implementing a buffered bike lane. You know (mumbled) is really good. Either one! Cole/ I don't remember, did we talk about .... so often one lanes are paired. Did we .... did we discuss doing a one lane on South Governor and then doing a two-lane on Dodge, I mean was that .... was that one of the options there or....or not? Ralston/ No, it would actually be .... because of the same width, it would be taking each corridor down to one lane, if you're retaining parking on both Dodge and Governor. So .... so if... if we want a parking lane, a bike lane, and a travel lane, it would (both talking) travel lane on both, correct (both talking) Uh, Dodge'd be southbound, uh, for obvious reasons, and then north, uh, would be on Governor. Salih/ And that's number three, right? Ralston/ Correct. Cole/ Okay. Cause we were just sort of breaking it down into pieces and I didn't know... and we'd have a separate discussion on south of Dodge, so that makes sense. Thomas/ One question I had on that scenario, Kent, is we haven't really talked about .... well you did show a photo from Burlington, Vermont, on what that might look like, but .... what about the possibility of using the parking lane between the bike lane and the travel lane. So it would serve as a buffer. Ralston/ Yeah (clears throat) that's certainly an option, that's something we'd look into. Um... you know, the issue you might have, and I don't know if this would happen or not, is if you have one vehicle pulls to the curb, and all the other vehicles do what they would be intended to do in that case, you have no place to go as a bicyclist, cause you essentially get trapped between the .... the buffered .... the buffer in that case would be the vehicles, is that correct, Geoff? So if the .... if the buffer's the vehicles and someone doesn't do what they're supposed to do and parks at the curb, you essentially hit a .... a dead-end, and I don't know how, um, frequent that would happen, but that would be one drawback of that solution. Throgmorton/ Yeah and we don't have any bike lanes like that right now. So people are not used to looking out their back right for a bicyclist. Ralston/ Right, and the nice thing about the separation is you don't have any dooring issues. Now the doors would be the passenger doors, which aren't as frequently as the driver door, but you'd still, you know, you do rid of the dooring issue that way. Um, the only thing I would mention with those two that I didn't mention, uh, before is for deliveries. So in a situation like this, for deliveries you're certainly going to have, um, UPS trucks, postal service trucks, that sort of thing, parked in the bike lane at certain points in time, which is .... which is no different than Clinton Street right now and some other things that we're trying to work through. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 29 Cole/ Could we put those five options back on, Kent? So .... (mumbled) quick with a question. So staffs sense that it's more important to have that access to the south, as opposed to ... to the north because there are other northbound travel lanes like Summit, like even Governor as it is, with the two lane, that it's not as important to go north as opposed to south, because of the connectivity issues. Ralston/ Correct. Cole/ Okay. So my position is going to be that I actually do support staffs view on two, uh, that we keep Governor as is and that as to South Dodge that we adopt essentially the, um, the buffered travel lane, um, as far as that goes. So I'm actually recommending travel two, and one of the things about this is that even with a lot of bike advocates have acknowledged, this is a really tough decision. Um, I do think though that if we are serious about our climate change, about our community health, and about our transportation equity, we really have to make sure we're facilitating connectivity for our cycling infrastructure. It is gonna cause some heartache, but I think I also wanna put the shoe on the other foot. What about the heartache for the cyclist that continually don't have the access that they need either. So, it is very difficult, but I would support the option two. 1 know you wanted to do one at a time, Jim, but I'm sort of having difficulty separating the two. I think two makes the most sense. Teague/ Can you put up the options again please? Wu/ One thing I would be interested in is, um, partially modifying staffs recommendation, um, get rid of the parking on Dodge, but um, on Governor Street have that shared parking/bike lane, instead of the sharrows, cause I .... I agree with Mayor Throgmorton. Shar ows don't really mean anything and um, for the signage, I think it might be interes.. might be of note to put in instead of share the road signs is to have those (mumbled) lane signage I've seen in Cedar Rapids, and it's, uh, been empirically shown to be more effective. And then another thing I would like to see is that if parking is removed on any of these streets that, uh, transit connectivity is improved. Uh, later hours for the buses, shorter headways. Um, as, you know, a way to offer, uh, meaningful alternatives to people who don't have space for their cars anymore. Throgmorton/ Well there's a lot of it already with the shuttle that serves that area (both talking) and (both talking) Wu/ One continual complaint is that free shuttle south stops running at 6:00 P.M., and most people obviously are, uh, awake past 6:00 P.M. (laughs) Teague/ So I think we're assumin' that the public comment from the, um, the neighbors of Governor Street were just speakin' about removin' of parking, but I think I .... I remember, um, these neighbors were very influential and wanted the two-way for Governor Street, and um, they worked really hard to get the two-way, um, and it worked! You know, they, um, they got it done, um, from some of the people that I've talked to, it actually slowed This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 30 down traffic, from their perspective. Of course they didn't do a study. And so I think we're assuming potentially, um, that it's only parkin' only that the residents might have been talking about. But they fought really hard to two ways. The other thing about Governor Street specifically is through the UniverCity program there's been, um, hundreds of, you know, thousands of dollars, um.....you know converting these rental properties to owner occupied properties within that community, and so, um, it has .... the neighborhood is more stable than, especially compared to Dodge, on some level and so ....it, I .... it is a challenge when you think about, you know, Governor Street goin' back to one lane, I .... I think I can live with that, um, but I do think that the residents fought really hard to make it a two lane, uh, so that it can have more of a residential feel, um.... Cole/ .....paying for the residents, I mean the whole thing with the two lane is that you get the friction, but not only that, for the residents there they would have to go all the way, you k now, to another block and then down and then up, I mean it is much more difficult for them. So that's why I wanna keep the two lane there. Um.... Teague/ Yeah. So I know that Summit Street, um, actually has a little, you know, pocket of where bikes share the roadway. Um, I'm not exactly sure where I wanna land on, um, on .... on Governor Street, but.....I'm almost thinkin' of, you know, just mixing with the traffic on a shared street, for the bikes, for Governor Street. As far as Dodge, um, I think definitely option number three, um, goin' to one lane, travel lane, and implement a buffered bike lane and retain parking would be appropriate. Um, that is already going to one-way, to convert Governor back. I'm not exactly sure, um.....so..... I think right now it's safe for Dodge Street option number three, and then for ...um, Governor Street .... I'm ....I'm gonna have to say just, um .... leave it as is and there'd be shared, um, shared streets with bike and, uh, traffic. Throgmorton/ So I'm a long-time bicyclist. I've been biking around here for at least 30 years. And I know that bicyclists learn to use .... all the streets that they can ride on safely. And if that means sharing the road with drivers, they do that. But that's not particularly safe. It's much better to have a dedicated lane for bicyclists on key roads, not .... not small roads that are not heavily traveled at all, but.....key.... key roads. So .... I think we definitely need a bike lane on Dodge (laughs) goin' south. Yeah, violating my own instructions (several talking and laughing) Yeah, but.... Cole/ And what about the revert to .... is that beyond the scope of tonight's discussion for Dodge, to revert to two-way? Is that beyond the scope? Cause I think at some point (both talking) about that, correct? Ralston/ Yeah, and actually, um, that was a good question. Un .... unless we can't revert it back, meaning we have a ... a southbound one way ...well, if we .... if we .... let me back up. If we were to use option three and reduce Dodge Street to one lane, obviously we couldn't revert back to two-way, but if. ... if that doesn't occur, that would be staffs .... i .... idea, would be to change that back to a two-way corridor. In fact, if we were to use staffs recommendation, that's what we would do, is change it back to a two-way street. So both Dodge and Governor, um, operate as they sort of were intended to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 31 Cole/ That's why I like two. I think it's the best of both worlds. We get the connectivity, plus we get .... honor the neighborhood on Governor, um, and I think the other thing too, even though Governor's a lot busier road, it does remind me of sort of like biking on College or something like that, where it's a two lane but it's, um, but it's something that it's relatively slow speeds that you feel pretty comfortable biking there, is my thought. Salih/ I just wanna ask you, when we have the, when you had the meeting with the residents, what their feeling about changing the street to one lane? Ralston/ Governor or Dodge? Salih/ I mean Governor. Ralston/ Governor, urn .... to be honest I don't know if I have a good sense for that, and I would worry that ... I would worry that they would not want that, you know it was an option that was thrown out, but with 80 or so people in the room, or rooms, we didn't, we weren't able to get everybody's opinion. Um, I would .... I would ..... I would hesitate to say if that's something the neighborhood would support or not. And that's why the staff did not support that option. Or I should say that wasn't staffs preferred option. Mims/ (mumbled) Wu/ I think from a student perspective, um, getting rid of the parking on Dodge shouldn't be a terribly big deal. Um, I .... I like the idea of keeping those two traffic lanes and the one like two-way street. Um, Dodge Street really kinda falls in like, on that boundary, like that 30 -minute radius of a walk to the Pentacrest where you could walk there within 30 minutes, just kinda on that like nice commuting edge. It'd be good for cycling. Um, and as mentioned earlier, the alley does provide large amounts of off-street parking. If we think of those like kind of stereo -typical like two and a half story split-levels from the 70s and 80s, like half the lot's building and half the lot's parking in the back, um, so I think it won't cause too much heartache, if the parking is removed there. Throgmorton/ We can quote you on that, right? (laughter) Wu/ Yes! Throgmorton/ So.... Ralston/ If I could I was going to say too that I think that's a little bit of staffs, um, part of staffs thinking is that for Dodge Street, if it's not 100% rental, it's 80 or 90% rental, um, I would say it's probably closer to 100%. And although we're sensitive to students and the students' needs, those students.....their leases will be up, you k now, typically next summer and they are asked to re, uh, re -up sometime in January typically and resign a lease. So, uh, it's a .... it's, we're sensitive to those needs, but certainly Governor Street would feel the effect more than Dodge Street, in....over the years. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 32 Throgmorton/ (several talking) Hold ... hold on. With regard to South Dodge Street, what I've been hearing is support for option number two, eliminate off .... on -street parking and implement a buffered bike lane. That's what I'm hearing. Am I wrong? Mims/ Not from me. I'm not .... I'm not comfortable eliminating that on -street parking. (several talking) Not without more specific (several talking) specifics. Yeah I mean I .... I .... I guess I wanted to finish Governor, but (laughs) we're not. Urn .... that's, that was one of the reasons I'd asked Kent about the traffic numbers on Dodge and if one lane could accommodate, because what I would be interested on Dodge is going to one lane, buffered bike lane, keep the parking. Urn ..... then in my non -traffic background, you come down Dodge Street to Burlington, and the right-hand lane is a mandatory right turn. The left lane, if it lines up right (laughs) you know, one of 'em's either mandatory left or mandatory right, and then the other one you can go straight. Um .... and then when you get to .... to Bowery, you probably still.....because you stop the parking, you could still probably get two lanes there to match up going through the intersection, across Bowery. Soto me it doesn't seem like that'd be too hard a job. So that would be my preference, is to keep the parking on Dodge, go to one lane, and go to a buffered bike lane. Teague/ I'm number three on Dodge as well. Um, I think when I look at the other streets, um, on Dodge that are not what we're talkin' about now, the ... the houses or the apartment buildin's don't actually face Dodge. There's actually very few, and so those streets that don't have on -street parking, that's not an issue, but for that street it's very different. The houses and the apartments do face the street, um, where would these, you know, right now it's 40 cars, where would .... we'll say now 30 cars go, when there isn't any parkin' on Bowery Street, not on Burlington Street. All the other side streets are pretty full already and so I'm gonna go with option .... my.....my choice is option number three for Dodge Street. Fruin/ One thing we haven't talked about, just to throw another wrinkle in there, um, if ...if time implementation time's important to you, um, just know that number three is not going to happen soon. It's going to take some engineering study. I .... I couldn't commit to us doin' it next year. Um, I would like to think we could do it next year, but um, we would have to engage the neighborhood more and there's some engineering that goes along with that. Uh, the .... the benefit with number two and .... and part of the reason we liked moving forward is cause we could .... we could stay on schedule with the implementation. The Dodge Street striping is already been awarded and while we can .... carry that over to next year, we could still get it done this year too. If time's important, you know (several talking) Thomas/ I came in thinking I was going to support.... we're speaking about Dodge now, three, but I am, urn ..... you k now, in hearing the conversation, and also learning for the first time that the idea of reverting Dodge to two-way, uh, I like the two-way concept because that helps with respect to speeds, you know, the two lanes currently one-way, I do think from a jockeying, but if it goes back to two-way and I tend to always prefer two-way to one - This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 33 way, if possible, and I'm not hearing a strong.... concern about the on -street parking on Dodge. Salih/ Do we, John, do we have two-way for .... there is an option two-way for Dodge? Thomas/ No ... well that's what staff brought (several talking in background) Salih/ Okay! I'm sorry. Ralston/ Yeah, unless.... unless we can't do that, I think that's our intent is to ... is to have Dodge Street go back to two-way, just like we did with Governor years ago. Salih/ Oh! Ralston/ And again, that was the intent years ago, um, we didn't do it for a number of reasons, cause there were some other projects going on, but that .... that is our plan, and that was actually part of the .... the plan we have now, uh, unless we can't do that. Salih/ If you ... if you did it the way (mumbled) parking and a bike lane and all this? Ralston/ If we ... if we go, um, no. So .... so we can't keep the parking on Dodge if we add a bike lane, as it is today. If we go back to two ... we would .... we would have to reduce it to one travel lane to be able to keep the parking and add a bike lane. Salih/ Okay. Ralston/ With the width as it is today. (several talking) Cole/ I mean one of the points that Geoff brings up a lot of times in our four to three conversion, although you wouldn't wanna instantly change it back, I mean if it is a disaster or causes major problems, you can always add the parking, right, I mean that's something that can happen. So we're not changing the infrastructure. We're just repainting the road, correct? Um, so I like two, so we can really move on our plan. Salih/ I can go with two. Throgmorton/ So how many people favor eliminating on -street parking and implementing a buffered bike lane only on Dodge Street, just to get that one out there. Cole/ I do ... I do two, two is what I support. Salih/ I support two too. Throgmorton/ You support that, right? Cole/ I support two. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 34 Throgmorton/ You support that too. Who ... who else? Anybody else? (several talking) I'm just talking about Dodge Street. Thomas/ As .... as I said, especially with reverting it to two-way traffic, I'm more supportive of two than I thought I would be. So yeah, two is acceptable. Taylor/ Also (both talking) Yeah. Throgmorton/ Well I think there's majority support for doing that for Dodge Street. Is staff clear about that notion? We're not gonna be able to time ... we won't have enough time to finish discussing Governor Street before the formal meeting. Mims/ We might. Salih/ We can .... it's easy! (laughs) Throgmorton/ Five minutes? Okay! Good luck. All right, so we'll find out! Okay, so would somebody propose a .... a solution to the Governor Street dilemma? Salih/ I would propose number two. Throgmorton/ Number two. Cole/ Me too. Throgmorton/ Provide pavement markings and signage on Governor Street, meaning sharrows. Salih/ Yes! Throgmorton/ Is that .... is that what you mean? Salih/ Uh huh. Throgmorton/ Is that what you mean? Cole/ I'm talking Austin's solution on occupy the lane for two. So if. ... if we had the occupy the lane as opposed to, or bikes may use the full lane. You know what I'm talking about, the sign? (several talking) Is it sharrows? It's not really sharrows. (several talking) Wu/ I would be interested in five on Governor Street. I've seen it done in Vancouver, Canada, pretty well, but it would maintain the parking for the church, and allow .... (mumbled) thinking also on Highland, um, there's that shoulder that bikes can use but cars can park on it as well, but .... I don't know. Throgmorton/ What do you have to say, Kent? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 35 Ralston/ I was gonna say we .... we currently are using the bikes may use full lane signs because we've got a few, um, details, some wrinkles I guess with our code that don't allow them now, but they are (mumbled) approved and I think that's somethin' we could work through, certainly. Mims/ I .... I agree with that, particularly because we also have Summit as an option. Cole/ Yeah, it's not as critical. Mims/ Yeah, I think you have a couple of different options. There's also not as much traffic on Governor as there is on Dodge, according to Kent, about half as much, and some of that's northbound and some of it's southbound, so you've actually got even less than half when you talk about just in that .... just in that northbound lane. So .... while it's not ideal, I agree with you, Jim, it's not ideal for the bicyclists. I think given the .... the critical need for, um, that was expressed by the residents in that area, I think we need to keep the parking on Dodge .... or on, excuse me, on Governor Street. Throgmorton/ Okay, the proposal I'm definitely hearing is to on South Governor retain parking and provide and .... and to provide the two-way street, but have the northbound part of it, uh, a .... a bicyclists can use the full lane kind of signage. Ralston/ Yeah, we would use signage, something like this, and then we would use in addition to that some directional signage, and if we can get through our code issue, the bikes (mumbled) It used to be, uh, share the road signs, and this is just the new preferred sign. Throgmorton/ Okay, uh, who supports that idea for South Governor Street? Thomas/ I'm willing (both talking) I support it, but I do think we need to test it. You know, I ... I have your concerns about how .... how it will work. Throgmorton/ The good news is that traffic volumes are pretty low. (several talking) Cole/ It's not like Gilbert, you kn ow, in terms of traffic (both talking) Thomas/ I mean I would be interested, you know, depending on the outcome, uh, look .... I would be willing to look at wide.... potentially widening Governor, um, so that we could have a dedicated bike lane there. Throgmorton/ Okay, and that'll be somethin' to discuss later (both talking) Okay, uh, I think we've got a clear decision on that. I .... I would like to say with regard to South Governor, I expect there will be pushback from some residents who park there along the street, or else have visitors park there or whatever. I don't know what exactly, but I expect some pushback. So .... (several talking) Mims/ Oh, you just said Governor. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 36 Throgmorton/ Did I? Oh I'm sorry, I meant to say South Dodge. My bad! So I expect pushback with regard (laughs) Mims/ I would agree! Throgmorton/ Not as much as South Governor. (noises on mic) Okay so we need to stop our work session now and we'll return, convene the formal meeting at 7:00, and then return to the work session after the formal meeting. (WORK SESSION ENDS) (WORK SESSION RECONVENES) Clarification of Agenda Items: No discussion — occurred after formal meeting. Information Packet Discussion (September 5 & 12): Throgmorton/ So .... yet again it's pretty late. Cole/ I was gonna say are any of these issues so important that they can't be deferred until next meeting? Taylor/ I had one quick thing that I ... I would like to point out now, since we've been talking about, uh, the environment and etc., was IP 15, and I just found it very interesting (both talking) Throgmorton/ (mumbled) Taylor/ Oh, I'm sorry, on the September 12th packet, IP15. Uh, the minutes of the Airport Commission. Uh, from their August 15th meeting. I want to commend them, uh, for discussing how they can help the City meet its climate action goals. They actually talked about that in their meeting, and I think that's truly an example of how everyone can work together to help us reach our goals, and uh, I especially took note of, uh, an interesting idea they proposed of an all -electric plane, uh, that could possibly be used for training. I just think they're on top of it there and they're.... they have plans! That's good! So thank them! Mims/ The only thing I would mention is we had late, hard copy late handout here from the County about a future land use map and wanting to set a meeting in the next couple of weeks. So I think we need to address that. Fruin/ Yeah, I'd like to, they have deferred an item. It's, um, you may recall earlier this year, um, we had a need to create a committee, I think Councilman Thomas and I don't remember who the other Councilman was.... Councilman Teague, uh, you were part of a, um, mediation, uh, on a land use issue. Um, this is a similar but not the same. In that case, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 37 um, we were required to come together. In this case it's more advisory. Um, the County had asked for an opinion on a development outside of our growth boundary. We gave that opinion, and I think the board would like a little bit more discussion prior to making a decision. So they have deferred a vote on a commercial subdivision that is out, uh, south on Riverside Drive, just .... just past our, uh, our city limits at the intersection with Oak Crest Hill Road. Uh, so the County has requested that staff and .... and if you....if you could like a couple Members of Council come together in the next two weeks and... and have a, again, informal discussion with them, um, about the concerns that staff raised with that, uh, proposal. So I'd just ask if, uh, if one or two Council Members want to participate, or if the Council as a whole wants to participate, that you'd select a couple Members, and then, uh, staff would work with those two Members to get you up to speed on the issue and then to schedule the meeting with the County. Throgmorton/ I'd be happy to participate, uh, could be that there are others that want to and maybe I'd defer to that. (several talking) Frain/ Uh, they asked for .... uh, Council Members of your choosing, so I'd say no more than three. Uh, we typically would do two in a situation like this, but if you prefer to have three, that's okay. Throgmorton/ Does anybody else want to participate? Mims/ I'd be very interested. I just ... I'm gonna be out of town a little bit here and I don't want that to impact things. Fruin/ Uh, they want to meet in the next two weeks, so you're probably lookin' at two meetings, one with staff and one with the County, uh, for the remainder of this week and into next week. Mims/ I'll stay out of it cause I'm going to be doing a little traveling. So.... Frain/ Couple hours of your time, probably.... I'd plan on about three, three and a half hours total of your time in the next 10 days. Throgmorton/ Three or three and a half hours, is that what you said? (laughter) Salih/ (mumbled) Fruin/ No, not a meeting. You're gonna have a prep .... you're gonna have memos to read from staff to familiarize yourself with the issue. You're gonna meet with staff and then you're gonna meet with the County. So..... Salih/ ....as a possible, if nobody want (both talking) Throgmorton/ Sorry? (several talking) What'd you say? I couldn't hear ya. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019. Page 38 Salih/ I said I could be possible if somebody else available would be great. Throgmorton/ Well I think John and I have both volunteered, course my window is narrowed by the fact that I'm gonna be gone to Dubuque for the 25th through the 27th, but we can probably work around that. All right. Fruin/ Two of you or all three of you? John? Okay. And if they for some reason schedules don't align, I'll reach out to ya. Okay. Throgmorton/ Okay, with .... I'm not gonna follow up on these things, but with regard to September 12th packet, IP #7 and 8, tax exemption.... tax exemptions for affordable housing and HCDC feedback. We could probably deal with'em pretty quickly, but it's pretty late, and I'm sorry, Tracy. I see you sittin' out there. Thank you for hangin' around, but..... good grief. Uh.... and we need to hear about the Emerald Ash borer as well, but we .... we don't wanna do that now. Frain/ Want us to carry those three memos over to the next.... information packet? Throgmorton/ I .... I think we do. I'm seeing a lot of fading, nodding heads. Salih/ I'm really exhausted. Mims/ ...put these two info packets on our next meeting, I mean, I don't think it'll take long to go through'em, but maybe just do the .... put the whole info packets on the next meeting. Throgmorton/ Okay. Mims/ Then you don't have to move the stuff over to another packet. Council Updates on Boards/Commissions/Committees: No discussion. Throgmorton/ Okay. So ..... I think that's it for tonight. So we're gonna end our work session. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of September 17, 2019.