HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-26 Transcription
June 26, 2006
June 26, 2006
Council:
Staff:
City Council Work Session
Page I
City Council Work Session
6:30 PM
Bailey, Champion, Correia, Elliott, O'Donnell, Wilburn
Atkins, Boothroy, Davidson, Dilkes, Franklin, Fosse, Hargadine, Helling, Karr
TAPES: 06-49, Side 2; 06-51, Sides I and 2; 06-52, Side I
Plannine & Zonine
Wilburn:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Franklin:
(can't hear)
Karin?
Ok. Tell me if you can't hear me, ok?
I can barely hear you.
Here you go. Can you hear me now?
Yes. It's Verizon?
a) CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
JULY 18 ON AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING
1.39-ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 1820 BOYRUM STREET
FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) TO COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL (CC-2) (REZ06-000014)
The first item is to set a public hearing for July 18th on an ordinance to rezone
property on Boyrum Street from intensive commercial to CC-2. This is the Big
10 Rentals Property.
b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY FORMER
BENTON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AUDITOR'S PARCEL
NO. 2006081 LOCATED TO THE NORTH AND EAST OF 708 S.
RIVERSIDE DRIVE, TO PROFESSIONAL MUFFLER INC, AND
SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID CONVEYANCE FOR
JULY 18, 2006.
c) VACATING A PORTION OF THE OLD WEST BENTON
STREETRIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED NORTH OF THE
CURRENT WEST BENTON STREET AND EAST OF SOUTH
RIVERSIDE DRIVE. (VAC06-00003)
Item b is a resolution of intent to convey former Benton Street right-of-way, and
this is in association with item c, which is the vacation of that right-of-way. This
is part of enabling the reconstruction of the Professional Muffler building and on
the screen is the general location of this. And I've been warned that our - yeah,
the scans today came out rather blurry, so hopefully you can follow.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 2
Well, the arrow points to the vacated right-of-way. This is to enable the
reconstruction of Professional Muffler beyond the lot which they had which was
damaged during the tornado. Other questions about this? We're retaining a 20-
foot alley, essentially, just to the north of the property, which will go back to Ned
Ashton Park, to retain access to that park and a small parking area, because Ned
Ashton Park is a trailhead for our trail system along the River there. But
otherwise, this property just provides access to Professional Muffler and to
Linder Tire.
Well, there's issues in the packet, different memos related to whether?
Those are related to
Can't hear you.
The, most of the items in the packet are related to the price for the conveyance,
and there is some distance between what Mr. Kemp would like to pay for this and
what we have calculated, and I guess I'll let Eleanor address those items, since
that's being negotiated through the City Attorney's office.
And Rick Fosse is here too, because he's been involved; in fact, Rick, why don't
you come on up, because he's been pretty involved in this whole scenario and can
address specifically the issues involving the sewer. Essentially, the difference
between the City and Professional Muffler at this point come down to whether
they paid for the right-of-way. He's making an argument that because it's, he's
making an argument that the City has an easement as opposed to owning the fee
simple and therefore shouldn't extract compensation. We don't distinguish
between that when we, when we vacate and convey right-of-way, and logically,
it's my opinion that there isn't a distinction. You know, at this point he doesn't
have the right to use it, and once we vacate it and convey it, he will have the right
to use it, so that, that's a situation that always exists. But that's the argument that
he's making. I believe also, although we have asked him to make a proposal for
specifically what he's interested in doing, I think that's just come from him orally
at this point. But it's my understanding that he is willing to pay for the auditor's
parcel along the terms that are set out in Mitch's memo, there being a discount for
the portions where there's an easement. He doesn't want to pay for the street
right-of-way, and he wants the City to pay for relocating the sewer. That's my
understanding of his position.
So, in our resolution then, how, where is all that addressed? I mean, is it
addressed in the resolution, all those?
Which are you talking about, the resolution of intent to convey? We're not even,
we're just setting the public hearing on that one, so that will all be
Ok, so that
So that will all be dealt with
When we do the public hearing.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Dilkes:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Fosse:
Franklin:
Fosse:
City Council Work Session
Page 3
Once we do that.
Ok. So that will all be worked out, we'll have the details of that.
Right.
So that which you just discussed will be ongoing. We're simply setting a public
hearing now.
We're setting a public hearing for it in b.
Ok.
and we are having a public hearing on the vacation in c.
And so how does that effect vacating it? I mean, we're vacating it so we can
convey, but if we don't eventually convey, do we want?
Well, the way we always design these is we line them up to occur at the same
time.
Ok.
And so this is just a first reading of the ordinance in c.
Ok. Got it.
Ok.
So if the conveyance doesn't happen, will we just stop the vacation, then?
Yeah. There's no reason to vacate if we're not
Right, that's what I - got it.
That's the whole purpose for the vacation.
So the issue related to the sewer, then?
Yes. Would you like some background on that?
Brief.
Ok. The building that got damaged by the tornado was built over a sewer, a
sewer for which the city acquired a right-of-way, the easement was called a right-
of-way back then in 1923. They built over it anyway, so in order to reconstruct
. the building you either need to vacate the easement or get our permission to do
that. And because of the configuration of the sewer, we think that the best option
is to line the sewer and allow them to reconstruct over it, but we need to keep a
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Fosse:
Champion:
Fosse:
Champion:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 4
safety valve, that is an easement route around the building so that if we need to
reconstruct later we can do that.
We're currently using the sewer.
Yes we are. Quite heavily.
But he would like us to move the sewer? Is that correct?
Yes.
Ok. Thank you.
I think we'll have more discussion next time.
Ok.
d) REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 619 KIRKWOOD
AVENUE FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO-1) ZONE.
(REZ06-00012)
Ok. Then let's move on to item d. This is a request rezone - the property that's
shown on the screen - from RS-5 to CO-I. Both the staff and Planning and
Zoning Commission are recommending denial on this. And just to briefly
reiterate the staff report, we have looked at rezonings in this area in the past,
rezoned the funeral home to COol back in the mid-90s. At that time one of the
issues was where do we stop. And there has been really no compelling reason.
presented with this particular application to argue for rezoning, because again it
raises the question of where do we stop. It really isn't about Mr. Teague's use,
which certainly is laudable and necessary, but it's about the zoning of this
property for Mr. Teague and whoever might own it in the future. And the
question of where do you stop the commercial zoning and the encroachment into
this residential neighborhood. And neither the staff nor the Commission was
presented with a compelling reason to make the change, to make this
commercial. So that's the recommendation. Any questions on that?
No.
e) REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG SOUTH GILBERT
STREET, SOUTH OF WATERFRONT DRIVE AND NORTH OF
SOUTHGATE AVENUE, FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-
1) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2) ZONE. (REZ05-
00022)
Ok. Item e is a rezoning request from CI-l to CC-2 for a number of properties
along Gilbert Street. We did have a request from one property owner some
months back, and at that time indicated that in order for us to look at a rezoning
in this area we would need to have a concurrence of a number of property
owners, that to rezone just the one piece would not be appropriate, it would be be
a spot zoning. At that time, the property owner could not get enough people who
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franlin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 5
would concur with that rezoning. Subsequently there's been more discussion
that's gone on in the area. We had a request from Mr. Kennedy to reactivate this
rezoning, and there has been discussion with all of these property owners in the,
it's shown as the shaded area, which would be subject to the rezoning. There are
two who have either been reticent or objected. One objected, the other was just
not sure, and those are pointed out in the materials in your packet. The
recommendation for this is to rezone it to CC-2. CC-2 is the zoning that was
contemplated when the district plan was done for this area. Given the activity that
we expect on Gilbert Street and the development that's going to happen south of
here, that CC-2 is an appropriate land use here. With it of course comes with the
caution about the Gilbert Street/Highway 6 intersection and we do have to do a
left turn lane project that is currently in the capital improvements program that
we're moving forward with with studies, construction plans, but the caution not
to delay on that if we're going to approve these kinds of changes in zoning or any
further development on Gilbert Street.
What year do we have that in, in the CI?
I think it's '08.
'08 to do, to begin construction? Or even to
Right. To have it constructed in fiscal year '08. So we would be doing, right now
we're doing the planning for it in terms of the engineering work on it, but then we
anticipate acquisition, so that takes some time.
Karin, I'm not familiar with Southgate Avenue. Where is this in reference to, say,
this is between Waterfront Drive and where's the railroad tracks? Give me an
idea of what.
Railroad tracks. Here's the arrow. The railroad tracks are south here, Bob, as this
converges down here, the railroad is down in this part.
Ok. So this is all considerably north of that.
Yeah.
Ok.
1) CONDITIONALLY REZONING 20.79 ACRES OF PROPERTY
LOCATED ON LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD, WEST OF
TAFT AVENUE FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (ID-RS) ZONE TO LOW DENSITY
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) ZONE. (REZ06-00013)
Ok. Moving on to item f. This is a rezoning requested by the developer of
Windsor Ridge for further development of Stone Bridge Estates from ID-RS to
RS-5, kind of filling out this area north of Court Street. We do have conditional
zoning on it which the developer agrees to share in the cost of the reconstruction
of Lower West Branch Road, which we are in the process to, of doing that
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 6
project. In fact this next fiscal year, fiscal year '07. And also agreeing to comply
with the Northeast District Plan principals and preserve the stone bridge which is
in the area, thus the name Stone Bridge Estates. It's kind of where that arrow is. I
tend to be - there we go, right in here. And as this other property develops we
would, you know, hope to be able to have a pedestrian connection through here,
but, yeah.
Tell me what's intended by neighborhood designed policies.
This has to do with the configuration of streets, that it's a pedestrian-friendly
neighborhood. These are all comprehensive plan terms, not ordinance language,
but as we look at the plat for this we will be making connections with the existing
neighborhood, that we will be looking out for pedestrian access throughout the
subdivision, a lot of the things that we just typically do.
So in other words, so that this would be similar if not identical to that style of
neighborhood and streets and sidewalks, setbacks
It's going to fit in with what's already there, with Stone Bridge, yeah, it's kind of
what you already see.
Ok.
PROVISIONS WITHIN ARTICLE 28, MUL TI.FAMIL Y RESIDENTIAL
ZONES, ARTICLE 2C, COMMERCIAL ZONES, ARTICLE 20,
INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH ZONES, ARTICLE 48, MINOR
MODIFICATIONS, VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND
PROVISIONAL USES, ARTICLE 5A, OFF STREET PARKING AND
LOADING STANDARDS, AND ARTICLE SA, GENERAL DEFINITIONS.
Ok. Item g: I would refer you to your packet for this one, because I think the
easiest thing here, these are a number of ordinance amendments that, you know,
we just did the new zoning code in December and as we use it we find that there
are things that need to be tweaked in it to make it work better for everybody, and
in the ordinance itself, in the wheras sections, it point out what are the different
factors that we are looking at in this ordinance. Also, the memorandum from
Karen Howard to the Planning and Zoning Commission gets at the crux of why
we're doing this as opposed to getting into the exact language. The, so I'm just
going to run over those, and then if you have specific questions about the
language we can talk about that. There's a change that's made to distinguish
drives from within a, that are within a parking lot from those that are external to a
parking lot. That has to do with screening, so we're not requiring screening
around drives that are inside a parking lot. Makes sense. Clarifying language
regarding exterior stairways. There was reference to stairwells. We want that to
be stairways. Stairwells go down into, it's just a fine distinction. It also, so that it
doesn't cover stoops, you know, little things out in the front? That with
commercial, industrial and research zones, we have the same opportunities for
minor modifications of site development standards as we now have with multi-
family development. This enables people to more flexibly work within the code
and allows a reduction or a modification in those standards administratively
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 7
rather than having to go to the board of adjustment. Changes in the building
material requirements for large retail users, we had a provision in there regarding
tilt-up panels, and this just refines it a little bit more to indicate that tilt-up panels
will be acceptable in certain circumstances when they have the appearance of the
materials that were preferred in those particular requirements. And then, lastly,
that we had a provision in which, if you had parking underneath the building you
could be no more than one foot above the sidewalk on the exterior of the
building. Well, as we're looking at projects, say Burlington Street, and anticipate
redevelopment in that area, Burlington Street peaks at Clinton and then goes
down on either side. When you have those grade changes over a half block or a
block, it's very difficult to make that one foot precisely, and so we've just got a
little leeway with that. The effort still will be to get access directly to the
businesses from the public sidewalk and not have steps or steps and arcades like
the College and Gilbert building or the one on Burlington in which you really
have to go up steps to get to the commercial spaces. That's just not working very
well.
The most recently built City parking parking ramps don't comply with that, do
they?
Yes.
The one in which, the one right in back of, the one where the cable tv office is
located?
No, you can walk right from the street into the building.
No, no, I mean that the lower ramp does not exceed more than one foot above the
sidewalk level.
No, that's not what this is saying.
It's for subterranean parking.
Yeah, this is when you have subterranean parking and that's your first floor level
of your building, where you're going to enter your building for usage,
commercial uses. That that can be, as it was, no more than one foot above the
sidewalk.
Why?
Because you have no interface with that building. If you're trying to have a
successful retail use, or office, but more retail use at that street level, if you have
to go upstairs and in to get to that retail use, it makes it much more difficult for
consumers and for that retail use to succeed.
Good. You've just made a point that I'll want to raise in just a minute.
It's also not as accessible for persons with disabilities.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Elliott
Champion:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 8
Right. They're not as accessible, but the reason that we, with one foot they would
not be accessible either.
Well, yeah.
Yeah. And what we're doing here Bob is we're loosening that up so it's not as
strict and it gives some ability to modify that up to three feet in some instances,
as long as there's somewhere along that way that you can get into the building.
Could you not have simply done that by saying that you have to have immediate,
direct, unencumbered access to the building and forget about whether or not it
exceeds one foot at one place or another?
But what if (can't hear)
Now would that be defined as you have to go up ten stairs or up two stairs?
Well, however you defmed the access to the building is however it could be, and
forget about whether it exceeds one foot above the sidewalk.
Well, that's what the effort is, to try and keep it down, so you don't have to say
how many stairs or, that's defining the access.
It's going around Robin Hood's barn to get at it, though. All you have to do is say
that it has to have access of no more than one or two stairs. What's wrong with
that?
That's another option, but I think there might be some instances when you want
maybe three stairs. This change right now is to make it more flexible.
For the business owner.
For the business owner. Because right now it says one foot and that's all you get.
And we've got circumstances in which there's a greater grade differentiation. Are
there any other questions on ordinance amendments?
Yes. When we went through this garage business, we were told that the City is
not going to get into building design. And I looked through here, and building
design is mentioned a multitude of times. And also, I don't understand - I says
the surface parking, parking and loading areas must be located behind principal
buildings and concealed from view of fronting streets. Why do we seem, why do
we
Can you tell me
Why do we seem to think that seeing a parked car is a crime? I think all this goes
through
What page are you looking at?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
_,_,__,_,~__.'_'_"_ _____~_______"~_,.__.,.,.._ - - __ ___ _,.._____~__.___,__..____________._,..._._._____._____,.____,~_ .....___._,__._____..___.._ "n
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 9
Page 4.
Thank you.
I will point out that in those pages from page lon, only those items that are
underlined are changes that are being proposed at this time. If you would like to
change any of the other language you need to bring that up at another time.
Ijust, Ijust raised again, I don't like the City getting into building design. It just
seems like that's none of the City's business, and then, you just mentioned
making easy access to commercial businesses, and when you put parking behind
the business, when I'm driving by and I want to stop say, at an insurance office or
a doctor's office or a paint store, I want to see whether there are parking spaces,
and you're hiding them from me intentionally, and it makes no business sense.
That's not the subject of these particular amendments, but if the Council would
like to discuss those items again, we can do that as we did during the zoning
ordinance.
This is what I'm seeing in this zoning, and it seems incredible after what you said
you went through to make it easier to access commercial business that you would
hide the parking spaces from the people that want to get into the commercial
business.
Bob, do you understand that what you are suggesting is, if you want another
revision to the code, then you have to get support to put that on the table. That's
not what's on the table.
I'm raising a point which I think needs to be made and I think there isn't
sufficient support on this Council to do it.
Ok. So you've raised your point, again.
Yep.
Ok.
And I think it's anti-business and Ijust would like to see it changed.
Well, you've raised your point. All right.
h) VACATING A PORTION OF DANE ROAD SOUTH OF
HIGHWAY 1. (VAC06-00002)
Anything else? Ok. Item h is a public hearing on the vacation of a portion of
Dane Road south of Highway I. This is just the remainder of Dane Road that has
not been vacated. It was necessary to vacate it in order to go forward with the
runway project at the airport.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Dilkes:
Franklin:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Karr:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 10
i) VACATING A PORTION OF RUPPERT ROAD WITHIN
AVIATION COMMERCE PARK NORTH (VAC06-00004)
j) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF
AVIATION COMMERCE PARK NORTH (A RE.SUBDIVISION OF
NORTH AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND NORTH AIRPORT
DEVELOPMENT-PART TWO), IOWA CITY, IOWA. (SUBOS.00021)
Item i is the vacation of Ruppert Road within Aviation Commerce Park. Now, it's
my understanding, and i and j are related. J is the final plat for Aviation
Commerce North - that is the final plat for what will enable the Super Wal-Mart
construction or purchase, then construction. In that final plat there is a
development agreement that we have with Wal-Mart which has not been signed,
and will not be signed by tomorrow, was the last communication I had from
Mitch.
Yeah. That's right. It had been our understanding it would be signed by today, but
it won't be.
Which mean that the vacation and final plat should be deferred, so you want
I
I
So I you want to continue the public hearing and the vacation and defer the
resolution and then defer the resolution for the plat.
Karin, is this until July 18th?
Yes. And I, I can just get into the specifics of the development agreement at that
July 18th or July 17th work session rather than doing it now, agreed?
I had one question.
Ok.
But I can just, put it to the 18th, it doesn't matter.
Whatever's your pleasure.
I just, with this final plat, I was looking at the parking spaces that they had
outlined. Are these all required, or are these, I, what level of parking is required
and what level is Wal-Mart because.
I'll have to check that.
Everybody builds, everybody builds large parking lots that are rarely full.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
ITEM 10.
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 11
And understand that in your approval of this you will not be approving the site
plan. You're approving the plat with the development agreement and then the
vacation.
APPROVING OF A THIRD AMENDMENT TO A PURCHASE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF lOW A CITY AND W AL-
MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST FOR APPROXIMATELY
21.76 ACRES OF PROPERTY LYING WITmN LOTS 10 THROUGH 17
OF NORTH AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION AND LOTS 2,
THROUGH 4 OF THE NORTH AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT
SUBDIVISION - PART TWO.
Item 10 which is on your agenda, which is the purchase agreement for the
additional land that Wal-Mart has requested: you may go forward with that.
And that thing would be contingent on whatever final decision is on the
purchase?
Right. Whatever they fmally decide on the 31 'i, yeah.
Yeah.
k) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE ALLEY
LOCATED NORTH OF BENTON STREET BETWEEN CLINTON
STREET AND DUBUQUE STREET. (VAC06-00001) (PASS AND
ADOPT)
I) AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN AN
ALLEY IN BLOCK 27 LYING BETWEEN SOUTH CLINTON AND
SOUTH DUBUQUE STREETS TO THE NORTH OF BENTON
STREET, TO JOHNSON COUNTY.
Ok. Then k is the pass and adopt on the vacation of the alley for, that the County
had requested, and j is the public hearing and conveyance on that disposition to
the county.
Karr: 1.
Franklin: 1.
Champion: Oh,i.
Bailey: 1.
Champion: I,j, k, 1. Right.
Bailey: Sing your song.
Champion: It looks like an i.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Liquor Licensinl!
ITEM 15.
ITEM 16.
Wilburn:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 12
I know.
Did you break it, Karin?
I, no, I think we need new batteries.
Or take the batteries out and erase them.
No show.
CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 4, ENTITLED
"ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES," CHAPTER 2, ENTITLED "LIQUOR
LICENSES AND BEIER PERMITS," BY AMENDING SECTION 3 TO
ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT THAT JOHNSON COUNTY
OFFICIALS APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR ALCOHOL LICENSES
AND PERMITS ANDIO MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES RESULTING
FROM THE STATE'S NEW ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM AND THE
INCREASED INSPECTIONS BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. (FIRST
CONSIDERATION)
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE POLICE CHIEF'S
GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING WHETHER APPLICANTS FOR
INITIAL AND RENEWAL LIQUOR LICENSES, BEER PERMITS AND
WINE PERMITS ARE OF "GOOD MORAL CHARACTER".
Ok. Liquor license applications, agenda items 15 and 16.
Good evening. Presently before a liquor license is brought before the City
Council, I am asked to determine whether that applicant is of good moral
character. This is right out of the State code where the language comes from. Up
to now the department has had, has not had clear guidelines of what good moral
character means. Our practice has been to look at a DCI criminal history report,
supplied by the applicant, and then sign off on the application if nothing in that
DCI report merits a red flag. We have not looked at the activities of the liquor
establishment as it pertains to existing State of Iowa liquor' laws. Many state
alcohol licensing authorities also employed field enforcement agents that
routinely check bars in concert or with local law enforcement. Iowa does not do
this. Presently there is a large profit motive to not obey the alcohol laws, and
without regular inspections by liquor control agents, there isn't a motive to
voluntarily comply. This proposal would supply a motive to comply with existing
state laws. The motive would be the nOn-renewal of a liquor license if the
applicant has a documented history of non-compliance. If this occurs, my
recommendation would be to refuse the license which would trigger a written
report to the Council justifying why we felt this action was merited. You would
then have the authority to renew or deny the application. There are many alcohol
establishments in Iowa City that do play by the rules. The passage of this
proposal would not effect them. Lastly, I would like to thank the City Clerk and
the City Attorney for your assistance in drafting this proposal. Basically, what we
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
O'Donnell:
Champion:
Dilkes:
O'Donnell:
Dilkes:
Hargadine:
Champion:
Hargadine:
Champion:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 13
want to do is establish a track history that deals specifically with the State of
Iowa and the City of Iowa City city ordinances as it pertains to alcohol, and if an
establishment clearly violates them over and over and over, that will give us
grounds to not sign a liquor license. Questions?
Isn't that technically what we do, Chief, now? If you have so many violations
now, your liquor license is taken away?
Different violations.
Would you, I think he's, Mike, are you talking about the sales to minors?
Yeah, well, in general.
Sales to underage people?
There's nothing that says, though, that whether three's five, five's bad, or ten's bad
_ at what point does the liquor license not get renewed? And in totality we're
looking at all of the different license violations. That's something that we've not
done yet, is establish clear policy for those that sign off, and that was the purpose
of this proposal.
I like this proposal. I think when we were discussing, the last thing we were
discussing, the 21 law or the 21, whether we should go to 21 or not, one of the
things the bar owners promised us was that they would have monitors in the bars,
and they would monitor themselves, and I don't think they've done a very good
job of that, and I think this will make sure they do what they promised to do.
I would comment, I think some have done better than others.
Yeah, of course, I don't mean all of them.
I like this proposal quite a bit because I think it evens the playing field. I think it's
a fairness issue. The question that I have is, given your criteria, do we have the
capacity? I mean, some of these your officers will be checking on and, in the
course of a year, do they have the opportunity to get to every establishment that
has a liquor license?
Over the course of the year, usually. There may be some that are outside of the
downtown area that they do not. But if this goes into effect we are going to try
and make it to every establishment.
And see, I think that would be the most fair situation.
I agree.
Because I notice on this PAULA report, the year to date, not every place, not
every establishment had a PAULA visit, and I think that if we do something like
this it's important that everybody gets at least one visit a year.
I would agree.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Baeth:
Hargadine:
Baeth:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Baeth:
Hargadine:
Baeth:
Hargadine:
Baeth:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 14
Chief, I would also like to point out that as one of the criteria, having P AULAs
per visit ratio at 1.5, are you considering the number of visits as well? For
instance, you could have one establishment on one visit have 2 P AULAs.
The number of visits is part of the ratio.
Right, so I'm saying, but, you compare that visit to another place that's visited
100 times and you only get 80 P A ULA:s out of that, and this one unlucky
business might have one visit. Do we have any criteria established?
It's a per-visit ratio, it says right there, per visit. It's not the absolute number.
Of the year to date.
He's saying, one might have a chance to have it spread over multiple visits,
another might have had one bad night, one visit, that's it. Is that what you're?
That's what I'm saying, yes.
I think that's a possibility. You wouldn't want to have that bad visit right before
your license was renewed. You'd want to. The other thing is, this is on the
internet and it's published. Every business would have the ability to know where
they stood. So if they were above the 1.5 and we're coming down to it, I'd, I
would try and get the police back in there, improve that ratio.
Ok. And would this be at your discretion, then?
The other thing is, P AULAs by themselves, I don't think would be a primary
factor.
Ok.
That's just something else in addition to other criteria. The worst criteria would
be making obvious sales cases to minors.
Well, and there is an opportunity to evaluate the corrective action that the
licensee has taken, so that can balance out some of the issues that may have come
up on a visit, which, once again, I think is a fairness, a good opportunity.
Right.
Sam, Ijust, I appreciate, I know I've talked to you personally, and I've been
pushing for a reasonable, objective way to identifY the problem bars, because I
haven't counted, but they keep telling me we have 40 bars. My contention is that
a very small percentage of them are causing most of the problem. So, I really
appreciate the fact that you've put this together. I do however have a concern
about one of the areas, and that's the number of what, assault, fighting incidents. I
think that could be cOlmterproductive and might, perhaps, be dangerous;because
you might be encouraging the bars not to call when a problem situation appears
to be imminent. Because if they call, they know it's going to go on their record.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 15
So I'd like to find some way that we could ensure against that or lower that as a,
because we certainly want them not to be reticent to call the police if problems
are imminent.
I agree with the thought process. With that small, minute number of problem bars
that we're talking about, there's already an attitude of if it occurs outside of my
establishment, it's not my problem. But they probably contributed to the
argument that occurred inside anyway. It would not be held against the bar if
they were the ones that called us down there and it was determined that they had
nothing to do with, they just happened to be picking up the phone. In a few
instances though, they're, the problem has occurred inside the bar and they
kicked everybody out and just washed their hands of it when they should have
called us to begin with. So that attitude already exists.
Yeah, I
I think also we specifically, Sam, if you remember, talked about not using calls
for service. I mean, it would be an easy thing to look at, just looking at the calls
for service, but we didn't specifically identify calls for service but rather tried to
focus on the behavior and the reports of the behavior.
I just think we need to be aware that there's going to be perhaps a reticence about
calling for this kind of service. That I
I think that's a misinterpretation of the intent, though.
Oh, yeah, I know what the intent is, and the intent is the best. My concern is
There's also other things that would motivate them to call, like? liability and
stufflike that.
Right.
Is it always, do sometimes patrons call the police?
Absolutely.
Not just staff.
Everybody has a cell phone.
Everyone has a cell phone.
Somebody has a cell phone, and they use it all the time. That's if they have one
that's not being used.
They have to hang up.
What is, in your estimation, the most significant and the most serious problems
that Iowa City encounters from the multiple bar scenes, or from the one bar scene
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26,2006.
June 26, 2006
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Wilburn:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 16
with the multiple bars? I'm just thinking, because we mentioned P AULAs, you
mentioned in here serving to an existing intoxicated person. What does, what
does a person in your position think is the most serious problem with our bars?
I don't know that there is one. It's a conglomeration of all of it. We have a high-
intensity number of businesses down there that make a living selling alcohol. I
certainly spend more of my week discussing alcohol issues than any other topic
at all. I've got some that think we do too much down there, and there's others that
think we don't do enough down there. All I can do is listen to all of them. But I
think this is one thing that we, we can't control the revelry that occurs out in the
ped mall, but this is one thing I think from a business standpoint that you can do
to at least make sure everybody's playing by the rules.
I was just thinking, and this might be more for Eleanor than for you, if it were to
appear that P AULAs are one of our major problems, that's certainly what we've
heard to this point over the past few years, if that were to be one of the major
problems, is there a possibility. One of the bar operators suggested to me making
Iowa City 21 and over and then, by a special amendment or however you might
call it, bars could request to have 19 and over capabilities, and then we'd charge
more for that. Is that a possibility? In other words, it would be a modified 21 and
over that on certain requests, they could request to have 19 and over, but they
would have to meet certain criteria, they would have to be more closely
governed, and it would be possible to charge them more.
Well, it exists now that they can request, what is that?
An exception to the 19 (can't hear)
The point of this is we want to use the existing rules that are already in place by
the State and by the City and start using that for criteria against. I'm not really
asking for more laws, I want just to use the ones that we've already been given. Is
it a possibility? Yes.
Yeah, and I would want to talk to Eleanor.
The charging thing causes me some concern.
The extra fee.
If the police department were to get it, that might be good.
I have a question.
You remember, the way this works is that, that, if the recommendation comes
from the police chief to deny them renewal for instance, and you deny them
renewal, then it goes to the ABD and they take a look at it and
And it would be
They could both be overturned at that point, it's possible, but that's just the way.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
---~_...._.,.- ----_.- .._,-~-_._--,_._-,---~----~-_._-_.__.._-~.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Hargadine:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Dilkes:
(laughter)
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 17
What does ABD stand for?
Alcoholic Beverage Division.
Because they have final say.
Sure.
It's my understanding though that they are encouraging municipalities to develop
their own rules, which is a shift from years past.
I think what everybody's backing off from is moral character, and the definition
of that.
It's an unfortunate word that apparently we have to use.
Well, if
It's an Iowa law, correct?
Well, we have nothing to do with that terminology, but I think it's terrible. You
know, moral character could just as well have been good business practices or
something like that. I think it would have been accepted better.
Well, I think when I first saw that I thought, huh, and then you take a look and
you see that that's the language that's used in the Iowa code and we are saying
based on Iowa code use of the definition of this.
Determined by the legislators at that time.
Yes.
Maybe that's how we're defining it locally.
At that time, but it's currently in place.
It's in place. We have nothing to do.
Right, right, that's what I'm saying.
I do disagree with it.
Well and all the criteria related to alcohol and the control of access to alcohol,
and there's nothing in here about other, you know, extramarital affairs. It's all
about alcohol.
I think that was smart.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Correia:
(laughter)
Correia:
Wilburn:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Wilburn:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 18
And really, I think there's something, if a guy did a burglary ten years ago, does
that really inhibit his ability to manage a bar now? If he served his sentence and
he's back in the good graces of society.
And that's covered in here.
That
But, technically, that's a violation of good moral character. But at least here we're
sticking to the alcohol laws already in place.
I think it's a good policy.
I agree.
It's fair.
Create accountability.
I continue to have concerns about the problems being reported, but again, I really
appreciate you bringing this to us, because it's been much needed.
You've better run while everybody's (can't hear)
Well, I had
I have a question though, I have another question.
Go ahead.
I'm just wondering if you had been in communication with other police
departments in communities similar to ours, in terms of universities, town/gown,
very close, like Madison or Ann Arbor to see what are some of the practices.
Not formally. I do that work with other college town, came from one, and then
Loras Jaeger is the chief from Ames, I do work with him quite a bit. They have,
everybody's a little bit unique. I'm not aware of another city that has the density
of the businesses all in one spot. There may be bigger cities that have them all
spread out, but we've put them all in one.
The other challenge is, as you've pointed out, different State laws and how those
translate to control at the local level.
And as I mentioned, some of those state alcohol authorities, they have their own
liquor control agents and they send people out on their own. Iowa, they want the
money from licenses, but they don't really want to do anything else, so. They
leave that to you and me to enforce.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26,2006.
June 26, 2006
Elliott
Champion:
Hargadine:
Champion:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Karr:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 19
What else is new.
Do you happen to know, and it's not really your department, how the occupancy
numbers are working out? Didn't we hire somebody to enforce occupancy? Will
you be doing that or the fire department be doing that?
It is the fire department's primary, primary responsibility, but we will be there to
assist them anytime they need it.
Ok.
1 think the projected start date is September 151 for that.
For the occupancy - right.
One fmal note is on the issuance of warnings first. That's something we've
discussed and we're willing to put a time period on this, because it is something
that's a radical change for us and probably would be for the businesses that are
effected. So that would give them, as violations come in, they'd get a letter from
me which would warn them that if this were to continue, this type of activity
would result in the loss of your license, so.
Are you talking about occupancy specifically, or this
No, I'm talking about this whole procedure.
Ok.
I think it would be up to the businesses to put it in place today. Some of the
businesses are up for renewal all year long, so they wouldn't have time to prepare
for this, so I think a warning system, a written letter.
Will they get a copy of this?
All the, would all the?
Certainly.
So how do you see rolling this in? When would it be effective, the policy?
Will all the liquor
I think they expire one year from when they're applied for. They don't expire all
at once.
They're all staggered.
I know, but I mean, in terms of this, when we pass this policy, a new policy's in
place, will all the liquor license holders get a copy of this so they know
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Hargadine:
Karr:
Correia:
Elliott:
Karr:
Correia:
Karr:
Elliott:
Correia:
Karr:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Champion:
Elliott:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 20
I think that's a good idea.
I think we plan on a mailing, an education system as well.
Ok.
I think especially the occupancy, as that becomes monitored, is especially
important that the bars have time to adapt to that. That would be like the State
telling Iowa City they have to have something that happened the night the
tornado hit. Because football season starts and Friday and Saturday nights are
just really something else.
I think the fire department.
They all have
fire department is doing quite an educational piece on that as well.
Good.
They all have occupancy limits, so they should know.
Yeah, so that's not a, the occupancy limits aren't changing.
Right.
No, but the fact that they're going to be enforced and need to be monitored I think
is a change.
Shouldn't be.
It should not be a change, because it's
No, when you have not enforced anything for an extended period of time, and
then decide that you are going to enforce it at a peak period, that's not fair.
Well, I would think the bar owners would want to enforce it
(cut off - end of tape)
Champion:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Bailey:
I think it should be enforced immediately. They know it's coming, they know
how to count people.
And they're getting a heads up.
And they're getting a heads up. It's really dangerous in some of those bars, or in
any building that's overcrowded and there's a disaster.
Yes.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Crime Stoppers
Wilburn:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 21
Crime Stoppers.
Routinely the Department issues press releases ending with "anyone who has
knowledge of this crime, please call the Iowa City Police Department." This
rarely results in anyone calling us with information that leads to an arrest. Our
Department would benefit from a Crime Stoppers program that breaks through
the barriers giving people the opportunity to provide information without directly
speaking to the police or having to testify in court. Most often we need
information that allows us to zero in on a suspect or criminal operation such as a
drug trafficking ring. There are approximately 1200 Crime Stoppers programs in
communities around the world. There are at least 20 cities in Iowa that participate
or have some type of Crime Stoppers program. These cities include Quad Cities,
which includes Davenport and Cedar Rapids (I want to come back to those a little
later), Burlington, Polk County, Sioux City, Council Bluffs, Dickinson County,
the city ofWaukee - most of these I've never heard of prior to this research-
Clinton County, Spencer, Le Mars, Clay County, Montgomery County, Red Oak
area, Des Moines, Pleasant Hill, Tri-County Crime Stoppers, which is based out
of Ankeny, Cerro Gordo County, whatever. Laramie County, they have a
program called Silent Witness, that is an affiliate of Crime Stoppers International
and local. Cedar Rapids and Quad Cities Crime Stoppers. They've got two
different structures, although they do the same thing. Cedar Rapids is a Council
commission. Quad Cities is a not-for-profit, partnered with a local television
station. In addition to these cities, I've got over 20 years of experience partnering
with Crime Stoppers from my previous employer, having rotated through
investigative four different times in my previous career I've seen Crime Stoppers
work on cases that I was personally responsible for. These cases have ranged
from thefts up to homicide. There, Columbia, the Crime Stoppers work was an
independent not-for-profit. I've been solicited by corporate sponsors and
individuals wishing to get involved and provide funding to get Crime Stoppers
off the ground. I told them to hold onto that thought and I'd get back in touch
with them. How the Board is set up, not-for-profit or Council Commission, I
have no strong feeling. What I need, what the Department needs, are the results
of having a program up and running. The Department's only involvement after it
is set up would be to report to the Board on success cases where information
provided by Crime Stoppers led to an arrest. The Board would decide how much
to award and the manner in which it is paid. The awards would not be paid for
with tax-supported funds. The Board would need to be comprised of individuals
who can raise funds and be an advocate for Crime Stoppers. The chiefs and
sheriffs of Johnson County are all in support of this program. They have agreed
to allow me the use of their logos in any advertising. I am asking for you to do
one of three things: approval of Crime Stoppers being a Council Commission or
your blessing if you feel it is better for it to be an independent, not-for-profit or a
combination, or not do it at all. I'm leaning towards the first two. Any questions
as to how it would actually run? It would basically start out with every one of our
press releases, ours and other County cases for that matter, would have the blurb
"anyone that knows any information about this crime is urged to call Crime
Stoppers. Crime Stoppers will pay up to $1000.00 if information will lead to an
arrest.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Hargadine:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Baeth:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 22
Who answers the phone?
It has to be a 24 - 7 operation, which would mean it would be our staff in the
dispatch center, that they would answer it "Crime Stoppers, may I help you?"
Don't citizens already have the option of providing anonymous tips?
They do, but it rarely comes in.
So is the issue then sort of, because you could, there could be a tagline that said
anyone with information could call, whatever the number,
It's usually a catchy number, like 311- TIPS.
I know, but what I'm saying is, is that if the spin of Crime Stoppers is that there is
a name that is not Iowa City Police Department, so it's some
That's part of it.
And that there's this extra layer of that it's anonymous, but if you want the
reward, there's a reward, then you would have to give your name.
No. It's, when they call in they're issued a number and encouraged to call back
after x amount of time, usually after 2 weeks to a month. That allows the Board
to meet. The Department would report to the Board if it was a successful case.
The Board meets and determines how much of a reward it is and then would
notify us back at the Department how much that was. When the CrimeS topper
called back in they would identitY them by that number, and then we would tell
them "yes, you do have a reward coming. Contact so and so Board member for
reimbursement. "
They all have reward programs?
But,do
Yes.
They all do.
How would you get the reward?
Who do you make the check to?
It's usually set up by the Board. It helps if it's a downtown business; you need a
variety of people on CrimeStoppers. It helps to have a banker, it helps to have an
attorney. All of them of course need to be good at fundraising. And it helps to
have a variety, a cross-section, but one of them, if it's a downtown business
person, can be the person that makes the payments.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Champion:
Correia:
Champion:
Hargadine:
Champion:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 23
I, ah
And make
You know, my first concern when I heard aboutthis a couple of weeks ago was
that I really object to, I term this Big Brother attitude of the City, and so,
because this, I would want it to be an independent organization and not by the
Councilor the Police Department. And the other, the main question I would have
then is so, if someone, it's a different phone number but it's answered by the
Police Department, is this phone going to have caller id on it?
No, it's.
Oh, ok.
And if there was another way to have a line answered 24-7, I would love to do
that, but the reality is that's the only place that is manned. Some of them do
have, you can only call between 8 and 5. I think they miss out on some things,
because when someone has the urge to call, you want to capitalize on it, because
they might talk themselves out of it.
But do people not call, why don't people call? If it was widely known that the
police accept, welcome, not, you think people call because there isn't, there's
really the opportunity for potential reward that gets them to call, or it's that they
don't think they're calling, well, they're not calling the police, although they sort
of are calling the police, though they're not calling the police in the same capacity
and people don't trust the police? Is that?
I think a variety of things. A lot of the studies that have been done will pertain to
the reward amount. And a thousand dollars or twenty-five thousand dollars, the
motives for calling were not all that much different. That's why CrimeS toppers
suggests capping it at one thousand dollars. Cedar Rapids doesn't have a cap -
they would pay theoretically much higher if it were a heinous crime. The motives
for people to call are varied. It may be one drug dealer who wants to get rid of his
competition down the street. We don't care what the motives are, because the
other guy is at some point probably going to call him. They may, the spouse has
been doing burglaries and now he's made his wife mad. I mean, the motives are
numerous; they're not always just for the reward, but they don't just pick up the
phone and call the police department.
I know, that's what I'm wondering. Is there any studies to suggest why people
don't just call and talk to the police?
I'm not aware of any.
Is there any, what I was wondering is, are there any studies around, related to
community policing and a neighborhood and community likelihood to interact
with the police in this fashion?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Baeth:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 24
There is quite a bit on crime and Neighborhood Watch, for instance. Crime is
usually lower in a community that's closer and communicate with one another
and looking out for one another, so those types of neighborhoods are more likely
to call police and say.
But that's not, Neighborhood Watch and community policing are not the same,
are they?
I think Neighborhood Watch is an element of community policing.
Sure.
Can you give us an idea of frequency of use for a similar-sized city? How many
calls they might get?
I have not done any type of analysis like that. It's usually, actually, the press
releases on a very few number - it's usually the more heinous types of crimes that
we have to solve, and so of tens of thousands of reports that we take, it's a very
minimal amount that actually merit that type of case.
I tend to agree with Connie on the, I think it's something about the Big Brother
aspect of it, and when I read through this, I'm not sure that this is a fit for our
community, honestly. I know that apparently you had people approach you about
it. Additionally, as a non-profit Board, we have a lot of non-profits in this
community and they all are struggling, most of them, are struggling to raise
money and I believe in donor choice, but I'm not sure that I would want to be the
instigator of another non-profit organization to raise funds in this community, so
Ijust don't see the fit for Iowa City, for myself.
I think however we've talked about quality communities in the Corridor, and one
aspect of quality communities that's probably as important as any is crime,
safety. And I would be very much in favor of this. I agree with Connie in that I'd
like to have a bit of a separation in it being perhaps a non-profit. But I think if
anything, it will make an impact on crime which experience has shown in other
similar cities it has made a significant impact, I think it's well worth the money
and we're using greed the same way that those who are breaking the law use
greed and we're attacking them on their own terms. And I do cringe, Regenia, I
cringe when I think you reward someone financially for doing his patriotic and
civic duty, his or her, but I think it's come to that, because so many people simply
don't want to get involved. And if a hundred bucks will help them get involved,
then let's do it.
Yeah, but that's what the East German Secret Police used in 1950 East Germany,
I mean, that's what makes me very uncomfortable. I don't think it says quality
community. I think it says something else.
Why is this different, to pay somebody, than to assume they'll do it on their own?
Ijust don't think it communicates quality of life. I think a Neighborhood Watch
may send a different message. I really have a lot of discomfort with this.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Elliott:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 25
I see this as an extension of Neighborhood Watch. I have, I really don't have a
problem. It's about
Spy on your neighbor?
being a good citizen. There's one interesting paragraph here. It says in twenty
years Quad Cities CrimeS toppers has received 2,949 tips that have led to 1678
arrests.
You know, but the thing about arrests is that, what's the conviction rate? Because
people get arrested that end up getting released, too. I don't necessarily think, just
because somebody was arrested because a tip came in, that means they were the
Guilty.
I think part of the story in there, and it wasn't necessarily, it led police to the
direction, it wasn't necessarily the tip necessarily that identified the person, but it
got them in the arena of them finding some facts to make an arrest which would
be presentable in court.
And this is not going to be an excessive weed complaint line. This is for a crime
that has already been committed, and it's to assist us to determine who it was who
did it. We may get 20 bad leads, but if we get the one good one that wouldn't
have come in otherwise, that's what we're looking to get.
I'm willing to continue talking about this in a way that includes the whole
County- I mean, that's not, I like, in terms of thinking about Quad Cities, it's not
the Davenport CrimeStoppers, it's the Quad Cities, it's all of those communities,
it has the identity of being all of those police departments, not just one police
department.
I think it will evolve into a county-wide, just because whoever sets up the phone
line, they're going to start solving crimes for the surrounding jurisdictions.
I guess
And that's, we would funnel that information to the appropriate agency.
The Amber Alerts, what I was thinking about is the Amber Alerts, and you get
those notices out, and it directs people to call, and those aren't, reward-based,
making those calls.
No, but everybody's heart sinks when their child is missing. Clearly that's an
emotional issue that everybody can relate with. A convenience store robbery
doesn't have that same emotional tie, so. Not everybody's going to drop what
they're doing like they would on an Amber Alert.
I, noticed, Sheriff you, my experience is with the community, I'm thinking of
some cases, more recent cases where there was a shooting off of Highway 6
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Baeth:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 26
down in Hollywood, Taylor area, and involved several young people, and some
of my, the other people that volunteer with me would hear things, or word on the
street. But, you know, I'd encourage folks to call and they wouldn't. But this is an
example where, my understanding is, that some of the young people or one of the
victims knew something about someone but wouldn't come forward. So this is
the type of thing where I can see someone coming forward, potentially. I can
remember at a neighborhood gathering of neighborhood centers and Iowa, there
were a couple of law enforcement people over helping with the neighborhood
party and I was helping them, it was cleanup, helping them carry picnic tables
away and there was one table left and a couple of young adults, not teens but
young adults in their mid-20s and Ijust said hey, fellas, can you give me a hand
with this? We can't, you were helping the police. So, that, it, they weren't saying
I'm not going to help you, but the association wouldn't. So again, I view this as a
tool for reaching some people that wanted to come forward and provide
information.
I would
Ross, you don't have any reservations about this? I really respect your opinion on
this.
No, I don't.
I would be willing to continue to talk about this if we could get some more
community input, because one of my concerns is it's not a fit for the community,
and Sam has indicated that he has had business owners come forward, but to
have a meeting at neighborhood centers or to have a meeting in different areas of
the community and get other people's input, and if other people thought this was
a good idea, general citizens, I think I would look at it differently.
Regenia, how do you view our community as different from the others, how this
wouldn't be a fit for ours, as opposed to others?
I would say the others in Iowa, the counties listed and the cities, I would consider
more conservative, generally, politically conservative, and I would consider that
there's less concern about that Big Brother or more police intervention in people's
lives. I think Iowa City, I mean, I grew up here and I think there's an attitude of,
this is a progressive community. If, even if that mayor may not be true, and so, if
we're going to talk about this and go forward with this, I think we should have
additional community input, and I would be interested in exploring it to that
degree, but I think that would be a good thing.
I guess I don't see the Big Brother aspect when you, it's your civic duty if you
see a crime committed, you really need to report it. And all we're doing then is
providing financial incentive. Where's the Big Brother aspect?
Who would be we?
All I'm asking, I mean, I'm really uncomfortable with this and we all agree that if
you're uncomfortable with something, Bob, you
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
__,_...m~___"_""'__"___""_"_"__'__~_____ ----,-----..----.--.-.-~-- ""'---------.....,.--- -,,-,,------_.....
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Hargadine:
Bailey:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Hargadine:
Correia:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 27
We all agree you're uncomfortable.
No, no. If you're uncomfortable with something I respect that you're
uncomfortable with it, I'm not going to necessarily ask you to explain it. I'm
uncomfortable with this, I don't think it's a good fit for our community, I'm
willing to explore it. I mean obviously ifthere's a majority I can't, you know, but
I think that if we're going to move forward with this, let's talk to other people in
the community and see ifthey're interested. If we're setting up a non-profit
organization, you're going to want that feasibility anyway cause you're going to
have to raise money, so it would be a start from that.
I've got no problem with discussing it further and getting more community input.
Not us. With the community.
And also I'd like to include the other - if we're going to set this up and we think
it's going to evolve into multi law enforcement agencies, then it should start that
way, and it could be answered by the Iowa City Police Department. We're talking
about the Joint Communications Center, answered by the Joint Communications
Center or whatever, but I think that that.
Part of the problem is that they have not set one up before either, so they thought
it was a good idea if you would set it up.
And I think it's fine ifIowa City takes the lead in that, but keeping everybody in
the loop and having it from the beginning feel like if this is the way we go, that
this is something that all the jurisdictions and municipalities are brought into,
want to participate in, see the value in, that becomes
All of the organizations that are tasked with solving the problems are already on
board. And I think a lot of, it you go to the different neighborhoods, the
differences are probably reflective upon whether they've been the victim of an
unsolved crime.
And that would be good information for me to have, personally. If they think this
would benefit them, that's information I definitely want to hear.
And I also think if we get, get information, information that you got about people
that don't feel that the police are some agency to go to, that's also information I
want to have. And what does that mean for how the police interact with
community so that the breakdown
I think
I don't think that problem is unique to Iowa City. It's everywhere.
No, I know it's not unique to Iowa City. No, but I also think there's way for the
police to work in the community, community policing or whatever, to have
different types of attitudes about the police. I think that's important.
Well, ifthere's a majority that wish to defer it tomorrow or, I'm sorry
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Wilblim:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Correia:
Champion:
Hargadine:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 28
It's not on the agenda.
That's right.
There's not a decision, either.
If there's a majority who wish to do some type of public input or whatever, then
would say go ahead and suggest that. Again, I just view it as another tool
available to law enforcement. Some of the folks, the concerns that you're
expressing I acknowledge, but some of the same folks that you may want to hear
from that might call in on a CrimeStoppers service I doubt are going to come to a
public hearing or a neighborhood meeting. I'm just putting that out there.
No, I'm not, I'm just saying if we know that these are there because we are in the
community and hear it, not because we had a specific meeting and asked for that,
we know it's out there, then I think there are ways to proactively address that,
irrespective of whether we do CrimeStoppers or not.
Well, I, I mean, I have some reservations, but I'm not totally against it. I think it's
certainly worth exploring. I think it's naIve to think that everybody loves the
police, and no matter how nice they are, they're probably not going to like the
police. Because the police have a gun and they have a lot of power, and in certain
areas where there are problems the police have a kind of negative
They're authoritarian, in a town that doesn't really like authority.
They're authoritarian, a lot of people don't like authority. I mean, my persona]
experience is I've never had anything but wonderful experiences with police, so
I'm not afraid to call the police. But my family has never had a bad experience
with the police either. I don't have any family history to make me leery of the
police. But I can tell you I know people, for instance, my brother had a friend
who was shot by the police - his family doesn't have a lot of good to say about
the police, and I'm sure their grandchildren don't have a lot of good to say about
the police. So I think it's really naIve to think everybody's going to call the police.
I think, I understand that, and I'm not, I'm trying to say that even in areas where
there might be more police presence there, good people who want to go to the
police, who fee] that the police aren't there for them and it's those situations that
they can't easily access police in the ways that would fee] that was creating
safety, and that's what I would like.
Do you folks know who has a lower acceptance than the police? E]ected
government officials.
I don't know one person who's ever gotten a ticket on Burlington Street and said
"boy, what a wonderful experience." You know, that just doesn't happen.
I've had wonderful experiences getting tickets. I have!
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Ellliott:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 29
If you are indeed afraid of contacting the police, then this seems like the ideal
tool.
Then let's check it out and see if other people in our community think it's the
ideal tool and if so, use it. And I don't think there's anything wrong with the
Police Department making the rounds of neighborhood meetings or
neighborhood picnics this summer just seeing if, what people think of this and
would they contribute money if we developed CrimeStoppers and would they be
interested in participating. I don't know if I'll be supportive of it, but I think that
that would be a good next step.
I want to pursue this. I'm very happy to discuss it more fully. That's fine.
It's not on the agenda, this is just a discussion.
No, that's fine. But I certainly don't want us to drop it.
I just want to make sure I heard you correctly. You said you want to get public
input and then I missed something in the middle - you said you're not sure you'd
support it anyway?
Well, I'd like to hear what other community members think of this. I mean for
what, I said that I don't think it's a fit for our community, and I'd like to hear if
others think it is or it isn't.
And then you'll base your decision on the input?
That would help, probably.
Ok.
Because I'm really, really uncomfortable with it.
So, how many are interested in giving direction to proceed with this?
I'm willing to, I don't want to drop it. Don't use the word proceed - can we
change the language - it's like moral. Yeah, use investigate it further.
Ok. How many would like to investigate it further?
Hear.
Ok, and so 1,2
Well, it depends on what that means.
Well, broad term.
Proceed.
No, proceed means we're going to do it.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 30
Don't add another discussion of (can't hear)
Not going to be on the agenda next time
Well, io heariog what Connie was describing, she was wanting more information.
About?
I suspect she was talking about what you were talking about, trying to get some
type of community input.
Is that what you want? Ok.
I think
Now, just in fairness to staff, what is that, what are you, are you talking about
one public hearing, are you talking about?
I'm talking about going out rather than bringing, having people come?
Aod who going out and, I'm just trying to?
I don't know.
I have a question - when does the neighborhood, I mean, I think we can identify
the places that we might.
That's, that's what I'm asking.
Our neighborhood association has an officer that will attend if we call - I think
it's a him.
The neighborhood council?
No. Our association. I assume that other associations are connected.
But the neighborhood council has somebody from every neighborhood, isn't that
correct?
Right.
That might be one good place to start.
Yeah, that would be a good place to start.
Then they could discuss at the neighborhood meetings rather than sending the
police to every neighborhood meeting. We don't have enough police, but if
somebody could go to the neighborhood council meeting, then the neighborhood
council representatives could go to their neighborhood council and then could.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Baeth:
(laughter)
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Baeth:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Hargadine:
City Council Work Session
Page 31
And provide a police officer if they wanted to hear more about it.
Except neighborhood councils are not nearly comprehensive as this discussion
would have them be. For instance, there are some neighborhoods that are not
organized.
(can't hear)
Well, for instance, my neighborhood, there's no reason for us to, we like it, but
within those neighborhoods that are organized there are a lot of people that are
organized.
We like our neighborhood - we're organized.
(can't hear)
So we're going to take it to the neighborhood council. Is there anything else,
those of you who are wanting some input?
Oh, I would probably, personally do some on my own. Also because I think
again I'm a little reluctant to depend on a public hearing where there are citizens
in town who will always attend public hearings versus citizens who won't.
We're not talking about
I'm totally willing to ask on my own and talk to people in my neighborhood or
And I'm willing to ask all 29,000 students at the University ofIowa, get you guys
an answer.
One to one.
One on one, absolutely.
Yeah, yeah.
I think you should sit with each of em for at least an hour so it's a comprehensive.
I think I got a sense that there's general support on the part of the Council, but
there's clearly some additional information. How about if we do this, let Sam and
I figure out how we can do neighborhood councils, neighborhood centers, visit
with those folks, get some sort of response from them, and let's bring it back a
month from now.
Great.
Sure.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 32
Because I'd like to put it back on the agenda, and apparently, if your feelings are
strong enough, you may have to vote on this.
I'd just recommend as you decide where it is you're going to go you get a memo
to Council so you don't come back in a month, say you did this, and a Council
member or two, why don't you go here
Ok, we already
I think, for instance, Regenia might be interested in going to one or more of the
meetings where this will be discussed, correct, so you'd like to know?
Ok. We'll get you a schedule.
We could take minutes, and then some more meetings.
Ok. Thanks. Let's take a break, be back in here at 8:00.
8:00? Fifteen minutes!
Burlimrton Street Median
Franklin:
Davidson:
Ok. This is going to be a team effort here. The Burlington Street Median project
if you remember, and I know you do, because you remember the video of the
work session that we had of the simulation of what it would look like in the
Burlington Street corridor in the future. And at that point the Council indicated
that you had an interest in the median project and so we've pursued it a little bit
further and wanted to share that with you. We have this in the capital
improvements program for fiscal year '09, so there's that part of it that's kind of in
the system so far. But we went ahead and we hired a consultant, Hoffman Design
and Anderson-Bogert Engineers, so we have the design component and the
engineering, because it's very important to have these two things linked together
in this project. Just wanted to go over what the goals were of this whole thing, the
whole idea behind it, and we'll get into these in a little bit more detail. Improving
pedestrian safety, maintaining our traffic capacity on Burlington Street, it's a
major corridor, that's a very important part of it. Reducing the corridor crash rate
or any possibilities of crashes in the corridor. Linking the downtown to the near
southside: remember, the near southside is that area south of Burlington Street
where we see the potential for expansion of the downtown rather than going
north, going south, and Burlington Street has been identified as one of those
barriers to that potentially happening. And then lastly, just to enhance that
corridor visually, this is one of the main corridors the people experience as they
come to downtown Iowa City and through downtown Iowa City. So I'm going to
have Jeff first address the pedestrian safety and the traffic capacity issues.
A couple of you that I've spoken with about this have asked what's our
motivation for doing this? Why are we even considering doing this?, which is a
perfectly legitimate question. The major motivating factor for this is pedestrian
safety. If you don't buy the argument that we need to try and enhance pedestrian
safety along this corridor, then there's much less need for this project than we feel
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 33
is necessary. That's the principal motivation. At least a year or two ago
improving pedestrian safety in this corridor was something that City Council
specifically asked us to look into. We did come up with three strategies. We
tested a bunch of strategies and then came up with three that we felt were things
that would work to enhance pedestrian safety. Those were the countdown
pedestrian timers, the continental crosswalk markings, which are the large
rectangle markers across Burlington Street, and the vehicles must yield to
pedestrians and crosswalk signs. Those were the three strategies. Now, those
have been implemented recently enough that we don't have the after data to see
how well they have worked, but we really feel that they were good, and as where
none of them were terribly expensive. This is what we feel is kind of the next
phase, if you really want to take an order of magnitude leap in this corridor to
improve pedestrian safety, we feel that this is a good project. There has been a
couple of research projects conducted, one by Oregon State University, one by
CITRI, which is the research arm ofIowa State University and the Iowa
Department of Transportation in Ames, and both studies showed that the crash
rate can be cut in half, basically. They studied urban arterias with medians and
without medians, and the crash rate was half as much, crashes involving vehicles
and pedestrians, was half as much when there was a median present. So this is
our main motivation. Two things, principally, that the median would do: it would
do what we call channelize pedestrians to the intersections - I don't think I need
to remind any of you that there's a great deal of crossing mid-block, especially in
the two blocks between Gilbert Street and Dubuque, yeah, Dubuque. That
corridor in particular has a great deal of crossing, and I would point out, it's not
illegal to jaywalk. It's permitted by State law. You, the pedestrian must give the
vehicle the right of way, that's the difference; at a crosswalk the pedestrian has
the right of way. But it would channelize pedestrians to the crosswalks, which we
feel would be a very positive thing. The other thing it would do is create a refuge
area. If you did happen to cross, and for whatever reason, you were crossing
against the light or you didn't make it, there would be a refuge area halfway
across, which you can see clearly here. It's relatively narrow obviously at the
intersection, it tapers down fairly narrow so we can squeeze in all the lanes, but it
would be an area where the pedestrian could take refuge. So that's the principal
motivation. And another thing, and Karin may wish to elaborate on this, is
improving the aesthetics ofthe corridor. You know, between those curb lines
there's really nothing of aesthetic value right now, and so we do feel that visually
the over-story trees and then we'll put up a diagram that shows the whole corridor
here in a second, factored into the area where the over-story trees are, which we
think would make a, you know, as you looked down the corridor, would be very
impressive from an aesthetic point of view. We did, however, and it was on the
slide that Karin showed earlier, want to make sure that to the degree possible, we
were maintaining as much traffic capacity as we could in this corridor. This is a
major traffic corridor. It is a corridor with very little capacity to absorb additional
traffic. During off-peak periods it has some ability to do that, but during peak
periods it's virtually, at least at times, certain times of the year, at what we call
saturation flow, where there's very little additional traffic that can be added.
Because of that, JCCOG performed a study and then the consultant that we had
assisting us with this project we had do a follow-up study. And it was the
conclusion of both studies that we can implement this project and generally
maintain the traffic capacity that we have. There's a couple of things here. We
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
(laughter)
Elliott:
Davidson:
Champion:
Bailey:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 34
want to preserve the amount ofleft turn capacity that we feel is necessary at each
intersection, and we evaluated each intersection specifically. And you will see
when we put up the next slide that we did have one block between Gilbert and
Linn where there's really no room for the median with the over-story trees
because of the necessity for the left turn lanes to be so large. The rest of the way
down to Madison Street, actually all the way to the River, we do have the ability
to have the over-story trees at mid-block. Go ahead. You can see that here. Just to
orient you, maybe Karin can orient you and show you where Gilbert Street is and
where - the lower right there is where Gilbert Street is, so that would be the far
east right there would be the far east part of the corridor. And there's the CC-2
zone.
Ned Ashton Park is very popular tonight.
Anyway, I'll continue talking here while Karin tries to bring that up. What the
traffic consultant concluded that did the follow-up traffic study update of the
JCCOG study basically is that during peak traffic periods, there's very little
ability to add additional left turners to the system because of the through
volumes. The through volume will basically govern the amount of number of
vehicles that can access the corridor during peak traffic periods. And for that
reason it was the consultant's opinion that adding the median would not
significantly impact traffic capacity. The other thing it does is it eliminates from,
there are a few alleys and a few driveways along this corridor, and it eliminates
left turns out of those. Now, left turns out of an access point such as that is a very
high probability of a collision at that location. That's a movement where there's a
number of conflicting movements. And it's, it's a very common strategy to reduce
the crash rate is to add a median and eliminate those. There's still access in and
out of them, but it's right turns only, right in and right out, so that would occur in
a few places along the corridor. That would positively impact traffic capacity as
well, as well as reducing the crash rate and, just so everybody is clear, this is not
a super-high crash rate corridor, in spite all the volume, traffic moves relatively
slowly and where, it's where traffic moves quickly that you have the high crash
location. So it's not a high crash location, but there is some crash history in this
corridor and we would bring, we feel, reduce that by eliminating the left turn out
movements. Karin might want to speak a little bit more about the aesthetics and
visually connecting the two sides of Burlington Street?
It might be a low crash area, but we had two pedestrians killed on this street.
Right.
Right. I wanted just to explain a little bit, one of, to let you know that as we
worked through this, and if you haven't had the chance to read the report, that this
was a collaborative effort in terms of looking at this with representatives of the
University ofIowa, the Downtown Association, as well as Public Works, Parks
& Recreation and us in Planning. That the consultants spoke with the business
owners in this area who would be effected by the access points in terms of the
right in, right out. One of the businesses that had the most problem with it was
the bank on Burlington Street, which indicated that they would resist this until
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Champion:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
(laughter)
Franklin:
Elliott:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 35
there was redevelopment at that site. And you know that that block between
Clinton Street and Dubuque Street is one in which we expect redevelopment in
the next few years. The majority of the property is owned by Mark Moen, and I
think there's some work that's being done with the bank that would incorporate
the bank into their project, and so that redevelopment is likely to occur
concurrently with when this project is scheduled, the capital project.
What bank?
West Bank.
Oh, but people could go in right, and come out at the stoplight.
The alley off of Dubuque, yeah, yeah. But right now, their drive-through comes
out on Burlington Street and they would still have a right in, right out option,
which, I'm not quite sure what the concern is, because right now they're only
exiting, they're not entering.
They couldn't turn left out.
They couldn't turn left out, right. Right, Amy, that's exactly right, so it is a
diminishment of some of their access. The other places we would have to work
with were the Kum N' Go gas stations, primarily the one at Gilbert and
Burlington. And there we have, the access there is from that alley which is just to
the west of them, as well as off of Gilbert Street, and so we were looking at some
ways in which we could incorporate access off that alley but then would have to
go south, it couldn't go north, unless they wanted to go just right, so, there's
things to be worked out with this, but I wanted to let you know that we had talked
with the businesses there. In terms of the aesthetic, and I'm not going to talk too
much about the linkage, I think you understand what that is, what that could do,
because it's the pedestrian safety issue that really speaks to that linkage. What
we're looking at in those planted areas where it popped out and you saw the trees
in the last diagram, is an area which would have some fairly low plantings and
then would have over-story trees in those areas in which there was room enough
to put the over-story trees, and that would be every place except that block
between Linn and Gilbert Street, where we don't have the width in the median
that would enable the planted area. What also would be included would be this
kind of a barrier rail that you see. That would go where - let me go back here - in
this illustration that barrier rail (I'm trying to touch this lightly so it doesn't pop
off). In those portions where - don't look at it.
Ok. The portions where you don't have the planted areas in these reaches along
here, and then this entire block, you would have this in that area right there. This
is difficult.
You could stack for virtually a block then? Stack left turn cars for?
No, not any more than you can stack now.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Elliott:
Franklin:
El1iott:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 36
You mean between Gilbert and Linn?
I thought you said the safety island in the middle would not be wide so the
stacking lane for the left turn would exceed how far?
In this one, right here, this starts the lane for the left turn movement for Gilbert
north.
That's about half a block then. Yeah.
In this particular block, yes. Over here, over here you don't need as much
stacking space, and this is the analysis that Jeffreferred to, that was done block
by block. This intersection that is portrayed in this particular illustration is at
Madison and Burlington, where we worked with University and it was looked at
in conjunction with the Rec Center construction that's going to be occurring, and
also moving that sidewalk on the north side a little bit further north, and also
moving that fence that is around Gibson Park. They want to try and direct
pedestrians to use that sidewalk, but it's working in conjunction with the
University there. Back to this illustration. This barrier is
(cut off- tape ended)
Franklin:
(laughter)
Correia:
Bailey:
Franklin:
. . . the height that would deter people from going over the top. It's 23 inches to
the top. Now, it doesn't mean that nobody could jump over the top, but it means
that most people are not going to do that. The other feature which is included in
the cost that's in your report has on the side of this form, there's kind of this
skyline, and then the plan includes a lighting element that would be a LED light
just kind of underneath the lip of this. That is just another feature that would kind
of give you a signal that this is a corridor as you go down, down the street,
Burlington Street. So between the barrier, the trees, this lighted element, would
al1 define this corridor and at the one end, at this end. This doesn't help you by
pointing at the screen, does it?
It's al1 right.
It's getting late.
This right here is an opportunity to have a public art element, and that would be
something separate from this whole contract, but it would be some sort of vertical
element there that could identify the entry into Iowa City as you come over the
bridge. Anyway, we don't need anything from you tonight, we just wanted to
bring you up to date as to where we were with this. The next time this would
come up would be during our discussion of capital projects, and the next step
would be to do constructions plans in anticipation of construction in fiscal year
'09.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Champion:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Champion:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
City Council Work Session
Page 37
Karin, I just have one question. Is that barricade in the middle, that, whatever you
want to call it.
That swoopy thing?
Yeah, that swoopy thing. I, is there enough room for people to, I could see that
somebody under 40 isn~ going to hesitate to cross that thing if they want to get
across the road. Maybe I would even do it, and I
There is about a foot of room.
Ok, so that, they'd be safe.
Right there, where they could stand if they wished to. Now, in most places, I
mean, this is where the channelization of pedestrian comes. Yeah, they wouldn't
be stuck there such that they would be standing out in the
Street.
in the travel lane. But the barrier is there to act as a deterrent, to give you a visual
cue that you're supposed to be down thisaway.
Right.
The block where we have the most problem with that, of course, is that one,
where we don't have room to put in the planting and the bigger impediment.
They still would be able to stand.
They would be able to stand, yeah. And I think as we all looked at this and
struggled with it in terms of you know, not having something there that was
barbed wire and a chain link fence, that there's a certain bounds you try to reach,
and you understand that you're not going to prevent it all, but you may hit, oh,
optimistically, 96.5 of the people.
You are optimisitc.
I am.
But you could, Karin, come out to the center and walk down that thing, couldn't
you? It's a foot wide, so you could be walking down the center of Burlington.
You could.
And I have one more comment on, you know, this has not been a good year for
me for trees. I'm still quite fond of them, but I don't know that I really would
have an over-story tree over an extremely busy traveled street. You know, they
drop leaves, and at certain times of the year ifit gets wet, that's just like driving
on ice and sliding. I just don't think it's wise to drop leaves onto the center of
Burlington Street.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Wilburn:
Correia:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Fosse:
Correia:
Fosse:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 38
Well,
Locusts, right?
Honey locusts.
Yeah, honey locusts were the tree that was suggested, and the skyline honey
locust at that. I hear you, and if
They don't drop leaves?
Little tiny leaves. I guess you know if that were the prevailing opinion, that that
was a major element that we talked about as a group to kind of define the
corridor, and so we would need to talk about that, but yeah, we can.
I think a major (can't hear) is safety, though, and anybody who's ever driven on
wet leaves knows that they are slick. If you stop on them it's hard to take off, and
you can slide when you try and stop. But I don't know, that's just my opinion.
Build a tent over the streets.
One of the issues in the report had to do with the sanitary sewer underneath - one
of them needed to be replaced?
Oh, as an opportunity, if we were going to do this, yeah.
But that's not related to, that's not built into the cost?
No.
So that would have to be, would that be built into the cost? And it's not built into
the cost of the CIP?
I don't think it's in the current CIP - is it, Rick? No, no. And I mean, that's a
project that may need to be done regardless of whether we do this or not. This
project does not require the sanitary sewer project.
Right, but I thought the report said it's presumed it's in need, presumed to be in
need of rehab.
Because of its age.
Right.
What we're doing this summer now that the students are gone is we're televising
it, we've put in flow monitors so we can get a handle on how much additional
flow line Tower Place has added to it, and by the end of the summer that issue
will be in better focus than it is now.
I have two questions.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
-- _.__._.,--~-_._--_.~-_._,-,"----_._--_.-._-_.~---'_._.--_._._--~--_._-----,~---_..._--_.__._-_..._---
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Correia:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
O'Donnell:
Wilburn:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 39
We just wouldn't want to do this project and then rip it up again and have to do
the sewer.
Well, right, that's what I mean, so we would to make sure that's all happening at
the same time, and then have the budgetary plan.
But the sewer would be paid for with sewer money.
Sure.
What's PCC, first question?
Portland Concrete Cement, cement concrete, I don't know.
Ok, good. And where is this 3 million dollar fence that's going to be relocated?
That's the Gibson
That's the Gibson fence. 3 million!? Is that?
3 thousand, I thought the other.
That's one heck of a fence.
Yeah, I thought the other, ok, that's one heck of a fence.
Ok. That would all be University costs.
Million, thousand.
It's the University. Ok.
Good. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thanks.
FEMA DENIAL OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE
Wilburn:
Atkins:
FEMA denial of public assistance - Steve.
Ok. Connie, can I ask you to pass these out please? In the packet I prepared a
memorandum advising you about the denial of our public assistance and the fact
that we would be appealing that public assistance denial. Since that time, and
that's been processed, since that time, on Friday, the Small Business
Administration has released through a press release information declaring our
area a disaster area. Now, I haven't quite figured out why SBA, a federal agency,
thinks it is and why FEMA thinks it isn't, so I will defer all questions to, but I
met with the SBA folks this afternoon, and want to kind of give you a quick
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 40
update on that while we're appealing the public assistance portion, they're
proceeding with the individual assistance. Again, SBA, they reminded me and, I
should say, they informed me about 80% of their loans are for homeowners. I did
not know that. I thought it was overwhelmingly, strictly businesses.
SBA?
SBA.
Oooh, that's interesting.
If you look at the handout that I gave you, the important thing here is that one we
were declared, as well as the surrounding counties, our eligibility. Two, they
open shop tomorrow at the County Administration Building, and will be here
through Saturday, July 15th. This information is intended for you all to just get a
feel for what kind of programs they have. If you go to pages 3 and 4 of the
handout, it points out some of the things that are available through the SBA:
home disaster loans, and I would note, one of the difficulties for example, the
University was experiencing with some of the student renters, cars got crunched
and apparently SBA will consider loan programs for replacement. At the bottom,
where it says no credit available elsewhere to give you some idea of the interest
rates, it's from 2.8 to 4%, so they're good interest rates. They also will help
finance the business physical disaster loans, that is, if your business was
physically damaged. And they also have for small businesses, if you have a cash
flow problem, to get back up and running. Again, looks like a good program. We
will be supportive ofthese folks and there was some media coverage. I didn't see
extensive media coverage in response to this press release, but I felt if! get you a
copy of this and we'll make it available, I'm sure I'll get calls in the office about
this. The bottom line, we're pursuing the public assistance as an appeal, I
wouldn't hold much hope out for that, but at least the SBA has stepped up and
will also be helping out.
Steve?
Yes?
Did the public assistance, did that apply to mean government-owned structures,
or did that mean publlic/private facilities?
Public properties, public damage, debris cleanup: that's what I mean by public
assistance.
Meaning what the City had to do.
The City, the City and other government agencies had to expend, right.
So, my question - did the amount of funds that we have in reserve enter into that
decision of theirs, which means we were, if that's the case, we were punished for
being very judicious with our budget.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 41
Atkins: I think you can make that assumption, that one, we did have, our reserve position
was healthy and that we did spend from the reserves to finance our cleanup. We
were, we have a good insurance program, we have large deductibles, but we are
well-insured and we're still in the process of figuring out exactly how we'll stand
with that. I think.
Elliott: Excuse me, but it just bugs me a little that we have been very concerned,
. financially and fiscally conservative, we have done a really good job under some
trying circumstances, we're being punished for it, and the other, other cities may
be rewarded for not being as good.
Atkins: Well, if you read the denial, it said that it was not beyond our ability of the State
and local governments to respond. In that case, they're correct - it was not beyond
our ability. But those are permanent expenditures. They went to payroll, contract
cleanup work, so once the money is spent, it's not coming back.
Elliott: I've said my piece. It just bugs me.
Champion: The whole thing might have boiled down to the fact that it's a Democratic
County.
Bailey: That's what I thought. Too blue.
Atkins: Well, one of the things that they have, and I'll give you the short version of this,
is that, and don't hold me to these numbers, they take the population of the
County and they take it times $1.19, and they create a number, and then they take
the population of the city that was effected and they do that population times
$2.50. You add them all up and that's our threshold. So if your damage and
expense for cleanup does not exceed that number, then you're automatically
denied.
Elliott: Wow.
Atkins: . Now, our estimates, we feel pretty good about it, particularly because we have
contracts for debris cleanup, we've already paid overtime for our employees that
were involved. We're still working on some of the other projects, how much of
our insurance settlement's going to be for the Rec Center roof, the window
replacement, and those things. But it is, it is unfortunate, it was not beyond our
ability, and if you were to ask me, I would have to say you are correct, it was not
beyond our ability to respond. If it does, once again, once you've bumed up the
reserve, you have to work to bring it back up.
Correia: How much did we spend of our reserve?
Atkins: We don't know exactly. I can tell you that we probably spent a million dollars,
and that's just a rough estimate, because we haven't settled some of these. There
are certain insurance claims pending where we paid for the work and will be
seeking reimbursement from our insurance company, so those numbers will
change. I'm going to probably wait 2 weeks to 30 days to see how the appeal
goes. Then we'll present a plan to you on how we're going to cover all those
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Correia:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
SILO Update
Wilburn:
Al!enda Items
Wilburn:
ITEM 7.
City Council Work Session
Page 42
expenses, the effects on reserves, things such as that. But the SBA thing is out
there ready to go.
Do we have a database or list of homeowners, addresses where there's damage?
No, we do not. No.
There's no way to mail out this?
Oh, this? We'll find a way to get the word out on this. I haven't figured that out.
We just got this this afternoon, because we do want to make sure particularly
those, like the Iowa Avenue folks, we have not figured that out, but we'll do our
best to get this out.
Ok.
We do have a public relations group in town and he was part of the group that I
spoke with and they're on top of it. I was impressed that they're pretty well
organized. Particularly when this thing opens up - I'm assuming we'll get some
press coverage tomorrow. Folks go down and actually see that they're there.
The Crisis Center case advocates have been working with several of the folks,
and so I'll make sure they get that out and they're also on a committee with the
United Way, which the University has several folks on the list, and so they'll
work to get that out to folks that have been getting assistance.
The insurance people should know about this. They're dealing with these people
all the time.
That's a good idea.
We'll do our best to get the word out.
Ok.
That's it for the FEMA thing. Unless you have any more questions on it.
SILO update. In the packet is the letter that I sent to the School Board and I've
heard no formal communication back. The School Board is going to be
discussing this tomorrow at their meeting. The County has also sent a letter to the
School Board basically similar to the letter that I had sent. Otherwise, unless
anyone has any update, that's all I've got.
Agenda items.
AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF 426 BAYARD STREET TO FRANTZ
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia;
Atkins:
Correia:
Boothroy:
Correia;
Correia:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Boothroy:
Elliott:
Champion;
Elliott:
Boothroy:
Elliott:
Boothroy:
Elliott:
Boothroy:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 43
Why don't we talk about Bayard Street?
Bayard Street? I think Doug is, yep, here he is.
One question I had was there seems to be the desire to keep that second lot from
being developed. I know there's options of having it come in or whatever with
some of the potential homeowners or planned owners or whatever. If the City and
the neighborhood doesn't want that land ever to be developed, can the City just
keep that?
No.
Why is that?
Because, E]eanor can correct me but, under the statute that we used to condemn
the property we're obligated to dispose of it. We didn't condemn it for public
purposes, we condemned it to eliminate the nuisance property, which was the
house that was dilapidated, still is. And it's my understanding from talking with
Mitch about it, we can not keep any of that property.
But it could be, could the, that piece of property be separated from the house and
be conveyed to a non-profit, Parks, you know?
It has to be conveyed for rehabilitation or demolition for housing.
Right. It has to be for a development, not for a park. It can not be used that way.
Well, the person who seems to have, it seems to me, it'll depend on what other
people think, but at least the proposal that I would support plans not to develop
that parcel of land.
Right.
So how does that fit when you say it was condemned for the purposes of
development or demolition, if we're not going to develop it?
Well, he's using it as all one lot, and so it's part of the house that he's rehabbing
and so the tract ofland, the two lots.
That's a lot, so no problem then.
Right. That's correct, and he's willing to restrict through a covenant that it won't
be ever developed
I think that's asking a lot of the property owner, but if they want it, that's fine.
He volunteered that for, he said perpetuity.
Say again? How long does the covenant last?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Champion:
Boothroy:
Correia:
Champion:
Boothroy:
Dilkes:
Boothroy:
Dilkes:
Champion:
Boothroy:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Champion:
Boothroy:
Bailey:
Champion:
Boothroy:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
City Council Work Session
Page 44
How can that be?
I don't know. He said as long as he could. I don't know how long that can be, but
as long as he can possibly covenant he would.
How long
It will take it to the next owner.
No I think it goes
No, no, non. You can restrict up to 20 years and then it can be renewed.
So a long time.
A long time.
20 years isn't a long time.
But it can be renewed.
We didn't, we didn't seek proposals that wouldn't, we sought any kind of proposal
and these are the ones you got. We didn't seek ones that wouldn't develop that lot.
But I mean, there were some communication from neighbors that they don't want
that lot to be developed.
Of course not.
Absolutely.
Those trees are incredible. Did you see them?
I know, but
The City Forester, I had the City Forester go out and take a look at it because
there was some, one of the proposals had suggested building two houses, and the
trees might not be in the best of condition, and Terry said that the trees can
survive for a long time, and it would obviously be a crime to cut the largest one
which could be damaged by a second house. According to Bill Frantz, I think he
said it was over 30 feet in diameter, which would make it a very old tree. Much
older than many of us.
I have a question about the contract. I guess this was the contract, and we read a
lot of contracts. So if the sale is subject to the conditions of the proposal, where
do we indicate that in the contract? How does that work?
The resolution that you have allows an amendment to the contract to take care of
that, and we allow Steve to make that amendment.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Boothroy:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Boothroy:
Elliott:
Boothroy:
ODonnell:
City Council Work Session
Page 45
Ok. And then, clause II, is there any significance that the buyers have not
examined the abstract to the title of the property and the abstract is not accepted?
Is there any significance to not examining the abstract?
No, it will be examined prior to closing, it just, it's just an indication that they're
not accepting title at the time they signed the purchase agreement.
Got it. Thank you.
I liked the proposal from McDonough's structures. I liked that it was somebody, I
mean, I understand that one thing that is not, that we don't like, or like as much,
is that he didn't indicate he wanted to hold that second lot. He's not planning to
develop it at this time, but what I like about it is he has experience in historic
structures, plans to live in the house with his family, I don't know.
I looked at that too, and then I went out and looked at the property, and I didn't
really see how you could, if there's no covenant not developing the second lot, I
would be uncomfortable with that, because.
Can we sell it with the covenant not to develop it? Why can't it come from our
sale?
Sorry, I missed the question.
Can the City sell that with the covenant not to develop the second lot?
That's what we were talking
No, she's asking could we have put the covenant on at the time we offered it for
sale, as opposed to having it come from the applicant.
We have some concern about doing that. It was, because of the way the statute
reads, so it was our preference to not limit it at the time of the solicitation of
offers.
Ok. So.
And I did discuss that with Brad, and he was not willing to limit the future
development potential of that lot.
I really like the fact that the covenant was the idea of the developer. Or the
purchaser, I would say.
Bill has not only proposed that, but he was very active in meeting with all of the
neighbors, more so than any of the other applicants, and I give him a lot of credit
for that. And I have received 2 emails and 3 phone calls supporting his proposal,
so, he has some broad support in the neighborhood for it.
I've had 3 phone calls.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Elliott:
Boothroy:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Boothroy:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Wilburn:
Boothroy:
Wilburn:
ITEM 21.
Champion:
Atkins:
Champion:
Atkins:
Correia:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 46
I had an initial phone call very early on from a very close neighbor who
recommended another buyer, one of the four, and that person contacted me later
and said "we've met with Frantz, and we now prefer that" so whatever that
means.
I had the same experience.
I also had that call. Those lot sizes aren't uncommon up there. There's many big
lots.
Well, once you put a garage in there too.
Yeah, and he's going to restore the garage, not tear it down, so that makes a big
difference.
What's uncommon is the oaks.
Yeah.
Yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Other agenda items?
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO
ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY AND HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY TO PROVIDE
ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE MCCOLLISTER
BOULEVARD IOWA RIVER BRIDGE PROJECT.
Well, I just have one, and I'm not saying we should do it, but I hope when we do
the bridge project, that we will consider making it bat friendly, if it's possible. It
may not even work in this climate.
Making it what again?
Bat friendly.
Oh, bats, as in critters.
Bats.
Connie, you give me the willies.
Haven't we done that before?
I mentioned it.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Champion:
Atkins:
O'Donnel1:
Bailey:
O'Donnel1:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Correia:
El1iott:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 47
No, I think we actual1y did something once.
I don't think so. It was just this bridge.
You don't think so? I wouldn't have forgotten bat friendly.
Bat friendly, the bats live under there.
Item 21. Isn't the Park Road Bridge bat friendly?
No, that's pigeon friendly.
It's pigeon friendly.
Oh. Bats, pigeons.
(can't hear) and I think it would be, it could become a tourist attraction, and not
only that, they eat thousands and thousands and thousands of mosquitoes every
night.
Oh yes.
I think we should look into it.
Ok.
I'll send al1 the ones by my house every night.
Do you have a fixation on Bruce Wayoe or something?
I have a question on that item, but it's not exactly on that item.
It's not 21 or it is 21.
It is 21, but it's not what we're fighting about.
It's not about bats.
Consent Calendar CorresDondence 3e(13) - Laura Stern: Thatcher Mobile Home Park
Correia:
Dilkes:
Atkins:
There's correspondence in the packet from a resident of the mobile home park
there, so are those documents, requesting documents?
Yeah, Public Works and my office are working together to pul1 those together.
We've been responding to them I think routinely as they, as they come in, and
you'l1 see copies of that.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Atkins:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Champin:
Bailey:
Champion:
Item 21.
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 48
Ok. So are there plans as this project progresses to meet with residents ongoing,
just?
You know, we're certainly welcome to meet with them any time they want. I
know we've had some conversations with those folks and how much formal we
can get
I just mean in terms of like, I think when 1 " Avenue was going through there
were regular meetings with neighborhood folks and the City just updating on the
process.
They've already had how things are going.
Yeah, I think we've had those, but there's no reason why we can't have more. And
we have not settled on the exact aligrunent of the road yet.
Right.
Right.
It's too bad that road probably will come pretty close, and then they're going to
have the hog thing on the other side of them.
Well, then, that road is going through Sand Hill Estates, so it's not like it's a,
we're not talking about an interstate.
No.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO
ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY AND HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY TO PROVIDE
ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE MCCOLLISTER
BOULEVARD IOWA RIVER BRIDGE PROJECT.
Item 21, continuing, not a bad item.
What's the item again?
The same number. In the concept, I mean, we've talked about having inclusion of
bike and pedestrian access, and shouldn't that be, where is that noted in here? The
conceptual bridge design is not noted, so I just wondered, I just want to make
sure that's always out front.
I will check on that.
Because that's going to be also a really important part of the tour, the bats and the
bikes
And the trail goes through it.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
,,---"-~-'-'---------'
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
(laughter)
Elliott:
ODonnell:
Elliott:
Correia:
Elliott:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 49
The trail, trailhead is mentioned, but I think that's important to keep in front of
us.
It's time for me to ask, since this is an extension of Mormon Trek, does anyone
else agree with me that it should be named Mormon Trek and not a different
name?
It's got to be a different name on the other side of the road, right?
No, it's the same street.
When it turns directions it changes, right?
Just like, it seems odd to me, you're driving down Kirkwood, and Kirkwood
makes a turn and all of a sudden you're on a different street.
We have many streets.
You get lost.
It makes no sense.
We'll take you out on a tour so you don't get lost on McCollister.
It's an extension of Mormon Trek. Nobody agrees.
I think the point is well taken that at what point do you stop in helping with
deliveries and people understanding what part of Mormon Trek. I think that's a
salient point.
It's like Iowa Avenue and Newton.
Yeah. If every highway in this country changed names every time it made a
corner, where would we be?
It's not a highway, though.
Apparently you folks agree - it's just nonsensical.
Bob, I still like Captain Irish Parkway.
Oh, I did too. Steve.
I still have, I'm still on 21.
Ok.
Was this, was this consulting project bid out?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Bailey:
ITEM 17.
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 50
No we put it up for proposal and then we interview, interview folks. Rick's
department does that. So was there, do we do
We do an RFP, right?
Yes.
We do a Request for Proposals, an RFP, which, you do those on projects where
money really, it's one of the factors but not all of the factors.
Oh.
You can't really competitively bid a service contract.
Did we have a sense it would cost this much?
We're quite comfortable with this number.
It's already budgeted.
Project is about 5 million dollars, and this represents about 8%, so that's about
right. This is the one we had the federal earmark for, so we're anxious to move
this along.
So these are federal funds, that what you are saying?
Yes.
Great.
Two years, no, it's probably about a year ago that we received a federal earmark,
which is a nice word for pork.
Yeah.
Yeah.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGETED POSITIONS
IN THE TRANSIT DIVISION OF THE PARKING AND TRANSIT
DEPARTMENT BY ADDING ONE FULL.TIME AND FOUR PART-TIME
(.75) MASS TRANSIT OPERATOR POSITIONS.
Ah, 17 Steve. $132,400.00 - is that salary and, is that total compensation?
That's the package, right.
How many people is that?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
Champion:
ITEM 19.
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 51
One full-time, four part-time - .75, yeah. It's whatever's necessary to run the new
routes.
Oh, I see. Amy just pointed out - it's stated right there.
I wasn't going to say that.
Oh, that's nice of you.
I, is everybody else done?
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CHAPTER 28E AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AND THE CITY OF
CORALVILLE, IOWA FOR THE PROVISION OF ANIMAL CARE
SERVICES.
I had other things. I had a question on item 19, the Coralville.
Oh, that's exactly what I was going to bring up. Oh good.
That was my next one.
So, I'm not quite clear. Weare, our current animal shelter
Let me explain it to you as it was explained to me. The Animal Control Advisory
Board has not functioned very well. Bad on attendance, and when we were
negotiating with Coralville for the purposes of animal care services, that was one
of the issues. Our representatives did not show up on a regular basis, so the
proposal was to try the task force idea.
The Coralville residents didn't show up, or all of the residents?
Coralville, not the residents, their
appointees.
appointees, yeah.
But the other ones.
Yeah, and it was a means by which to kind of rejuvenate this group offolks, get
some new faces, and that's why we're cooking up the task force.
So we're disbanding the old one and creating a new one with a different name
with the same function?
Yeah. Functions will be a little more different.
And we're giving Coralville $54,000.00?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Correia:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Elliott
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 52
Yeah, I have a question about that.
Yes, that's by contract, yeah, we have to reimburse them.
For what?
For what?
I knew you'd ask me that.
We have to remit $54,000.00.
That was the $54,000.00
Plus 13, we're paying 13.
I asked Sue about that. It's a buyout provision of under the previous contract,
because they had made contributions to the facility as it was envisioned as a joint
facility, so it's a buyout, the cost of their contribution minus depreciation, etc. I
think accounting came up with.
It sounds all right.
And now it's.
Conditional occupancy
Now it's just our facility?
Yes.
And they are like per diem.
And we, they, we provide services to them by contract.
With our policies.
With our policies, yes.
So we'll no longer say Iowa City/Coralville
It doesn't say that now, think it says Animal Care and Adoption Center.
Actually, it's the Iowa City/Coralville Adoption Center.
No, there has been letterhead to that effect, and we will have to change that,
because it's wholly ours now.
And how much did we get from the old 28 East, since I'm new, what was the
amount we got every year from Coralville?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Champion:
Atkins:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
Champion:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 53
I don't know.
So now we're going to be paid per dog or per cat or alligator.
They bring the animals. They're subject to our policies. One of their concerns
was that they wanted to cap the number of days that we would keep an animal
from Coralville, and we objected. We said if you're going to bring animals to the
shelter, we're in the animal care and adoption business and if the animal has to
stay 20 days, it stays 20 days. But if the animal remains adoptable, then you will
have to pay, and they ultimately agreed to that. That's our policy. Because we
have animals we've kept a long time and adopted much later on.
The cat I adopted had been there for 10 months. He's wonderful.
What did you say?
We keep them for that long?
Yeah, my cat had been there for 10 months.
We're an adoption center.
That's unusual, Bob.
Oh, I would say.
We do, we will keep, if we believe an animal is adoptable.
But Misha is really good with the cats there.
Oh, yeah, very much so.
I mean they have kind of a free run, there's cats on the counter when you walk in,
really kind of a neat thing.
They're shelter cats, there are shelter cats, as in cats are just part of the shelter.
They've been formally institutionalized.
Other agenda items?
No.
Ijust have, this task force, I'm sorry. This is an
I'm sorry - I told Misha she didn't have to stay tonight, because I didn't think
there would be any questions.
It's about animals. Are you kidding?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Champion:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Correia:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 54
Oh, I understand.
So this is a new attempt to make this task force more active.
Yes it is.
Particularly within, I would assume that it would be in our best interest to do the
education programs.
Right. This is such a high profile public service. Some sort of an advisory body,
task force of citizens makes a lot of sense. And it also helps reinforce the overall
concept that we're in animal care and adoption, we're not a dog pound.
That's right. And what would happen if we didn't want to take Coralville's dogs?
I'm not saying we shouldn't, but what would?
Oh, we will take them as long as they pay. Their concern was when we drop an
animal off after 10 days, we don't want to pay anymore. And our point was, no, if
the animal, I mean, if the animal is sick or something we'll put it down.
What do they do with, say they pick up a cocker spaniel and we have kept it for a
month and they say we ain't paying anymore?
They will pay.
They have to, they have a contract.
They have to pay, they have a contract.
You mean, they have to pay forever, until the dog dies?
Or is adopted.
Our objective is to
The animals are, Bob, the animals are moved out. They're not, other than the
shelter cats, who hang around for a long, long time, the animals are moved
through rather quickly.
That would be why the task force should get on this education component of
educating about animal over-population.
I think you've just been told.
We don't have enough for public safety but we have enough for dogs.
Well, if the animal and it's owner is found, they pay.
Oh, hey.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
(laughter)
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 55
Oh yeah.
To get it back you have to pay.
Oh, yeah.
Pay for the microchipping too.
Right. And spayed, and what do you call it.
Well, they don't do that twice.
Any other agenda items?
Ross, when did you lose control?
I have a couple of things related to correspondence. Is that under agenda items?
Consent Calendar CorresDondence 3e(3) - Bob Hoff: Skateboard additions
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
There is correspondence about the skate park?
Yeah.
Is that something, I hadn't thought of in this letter about events, sporting events.
Is that something that, you know, thinking about the Sports Authority and the
CVB and potential.
The skate park was built for the intent of being recreational, and that was, I don't
think there was ever any doubt that was what we were trying to do. As far as the
Sports Authority, the folks from the CVB and their intent, could skate boarding
be some sort of, yeah, whether our facility could satisfy that?
Well no, that's what they're saying, that is what they're asking for, this person.
There's a couple issues pending that will have an effect on the skate park. The
University, which we expect to come back before long with the boathouse, we
indicated to them that one of the things that we'd like to see is that they'd have
public restrooms. Whether we want to expand this thing or not, there's some
engineering issues. The ground's pretty soggy and there's a nurnber of things we'd
have to look at. If you want us to do some estimating for you, we can do that.
Yeah, was there a plan?
I thought the public restrooms in there.
The public restrooms was the biggest, lately was the biggest deal.
I thought we put those in?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Correia:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 56
Beg your pardon? I'm sorry, I didn't hear you?
I thought we put in restrooms in the CIP.
You did put those in the CIP, yeah, we just haven't gotten around to building it
yet. But then with the boathouse thing I don't think we want to duplicate them,
but we'll know about that before too long.
When you built the skate park was there a plan to continue to do improvements
or changes?
I don't recollect that. I think we decided that, it was pretty pricey at the time and I
think we said $300 plus thousand dollars is about where we want to go and we
ended it right there.
We just meant it to be recreational.
And it was an experiment. We didn't know if it was going to be accepted. I mean
Oh yeah, it was intended to be
It has been and that's why I was wondering ifthere was a market for expansion of
that. If we expanded it so it had a competitive appeal and it was rented out for
these events, then that would be.
Then we'd have parking all over Terrillmill Park and everybody's yell at you
about that.
Always the optimist.
But you know what, if we wanted the people, I don't think we'd put the location,
it would be better to have another one in another location.
Yeab, and there are some younger kids who want, I don't know what it would be,
younger.
Scaled down version of it.
We want a bigger version and a smaller version.
Perhaps this is something we could continue at CIP budget talks.
Consent Calendar CorresDondence 3e(10) -Naftaly Stramer:Parking at the Art & Jazz Festivals
Correia:
Bailey:
Ok. I also, there was correspondence from, I'm not going to get her name right,
from Oasis Falafel. And my, I think it would be worth talking about free parking
during festivals at some time, but my issue with this correspondence is how she
didn't receive a response back.
It's a he.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
-----------~.__._"'-"'---_._._"-"'-------_._-"~ ._,-_...--_......__._~,-----------_..~._-~.._--"-
June 26, 2006
Correia:
Atkins:
Karr:
Correia:
Karr:
Correia:
Karr:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Bailey:
Helling:
Correia:
Helling:
Correia:
Helling:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 57
He, sorry. He didn't receive a response back. I had questions about that and I just
wonder about the process ofletting people know as soon as they send something
in like an automatic response what the process will be so they're not waiting.
Well, first of all in making the assumption that they're correct, because we're
really quite good about getting folks a response. I mean, normally, I can't tell
you.
Are you talking about item #10 on the Consent Calendar?
Correspondence.
I believe that the person did receive the standard response that it was going to
Council, but there was no direction from Council to do anything more than that.
Right.
And so I think that might have been the breakdown. Is that what you were
wondering about?
Kind of.
And I would agree with you Amy that folks who write we sort of make it a rule
that they will get a written response either by email or by letter.
Right.
So unless we direct that you respond to these people, they only get the standard
response, correct?
Typically if someone (can't hear) you'll get correspondence from people, volumes
of people on issues just stating an opinion.
Right, yeah.
So typically when someone just writes in and states an opinion, we11 just wait
until you get it and see if you have any interest or whatever rather than respond to
every single person, because we do get a lot of emails.
Yeah.
But what we do typically do, if anybody is either looking to dialogue with you or
get some response from Council members, then we respond and tell them that
you do not get your emails directly, that it is forwarded to you as part of your
consent agenda as official correspondence, and then we suggest they go to the
website and get your phone numbers and contact individuals in that way.
So, then, is there anyone interested in talking about free parking during festivals
at any time (can't hear)
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Champion:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
Atkins:
City Council Work Session
Page 58
No.
I'd be interested in knowing what the cost to the City would be.
There's no free parking.
It would be a lot.
I think the purpose of that is just to get some more people down there.
Oh, I understand, so can somebody, Dale, can you respond to this gentleman and
there doesn't seem to be?
Ok. We'll take care of it.
Consent Calendar CorresDondence 4e(2) -Jay & Michelle Geisen: House at 17 S Governor St
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Franklin:
Atkins:
Thank you. And then I had one other thing from the correspondence. Someone, I
think it was maybe the house at 14 S. Governor was wondering about 17 S.
Governor.
I had a question about that.
And I drove by there and I didn't realize that was 17 S. Governor and I have gone
by there a lot and I have wondered about that.
Behind the sorority house.
Yes. So, what's the deal with that?
Well, I thought Historic Preservation talked about that as well, that particular
property.
They could have, I know that. Oh.
Here's the woman that knows.
Which, that is the ACO house?
Behind it.
Right behind it.
The house behind it.
It's been racked, twisted.
Well, we don't know if it's been racked or not.
That's what I
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 59
That's the assertion. The property owner has submitted a demolition request for a
demolition permit. This is in a historic district and so he was told he needs to go
to Historic Preservation, was given the documents that he needed to fill out for
that. We have not heard from him. The Preservation Commission was concerned
about the building, because the longer you leave it unsecured with all the rain,
then it sort of becomes demolition by default. The avenue that is available in the
code is that the Historic Preservation Commission can ask the Building
Department to pursue remedies with the property owner to get a building
secured. The Building Department has done that, has sent the notices to Mr.
Rittgers (Reis), I believe is the owner, and there has been no response. So, it's
been a series of non-responsive incidences with the particular owner. You know,
it's kind of difficult to say what happens next.
(can't hear)
Pardon me?
Does the owner live in Iowa City?
I don't know. The name sounds familiar, but I don't know that he lives here. I
think he's just been a property owner for years and years and years. When the
Building Department, according to the code, the Building Department could go
further with this in terms of issuing a citation which then would go to court. I'm
not sure of what we get out of all that.
But in the meantime we don't, we can't secure it by ourselves?
No.
Well, in the meantime it is demolition by neglect.
Well, I mean, there is a dangerous building code,
If it becomes dangerous, yeah.
with those kinds of things it becomes dangerous, if it's unsecured for too long,
sometimes that Can contribute to
One of the things that the Commission was concerned about and we have been
cognizant of is treating everybody fairly. And the sorority right next store
obviously is in the same condition. However, we've had communication with
Alpha Chi Omega representatives with an architect that's working on the building
to let them know what's necessary and work with them on their decision making,
which they're still waiting on insurance from, and so
(cut off- end of tape)
Elliott:
The house we're talking about now, we could be dealing with that similarly with
the one we just talked about that was condemned and resold.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Council Time
Wilburn:
Elliott:
ODonnell:
Bailey:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 60
It's possible.
Because all we can require is that they seal it up.
Well, it has to be a nuisance.
Yeah.
But I mean, we can't require that he spend $200,000.00 to put it back in shape.
No.
Yeah, so, it appears.
I guess if he chooses to do nothing with it and to just let it deteriorate, then it gets
to the dangerous building situation and we step in.
But then, there's a motivation to demolish it, which is exactly what he wanted in
the first place.
Correct.
But it's in a historic district. That will restrict what can be built there.
Yes. It would be reviewed.
And it would restrict what we could do with the house after we condemned it.
Similar to the one at Washington.
Right. Similar to the one.
Other agenda items? Bob?
Nope. I've done complaining tonight.
Oh, thank goodness.
Council time.
Oh.
Want to hold that?
Oh, you can complain.
I'll wait.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.
June 26, 2006
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 61
Ok. I'll just encourage Council and Bob to read the Corridor Business Journal.
There's an article by Kevin Munson, from Munson Architects about design
elements.
Oh yeah, I did read that. That was nice.
Can I just, so quickly, about Council Time, I just want to just do a brief update
about the Advisory Commission. They're working on, they're wanting to have
some identity in the community, working on t-shirts and name tags and
identifYing different activities in the community they want to go out and be
involved and be recognized as the Youth Advisory Commission, branding. Katie
Roche is going to come to our next meeting, see if there's any way they can
volunteer and help with the remainder of the Summer of the Arts, and then talk
about future collaborations with the Summer of the Arts and encouraging youth
volunteer service in the community and more visibility next year with that. They
also want to talk about some policy issues. The first one would be the late night
bus issue, that was one member brought up, and then I'm wondering the sense of
you all having them tackle the apartment recycling issue. There's a couple of
members that are really into environmental and recycling, so that's one area that's
come up, and I thought we could take a stab at that.
And do they talk a little bit, I always had a vision that we would expand the
downtown recycling, that there would be a recycling container next to every trash
can or something similar. Did they, I mean, that, if they're interested in recycling,
I'd love to hear what their thoughts are.
Yes, very interested.
Why not?
If environmentalism and recycling is their thing, let's get some energy behind
that. And doing that at festivals too, because I know we do it at festivals.
All right. See you tomorrow night. Toodles.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of June 26, 2006.