HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-31 Transcription
July 31, 2006
July 31, 2006
Council:
UISG:
Staff:
City Council Work Session
Page I
City Council Work Session
6:40 PM
Bailey, Champion, Correia, Elliott, O'Donnell, Wilburn, Vanderhoef
Baeth
Atkins, Boelk, Bootbroy, Davidson, Dilkes, Fosse, Helling, Karr, Knocke,
Morris, Williams
TAPES: 06-60, Sides I and 2; 06-61, Sides I and 2
Wilburn:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Correia:
Karin Franklin.
a) CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.83 ACRES
OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4435/4455 MELROSE AVENUE
FROM NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (P-1) ZONE TO
NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC 1 LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (P-1/RM-12) ZONE. (REZ06-00001)
Ok. Your first item is a rezoning of property from P-I, which is the neighborhood
public zone, that public zone that is for City, County and School District
properties, to a I, P-IIRM-12 to enable the construction of apartments on this site
for the Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing LP. And the issue that we
have dealt with regarding this particular property is primarily the one of access to
Melrose Avenue. As you can see from the illustration, the access point for this,
this is the access point for Chatham Oaks, and originally the applicant had
requested that access be at approximately this point, which is quite close to the
ramps for 218 and also would not work well with the median. So after much
negotiation we have been able to come to a resolution of this such that the
Planning and Zoning Commission and staff could support this rezoning, with the
condition that the access be provided by the Chatham Oaks entrance at this point.
The decision as to whether it goes in front of the building or behind the building,
this gives you a better illustration of what behind the building would be, with the
development property being the yellow area, and this being the primary access
point. The drawing that ljust showed you had this coming around in front. It
could also come in the back and it's kind of between the developer and the
County as to which way that goes. I'm going to ask you to defer this or continue
the public hearing and defer it. The County must sign this conditional zoning
agreement. Oh, there's one other condition that I would point out, and that has to
do with screening being placed on the site, on the, between the building and 218.
The conditional zoning has to be approved or signed by the County because they
are the property owner, and they will be meeting on Thursday, so we would ask
that you defer this, continue the public hearing to your August 22nd meeting and
defer the first consideration until then, also.
Karin, I have a question.
Karin.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
City Council Work Session
Page 2
Go ahead.
Well. You have a question about the site?
Mmm hmm.
I have a question about the proposal.
Ok. If they go in front of the building, it looks like it knocks out a lot of trees. Is
there a concern about the screening from Melrose for any of this, these
properties?
Ah, there was concern in Planning and Zoning about the trees that were going to
be eliminated. I guess you can't see them very well on here; the other one is
probably better, cause it shows you where there's going to be, on this proposal,
where some of the trees would be taken out, these two big trees here, but there's
also kind of a wiggle that was put in the drive to enable going around some of the
other trees on the site. And that's where that could be resolved, between the
County and the developer, as to exactly where this driveway goes. Our concern
was that the access point not come out so close to the ramps and not be a right-in,
right-out near that median, having people trying to do a U-e on Melrose.
And what about screening of this building from Melrose? Is that of any interest
or concern to you?
That was not an issue that was raised.
Ok.
It was more from the highway. Amy?
My question about deferring, on July 22nd we had a letter in the packet requesting
expedited action because of, this has been in the works for awhile
Right.
And there's the risk of losing some low-income housing tax credit, probably not
all of them but quite a lot, if they don't start the construction this Fall.
Right.
If we deferred or kept the public hearing open until the 22nd, can we do all three
considerations that night, if?
I would not be willing to do that.
I would not be willing to do that.
I would. I think it's a good idea.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 3
Franklin: Legally you can do it. It' s up to you. You certainly could do, you could do the
public hearing and first consideration, and then the next meeting in September is
the 5th.
Bailey: I would be willing to schedule the public hearing continuant to the work session
and collapse them that way, but I'm not comfortable collapsing the three readings
in one night, personally.
Correia: Well, having the first consideration the day before.
Bailey: If others.
Correia: See, you can't have first consideration if the County hasn't signed it yet?
Franklin: We can not close the public hearing until the conditional zoning is signed. That's
the rub.
Correia: Right. Ijust feel like (can't hear) the conditions.
Franklin: Well, yes, I'm sorry. If you don't want to impose the conditions, then you could,
but.
Correia: When did this, I mean, this has been in the works for two years? When did, when
did they first?
Franklin: Well, we first got wind of it in October of2005 -that's when we first had our
communications about this access issue. Now in terms of putting, well, in terms
of something corning before the City
Correia: Sure.
Franklin: and I think the project, ComPEER has worked on this for years. When the
arrangements, or lease agreement with the County was signed, let me just check
that. Well, I don't have one with the date on it.
Bailey: Well, this might have moved more quickly had they not pursued the curb cut that
we discussed a long time ago.
Franklin: Oh, clearly.
Bailey: I mean, part of it is completely in our hands that this is corning before us in
August.
Correia: Oh, I understand that.
Franklin: Yeah.
Vanderhoef: Just for information, I understand the County owns, will continue to own the
land.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 4
Franklin: Correct.
Vanderhoef; The improvement on the land, is that in a SOIc3, or is it taxable?
Franklin: 1I's, what was the second part of that? SOlc3?
Vanderhoef: Is it taxable?
Bailey: Is it a non-profit.
Franklin: It's a non-profit. Now, whether it's taxable or not, I don't know. I would assume
not, Dee, but I don't know that.
Bailey; I thought it was an LLP.
Correia: I thought it was.
Bailey: A limited partnership.
Franklin: 11 is, it is, I'm sorry, it's ,a limited partnership.
Dilkes: Just because something is a SOlc3 does not mean it's tax exempt for property tax.
Franklin: Right.
Dilkes: There's a whole other analysis that goes on. I'm sure Mr. Bums would know the
answer to that.
Franklin: Yeah. They are apartments, so, I don't know why they would be tax exempt,
particularly, but I don't know tax law well enough to say.
Dilkes: As I know, it's going to be a tax
Franklin: In fact, I don't know it at all.
(laughter)
Vanderhoef; And tell me
(female): Well enough.
Vanderhoef: One other thing about this is where is the trail connection from this property
going over to Hunter's Run?
Franklin: Urn. Ok. Well, we don't have anything that's big enough, cause I took one of the
slides out of here. This area down here is where we had the park component of
that plan for Johnson County land that was going to be an extension of Hunter's
Run Park.
Vanderhoef; Mmm hmm.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 5
Franklin: And the trails that we would have coming across the 218 would be coming under
218 somewhere over in this general- well. Ok. Can I have your little red thing?
Bailey: Is this? There's a map in our, that might be more helpful.
Franklin: The Willow Creek watershed is essentially where the trail would be coming
across under 218. That hasn't happened yet.
Vanderhoef: No, but there's already trail.
Franklin: There's some trail and we'll
Vanderhoef: In Hunter's Run.
Franklin: In the Hunter's Run, yeah. But it's down here, Dee, and we're talking about up
here.
Bailey: And there's a
Franklin: It's not going to be connected until something happens on the County property.
Bailey: And there's that preservation area.
Vanderhoef: Well, that's just it, I thought it was coming through that preservation area
somehow or another, so that it was a natural extension of park and so forth.
Franklin: It would be, but the County has to build it. I mean, unless you're going to decide
to build it, but.
Bailey: And there's still that 30 acres, even, between the preservation area that's future
public use, so.
Champion: I remember, correct me if I'm wrong, are we sewering this land? Wasn't that part
of the problem?
Bailey: Sewering? Is that a verb?
Champion: Is that a verb? Sewering? Sewering.
Franklin: We, we do
Champion: Sewer is a word, but is Sewering a word?
Franklin: It is. We use it all the time.
Champion: Oh thank you very much.
Franklin: We do provide sewer to this land, now. Anything else on this one? Ok.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 6
Franklin: Item b is the rezoning from.
Bailey: Do we need a deferral date that would accommodate?
Correia: Well, I want, I would like to suggest that.
Franklin: Oh, ok, yes. Thanks. Do you all want to have the deferral to the 21" of August?
Champion: My only problem with that is, that's a work session night, and Ijust don't think
we should have a public hearing on a work session night.
Vanderhoef: I agree.
Bailey: Are you interested in expediting it to, I mean, beyond, are you interested in
carrying it into September or expediting it within that week? I mean, could we
call a special meeting for, it would be the second and third reading.
Champion: Yeah, I wouldn't have any objection to that, but I don't want to have a public
hearing on a work session night.
Wilburn: And I wouldn't be interested, I wouldn't be interested in three readings of an
ordinance.
Vanderhoef: The only way that I would consider
Bailey: In a week?
Wilburn: In one night.
Bailey: Oh, I am, I am not either.
Vanderhoef: I might consider doing it, depending on how much discussion we get at the
public hearing tomorrow, because we have to open the public hearing tomorrow
and, you know, if we have no, no input to that public hearing, then to continue
that to a Monday night, I would consider it.
Correia: You're saying it depends how much
Vanderhoef: You know, if there's
Bailey: But we need, the motion to defer is typically to a specific date and that's what I
was trying to.
Wilburn: Well, we can open the public hearing and then get the motion to defer date
specific.
Vanderhoef: 21 is Monday and 22 is Tuesday.
Bailey: Connie didn't want to do it on a work session night, right?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31,2006.
_..~---_.__._.,-_.._,^-,,--_..,------"~,-_.__..,.._,-----
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 7
Elliott:
So.
Franklin:
So you'll decide tomorrow night after you hear what's said in the public hearing.
Bailey:
Ok.
Wilburn:
By tomorrow night.
b) REZONING 2.32-ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 2401 SCOTT
BOULEVARD FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (1-1) TO
NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC/INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (P-1/CI1)
(REZ06-0016).
Franklin:
Cool. Ok. Next item is to rezone 2.32 acres from I-I to P-lICll. Again, this is
ground that is publicly owned, now. This is the site of the East Side Recycling
Center, and the reason to, this is the building that is on the site. The reason to
rezone this to the Cll is to enable the Habitat ReStore operation to operate on
this site, because again this is not, ReStore is not a public entity; it will be leasing
a publicly owned building on publicly owned land, and so therefore we have to
go through the rezoning. Recommendation from Planning and Zoning
Commission was to rezone it, 4-0, no conditions attached to this one. You're
going to have a presentation a little bit later about the recycling center as a whole.
c) AMENDING TITLE 14, ZONING CODE, SUBSECTION 4E-BC,
NONCONFORMING SIGNS, TO ALLOW FOR
RECONSTRUCTION OF A NONCONFORMING SIGN BY
SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
Franklin: Ok. Item C is amending - oh
Bailey: I love these photos.
Franklin: Isn't that pretty? This is to
Vanderhoef: Cars!
Bailey: . Oh my gosh.
Franklin: To. This is historic. This is old. I mean, these are like cars when I was a kid.
Elliott: '56 Chevy and about a '52 Ford.
O'Donnell: '58 Chevy.
Elliott: '58. You're right.
Franklin: Actually. That one.
Champion: That's a great picture.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
Elliott:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Correia:
Franklin:
Correia:
Bailey:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Champion:
Correia:
Franklin:
Elliott:
Correia:
Franklin:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 8
That's an old Caddy.
Oh, is it? I thought it was a Mercury. I don't know cars. Anyway. This is an
ordinance amendment to allow for the reconstruction of nonconforming signs by
special exception. And, obviously, this was done in the wake of the tornado and
the damage that was done to the Dairy Queen sign in an effort to enable the
reconstruction and replacement of this "iconic," to quote Mr. Elliott, sign.
Thank you.
That sign was just missing.
Well it got blown off.
No, I know.
They searched the River.
No I think, they couldn't find it in the river.
!t's cruising down the river.
Or it's in somebody's backyard.
The woods or something.
That could be.
The paper said it went into the river.
Yeah.
Ok, so public hearing tomorrow night on that and first consideration.
I had a suggestion that the same kind of amendment be for structures, but after
conversation with a couple of attorneys and with Karin, I decided it was legally
difficult and politically impossible, so, we'll forego that.
d) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING
1.39-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1820 BOYRUM STREET
FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) TO COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL (CC-2) (REZ06-000014) (SECOND
CONSIDERATION)
e) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY
LOCATED ALONG SOUTH GILBERT STREET, SOUTH OF
WATERFRONT DRIVE AND NORTH OF SOUTHGATE
AVENUE, FROM INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) TO
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Franklin:
Franklin:
Franklin:
City Council Work Session
Page 9
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2) ZONE. (REZ05-00022)
(PASS AND ADOPT)
f) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE 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) (PASS AND ADOPT)
The next three items are all repeats. Item d is the rezoning on Boyrum Street
from CI-l to CC-2; item e is the rezoning along South Gilbert and South
Waterfront Drive north of Southgate Avenue from CI-2 to CC-2. Both of those -
no, I'm sorry, the first one is second consideration, this one is pass and adopt,
and then the third, item f, is the rezoning from ID-RS to RS-5 for Stone Bridge
Estates, and that's a pass and adopt.
g) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF DANE
ROAD SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 1. (VAC06-00002) (PASS AND
ADOPT)
Item g is pass and adopt on the vacation of a portion of Dane Road, which is
within the airport property, for the runway extension.
h) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF
HOLLYWOOD MANOR, PART 9, IOWA CITY, IOWA. (SUB06-
00011)
Item h is a resolution approving the final plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9. This
is, you've seen the preliminary plat on this, this is right next to Wetherby Park, at
the end of Tofting, and Wetherby Drive, a l2-lot subdivision. We made need to
defer this depending upon whether a document comes in tomorrow which
provides for an easement for the storm water runoff for this property, and so I'll
just have to let you know tomorrow night whether that has come in or not.
Otherwise, it's in order. That's it.
Consent Calendar Deletion
Karr: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to note one change to the consent calendar. We're going to
be deleting item 5e(3). It's on page 5, it's accepting the work for General
Quarters. There's an outstanding issue to be resolved on that, so we'll just be
deleting that item and considering it at a future time.
Vanderhoef: 5.
Champion: Page 3.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting oOuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Couucil Work Session
Page 10
Karr:
Number 3 on page 5.
Champion:
Thank you.
Elliott:
Oh, number 3.
Karr:
On page 5.
Elliott:
I see. Ok.
Wilburn:
Are you hanging around Karin, or are you leaving?
Franklin:
I will be here for the duration.
Wilburn:
Ok. Council Appointments.
Council ADDointments
Correia: Should we do the library first?
Wilburn: Sure. Ifwe could do the library one first, because the other one involves, I
mentioned I have a conflict of interest with.
Champion: Well, I'd like to nominate Mary New as the
Elliot: Library has one?
Correia: One.
Elliott: And Housing Commission two. Ok.
Correia: One is the library, the unexpired term. I would also support Mary.
Vanderhoef: So would 1.
Champion: She's certainly earned her stripes for that commission.
Wilburn: Ok. Looks like Mary.
Elliott: That was tough.
Champion: It was tough. There were really good candidates.
Karr: I'm sorry.
Bailey: Mary New.
Wilburn: Mary New will be the appointment for the Library Trustees.
Elliott: John Kenyon would have been a very good candidate.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31,2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page II
Correia: Yeah.
Vanderhoef: Actually, there's a whole list of very good, qualified candidates.
Bailey: We have a nice list of candidates.
Elliott: Yes.
Correia: Yeah.
Bailey: I hope that they reapply.
Wilburn: Ah, for this next commission, Housing and Community Development
Commission, I have a conflict of interest and will not participate in discussions.
Bailey: Ok. Housing and Community Development Commission. We have two
vacanCIes.
Champion: Well, Michael Shaw is serving his first term. I think we should reappoint him.
Elliott: Well his term continues almost through '09. It would seem appropriate just to
leave him on through '09.
Champion: I didn't catch that.
Correia: No, no, no. He is serving an unexpired term, so he didn't fill the whole term.
Bailey: And his term expires.
Elliott: It expires in '09, does it not?
Bailey: No.
Dilkes: No. It says that it expires August 31" this year.
Elliott: I thought I had read
Bailey: He's one that, the terms are expiring for Michael Shaw and William Greazel but
Michael did.
Elliott: Could I have made a mistake?
Bailey: I don't think so.
Champion: Maybe you got confused.
Bailey: I would support Michael.
Correia: Ah hah.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 12
Bailey: Do we have another person who would support Michael?
Champion: Yes.
Correia: Ok.
Elliott: That makes it
Bailey: So that's four for Michael Shaw, and for the second opening?
Vanderhoef: I would like to bring in Steve Crane, please.
Champion: Oh I
Bailey: Hmmm?
Elliott: I think that that would be appropriate. As a matter of fact I think they are losing
the Loan Banking Lender person on there and I believe the, whether the bylaws
or preferences or requirements indicate a strong preference for somebody with
lending experience. When I was on there the people with lending experience
were very beneficial.
Bailey: Ok. That's.
Correia: I agree with that.
Champion: Oh I think he'll be fine. I think there are, you know, a lot of good candidates.
Bailey: There were.
Elliott: Yeah. Carol Bonesak, I would loved to have had on there.
Champion: Oh, me too. I had her written down too.
Bailey: So, is it Steven Crane, Steve Crane, four for Steve Crane? Ok. Easy enough.
Michael Shaw and Steve Crane.
Elliott: Ok.
Bailey: Thank you.
Housinl! Policv
Wilburn:
Housing Policy. Steve?
Atkins:
So, what do you want to do?
Wilburn:
In the info. packet you included that summary list of where there seemed to be
potential disagreement with the
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
...._~._--~---~..__.-.__._.~--,..-'-'~_._--_._......_--------- . ---..-----..----.-----
July 31, 2006
Atkins:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 13
Some of what I did was, we took the Scattered Site Report. We went through
each of those points, tried to keep notes along the way, and I think there was
general agreement, these tend to be shortened versions of what the agreement
was about each particular point. And the only issue that is left unresolved is
inclusionary zoning, and I've asked Karin how to present something a little more
detailed so we can talk that through, but these fifteen points would intend, I
would intend to say this is your policy with respect to housing. Now you may
choose to embellish certain points during
What happened?
as we bring projects and programs back to you, we would be following these
general guidelines, unless you see some other? There's trying to find, what is the
instrument to express your receipt of, response to, the Scattered Site Housing
folks, and I wasn't real sure of how we would accomplish that other than to
simply go through these points and try to confirm them.
I had a, #14, where it says through the CitySTEPS plan provide for a review of
fair share data, and I thought in our conversation that there wasn't a consensus
that we would use that fair share data as presented in that report?
Admittedly, Amy, I took it from my notes, and that very well could be and this is
a good time to clarifY those. If there isn't, then let's pull it back and then, your
thinking.
Yeah, I wouldn't.
But we're saying there's at least
That. I wouldn't - I think I indicated that I wasn't interested in looking at a
review.
Yeah, I think it was just the three of us at that point and I wouldn't.
Oh, it wasn't, it didn't (can't hear)
Well, I don't know what else you use, but I am interested in looking at some type
offair share data. Ijust
I, I'm interested in determining what would constitute fair share or what type of
data you would use to indicate what the benchmark would be for the type of
scattering you want, but I don't agree with, I don't support the fair share matrix
that was developed as part of that Scattered Site Housing.
Would you feel better if the fair share were not upper and lower case?
No. I mean, this, because review of fair share data would be then the review of
the Scattered Site Taskforce created that benchmark.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
Correia:
Elliott:
Correia:
Elliott:
Correia:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 14
No.
But then we would have to say.
By saying upper and lower case, this is upper case, meaning the specific
something identified as fair share.
Right.
Just the two words meaning fair share, whether it's based on school district or
districts of the, so
I understand what you're saying, now, but then I would say we would have to say
develop the criteria for fair share, I mean, well we don't have it, then. You know,
there's not an agreement on what data would be used to determine whether we
have, see, we haven't really determined what is our goal for scattering. I think if
we were looking towards a mandatory inclusionary zoning, that would fall in to
place because those policies include benchmarks of percentages of low to
moderate income housing in neighborhoods. But, without that, I don't know that
that encompasses - we wouldn't be directing staff to review based on a
benchmark.
I would like to have our next step be a discussion around the table with parties
that would be directly and indirectly involved and talk about inclusionary zoning.
Everything we've talked about thus far has been quite broad and open to
interpretation and I'd like to sit down with the parties that would be involved and
really talk about inclusionary zoning and the two forms that it might take and the
kinds of areas that we would like to see involved. By two forms I mean one could
be incentive-driven and the others regulatory-driven.
Mmm hmm.
But I think what we need is to sit around a table with the people who will be
involved and we can talk back and forth.
Well
I think that's a good plan.
And, I agree with you. I wouldn't necessarily have that as our first discussion of
inclusionary zoning. I'd like a presentation of what it might look like here, what
the costs might be, what the incentives available to us are, and then, set up some
opportunities to talk and do some public meetings. Not public hearings but public
discussions.
Yes. And I like that, so we could go into a kind of roundtable discussion with
some information.
Yes.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 15
Elliott: As opposed to going into it cold. Fine.
Champion: Would we do, like, invite people to come and we would do, do debates around
roundtables come with ideas? What did we call that thing when we did The
Peninsula?
Atkins: Charatte?
Champion: A charatte? (can't hear) Where somebody would be the facilitator and all the
ideas on the table would be presented? Would we do that kind of thing?
Elliott: I would like to select the representatives rather carefully. If you have 25 people, I
don't think you're going to get anywhere, but if we could have maybe no more
than a dozen people.
Champion: But if you had a hundred and you did it that way, you would have broken down
into small groups who, all those small groups' ideas would be presented.
Bailey: Well we could do a presentation, do an invited discussion, with Bob's smaller
group, do a broader, open, public discussion. Because I think this is multiple, I
mean, this is something that would involve a lot of discussion, and obviously it
sounds like a lot of meetings, but we could, one way doesn't necessarily rule out
another. We can do all of them.
Vanderhoef: But I think we've got a little bit of a problem in here. There may be two levels of
discussion. There might be, ideally, what we would like to have happen.
However, the second layer you touched on earlier in what kind of monies are
available for the incentives or how you make it if you went to mandatory versus
voluntary, those kinds of things.
Correia: And I think
Vanderhoef: And I think it has to be written together, so getting the information up front of
what might be put together, like you said, and what potential costs might be
Correia: Well and I think. Oh.
Bailey: But I think we - I always think policies should start from what are we trying to
achieve, ideally, and what can we afford to achieve realistically. So I think we
should have that ideal discussion, and then look at the dollar amounts. I'm sorry
- go ahead.
Correia: Yeah, and I, well, Karin Franklin included information in our packets about
inclusionary zoning - they were good zoning, sure, and I think that there is
baseline information, research and data about the differences and benefits
between voluntary and mandatory inclusionary zoning. And what I got out of it,
one of the things that I got out of reading those articles is that mandatory policies
don't involve federal government, local dollars. And that, that, it seems to be the
wave of the future with affordable housing and community development across
the country. There's information out there. I think that Karin, other members of
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 16
our staff, could do a presentation on what has been done around the Mid-West,
because we're seeing more Mid-Western communities adopting inclusionary
zoning policies.
And it might be good to invite the Home Builder's Association to send a
representative, because they probably have some good ideas too as to how this
can be achieved, because I know they're talking about it, because they know
we're talking about it.
Well, and I would like, I think in some way, I know that is our discussion, but in
some way, at some point, we have to broaden the discussion to Johnson County,
to other municipalities. Now, perhaps they're not necessarily interested, but
finding out, you know, how do we address this as a county or as a region, I mean,
this is kind of a corridor issue, even, because if we refuse to have transit up and
down the corridor, I think addressing this issue becomes a, you know, different
challenge.
Eleanor, did you have a question or a comment? Ok.
I just wanted to clarify, when I mentioned incentives, there are other incentives in
addition to financial.
Sure.
I'd like to explore that.
Sensitive (can't hear)
I also think we need to make sure that we make distinctions, or at least,
distinctions are not made between rental assistance availability and affordable
housing for home buyers, that sort of thing, because to me there are certainly two
different aspects.
They're totally different.
So is the next step, what you are asking for is some type of presentation based on
information provided by our Planning Director and making sure we invite
selected parties to that work session presentation? Is that a fair next step? I'm
getting nods of agreement.
Yes.
And I would suggest that as we look at our schedules tonight, perhaps we look at
scheduling these types of meetings as well, because, I mean, and decide how,
what is our timeline. I don't know if there's any particular rush, but I think we
should get them on the calendar.
And I would like
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 17
Vanderhoef: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to invite HCDC to come when that presentation is being
made, because I think of all
Wilburn: I've heard HCDC, I've heard the Home Builders
Bailey: Home Builders
Elliott: I think they need to be aware that the presentation is being made and what our
attentions indicated tonight are.
Wilburn: Ok.
Correia: Well then I'd also like, if that will be a work session, if that could be taped. I
mean, I think that's a way to get, oh, public education
Bailey: I would agree with that. That would be a particularly good one to tape, kind of
like our budget presentations. It's basic, and then we can, we can know as we go
forward that hopefully the community is operating with the same bit of, you
know, the same presentation, the same information.
Wilburn: Any other groups we want to make sure are at the presentation?
Atkins: I suspect you would want Housing Fellowship.
Bailey: Right, the usual suspects.
Correia: Housing.
Champion: The usual suspects.
Elliott: I loved Casablanca.
Wilburn: We can give staff the discretion to decide who those usual suspects are.
Bailey: Absolutely.
Wilburn: Ok.
Vanderhoef: I would like a little bit, perhaps, also from Legal on what is doable by Iowa laws,
number one, and what kinds of groupings of fundings or what kind of additional
zoning might be, well you and Karin both would work on that, but.
Bailey: Well, and is this happening anywhere else in Iowa would be interesting to me.
Vanderhoef: And what would be the possibility of doing it in a larger framework than just the
city ofIowa City.
Atkins: Regenia's already mentioned that.
Wilburn: Now there's a question you're faced Eleanor.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Champion:
. Atkins:
Wilburn:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 18
So as I understand it, you want a presentation on both types, the voluntary,
incentive based and the mandatory, is what you're talking about at this point.
And is the presentation, these people that are going to be invited to listen, it's just
to listen to the presentation at this point, or is it to have some kind of discussion
with you?
I think at subsequent meetings we'll have discussion.
Ok. This first meeting, just a presentation?
And discussion among Council, right.
And discussion among Council, so, essentially it's a, it's a focused work session,
making sure that there are certain people in the audience that we can have
subsequent conversations with. Ok.
Couple questions for you.
Yes, sir.
I see there's two elements to your housing policy that we have not reached
agreement on. That's the fair share issue that's still out there, and then the
inclusionary zoning. The inclusionary zoning has a couple components, the first
one of which is what is it? - a presentation to you all describing, and then,
possibly, a follow-up meeting on sort of what it means, and that's when we invite
Home Builders and all those folks to discuss with you - no.
Yes. That's, the first one is they're, those are at the presentation, second one is
Oh, yeah, they're invited, anybody can come to the presentation. The intent is for
Karin to walk through what inclusionary zoning means, incentive, base,
mandatory, whatever it is. We do a lot of listening at that presentation.
Yes.
Yes.
And once we listen to it, as well as the audience, you will convene a meeting
where what it all means to us, us being as a community, and all those other folks
will be invited.
Right.
You ok on that?
And then I think, additionally, we should include a meeting that is, I mean,
broadly open to the public, not just invited.
Right. Exactly.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
._-----"_._._-~._--~._---.,,----_.__.__._.,----- -- --_._--,._--_._---~-~
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 19
I mean, was it the intent, I mean Bob, you wanted a focused discussion with
particular invited people.
Yes. I would like to have those people who are directly involved and who would
have direct input that would be beneficial in decision making so that it isn't such
a large group that give and take is out of the, but then, yes, one or more major
sessions open to the public.
Ok. That would be sort of a third level.
Right, and that could involve Connie's charatte if she, that's the method you
want to use.
You know, it says here in the book that mandatory is more effective than
voluntary, and anytime you put the word mandatory on something you're going
to have resistance.
We'll see.
Well I mean, I just, what are we saying, like 20% of the development is going to
be?
We haven't gotten there yet.
Well, but that's, well, what did we do at The Peninsula?
10.
10. All right. I thought 10.
10.
And I, yeah, it seems that some of the articles, anywhere from 10 to 15. I think it
depends on the, how bad the
Well, and housing solutions
I think you need to hear what it all means. Then you'll all settle-in on this is
really important to me and I need x%. Someone else may feel differently and say,
or I'm not interested in it at all.
Well and one of the things that would be interesting to me is to turn those
percentages in at our current rate of development, you know, in the last year or
two.
It's numbers.
If we had this percentage, what would that have meant for affordable housing?
You know, put some numbers to it.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 20
Correia: And I also think we can use some of the numbers from '98, the maximal number
of how much we needed in the each and how much we ended up getting in the
different categories.
Bailey: Right. That would be good.
Correia: And how it was really skewed away from where some of the need was, and if
we'd had a policy, what would it needed to have looked like to have gotten to
that, meeting that need.
Atkins: The next major step is organizing the inclusionary zoning presentation for you
all.
Wilburn: Yep.
Atkins: Haven't set a lot of policy yet other than we want to get this - ok.
Champion: Can I go? Are we done with that? Can I ask another question? Sorry Amy, but, if
we're not going to use the review of the fair share data that was in the report,
how are we going to develop a fair share data?
Vanderhoef: The criteria that we need to have in place.
Champion: That's going to be very important.
Wilburn: Well, I think the point that Amy was raising was if we did end up going to an
inclusionary zoning policy, that, that's your matrix right there.
Elliott: Mmm hmm. And we don't
Wilburn: Because it's 10, 15,20 - whatever the percentage is, that dictates it right there.
Elliott: But I think we were saying that there are several of us that don't agree with using
that matrix.
Wilburn: Right.
Elliott: Isn't that what you were saying?
Correia: Mmm hmm.
Elliott: For instance, I'm more interested in a school and at least involving the school
district in this. Where, if there are school-age children, where would they go to
school?
Correia: And I think then that, that's a conversation with the school that involves their
boundaries. I mean, I don't think it can only be where HOME and CDBG and
low income housing tax credits are used, it's, you know, how are their boundaries
drawn in terms of kids being bused past schools where there's low.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
_.,._--,-------_._--_..~------'~-_..-_._'--_.-_._-
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 21
Bailey: Right.
Wilburn: Can we make sure that there's an invitation to the school district for the
presentation on inclusionary zoning?
Bailey: That's smart.
Atkins: So I understand you, I'll prepare a memo for you outlining from a process
standpoint how we intend to take on this issue. Karin will do the substantive, and
how you want to step through this, and I'll get something in writing so you can
react to that, ok?
Elliott: Good. Good.
Bailey: I have another housing - are you done? One of the things, and I mean, maybe this
shows my level of naivete about this issue, but I've always been interested in,
when we talk about affordable housing we often talk about new development.
And you know, we would probably talk about inclusionary zoning probably in
new development. But are there policies somewhere that looks at affordable
housing ability within older or current neighborhoods and how do we achieve
that and how would that be possible? Because some of these neighborhoods,
mine, for example, very close in, they offer some transit and transportation
opportunities that others, that we're building, other neighborhoods that we're
currently building may not. And, that's something that we haven't really touched
on, and I don't know, if there's information out there that we can, is there an
article we could read or something to talk about how we could do that? I know
lead abatement is a big issue when it comes to older housing stock, but what are
the other issues? Is that possible?
Champion: You know one thing we did talk about that Regenia before you were in the
Council, when we designated the Longfellow neighborhood and Governor and
oh, somebody help me out with the other street.
Wilburn: (can't hear) preservation issues.
Bailey: Right.
Champion: District, and to preserve that affordable housing, but this Council chose not to
designate the North Side a conservation zone. Because I am interested in
preserving the affordable housing we have in those older neighborhoods. I think
it's really important that we preserve it.
Bailey: Well, and I
Vanderhoef: Well I think we are doing some of that just through our housing programs for
loans to keep up the housing stock.
Champion: But that would happen whether it was a conservation district or not.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Wilburn:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 22
That came out of
But I think, I mean I think the one issue is that, that there are some programs, I
mean I think this is an opportunity to look at some of the current housing
programs that we're operating and the policies that we're using so; for example,
if our policy is that we don't do the, when we do downpayment assistance it's for
homes built after 1976 because of the lead abatement issues because it's federal
money and you have to abate the lead, if we want to open up the possibility of
using these funds in older neighborhoods with older homes, that means we would
then be needing to put resources into lead abatement. I think, I mean I think
that's the type of thing - I'm interested in looking at that.
Oh I am too.
I think it would be
Well, 'cause I think that impacts then some of the scattering, being able to
It gets more to scattering, because if we're just scattering in new neighborhoods
that hardly seems scattered or fair, actually, to me.
And for, I mean, it creates choice opportunities.
Sure. Sure.
But I think most of our older neighborhoods are scattered.
I, I would say that our neighborhood is pretty diverse, yeah, in economic, but
that's not anything that, I mean, that happened, and if it's happening well and
fine and we don't need any policies to address that, that's great.
No, I agree with you.
But ifthere's something else we can, should or would come in at a more
affordable dollar amount to do, let's look at it.
But sometimes when you're talking about affordable housing, the lead abatement
issue doesn't become an issue, because the people who are buying the house can
afford it. It's affordable, so you're not dealing with federal money.
Right, right.
I mean, you're talking about low-income money you're going to use federal
funds for, then maybe lead abatement does become a problem.
But looking once again at how conservation districts maintain an affordability
and those kinds of things I think would be
And the diversity in the income in the neighborhood.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 23
Bailey: Yeah.
Champion: Right.
Elliott: And again, there are distinctions to be made between looking at rentals for rental
assistance purposes and looking at the affordable housing for people wanting to
buy houses, whether starter homes or second or third homes.
Champion: They're two different needs, and both needs have to be addressed.
Elliott: Yes. Yes. Absolutely.
Bailey: Well and, yeah, considering some of our neighborhoods, both of those options
are available, rental or purchase, but it, are there things we can do to look at
those? It's a discussion I would like to have, so can we?
Atkins: Yeah.
Bailey: And I don't know what information you need.
Correia: Well the other thing I was thinking about housing policy related to the Tenant to
Owner program, I think I'm interested in considering or just talking about
utilizing some community land trust ideas with some of these public housing
tenant to owner programs. What I've seen through the agenda is that folks are
needing to get two mortgages. One for what they can afford and then the second
that the City provides to meet the need, for the financial need, and I'm
wondering, rather than having a family have two mortgages, ifthere's a
community land trust and the City maintains ownership of the land then that
decreases the amount that we need, the family only needs for the house one
mortgage but also could increase the affordability period beyond the 15 years.
Bailey: So adding a land trust concept to our Tenant to Owner
Correia: Yeah.
Bailey: I would be interested in talking about that.
Correia: I mean, and that could even then lead into the community land trust in our
Affordable Dream - whatever - Affordable Dream Home, something.
Vanderhoef: ADHUP.
Correia: Yeah, thank you.
Bailey: Yeah, I think we should talk about that.
Correia: I'd be in.
Wilburn: Ok. Sounds like there's enough interest in exploring that a little further.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJu1y 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Atkins:
Champion:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Al!enda Item
5d(2).
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
(laughter)
Boothroy:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 24
So, is there anything that you might think that would influence the preparation of
this inclusionary zoning? Fairly well covered that?
We're hoping you could help us.
I don't sense, I don't think that influences that really.
I think Karin knows exactly what we need.
Ok.
All right. Grand Avenue Roundabout Presentation.
Ah, Mr. Mayor
Yes?
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
AUGUST 22, 2006, TO CONSIDER A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF 426 BAYARD STREET TO FRANTZ
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC.
I had some questions about Bayard, and I know that Doug Boothroy is here, but
probably won't be here until the end of the meeting. Can we move that? It's an
agenda item. I don't know how you want to?
That one item, or you want to talk about it
I would like to move that one item
That's on the consent calendar.
Yes. Is that all right?
That's fine.
Thank you.
You going to talk about that now?
Yeah. Sorry.
He was very focused on his presentation.
He was.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
--------,---~_.,..,._-----_.._-_._._-_._.._------- -,._------~--_.._-'----
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 25
He just doesn't listen to us. Nobody ever does anyway, so it's ok.
Now you know how Bobby Abreu feels when he leaves the Phillies.
What's your question for Doug?
Well Ijust want to get a little bit of background, I would like
(cut off - end of tape)
Bailey:
Champion:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boothroy:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boothroy:
. . . your item myself.
I agree with you.
I agree.
So. I, you know, I would like to remove it, because this kind of changes the
whole thing we talked about, so.
It does.
So. And I wanted to hear how this came about.
I was very surprised to read that.
Well, this comes about, as I understand it, from the respective purchaser of the
house that, Bill Frantz, as you all know, Frantz purchased the property on
contract from the City based on a set of plans and a concept that was discussed at
the last time that you went through this, this particular process. His purchaser
has, wants to change those concepts, so Bill came to me and asked if he could
bring it back before the Council to have you consider that, those changes. It
needs to be, we were going to send out those plans prior to the public hearing so
that you could review them. The comment basically says that, the idea is instead
of restoring the existing house with the addition and the garage, the two
additions, the garage and the residential addition, that they would demo the
existing house and rebuild on the same footprint as the existing house as well as
the addition that was shown on the plans that you approved, and eliminate the
two-story garage. Those drawings, as I said earlier, would be provided to you a
week before the public hearing. So the question is I guess whether or not you
want to set the public hearing at this point. That's what's up for tomorrow night.
I, I'm
Well, and we could start the process over, right?
I mean, I think
You could not set the public, I guess there are several options. You could, you
could choose not to hold the public hearing, you could, you cannot start the
process over necessarily, because we have a contract, a sales contract, that's good
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
Boothroy:
Champion:
Boothroy:
Wilburn:
Boothroy:
Wilburn:
Boothroy:
Atkins:
Wilburn:
Dilkes:
Wilburn:
Boothroy:
Dilkes:
Wilburn:
Boothroy:
City Council Work Session
Page 26
for 6 months. So as long as Frantz Construction Company continues on the plans
that you approved we are obligated to honor that contract, so you can not start
that over. The only, I think with, chance that or opportunity that you have to
change that is if through the public hearing process you chose to - either Frantz
withdraws or you choose to do something to the plans that he proposed before
you.
Well, as soon as I saw this I talked with another Councilperson. Then I talked
with Bill this afternoon and he is here, and I think he responded to my questions
and information that he has talked with neighbors as to why the change is being
appropriate. The fact that he has talked with the City Forester about the trees and
I think that he may have some answers to some very significant questions that I
think we have, because this is certainly extremely contrary to what we approved,
but at least Bill answered my questions satisfactorily. And he's here tonight.
But tomorrow night, tomorrow night'sjust setting the public hearing. I don't
know that there's usually public input at a setting of a public hearing. That's
usually held off. I mean I don't know that they can
I will.
They can do what ever they want tomorrow night? Ok.
Well if it's removed from the consent calendar, then it becomes a
Discussion item.
Discussion item.
Ok.
Doug, can I ask you.
Correct?
Well, it's not a public hearing but it becomes like any other item where you often
allow public discussion even though there's not a public hearing.
Right. Right.
We just don't have the plans available at this point. We certainly can, I don't
know if Bill can get reduced versions of those plans by tomorrow night or not.
I'll have to ask him, so.
I don't think it makes sense to do things that encourage a public hearing
tomorrow when we're setting it for another date.
Right.
Yeah.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
-~--_."-~_._---_._,.,.-
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
Wilburn:
O'Donnell:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 27
The only reason I want to remove it - first of all, I don't feel like it's a consent
calendar item and second of all, I think by removing it from the consent calendar
it draws attention to it and then by once again bringing it up within the normal
agenda it draws attention to it. This had some neighborhood discussion about it.
There were other people who were interested in this property. I think we have to
do everything we can to provide notice that there has been a huge change, or
potentially there will be a huge change in this contract, and we're interested in
hearing people's response concerning ideas about that.
That's why I think we should, we should set a public hearing. I also talked to
Ohwell.
I don't have any problems with that.
No.
to neighbors over there, and the big concern was dividing the large lot and having
two homes. That's not going to change. There's going to be one home there. And
the other concern was, well, you can rebuild on the same footprint, put the same
thing there, and ifthe neighbors aren't concerned with it, and, for that matter,
support it
I didn't know that.
Well, if
I talked to
Well obviously there is not consent about it being in the consent calendar, so it
becomes a discussion item. At that point if! read it and say discussion and
Council members can say this is a different thing than you were - will that
satisfy?
I just want to make sure that when we have the public hearing that we do have
feedback from neighbors. I don't necessarily, when we make an agreement, a
public agreement, that's what people expect us to hold to. This is a dramatic
change from the contract that we made.
WhatI'm
And it may be fine.
What I'm suggesting is by not allowing public comment at when this is removed
but allowing a Council member to give whatever notice, we're going to be setting
a public hearing, this is different, that that will take place without me opening a
public hearing.
Yeah, that's fine. I don't, I don't want to have a lot of public
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
---_.._-~---,~~-"-_._- ~--~--_..._--,---,., - - _.._-_._-,-_._--~._...-._---~_.._,.,._- .--"._-_._~--"..-'--"---'"
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 28
Boothroy: So you're not asking the contractor necessarily to provide input tomorrow night.
Bailey: No.
Champion: No.
Elliott: I think, it seems to me that if you have questions about why, what's gonna
happen, who is, Bill's here tonight, he can answer those questions if you have the
questions.
Bailey: But my point is, it's important for the public to know.
Elliott: Oh yeah.
Bailey: You know, I can certainly make a phone call, but that's, that's not what I'm
saying. I mean, this is a public contract. And so that's why I wanted to do
everything we can, and also, I think I'll be calling those neighbors and making
sure that they come to the public hearing if they're interested in commenting on
their support for this project. I think we should all encourage them to do that so
it's clear.
Champion: It may not be a problem, but it is a major change from the
Boothroy: Oh, it is a major, it's a change, no question about it.
Vanderhoef: And one of the
Champion: It could be fine, but I just don't think it belongs on the consent calendar.
Bailey: Right.
Vanderhoef: One of the things that may well be something we'll want to add, neighbors, and
when we see the design it may not make any difference, but I suspect this house
is perhaps eligible for historic registry, but I don't know that, and, and how it
would fit into the neighborhood. I know that they've been living with what it
looks like now and that neighborhood has a distinct flavor to it and putting very
different architecture in that location might not go well with the neighborhood. I
don't know, but they certainly need to be asked.
Elliott: Well. We will be voting on holding a public hearing tomorrow. It'sjust that it
will be a separate item.
Wilburn: Yes. Ok. All right. Thanks Doug. Let's take a 10 minute break, be back at 20 to.
Grand Avenue Roundabout
Wilburn:
Marian, are we ready? Grand Avenue Roundabout.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 29
Ok.
Presentation.
All right. Well, thank you for giving me the opportunity here to supply some
information on the Grand Avenue Roundabout project. I'd like to start with, the
purpose ofthis project was to provide some control or is to provide some control
to what is to date a confusing intersection at Grand Avenue and South Grand
Avenue, with many different conflict points and, in addition, assist in restricting
the eastbound traffic on Grand Avenue, which was implemented about a year ago
with some other improvements in the area. The hopes are also then to improve
pedestrian safety, knowing this is a major pedestrian corridor for the University
and the City, and then also to improve the corridor infrastructure and aesthetics
and the visual appearance of the area. In order to do that, first I'd like to go back
and just give a brief history on how this project evolved. In 2003 Earth Tech
developed and completed a traffic operation study for the corridor, and that was
about the time of the vacation of Grand Avenue Court. The purpose of this study
was to investigate traffic operations, as there was a lot of congestion in the area,
not only being a City arterial 3, but also with the University and their continued
development: the Hall of Fame building, the parking ramp, and other projects
associated with them in that area. In order to do this the study was put together
by a technical advisory committee. This committee had representatives from the
City, the University ofIowa, University ofIowa Hospital Clinics, the Melrose
Neighborhood Association, JCCOG, and then Earth Tech, who put the study
together. What came about of that study, in concurrence from all the parties
involved in it, were, was the suggestion and recommendation from Earth Tech to
implement a modified one-way loop system, is what we called it, which would
create one-way eastbound on Melrose, South Grand to the east, continue down
Byington and then more or less have a one way westbound on Grand Avenue
with that eastbound traffic being restricted to emergency and bus vehicles only.
As part of that recommendation there was several suggestions. One was the
improvements to South Grand Avenue, which were done in 2005, where we took
it from a 2-lane cross section to a 5, 4 and 5 lane cross section. Grand Avenue
improvements also were completed in 2005. That added a right turn lane on
Riverside and Grand; it also widened out some of the curves and then
implemented that one way system on Melrose. Directional signing was part of
both of those projects and is still continuing to be looked at. And then also
suggested, Byington Road curb project which, excuse me, has been fairly
deferred in conjunction with all of the parties due to the cost of that construction
and also the difficulty of it. And then finally a gate system or some type of
system that would help restrict that traffic going eastbound to emergency and bus
vehicles or authorized vehicles, if you will. Once we got into the design process a
little further, with the Grand Avenue, South Grand Avenue permits and looking
at that gate system a little further, it was everybody's consensus that there was
some problems with that. Number of reasons due to the fact that cars getting
stuck behind the gate during malfunctions. Also, people abusing that system,
whether it be drop-off vehicles, delivery vehicles to the dormitories or whatnot,
and, as a result, traffic could easily be backed up in the intersection and block
everything. There also wasn't a way for a car to escape if they were in that gate
and it did not work. They could be trapped between a bus and a gate. So that
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 30
made us look at other options on how to better improve this intersection, both for
the control and also to help with that restriction on the traffic to the eastbound. So
then we began looking at the design of this and that design followed FHW A
guidelines. It also looked at related projects, both locally and around the state.
And some key aspects for that design with this roundabout were again, the
eastbound Grand Avenue traffic, University and City utilities, which are
abundant in the area. The bus traffic was a main component. Cambus obviously
has a major stop here; it also makes a u-turn movement with their Interdorm
service, which causes a lot of problems, pedestrian, bicycle traffic, the geometric
constraints of existing infrastructure and facilities, and we also wanted to look at
other corridor improvements we could take care of at the same time, like an
asphalt overlay or PCC patching, and then also the visual appearance of the
corridor.
In the process of the design we did have several reviews: Kittelson Associates
out of Portland, OR, which worked through the Iowa Department of
Transportation, they are experts in roundabouts, excuse me, and looked at that,
and then Scott Larson, with the city of Coralville, who has been involved with
several roundabouts up in the Coralville area, the University of Iowa, and UIHC.
So, in general, through numerous studies, there are several benefits to a
roundabout which we feel would nicely apply to this area: fewer and less severe
crashes - it's been shown that 75-90% reduction in fatality and injury related
crashes. It does help with lowering the vehicle speed. The posted speed would be
20 miles per hour. Also, the geometries of the roundabout itself causes vehicles
to slow down in order to proceed correctly around it. An increase in traffic
capacity, which studies have shown to 30-50%, which would be ideal for our
arterial streets in Iowa City, as Grand Avenue is. And then, pedestrian safety,
again, which is key in this area - 30-40% reduction in pedestrian crashes, 10%
reduction in bicycle crashes, and then again, community enhancement, with
increased landscaping opportunities. That center island, the Public Art
Committee has done a call for artists as far as some art projects to be filled in that
center island, and landscaping as well.
So here's looking at the existing conditions that are out there. I'm sure most of
you are aware of this. Taking a closer look at it -let me get my cursor here -
another couple of points real quick, where this landing and the stairs, um, the
University has been wanting to get rid of those for quite some time due to the fact
that it's kind of become an informal drop-off and pickup area. Signs have been
posted and everything else but it still occurs, which causes problems with that
Cambus movement as well as other traffic, so that was something we added to
look at, as well as different sidewalk landings that were going nowhere or
shouldn't be that close to an intersection.
Looking at the proposed design on an overall view, this would be a single lane
roundabout, which is common around the nation as well as double lane. The
current right turn lane. As you're aware there's a left through movement for lane
for left through movement as well as a right turn lane on Grand Avenue.
Vanderhoef:
Say that again, please.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
_." _",,_,~__"_'_._"'__'_____'__'__' .._ ____.____,.,_._.___.._______m__.~_.....______._.____~._ -....--"--
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 31
Boelk: You bet.
Vanderhoef: Show me.
Boelk: Ok. Let me get my cursor here. Currently this is a left through if you will, left
turn only movement. This right lane is a right only turning movement. So,
currently we only have a single lane as it is making that predominant through
movement, that left movement, which is what most of the vehicles are doing. So
in order to better make that a single lane roundabout you need a single leg on
each area, so we propose to make that a bus only lane, which is more or less what
it is now, as the Cambus stops there one or two or three at a time. Make that a
bus only lane there, getting that back into single lane traffic. This is currently
single lane and would consist that way. Same with here and here. This actually
has room for a double lane right now but it really has no meaning, because only
one car can make that turning movement at this time, so there really would be
little change there. Taking a closer look at it here. This shows, the yellow is the
proposed, white is existing. So you can see where we are widening out in order to
get the geometrics that we need to make this roundabout work properly. Again,
showing the landing and the stairs would be gone. This here is representing the
wall. It would be about a 3 foot high retaining wall with limestone veneer, similar
to Dubuque, Foster Road. As you can see we're widening out on all the comers
except for this one which we were restricted by numerous utilities.
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Center island with a truck apron for the larger semis, and this would be a color
concrete stamped pattern, and then again the center island, there'd be room for
landscaping, art projects, whatnot. We're cutting this median back. This was a
ventilation access for a steam tunnel of the University that they no longer need or
use, so that would be abandoning that so we could get the road on there. This is a
model simulation of what this roundabout might look like. This is with existing
traffic counts currently. As you can see that east to west traffic is obviously the
predominant movement in this area. And.
Do you have
Sorry, go ahead.
Sorry. Well, I was just wondering if you have a simulation with bikes and
pedestrians?
Yeah, 'cause that
No, 1 do not have
Ok. That's a dream scenario right there.
Sure, sure, you bet, yeah, like any simulation. I just wanted to give you a feel for
what that movement would be. The people coming from the emergency area,
Pharmacy Road, if you will, the general thumb is you yield to whoever is in the
circle which, in this case, will predominantly be that east to west traffic. So,
currently they have a stop there I believe now and a yield here so this will just
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 32
become a yield and a yield and when the space is open you get into the circle.
Now a key component that's going back to that gate system was that if someone
comes here now, does not realize that this is restricted traffic to authorized
vehicles, emergency vehicles, right now they have to go all the way up here,
either turn around somewhere inappropriately or they have to go all the way up
between the dorms, come back down Byington, get back in here and get out.
Here they get in the circle, they realize they're not supposed to be there, all they
do is turn around, come right back out, head out to Melrose. Also, the Cambus, if
you've ever been out there when the Cambus tries to make their u-turns, they,
they crank it over here, stop, crank, stop, and look for traffic - it's very
conflicting and very dangerous. They also crank it back over here again. In this
scenario the bus would just get in its lane and move around. We ran traffic
templates on that auto turn and the bus would make that movement in a
continuous motion and come back over here. You. Yeah?
Can you go back to the one before?
That one?
So, right above the top there, there's a pedestrian cross there, right?
Yeah.
Is there a pedestrian cross across, like between the two dorms, with the median.
Over here?
Yeah.
Good point. Thank you. Yes.
Ok. So there's one there.
Yes. We are, as part of the other improvements, as I mentioned earlier, we are
proposing to put an asphalt overlay on Grand Avenue right here, which is much
needed, and then in addition, if you've been around these medians are in really
bad shapes. Deteriorated asphalt - don't look very good. Are goal is to remove
that asphalt there and put in color PCC concrete to match our other islands that
are, well islands that are currently there and islands that we'll add here. In doing
so we would put a dropdown at grade crossing.
And then, over there, no, other - yeah. There's no pedestrian? That right there.
This, this crosswalk was implemented with the South Grand Avenue
improvements in 2005. It, you know, obviously that's the closest we can get due
to the grade and the landscaping around here. It's pretty severe grading and all
landscape around here. Now, the University, Bob Brooks was here but he had to
go to a P and Z meeting. The University has been looking at changing, modifying
the Fieldhouse access, and what is their main entrance, exit, and they want to put
into one control point. In doing so they're also doing the landscaping plan for this
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
------~--_.._----"-'---"
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Correia:
Bailey:
(can't hear)
Elliott:
Correia:
Bailey:
(laughter)
City Council Work Session
Page 33
front so, in discussing with them, they directed me just try to remove and replace
the limited or minimal sidewalk and concrete 'cause they'd be doing some other
work in the future. But yeah, you're correct. That crosswalk would be there, here,
and here. Currently there's a path there which again, are way to close to an
intersection for a crossing and they're really not directing you anywhere in
particular.
So, if you come out of Slater, you have to go all the way over there and cross to
the Fieldhouse.
Yeah. Coming out here?
Yeah.
Right. Which, which
Aren't going to do that.
Because they cross right at the corner right now.
Right. They can do that as well. Yeah. They can come out right here, that's most,
yeah, they can come out this movement right here, take a turn right here and
you're in.
What did you say?
That was a long time ago. Is that what you said?
Vanderhoef: But the two dorms that are north of Grand Avenue, they have to either come
down Pharmacy Road and get into that somehow or another, or they have to
come the crosswalk in front of Slater and come all the way around the corner
rather than just jump, skip across the whole island.
Boelk: Which is what's going on now. Really we're adding an additional crosswalk.
Right now there's one here that's ADA, this one's an informal crosswalk without
curb ramps here: we're just pushing it back a little bit to get a vehicle's length in
there so they could sit and yield to a pedestrian and not be in the roundabout.
And currently, that's where they cross now, and obviously, they most likely may
not use this, but it's there for accessibility. I'm sure they will still cross at that
median, wherever they feel, but the one thing with making that modified one way
loop and with a roundabout is, luckily, you're only crossing one direction of
traffic at a time. That's the one positive of the pedestrian traffic in a roundabout,
you have the split island refuge in all locations and in this case, with this traffic
being restricted to emergency and bus vehicles, really that crossing there just
later is a lane watching vehicles going westbound.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 34
How come it can't be up where people would actually cross?
Oh, utilities. Immense steam tunnels under there. There's also chilled water lines
and numerous other. Right now barely fitting it in, if you will. We're removing
the Queen Anne lights in there and putting in new lights, the University is, under
their request. But yeah, really, there's no other way to go west with that
crosswalk. Same with here, due to the grade. In the current landscape there's no
way to push that any further to the north, and this one's about right where you
want it with roundabout design, or intersection design, for that matter.
The issue with the grade is the ADA compliance?
Correct.
And that's the same issue with the utilities, in order for it to be
Yeah. In order to take that, yeah, exactly. There's numerous vaults in this area
with access, excuse me, and you can't get that depressed crossing, if you will.
Ok.
How tall can a roundabout center be?
How tall, as in the art or the landscaping or whatnot? Or do you mean how big or
how wide is this?
Yeah. How, I mean. Ok. Thank of the one in Coralville - you really can't see
across it.
Mmm hmm. Right. And that is the point of a roundabout, actually.
Right. So when it comes to pedestrian visibility and their visibility and your
visibility if you're in a car to see them, it's going to be limited by the roundabout.
Yeah, and that's certainly one thing you know that we look at, that we'll look at
for that center island is, number one, that you can't get pedestrians, you won't
allow them to be able to get up there and use it as a refuge.
Right.
You know, you could put enough park and landscaping up there to block that off
so they don't cross through it. But yeah, typically yes, you'll want some type of
visual barrier so people realize that they're going around and they're not seeing
other traffic.
Right.
And bicycle traffic, ah.
Yeah, talk about the bicycle traffic (can't hear)
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription oftlie Iowa City City Council
meeting oOuly 31, 2006.
July31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 35
Boelk: Sure. Well typically the bicycle, sure. The bicycle traffic would typically follow
the actual flow and how FHW A guidelines show it is that the bicycle traffic
follow the flow of normal vehicular traffic. Now they could, obviously
Bailey: But typically, if you were coming up Grand you would actually, you might be
coming up over that bridge, and so you would be on the sidewalk, right?
Boelk: Mmm hmm. Correct. Correct.
Bailey: So, track it up the sidewalk, I'm riding up the sidewalk, because I'm not going to
get in there, because there's going to be a bus in that right lane, so I'm going to
stay on the sidewalk. So how do they get into?
Boe1k: Sure. They go right here, cross over here, or
Bailey: Ok. Or they could come to the end and get into the roundabout.
Boelk: Yes. Yeah. True. This is about 95 foot diameter, this outer circle here is 51 and
then the inside is 31, with a 10 foot apron on there. Anything else while I'm on
that picture? Just a closing, I guess. Again, the purposes that I stated at the
beginning ofthe presentation. The estimated costs, originally were up around
360,370. We did some PCC patching, that was part of this project, earlier this
year on Byington Road and Melrose. That bas a big necessity, so that took some
money off of that. Right now the estimate is about 334. The University is
graciously willing to provide 50% of the funding for this project and our goal
would be to get a letting sometime this late fall, early winter and construction
next spring or summer, obviously during the time when school is out so we can
get that accomplished while the students are away.
Champion: In the beginning you stressed pedestrian safety and automobile safety. Is this,
have there been accidents in this intersection? There are, I don't have the
accident count with me and I don't know if you could help with that, Anissa, or
not, but what I've noticed and taken several complaints on is just the confusion
there, in particular with that Cambus movement. If you go up there, I mean, it's
pretty dangerous, and not only for the driver of that Cambus and difficult but for
everybody making that east to west movement or just going through without any
type of yield or stop, because that's a constant through movement, that bus really
just waits and waits until he thinks he has a moment. Well, a lot of times they're
on track for their schedule, they just go, and aren't waiting for that moment, so
they jump in there, and the vehicle has to either avoid its stop or what it takes to
do that.
Vanderhoef: Why can't the bus then use the, the pull-off lane? We've got a stacking lane there
on the west side of the street, right by the ramp.
Boelk: Ok.
Vanderhoef: And the bus could drop off there and use the loop like everybody else is using the
loop.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
._"...._--~----~--~-----
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 36
Correia: Not going further. Circling all the way around?
Bailey: Not dropping all the way around?
Boelk: They
Vanderhoef: No. No.
Correia: Where at?
Bailey: Where are you talking about?
Vanderhoef: You see, they drop off, they can drop off. In this design they're dropping off on,
on
Boelk: Right now they come here, they drop off, the majority of buses drop off
Vanderhoef: Right there
Boelk: and proceed here and go down. The Interdorm bus service drops off, comes up
here, makes this u-turn movement, picks up here, and it goes no further than here
and heads back.
Vanderhoef: But, why couldn't it just come on around the corner, use the stacking lane and
then.
Correia: Tell me where you are talking about, the stacking lane.
Vanderhoef: Ok.
Baeth: I think. It's the only way to get to Stanley though, is if they.
Boelk: Right. There's no other way to get to Slater down there.
Baeth: Slater, yeah.
Boelk: I mean, you could talk to, that's been the discussion with Cambus and the
University on several occasion, but in order to fit their schedule and to pick up
those people at Slater, that's been their.
Bailey: So you have to pick it up at Rienow, you'd have to cross the street and pick it up
or cross the street and go home.
Boelk: Right.
Vanderhoef: But if it's safer to do that than having a bus going around a 350 thousand dollar
roundabout, I think we've already built a stacking lane that would serve the
purpose. I mean, our citizens walk four, five, six blocks to get to a bus stop to get
on a bus, so walking another half block to get on the bus safely versus having a
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 37
bus interfacing with cars, pulling a u-e at the top of a hill when there's ice and so
forth, I don't see that as any improvement at all.
Boe1k: That would, yeah, that would certainly be a discussion you'd have to have with
the University and Cambus. I mean I know it's been, they've been doing this for
how many years it's been in place, I'm sure it's been addressed.
Vanderhoef: Well, and traffic has increased, so unlike some of the others, I would like some
traffic counts at the intersection, I would like to see what's happening in that
stacking lane, how often is it filled.
Boelk: Are you referring to the stacking lane down here?
Vanderhoef: Yeah, the stack
Boelk: Well, the parking ramp isn't open yet, which is what that stacking ramp, that
stacking lane is for, that stacking lane is for cars that enter into those three
different accesses.
Correia: Then you'd have a bus.
Vanderhoef: No.
Boelk: The point of that is to get the traffic off the through lane into the stacking lane so
it's not blocking up as it has been in the past to get into that parking ramp.
Somebody waits because it's full, all of the traffic backs up, so the purpose of
that was to put in that lane so they can wait. You put a bus or something else
there, then you have people who are trying to get into the parking ramp and they
can not.
Correia: Too many people waiting
Vanderhoef: Ok, but we're going to have two ramps, correct, that are going to enter from
South Grand?
Boelk: Ah, there's one.
Vanderhoef: One that's open now and the second one
Bailey: Yeah.
Boelk: But one that's part of the Fieldhouse, the existing Fieldhouse, right.
Vanderhoef: And a second one opening. So. And those will be, I'm presuming two different
entrances to the two different, or are they going to be interconnected?
Boelk: I believe they're interconnected. Those two ramps are interconnected. The
existing Fieldhouse one and the new one are interconnected.
Bailey: So
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 38
Vanderhoef: So the one that is open right now is the only one that there will be, correct?
Boelk: Yeah, it's just
Correia: There will be one entrance for the new
Vanderhoef: For all of it.
Champion: I don't see
Boelk: There are 3, 2-3 separate accesses going into the parking ramp there when it's all
said and done, on that west side.
Vanderhoef: From? On the west side.
Boelk: Correct. Yeah.
Vanderhoef: Ok. Are you saying west side of the parking ramp or west side ofthe street.
Boelk: No. I'm sorry. West side of the street.
Vanderhoef: Are there any on the west side of the parking ramp?
Boelk: Ah, into that portion? I, do you know that, Jeff? I can't remember ifthere were?
Davidson: There's a clinic one
Boelk: Yeah, well that clinic one comes off here, yeah, you're right, and that reaches it,
family care.
Vanderhoef: There's a little parking lot, surface parking lot there, I thought for family
practice.
Boelk: Right. There is. I don't know how that's connected, to be honest with you. That
would be a question for the University.
Vanderhoef: I think we need to see the bigger picture and how this is gonna impact as things
are in transition over there.
Correia: It seems to me
Vanderhoef: I also need accident reports and I want speeds of what's happening on Grand
Avenue, Grand Avenue South and coming around that comer.
Bailey: Go ahead.
Correia: It seems to me that, I can appreciate what you were thinking about with the
stacking lane, but it, it seems that the purpose of that was to move cars out of the
driving lane that was waiting to get into a parking ramp so that we wouldn't have
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
...,~-------~._-_...._..-.._------"-".~..__.--~._---_..---
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 39
that traffic backup. Ifwe have adding a bus that's stopping, we're going to have
the same thing, then people would be stopped behind the bus that are wanting to
go or are trying to go around the bus, because they don't want to go into the
parking ramp or wait there either.
Bailey: Exactly.
Boelk: Yeah, and you have a conflict of whether to go in front of the bus or behind the
bus or whatever.
Correia: And I don't think that, I mean I don't. that the purpose of going around was so
that the folks later can't walk half a block, it's because they have the loop,
they're getting back around, it's the Interdorm, they're just going back and forth,
so then it just works that way, that those folks don't have to cross a busy street,
so I'm not really interested
Vanderhoef: Interdorm?
Wilburn: That's the name
Boelk: That's the name of the bus service.
Bailey: That's the bus.
Correia: That's the name of the Cambus, the route. It goes between the dorms.
Boelk: Strictly between dorms is all it does.
Vanderhoef: But it goes back across the river?
Correia: Right, and that's why it goes around and
Boelk: Correct.
Vanderhoef: Ok. So, it's the, local residents have to go around if they want to go west, they
have to go east and look around and com~ back up on Grand, go west on
Melrose.
Boelk: Correct. For those between South Grand and Byington, sure.
Correia: Right.
Vanderhoef: So they are, they're making the loop around and the loop is without all these
dangerous movements ofa bus. That's, you know, that's really tough.
Boelk: I'm not following you there.
Bailey: Can I ask you a question about the Fieldhouse and the reconfiguration, because
the infrequent times I drive in this area, one of the challenges is dropping off at
the Fieldhouse, and so that, if it's one lane over there and the stacking lane
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
.__.~_______,.__~___...___m~
July3l,2006
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
O'Donnell:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 40
doesn't start until later, it's one lane over there, people are certainly going to stop
in the middle of that lane, right?
Yeah, that's a good question, Regenia. Actually, when we did South Grand
Avenue improvements, this area was put in here as handicapped parking and they
also used it, considered it as a drop-off,
Ok, so they pull in
I think the intent is to get that main entrance over here, so that's why we have
those crosswalks going over there. I can't speak for the University, but they did
put in a pull-in area here because obviously we didn't want traffic stopping here,
which it does now.
And there's something else that happens over there, stopping, and maybe it is
turning movement into the parking ramp, but there's something else that happens
over there right now that delays or stops traffic and cars are swinging out, and I
don't know what it is. Is there another, maybe it's just the drop-off lane. Ok.
Yeah. That's really
So, so that is reconfigured so there is a pull-out
Yes, yep. Correct.
So if it's one lane, you won't have stopped traffic in that lane. Ok.
Right.
What's your estimate on this roundabout? Did I, did I just understand you to say
that this will handle 30 0 50% more cars safely?
That's what I, that's what studies have shown roundabouts in general will do. I
can't tell you if this one will exactly do that, but that's the intent.
And that $350,000.00 is not just for that circle, it's for all ofthese other
Right. That's a very good point. There is numerous other costs, including
utilities, that the University would like to do and are paying for. There's 3
electrical vaults that need to be redone, again, modification to this steam tunnel,
asphalt overlay, and then the dressing up the medians if you will. I mean, when
you get down to just the roundabout itself, yeah, you're certainly, I can't look
without that, but I'd say 150, if that. There's a vast majority of other
improvements.
So the medians will look better? Because no amount of public art on a
roundabout is going to improve the look of
Oh, it's terrible out there right now. Yeah, that's the intent.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Correia:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Champion:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 41
It's horrible.
It looks like a blighted area.
Exactly. Right. Right.
And what are the objections to this roundabout? Doesn't it
Pedestrian safety.
I think they're safer.
Yes, and that's what they're proven to be.
Well, I tend to think that they're safer for cars, but I still, and I like roundabouts,
I think some drivers have challenges with them, but I have a lot of concerns
about pedestrian safety with this up there. Because much as we'd like to believe
that people actually cross at crosswalks
They don't.
Sure. Right.
They don't. And they really don't in this community and I, you know, I have a
lot of concerns. I was generally supportive of this project, but the more I look at
where will the pedestrians go, the greater concern I have, and I can't believe that
the University doesn't have that concern and I can't believe that the University
has a belief that people up there will just use these crosswalks and we'll all be
good.
Well, yeah, and I wish Bob was here to address that.
I do too.
But yeah, they've been part ofthis process the whole time and given input as to
where the cross
What have they said about their concerns about pedestrians, because it's just - it
is just cross wherever, whenever, however, regardless.
Existing. That's how it is currently, correct.
Right.
And it's certainly obvious that, I mean, is it going to make it worse? We feel that
it's gonna improve it. We've been putting up chain and post along here as well.
The University incorporates that into the project so crossings can't occur as
easily, but again, without, even putting the roundabout aside, there aren't really
any, many other good options as to additional crosswalks that are closer to that
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Champion:
Boelk:
Champion:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Champion:
Boelk:
Champion:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 42
intersection. We feel that that roundabout, again, allows you to have a splitter
island, some refuge, some assistance in getting across.
Why will the roundabout improve it?
Again, usually it's because, with regards to pedestrians?
Yeah.
Usually it's that refuge for that splitter island and knowing that you're only
watching one direction of traffic coming at you rather than trying to cross two
lanes, like currently right here, you're crossing two lanes both directions. You
just cross one. Oops. Sorry.
Well I think.
Be in a refuge and then cross again, so you're just looking at traffic there. Same
here.
The University closes that entrance into the Fieldhouse and puts a wall there.
That's going to eliminate a lot ofthat pedestrian traffic across there, because
there will be nowhere to go.
Yeah, and that was one, good point.
But that doesn't seem to make a difference, in my observation of pedestrian
traffic, that there's nowhere really to land on the other side. They, it just seems,
look at Gilbert Street on any, they just kind of pour out of those apartments and
cross wherever and whenever.
That was a heavy point of emphasis, Connie, you're right, with the University,
was that they really wanted, I think either way we're going to look at getting rid
of this landing or stairs, because as you said, it does invite people. There's
benches there, it invites people to come and sit and to wait for pickups, so you've
got people crossing to get there. You'll have a retaining wall here. This grade is
pretty severe on both, on both siQes of that, so I think you're seeing more
restrictions. They're planning to landscape all of this, so hopefully you'll have
grown up shrubbery.
It seems to me, and I could be wrong, I have to really think about this, but if you
closed off that entrance to the Fieldhouse and puts a wall there, whatever they're
going to do, there'd be no reason to cross through that circle, because there's be
nowhere to go.
Right. Nowhere to go. Correct.
If you used either sidewalk and you wanted to be at a place, I could see you
crossing on either
But wouldn't you cross closer to the corner, though? That's my concern
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 3 1,2006.
..._.~__....,_._________,_..~. ..." ._.,,_,.._..._.'...m._._'___ __ _____.~'.m_________"~_________
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 43
Champion: Oh, yeah, no, they will, but they won't be going across the roundabout.
Bailey: Not necessarily crossing across all of it, but crossing
Boelk: Mainly, you're talking about here?
Bailey: Yeah.
Correia: Yeah.
Boelk: Again, this is all post and chain, bushes, trees, landscaping
Bailey: Steep?
Boelk: Yeah. And steep.
Bailey: Considered spikes?
Vanderhoef: Why don't we just have them close the stairway right now and see when the
traffic gets opened through the, to the new parking ramp, how this is going to go?
This is really a very expensive project. If it's to make it for a few people that
don't read the signs and turn down the wrong way and don't realize they can't
get through, our signage could be better. But $350, 000.00 to put that in so a bus
can make a u-turn up there, there are cheaper ways to
Boelk: Again, you're going to see some of that money either way.
Correia: It's not only for the bus! I mean, you go up
Bailey: I think it's to handle the greater
Wilburn: There's too many conversations going on at the same time.
Vanderhoef: The students have been able to cross in the middle of Grand A venue for a long
time to reach the buses, both going each direction, let's put it that way, and the
traffic, we have now created a stacking lane to go into the parking ramps. We
still don't have statistics, and we don't have any idea what the traffic pattern is
gonna look like when the additional parking spaces get opened. I, I cannot
support this at this point in time. It's, it's just not a good one, and when I look at
the bigger picture of traffic in that whole area, until we know how the future
Melrose is going to be, there's always been a request to make 2-way traffic on
Melrose someway through that area to connect with the lower part of Grand
A venue, and I suspect that that will come at some point in time and to put a
roundabout in now and not know time-specific when that Melrose is gonna
happen, I think this is just tinkering at this point.
Boelk: I can say that option of that 2-lane, 2-directional traffic, if you will, was looked at
in the study and concurred that it was achievable at this time.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 44
Vanderhoef: Well, it's deferred. So we tinker with this, now we've already done one upgrade
and change in there, and we've got something that's working, maybe not as well
as some people like, but I don't see pouring more money into this. Our road use
tax funds are being depleted annually, both at the federal level and the state level,
so to spend it on a roundabout at this point in time and then I noticed in the
minutes that we're talking about $50 - 75,000.00 to put public art in the center of
this thing, and so we have those barriers to all that site, that's pushing it up over
four hundred thousand dollars. It's not worth it.
Wilburn: Are you looking at this point for some type of consensus to proceed, yes, or no
with this?
Boelk: Yeah, I think some direction, yes.
Wilburn: Ok. Because if individual Council members disagree with the concept overall,
they have the option of voting no or saying no. So, can I hear from some others
of you?
Elliott: I've been waiting very patiently to ask my question. This is the first time I've
had.
Wilburn: Go ahead.
Elliott: Couple of very quick ones. You mentioned Byington. Where in the world is
Byington?
Boelk: It's what Melrose becomes, urn
Elliott: You mentioned Hall of Fame?
Boelk: That's Learning Center, Athletic Learning Center.
Elliott: Oh, Learning Center. Then my question really is can you tell me where in this
crosswalk that goes from the area of whatever dorm is on that side on the bottom
there. South Quad is a little further down.
Boelk: South Quad's up here.
Vanderhoef: Further up. North.
Elliott: Oh this? No, no, no.
Baeth: South Quad is right behind there.
Elliott: South Quad is right behind Slater.
Correia: Oh.
Boelk: Oh, South Quad, sorry.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 45
Elliott: But there is a pedestrian throughway that goes partially along the edge of the
Fieldhouse and cuts on through the Medical Center and over towards the football
stadium. Where does that pedestrian crosswalk fit with that, because there's a
whole lot of foot traffic that goes on there at any event. Can you tell me where
that joins up?
Boelk: Ah, that's a good question.
Vanderhoef: They used to route them through the Hospital.
Boelk: I think, I believe it's right through here.
Elliott: Some people will go right through the Fieldhouse that runs right adjacent there.
Correia: Down through the Hospital.
Boelk: Right.
Elliott: And that's the Fieldhouse right there.
Bailey: And you can go back behind over to the Hospital.
Elliott: So that crosswalk is very close to hooking up with that path that many
pedestrians will be taking.
O'Donnell: And the other one on the left.
Correia: Yeah.
Elliott: Ok. My, then my request is, I was, I don't remember whether I was here when
that one street was closed or whether it was just before I came on Council. I
remember there was a lot of discussion about it, and there was nothing about this,
so really
(cut off- end of tape)
Boelk:
Yeah, I probably, I can't answer than for the University, again, I wish we could
get Bob over here from P & Z or not or Jeff might have some insight there. I can
say that they have been part of the studies, part of the review process and
approved of it, but.
Bailey:
Are funding it.
Boelk:
And are, exactly, they're funding 50%, which really they don't need to fund
anything except for the utilities; this was a City street, it's not a University street
whatsoever, so they are funding it.
Elliott:
I know, I know that group of planning. It's just, before I would say yes I'd kind
of like to know what's coming up in another 5,10 years.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
- --------_.._,.._-"._-_..~._--_.. -- ._---"._-----~--_.,---_..._---
July 31, 2006
Davidson:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Boelk:
O'Donnell:
Champion:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
Champion:
Boelk:
Correia:
Boelk:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 46
Just to answer your question, Bob, the University has just completed an update of
their campus map. Some of us have seen what at least is the preliminary result of
that. So, I would imagine they'd be glad to come and fill us in and I will tell you
though, that in this area and in all areas it's sometimes subject to change. They
have some dynamics working that we don't in terms of big-time donors that
come on the scene at a particular time and so it does, it does change things a little
bit, but I would imagine they'd be happy to come and give you a run-down here,
and as Brian has reiterated, the University has been part of every bit of planning,
so it is consistent with what they've got going on.
Yeah. I would really appreciate that, because I'd like to know what, how this fits
in the context with, just as in JCCOG we were talking about that one road, it
impacts many more people than are just along that road, so yeah, I'd really
appreciate that.
Where are the designated, are there designated crosswalks right now?
Actual ADA accessible, no, well yes, there's one right here that they just put in
not too long ago. Again, these do not have a official curb drop, ADA access.
These do not as well have a full curb, they're just pads, if you will, and then we
just put this one in. So right now there's this and this and as far as curb-cut ramp,
whatnot, that's really the only one that I'm aware of.
I think it's a good plan. I think pedestrians are safer with this plan, there are
designated crosswalks, you do look down the road and look at the increased
usage of autos, and if it will handle 30-50% more, shutting off these steps I think
is a tremendous safety factor, but I think it's a great plan.
Yeah, that had to be done. I agree with Dee that it's expensive for a bus to turn,
but however, if you want to pick up students, you've got to pick them up in front
of their dorms. That's just the way
I don't think this is just about bus turning.
You know, I
There's a lot of cars that, a lot of cars that go through headed toward the
University and towards the doctors
Oh yeah.
Yeah. The other confusion, the other confusion's here. They have to do the same
thing as that Cambus does, more or less. They stop there and they wait for that
gap coming in here and just gun it when they can.
Yeah. It's very confusing.
They face that same problem.
I think it's important to have all these ADA sidewalks in as many configurations.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 47
Wilburn: Did you have something to say, Austin?
Baeth: Yes. I'd like to say I think it's a very good plan and I think too much focus has
been put on the buses here. I see this more as a good improvement for the City, I
mean, this is a very busy key intersection that we have, and if you've driven it
before, very confusing to people, especially if they're from out of town, how to
navigate it, so I think it's gonna be a big improvement for traffic flow as well as
pedestrian activity.
Bailey: Do you think it will improve for pedestrians up there?
Baeth: Yes, I think so.
Bailey: Ok. I mean, that's my major concern, because I've only seen roundabouts that
are more in traffic, in car traffic.
Baeth: And obviously, students are going to skip some of these noted pathways. We're
pretty limber - we could probably jump on that center roundabout.
Bailey: Oh my goodness. You are quicker.
Correia: That's right - that age is quick.
Vanderhoef: Is this what we wanted to hear?
Wilburn: If you think too about some ofthe larger traffic circles, I mean, I'm talking about
the Dupont Circle type thing, just because of the volume of cars and the direction
they're going, my personal experience and observation is that that's a
psychological barrier and you look for where you're supposed to go. That's my
expenence.
Bailey: Well and also, that's a good point, because when you think of those circles, and
that gives me a vision of pedestrian/car interaction, you also as a pedestrian are
looking at one, cars going in one direction typically, and that does make it easier.
Correia: And I also, I think it's important that we have the right amount of signage for,
and also, I've been in other communities where there are actually the sandwich
board signs in the pedestrian area that say cars must stop, and we don't really
have people stopping for pedestrians.
Bailey: No. In, when
Correia: When they're in pedestrian crosswalks.
Bailey: We don't. - we have to enforce that more.
Correia: I think having those visuals, that cars will stop, pedestrians are in there, I think
that will also, could also help.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 48
Champion: Well, I'm willing to, I agree with you. I'm also willing to look at this only if
they're going to close that entrance to the Fieldhouse. I think if they don't close it
and make it impossible to walk over there, you're going to create a real
dangerous pathway for anybody going over there.
Wilburn: Can you try and see if someone from the University can corne for our next work
session?
Baeth: And what's the speed limit? Is it 25?
Boelk: Currently, or proposed?
Baeth: Current.
Wilburn: Both.
Champion: Current.
Boelk: Current, ah. Shoot.
Bailey: Could it be 25?
Boelk: Anissa, think 25?
Vanderhoef: 25
Boelk: 25 current. 20 then, right.
Baeth: So it would be a new posted speed limit on the roundabout? 20?
Boelk: Yeah. A lot of times right now the concern with that speeding going up that hill
because people trying to get around that bus, they go in the right lane, down on
Riverside, knowing that they could speed up the hill to get around that bus before
it gets in the right lane, and it causes races which we've heard many concerns
about.
Wilburn: Oh.
Boelk: Thank you.
Wilburn: Thank you.
Vanderhoef: I hadn't thought about doing that.
East Side Recvclinl! Center
Wilburn:
East Side Recycling Center presentation.
Elliott:
Could we have music with this?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Correia:
Elliott:
Morris:
Wilburn:
Morris:
Karr:
Morris:
City Council Work Session
Page 49
Yeah. When do we get the music?
Music?
We need a soundtrack.
Can I start?
Yes, please.
Ah, my name is Kumi and I'm the architecture (can't hear) for the City.
Can you (can't hear) to the mic, please?
Oh sure. Is that better? This has been a very exciting project to work on. As you
know, in terms of timing, this has been a very fast-track project for the City.
ReStore, the Habitat for Humanity facility, was coming to the end of their lease
earlier this summer in their location in Coralville and they were looking for a
place to reestablish and locating. And in locating a site the had applied for a
CDBG grant for funding, but found that the property didn't qualif'y. So they
looked to the City ofIowa City to help purchase the property and become a
tenant, and the building suits their present needs. However, the overall site was
larger than ReStore had required. Our first priority, as far as staff, was in
purchasing the property and getting ReStore up and running. And then our
second priority was to investigate the site as an opportunity for a comprehensive
recycling and environmental center for Iowa City, and this is the reason that we
are now presenting the preliminary plans for the East Side Recycling Center, so
in the next several weeks we'll see that ReStore will be opening. We have been
working with an engineering and architectural consultant to review the existing
facility and the site and to expand and to eventually include other organizations
that work with the City with similar interests as ReStore, to recycle material and
have it accessible to the public. So there are two organizations that we are
looking to also have on this site. The first one is the Salvage Barn, an
organization with the friends of Historic Preservation. They are presently housed
in a metal storage building, a City facility that's at the landfill. And the second
organization that we're looking to bring eventually on this site is the Furniture
Project, which is located in a storage space at the Airport. When we go to sell the
Airport property, we will need to relocate the Furniture Project, but at this point
they are in a good location. Presently, in looking at the concept plan, what we
have at this point in time is what you see, it's just the building #1, which is right
here, which includes what will eventually also include an administration space,
which is #13 on this plan. The rest of the site isjust asphalt overlay. The reason
that we're bringing these three organizations together, ReStore, and then the
Furniture Project and the Salvage Barn, is because those three organizations are
supportive of the objectives of recycling and reuse and conserving space in the
landfill. Having them all on one site will allow the public to do a one stop
location for material drop-off and for shopping. Further, through a series of
meetings earlier this year we have worked with our consultant and
representatives from those organizations, ReStore, Salvage Barn, and the
Furniture Project, and our City staff to come up with a preliminary plan. The site
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Morris:
Correia:
Morris:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Morris:
City Council Work Session
Page 50
plan had to include future growth for ReStore, which we see in this plan as lA, in
two locations: one is to the north of the existing building and also to the west of
the existing building here on the plan. And also, for the two facilities for the two
organizations that I had previously listed, the Furniture Project, which is listed as
#2, and also the Salvage Barn, which here is shown as #3. The, the facilities that
are.
Who did, just give me some idea of what size we're talking about. I don't see a
size thing on here or
Sure.
Here, scale, the scale down here you can
The scale below that, this is, this segment shows is 20, excuse me, I'm sorry, it's
30 feet. So the total length of this whole segment is about 120 feet. Does that
help? As a comprehensive recycling and environmental center for Iowa Center,
we also looked at additional features on the site that allowed and encourages the
public to recycle, such as a drop-off site. The recycling bins for glass, paper,
cardboard and plastic are shown on section #4, similar to what's going on at City
Carton but hopefully a little bit better organization in terms of pull in and drop-
off. Further, in addition we looked at other components of the site, such as wood
chips and compost pick-up stations, creating another location for recycling these
materials and keeping them out of the landfill. So we see that here, and section
#6 is the compost and #7 is wood chips for loading, and this would allow for
backup of vehicles, public vehicles, to do that. We also included electronic waste
drop-off, which required, not to necessarily be housed, because it will be pulled
off on palettes, but requires some kind of protection from the weather, and so it
will be under a type of canopy space, and this is in #8. And also an oil drop-off
site and a hazard, a household hazardous waste mobile trailer station, and we can
see those as, the oil drop-off site is #5, down in the lower area here, and the
trailer can be, well, it's temporarily housed there, not necessarily there at all
times, and that will be in area #14. Now, while the three items I just listed are not
recycled directly to the public, they maintain the environmental objective of
redistribution in keeping them out ofthe landfill and encouraging disposing of
them in an environmentally appropriate manner. The next item I'm going, the
next three items are going to address, appear to be more public works or
commercial endeavor items, but also fall into the category oflooking at
environmental issues on the site. The first one is the sand and storage area, which
is # I 0, and it's housed in the, on the west side of the site and behind the facilities.
That's due to that.
You said 10. You meant 9.
9.
Oh I'm sorry. Correct. It's 8, yes, I'll get back to that one in a minute. #9, thanks,
that's located on the south side of the site and that's for, to, for the City vehicles
to travel back, reduces the necessity for City vehicles to travel back to the public
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
.____._.______,._._.__,_____._~.._u__.._._.._._..__.._._.__._..__.__
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Morris:
Champion:
Elliott:
Morris:
Elliott:
Atkins:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Elliott:
Atkins:
Champion:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Champion:
Morris:
City Council Work Session
Page 51
works main distribution center during severe weather. And the site could also
accommodate this need.
Enclosed?
Actually, the, it's enclosed, what we're looking at is a concrete 3-walled system,
and then a vehicle can back up into it. And then, that's to basically maintain
some of the salt, which is a problem with it at the present site, and into the green
space. #11, let's see, let's go to #11, which is the bulk water distribution, which
provides another location for this service to public and private need on the east
side. Presently the only distribution in Iowa City is at the Transit Center.
What does that mean?
What's.bulk water distribution?
Ah, bulk water is, allows commercial vehicles to fill large amounts of water by
using tokens, and currently they can fill tanks at the Transit Center, and they
purchase tokens and do this, and it's a service that municipal, the municipality
provides.
They can go get a truck full of water. I never heard, I didn't know - what do they
use it for?
Construction companies use it.
Pest control.
Really.
Concrete.
What an educational event!
I know. I never heard of it either.
I'm sorry
It's one of those things intended to beat the garden hose.
Yeah, I guess so. Is it the same price?
No.
Probably not.
Oh, well I'll get some (can't hear)
And so II is bulk water distribution. #10, finally is the west side of the site, it
will be the concrete wash down station, which is located, again, behind the
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
__~____"_,.~..____._______..____~__..._"___._"__~.__'m.___._._____"
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Morris:
Bailey:
Morris:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
Morris:
Elliott:
Morris:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 52
buildings, and the purpose of this is that it will be for commercial and City
vehicles that need to wash out their concrete trucks. It's a wash out pad, which is
a concrete pad and a filter that allows contractors to clean concrete vehicles in an
environmentally and EP A appropriate standard. It reduces concrete materials
going, getting washed down into our storm drains, which is currently a problem,
and will encourage the application of the new EP A storm water regulations to
contractors. Currently contractors generally onsite will have some type of
filtering system, but those many, I shouldn't say many, but some do not take the
opportunity and use our storm drains instead, and that has caused some problems
in the past, and so this provides a site on the East Side where this is a great
amount of development to have an actual wash down pad that the City will
maintain.
What's the capacity of that? How many trucks could be there?
At a given time only one.
Ok.
And lastly #12, which is one of my favorite parts of this project, is the, we're
looking at an education center, which is a classroom for school and community
groups to learn about recycling and the environment and how the site actually
works and what we're doing to eliminate waste going into the landfill, which is
expensive, and then lastly, what we see to the south of the full facility is what
will either be a storm water detention or, if funding allows, perhaps a bio swale
which will biologically drain pollutants that are often on parking, large, it's a
common application to parking lots where substantial automotive and pollution
has collected on the paving. So.
What do you, what do you call it, for instance, not long ago I took a trunk-load of
materials to the, as an old person I want to call it the dump, but it's the landfill,
I'm sorry, materials that have some benefit, that people could come and, what do
you call those? Like maybe a bottle of Wind ex that I wasn't ever going to use,
two cans of putty - what do you call that?
Treasure, Bob.
Because it's not household waste. It's not to be thrown away. It's to be picked up
and used by someone else. Is there a facility for that here?
Well. Well some of those items, yes, like cleaning products and so forth, your
household hazardous waste trailer will take those items. Putty I'm not sure about
_ paint it'll take that, for example, that's an item that is reused.
So that's all within the household waste. Not necessarily waste, some of it is
recyclable.
That's correct.
Good. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 53
Wilburn: An exchange, like at the current facility, for tbe crisis center.
Morris: So at this point, right now, what we're proposing is that we're just collecting it at
this site and then perhaps taking it and, like for example, paint can be collected
and then reused as, paint.
Correia: Paint.
Morris: Primer, for example.
Vanderhoef: So tell me the space that's presently used for the Furniture Project and the
Salvage Barn - what is that space going to be used for and how much of the stuff
that is collected at the East Side is going to be taken then to the West Side.
Morris: Let me make sure that I understand your question. Presently, only ReStore is at
the site and
Vanderhoef: No, I'm asking about the
Morris: Ok.
Vanderhoef: The West landfill, and the facility out tbere. Right now it has, the Furniture
Project is out there as well as the hazardous waste and
Morris: The Furniture Project is out at tbe Airport.
Vanderhoef: It was at the Airport.
Bailey: It moved back.
Morris: It used to be, it recently
Vanderhoef: Ok. We've got space going on out there at the landfill that has been used for
different things, including hazardous waste, so tell me, how much are we
duplicating here?
Fosse: Right now our landfill is actually storing stuff in other locations, so we need
additional storage space for our spray-on liner? Did I review that with you, the
spray-on liner? I did that at one of, Public Works, I think. It's kinda neat. But
we've got stuff we were storing at the Airport while we had the Furniture Project
out at the landfill, so it's kind of backwards there, so we were - we'll be able to
use the space at the landfill is the short answer there.
Champion: Will be keep the hazardous waste disposal at the landfill?
Fosse: You bet, you bet, and the exchange thing that you were asking about will remain
at tbe landfill and, as Kumi said, we'll collect at this location, but we won't have
an exchange where you can pick up used materials here. That's not part of the
present plan.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
Fosse:
Elliott:
Correia:
Fosse:
Correia:
Fosse:
Bailey
Fosse:
Elliott:
Fosse:
Elliott:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 54
Oh, that will remain at the present landfill.
Correct.
Ok.
Is the bulk water and the concrete truck wash down station, does that require that
to be there, or you talked about a token, people will be able to use that without
having to?
Right. The bulk water, one of the reasons we want to make it more freely
available is to keep people from tapping into fire hydrants when they shouldn't
be, because not only are they getting the water for nothing but the water hammer
that they create by turning those on and off inappropriately can cause water main
breaks and other problems in the system, so we want to make it convenient for
contractors to access this.
So, but we don't need staff-they'll just be able to access it.
That's right. That's the way it functions now and this one will work the same
one. The concrete truck wash out is really a new item for us, and it's a part ofthe
comprehensive storm water quality program that we're looking at in the City. It's
a new item for all communities. Setting one, a temporary one up at a construction
site is relatively easy, but for replacing sidewalks and driveways and concrete
patching throughout the community, they need a place to wash out and that's
what we'll provide here.
So with the exception of Habitat, the Furniture Project and the Salvage Barn, this
is a drop off site and it will be accessible, like City Carton, at any hour? I mean,
what are we talking about for hours and accessibility?
Well our intent is that this area out here will be accessible at any hours, provided
things work well. If it becomes a mess, we may need to restrict the hours, so here
we have drop-offs and along here we have pickups, providing an outlet for our
recycled materials, wood chips, compost, maybe someday we'll have bio solids
there. Occasionally we produce Class A bio solids at our waste water plant that
can be used without restriction, on vegetable gardens and that sort of thing.
But, for the recycling drop-off, you're looking at 24/7 unless something inhibits
that.
Unless it's a mess, yes.
Presently that's the way it is and that seems to work pretty well, so I hope this
does.
And what about the oil drop-off? Is there a charge for that? I've always seen
people dropping, dumping oil, and this is just for private individuals and not for
commercial.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
_._.__..._-_._,._--_.._--~_....- --------.--."....-----.-.---------.-
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 55
Fosse: That's right, that's right, and there will be no charge for that.
Champion: Great.
Baeth: And you said there's no pickup for the Furniture Project here, only drop off?
Fosse: Oh, for Furniture Project, they will operate out of#2 here, and yes, that's where
people will come to pickup as well as drop off.
Baeth: Oh, ok.
Fosse: But it's the household goods, the Windex, the tloorcleaner type stuff, that there
will not be a pickup for.
Baeth: What's your reason for that?
Fosse: Urn, we just haven't found the space for it, but it's, this is still in the planning
stages, and if that's something that's important to you all?
Bailey: I think it would be good.
Baeth: I think it would be a very good idea.
Correia: Because otherwise you have to go all the way out to the landfill?
Bailey: Yeah.
Fosse: Yeah, for the exchange.
Champion: At the landfill (can't hear) sell it here or give it away.
Bailey: Yeah, I think it would be better to exchange it here. I don't know.
Baeth: If they have resources, you wouldn't have to cart it back to the landfill to give it
away.
Fosse: It's certainly more convenient.
Baeth: And it would also make it available to people on the East Side, a lot easier.
Fosse: Let us look at that.
Vanderhoef: Tell me, what kind of traffic do they have presently coming into the store to pick
up things?
Fosse: It's fairly sparse.
Vanderhoef: That's kind of my impression too.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 56
Bailey: You mean for which? Furniture Project?
Vanderhoef: No, for the hazardous chemical exchange program.
Bailey: Well, it's inconvenient, because you have to be there the hours that they're open.
I mean, that's the challenge, the staffing and. Accessibility isn't only location,
it's also hours, and
Vanderhoef: An appointment.
Bailey: Right, an appointment, that's just crazy.
Fosse: Oh, that's for the hazardous drop off.
Bailey: Yeah. It's garbage. You shouldn't have to make an appointment for garbage.
Atkins: And yet, and yet, the appointment 10 years ago was the most critical issue. That's
the thing we got criticized the most for, for not providing for appointments.
Bailey: Wow.
Atkins: You're right, Regenia, it's how things have changed.
Bailey: Well, I just think we live in a 24/7 world, but we as a City offer 9-5 service on
Monday through Friday, and that's not really when people necessarily need some
of these services.
Atkins: This is going to have, we'll want some weekend hours
Bailey: Yeah, we'll definitely want some weekend hours, and some evenings, I would
encourage.
Fosse: For the drop off for household hazardous waste that's by appointment because
we need to pull staff from other operations at the landfill to be there when the car
drives up, and we're not staffed to just have somebody just sit and wait for the
cars, so that's where the appointments are necessary.
Bailey: And that will continue to be the case with the mobile trailer as well, or will we do
some regular, the mobile trailer will be here.
Fosse: The only time the mobile trailer will be there is when it's staffed. That is, when it
leaves the landfill and sets up somewhere, there's going to be staff with it. It
won't just be set up where you canjust.
Bailey: Ok.
Champion: But you used to have appointments for that too.
Bailey: There will be a schedule.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 57
Vanderhoef: That was when we had it only a couple times of year, before we had a place.
Fosse: Yeah.
Bailey: All I'm saying is that there needs to be a consistent schedule and it doesn't, it
shouldn't be Monday morning at 9:00; that's not when people clean out their
garage.
Champion: No, I think the hazardous waste disposal is a very important part of recycling and
I think as convenient as we can make it for people is
Bailey: Otherwise they throw it away. I mean, let's just be realistic.
Champion: Actually, I've got a whole bunch in my garage, stacked up, because I'm too lazy
to make an appointment and drive up to the landfill, even though I love the
landfill.
Bailey: Maybe we should carpool, because I'm too lazy to make an appointment and
drive out to the landfill.
Vanderhoef: I'm glad you love the landfill.
Bailey: The Furniture Project - we don't pickup, neither do we deliver. The City runs
that right now, right?
Fosse: Right now we contract with Successful Labor, and they are doing pickups and
deliveries.
Bailey: Ok, thanks.
Fosse: Other questions?
Elliott: Actually, sometimes when you clean out your garage people stop and want to
know if you're having a yard sale and you can sell a lot of crap just cleaning out
your garage.
Bailey: I haven't done that but nobody buys half a can of paint.
Vanderhoef: Or Windex.
Wilburn: Any other questions about the recycling center?
Fosse: One last point, I'll just say that we're early in the design phase of this. Working
on cost estimates, and we'll probably look at some sort of phased
implementation. To build it all at once would be a pretty big bite.
Champion: Is it going to be built with landfill funds?
Vanderhoef: And come back to us at CIP?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
-~_.~--~_._~--_._,-------~-_...."--_..._._-~."--,..-
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 58
Fosse:
Yes.
Champion:
And will it be built with landfill funds?
Fosse:
Yeah.
Champion:
And don't we have millions of dollars?
Fosse:
Here's a perspective of
(laughter)
Champion: I mean I think if we're going to do this we should do it and get people into it.
Baeth: Do you have a rough time frame for this?
Fosse: Ah, we're tentatively looking at phasing it over 3 years, but if it's something
that's a priority for you all and in the capital program, you choose to fund it all in
one, if that's something we could do, the fastest that it could be implemented
would be designed this fall and winter and bid for construction during next
construction season.
Champion: We don't bond for it, do we?
Atkins: No..
Champion: Right. So why would you want to phase it in?
Fosse: It's expensive.
Champion: What does expensive mean?
Fosse: A lot.
Champion: 1 guess we're talking budget.
Atkins: Design it, then we'll give you a good budget for it.
Vanderhoef: And lots of income offit.
O'Donnell: I'm a little upset that Elliott's throwing away half a bottle of Wind ex.
Bailey: I'm shocked actually - that's really not very frugal.
Correia: Throwing away Windex - shame on you.
O'Donnell: Appalled at that.
Elliott: That was only illustrative.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 59
Bailey: Oh, oh.
O'Donnell: I did not see before, but I see now.
Vanderhoef: I didn't know Dee Norton came back.
Wilburn: Ok. Thank you.
Vanderhoef: You don't look like Dee Norton.
Football Game Dav ParkiDl!
Wilburn: Football game day parking. Football game day parking.
Vanderhoef: I want to park on the 50 yard line.
Wilburn: Are you coming up for this Karin?
Franklin: No.
Wilburn: Amy, I think this was an issue you brought up.
Correia: This came up when we had correspondence from someone who was visiting
during a game day, used one of our parking lots, was actually in the park but
received a ticket because we were enforcing. There were a lot of people using our
parking lot to park and walk to the game, and so I'm wondering ifthis might be a
way to open up parking lots for game day parking and charge, a revenue making
venture for the City.
Champion: Well I think I'd probably make it a money making venture for a non-profit (can't
hear) staff it.
Correia: Well I mean I was, have a non-profit staff it.
Elliott: As I remember that letter, it seemed just really unfortunate that we assumed,
since somebody was parked in a parking lot, that they were in violation when
actually they weren't. So I think you're talking about some way to get around
that kind of misunderstanding?
Correia: Well, no, I think it just parked the idea of using parking, these parking spaces,
make parking available for
Bailey: So what parking do we have available? It would be down in that particular park
that they?
Correia: I would think City Park and
Wilburn: Crandic Park and City Park are the two probably closest to.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 60
Vanderhoef: But it's free in Hancher on game days and then they take the shuttle bus.
Correia: Free?
Vanderhoef: That's all free.
Wilburn: Yeah.
Vanderhoef: So parking in City Park wouldn't
Bailey: So why would you pay if you're (can't hear)
V anderhoef: Yeah.
Correia: That's a good point.
Champion: I would think that Crandic would work well for basketball games. You could
charge maybe $20.00.1 don't know. I kind of, I don't know. I mean, I think the
idea sounds great, but what if somebody wants to really use that parking space
for the trail?
Bailey: There's the Park.
Correia: Well, that's
Bailey: So do they get in free?
Champion: Or what if there's a big family event at City Park?
O'Donnell: And you know you look at the?, we've got football games in the, it's the first
letter I remember.
Champion: Right.
Baeth: Well see, if you wear Hawkeye gear you can charge them.
(laughter)
Bailey:
That's a good punishment, I think, for wearing black and gold, that's great, yeah.
Atkins:
Well, the staff went through it and except for stuff like, called City Park parking,
that was what it was intended for.
Elliott:
But!
Correia:
But I think it is, how do you determine then, why do we give tickets for those
days?
Champion:
Because most people from Iowa are honest and they're probably not going to
park there.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
-----------_..,-~-_._---_._-"_..,_._-'---..._-_._._.__...~---
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 61
Bailey: They have that black and gold thing.
Elliott: It just seemed to me that someone got a ticket for parking in the appropriate place
and the appropriate time and someone else simply assumed that they were doing
something other than they were doing.
O'Donnell: (can't hear)
Champion: We'll make good on it.
Wilburn: There may have been times on, at Crandic Park where someone may have gotten
a ticket parking on the trail. I bike through there and people are, during games,
parked on the trail.
Bailey: Oh yeah, I do that.
Wilburn: I'm not really sensing that there's interest in proceeding.
Bailey: I don't think, well first of all, it doesn't seem like it's feasible as a revenue
stream for us, and, I don't know - if a non-profit wants to propose (can't hear),
that would be something else.
Vanderhoef: What, what does the sign actually say there?
Champion: There should be a 2 hour parking limit or something.
O'Donnell: City park closes at 10:00.
Vanderhoef: No, I'm talking about Crandic, excuse me.
O'Donnell: There's about four of them there.
(can't hear)
Dilkes: (can't hear) across from the Mayflower, not supposed to be parking.
Vanderhoef: Yeah, and we finally had to start chalking those and ticketing them until they
really understood that that wasn't permanent parking for Mayflower residents.
No. I think we just give them their money back if they send us a letter. This is, I
agree, this is the first one I've ever heard of.
Correia: Should we not ticket during those? So people don't, all people who get tickets
who write letters if they feel like?
Vanderhoef: The whole point I think may be is whether it's there for an hour or two. So if
you're on traffic control, you might chalk it and note the time and see if it stays
there for 3 1/2 hours or something like that; they may well be.
Baeth: Well, and you could post a time limit at those parking lots.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 62
Bailey: But ifit says park use only, I mean, that's, you know, you know what (can't hear)
Vanderhoef: Park user parking.
Bailey: You know if you're risking or not, cost-benefit, if you're willing to pay the
ticket, there was your cost of parking.
Champion: That's true.
Wilburn: Again, I'm sensing no consensus on this, so let's move to agenda items.
O'Donnell: A good idea, that one.
Al!enda Items
Wilburn: Agenda items.
ITEM 6. AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME
LOCATED AT 1220 SOUTH FIRST AVENUE TO A PUBLIC HOUSING
PROGRAM TENANT.
Elliott: #6, Steve, just a quick question.
Atkins: 6?
Elliott: #6 was the Tenant to Owner, and is there no down payment involved in that? In
other words, they just get two mortgages and no down payment?
Vanderhoef: There was an earnest, $125.00 earnest something or another was in the report that
we got from Housing Authority.
Atkins: Bob, I'll have to determine that for you. I'll have it tomorrow morning.
Bailey: We're on #6.
Elliott: Ijust, Ijust added up the first and second mortgages and came to the total price.
Atkins: I'll find out for you.
Elliott: Ok.
Wilburn: Other agenda items?
Bailey: I have a bunch, so should I just start? Are you done?
ITEM 7. APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT,
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE RE-DEVELOPMENT OF
BROOKLAND PARK, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY
TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
_....._------~---,_._-_...,_._---_._---------_._.~----,.--
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
Elliott:
Champion:
Correia:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Correia:
City Council Work Session
Page 63
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR
RECEIPT OF BIDS.
I had #7. Ijust though, when neighborhood parks are first provided, those people
who buy the homes share in the cost of providing that green space, that park
space, but later on, when they're further developed or expanded, it seems to me if
the neighborhoods - I'd like to see the neighborhoods share in that cost. I guess
I'm looking at the Brooklyn Park that is costing, what is it 200 and? It seems to
me that's not for the benefit of the entire city, it's for the benefit ofthat
neighborhood. And it seems to me it would be nice for them to share in the cost.
On the other hand, you get into neighborhoods when they can't afford to do that,
but, philosophically, I just, I don't like to see the whole city pay for something
that's for a neighborhood.
But anybody can use the park.
And didn't they help pay for the design? Wasn't there some contribution?
Well they had a PIN grant.
They got a PIN grant.
Yeah, ok.
But seriously, it's public property and anybody can use it, and the whole concept
of neighborhood parks is they have people walking to a green space they can
enjoy, but if you want to ride your bike 5 miles to the other side of town and
enjoy that green space, you have that right too. It's like public art, everybody gets
to use it and admire it.
And. Ok.
Oh, so Bob understands now.
That's the way (can't hear).
Last one is, I hope these signs are going to be modest little signs, because the last
time we talked about a sign in a park, it cost $35,000.00.
It was public art.
You mean in Benton Hill Park?
Yes.
That was public art.
Well.
It was an archway, wasn't it?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31,2006.
July 31, 2006
O'Donnell:
Elliott
Wilburn:
Champion:
Correia:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Champion:
Atkins:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 64
Well.
Broadly described as public art, I guess.
Other agenda items?
I think you make a good point. I just don't think you could institute it in one
neighborhood and not another. Then it becomes discriminatory.
So how would, investments, on
I think we've made a judgement in this City that we value open space, we have a
policy about that. I don't see how we can begin to assess people, you know, and
We now have an open space ordinance where it requires dedication of property.
Yes. So I
And as I said, they pay for it initially. Because the price of their house goes up
proportionally.
Oh sure.
Yeah.
But that's (can't hear) public value.
Other agenda items?
Done.
Correspondence 3f(4) Amos Petersen: Sublease of mobile vending permit
Vanderhoef: Correspondence #4? 1'd like to just put this in with that discussion when we have
it on vending.
Correia: When are we having that?
Champion: Oh, is that the one with the rental? The sublet?
Vanderhoef: In the fall.
Elliott: That's right. They can't sublease.
Champion: Sublease. Yeah.
Vanderhoef: 1'd like to take a look, have a discussion of what we do with it.
Elliott: Yeah.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 65
Correspondence 3f(2) Tom Saterfiel: Sidewalk Issue on Muscatine Ave
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Atkins:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Atkins:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
And so on correspondence #2, are we going to photograph that as per our new?
Yes? Ok.
It may, assuming it hasn't already happened.
Inspected, probably.
I think it's already happened.
But we are starting to do that?
Yes.
Yes.
Ok. That's all I wanted to know.
Correspondence 3f(7) Kevin Hatch: Traffic light camera
Bailey:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
Correia:
Champion:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
And then correspondence #7, we do need some enforcement out here on Gilbert
Street of people running red lights. I mean, it happens all the time at this comer
of Washington and Gilbert. I've almost gotten hit I don't know how many times
crossing that, with the walk light.
Washington and Gilbert.
Are they turning? They're going straight?
No, they're going straight through a red light. They speed up and they go straight
through. Washington. Just out here, by the police station.
Oh,oh.
That takes a lot of courage.
No, and I think it's a huge thumbing of the nose right by our police station that
they're doing that.
There are a number of cities that are experimenting with making the running of a
traffic light or speeding a municipal infraction against the owner of the vehicle, a
municipal infraction, not a criminal charge. There's a number of issues about
whether cities can do that and I suspect one of those, one of those will work its
way up to the Supreme Court.
Yeah. I was just reading in the paper that at least it was approved at a lower court
level.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 66
Dilkes: It was approved at a lower court level in Davenport.
Bailey: Well, and I just, I just want to see more enforcement of, you know, the police
officers out there watching those intersections, because it happens quite a bit on
Gilbert Street.
Elliott: Oh, it happens I don't know how many times; I've pulled up, the light turns
yellow and I'll pull up and stop and here's a car that's been way behind me
zipping right through.
Bailey: Right. And Ijust think that, especially as new residents are moving into Iowa
City, it's good to have enforcement so people sort of get the idea of what's
happening where and what's not allowed, and speeding through those lights is
Elliott: I'd like to look at those traffic light and speeding cameras.
Bailey: I don't know if! want to do cameras. I just want enforcement.
O'Donnell: I just have a real problem with a camera taking a look at us, driving the car and
walking on the street. Ijust really, there's enough, there's enough control.
Champion: You could be doing other things in your car.
Wilburn: That was a big source of
Bailey: Sometimes that happens.
Wilburn: That was a big source of discussion when the current cameras went in.
Elliott: Yes.
Wilburn: And the discussion led to a different set of software involved so they don't record
Bailey: I'm just asking for
Wilburn: I'mjust putting it out there.
Bailey: police officer's cars out there to stop them.
Elliott: Why do you not mind a police officer ticketing you, but you do mind a camera
ticketing you?
Bailey: Well, they wouldn't be ticketing me. I'm usually on foot. I'm usually the target
there.
Elliott: No no, Ijust don't see the difference.
Vanderhoef: Oh, conflict of interest here.
Bailey: I don't think so.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Atkins:
Elliott:
Champion:
Wilburn:
3d(1)
Bailey:
Elliott:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Correia:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
City Council Work Session
Page 67
Is it illegal? Is there any way our community service officers can give tickets or
is that just not allowed?
Not moving violations. Parking violations.
No.
That's too bad, isn't it.
Other agenda items? Go ahead, keep going.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAILING AND
PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMMENCE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT THE LOWER WEST
BRANCH ROAD - SCOTT BOULEVARD TO TAFT AVENUE
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY FOR THE
PROJECT; AND SETTING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON
SEPTEMBER 5, 2006.
The 3d (1), I just, the setting the public hearing, the Scott Boulevard, acquiring
public, acquiring property for the project, Ijust wanted somebody to talk a little
bit about what will be our process?
This, I don't
Actually, this is not a change. This, there is agricultural property involved in this
Right. But.
Where are you?
And so that's been part ofthe law
Page 3.
for several years now.
Oh, I know that. I just, we mailed to them, right, not registered or registered? I
mean, how do we ensure that they're actually notified I guess is the problem.
Well, there's a, we, there's a state code provision that we have to comply with
Ok.
In terms of where we get the names and, I can't remember, I'd have to look at the
code section about what the actual mailing is. But yeah, we've been doing this
for
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Bailey:
3d(2)
3c(6)
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 68
Oh, I know that. I'm just thinking with this focus on eminent domain I think it's
really good that we are very, that we talk occasionally about what our process is,
that this is something we've been using, and that's what I wanted to have better
understanding of.
Well I can, I can double, I can look at it and talk to you tomorrow about it, sure.
Oh, that would be great. Yeah.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR
AUGUST 22, 2006, TO CONSIDER A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF 426 BAYARD STREET TO FRANTZ
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC.
Class C Liquor License for Etre Downtown Group, LLC, dba Skybox,
124 y. E. Washington St.
And then, oh I told you, I said I wanted to move 3d(2) from the consent calendar.
Also, I'm interested - this is a little bit different, we've never really done this -
I'm interested in moving 3c(6), the Class C liquor license for Etre Downtown
Group, which is doing business as Skybox, which is also a second story
establishment. I'm interested in moving that from the consent
(cut off - end of tape)
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
. . . we have a distinction here. You see what I'm saying?
When you say remove from the consent calendar, you mean just simply consider
it separately?
I don't know how to, I could highlight it, I can highlight it, but that's a second
story establishment and we aren't, we talked about it tonight that we provide
liquor licenses for second story establishments, and I think we should make some
distinction between why we have to "quote" address the issues at Englert and
then why this is just standard pro forma. Does that make sense?
However, I think we, it's my understanding we could not deny this one, but
Oh yeah.
I would certainly like to have a discussion at some time about how we might
address this public safety issue.
Maybe I'll just highlight it.
That would be good. Yeah, and I agree with you. It is a public safety issue.
That's one of my greatest fears, that
Mine too.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription oftbe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Bailey:
Dilkes:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Elliott:
City Council Work Session
Page 69
You know, you think about some of those bars that are on the second floor
downtown, with narrow stairways, you can't even get two people going up and
down.
Well, and I'm not, I'm not, I understand that we're not going to deny this, but
this is, you know, on one hand we're rewriting an ordinance to allow service of
alcohol on the second floor of the Englert, but on the other hand, on the consent
calendar there's a second story bar.
And you understand that's because they meet the definition of restaurant in the
Code.
Yeah.
Right.
And the other thing' think is, part of that second floor is enforcing our
occupancy numbers, because a lot of those bars are really overcrowded. It would
be tragic if some of those places caught on fire.
Well, are they sprinkled? Do they have sprinkler systems?
No. No.
Ok. That's another concern of mine.
, guess I'm just confused as to?
I'll highlight it Ross. I'm sorry. 'just wanted to, 'wanted to see if anyone else
wanted to bring that out, because' think it's urgent.
Right. Sure.
'just want a clarification. You don't want it removed, you simply want it
addressed separately, same as the
Right. I'll just highlight it.
one with the
No. What's she saying is when' say, when we move in second approving the
consent calendar
And during discnssion
as the comment she'll just point it out there.
I'll just point it out.
And the other one was that we were going to
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
_____"_,__._.___~_~_~____.._.~____. _ ..__._..._,.~_...,_._~_.__..._~__~._.,_" ___ ~.~_."m
July 31,2006
City Council Work Session
Page 70
Wilburn: We were
Elliott: Oh, the Bayard. We're not going to remove it, we're simply going to address it.
Bailey: We are.
Correia: We're removing that.
Elliott: Separately.
Bailey: We're removing it.
Champion: We're removing it.
Bailey: Because I think there was
Correia: That's a separate item.
Wilburn: It's removed from the consent calendar.
Elliott: Yeah, but you're saying removed. It's going to be addressed separately. Ok.
Good.
Champion: Yes.
Bailey: Because we, I think there was consensus that it wasn't a consent item.
Karr: If! may, just to clarify, we do not allow second floor bars.
Vanderhoef: Right.
Karr: We allow establishments that by our definition are hotels, motels, restaurants and
now, live performance theaters.
Dilkes: Private clubs.
Karr: And private clubs.
Wilburn: We already deferred that.
Elliott: Well, we're going to
Champion: We have second floor bars.
Karr: They're restaurants.
Dilkes: They're restaurants.
Atkins: Restaurants.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Atkins:
Karr:
Dilkes:
Champion:
Bailey:
Champion:
ITEM 11.
Bailey:
Champion:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 71
Jake's is a restaurant?
126.
No. Jake's is grandfathered in, but, Skybox is not a bar. Skybox will be a
restaurant, by the definition.
If you open up an establishment that has a liquor license on the second floor, if
you can meet one of those definition - hotel, motel, restaurant -
Ok.
Ok.
Got it.
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 EARTH TECH TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT
SERVICES FOR THE MCCOLLISTER BOULEVARD ROADWAY
PROJECT.
Ok. My last item, and then I'll stop. In item II we are doing a consulting
agreement with Earth Tech for the McCollister Boulevard Roadway Project, and
I would like us to consider changing that agreement to provide for more public
meetings and meetings that not, are not necessarily only run by Earth Tech.
Right.
And
What item?
Item II, it's on page 12, and this is on page 6 of the consultant's agreement.
There's a public information meeting, they're required to do one public
informational meeting. As anticipated, it's an open house, there's no formal
presentation. I think that there needs to be a public information meeting that has a
formal presentation of information. I think we need more than one public
information meeting. I just don't want to see us do some of the things that have
happened in other communities around without having good discussion. It
doesn't cost us necessarily more; well, it might with the consultant, but if we use
staff and we use Council, it doesn't necessarily cost us more to do good public
process, and then I think we avoid misunderstandings down the road.
I'm also wondering
(can't hear)
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Bailey:
Boelk:
Correia:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Correia:
Boelk:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Atkins:
Boelk:
City Council Work Session
Page 72
Ok. Oh, that would be, yeah.
(can't hear) that is part of our (can't hear)
Can I also as part of that, if you can address, in the contract it talks about
notifying property owners. Can that be expanded to notifying
The public.
the public, or, but people living in the effected area or something, because there's
a lot of renters that live in the area.
Right. Yeah. As far as the neighborhood meeting if you will, that is part of our
typical process, that we hold one via the City's Engineering, that we would
provide that with mostly any of our projects with the design and construction
aspect, so that is part of it. It's not included in the scope of the consultant due to
the fact that it's on our own, basically.
Ok. So there will be at least two public meetings?
Yeah, well we typically, there can be, yeah, we typically hold one in the design
phase and a lot of times we'll come back also prior to the construction phase just
to show them what they'll be seeing in the future.
Yeah. I think the more public process that we can have.
I think the more direct notification of persons living, not just public notice legal
directory in the paper but mailings to not only the property owners but
Right. And the meetings that we had so far, we had a public hearing' on the
location study out there, the environmental stuff that, and at that time we sent out
individual invitations to all the tenants of Thatcher Mobile Home Park as well as
the? Addition and property owners there, so they were all personally invited as
well as putting adds in the paper for that public hearing.
Good, good.
And so when the design of something like this comes to us, I think it's helpful,
helpful for me to know and it might be helpful for others to know exactly what
the schedule of public process was and how you notified people and who, who
were the people notified, so when people come to us and they call us up on the
phone and say I heard nothing about it, we can say well, this was our process,
and this is the process that we think is good to follow.
That's a good point, Regenia, and I do have a memo that's been sent, Steve, I
don't know that that will be shared with Council, but that addresses
That will be in your packet.
That will be in your next agenda packet.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Elliott:
Correia:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Bailey:
Boelk:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 73
Good, good.
So when you have a public meeting is there a sign-in?
Yes, yes there is.
And then with the property owner meeting, I'm assuming that's with staff and
with Earth Tech consultants?
Correct. If it' s in, yeah, part of that agreement and part of the scope, correct.
Because, you know, this is nothing against our consultants, I'm sure that they're
very competent people, but I have a lot of confidence in our staff being able to
interact with the public.
Yeah, we're always there as well, correct.
Ok. And I think part of the concern I heard in another community about these
individual small group meetings was there was no presentation of the overall
scope of the project and then they had the individual meetings and I think that
was something that was - ok, that helps a lot. Thank you.
Ok. You bet.
I would agree that it'd be helpful for us at those hearings of public information,
that those are helpful for us to respond, but don't kid yourself, that's not gonna
stop people from saying I didn't hear anything about it. I understand what you're
saying - I'm just pointing out the converse of that. People will say I didn't hear
anything about it.
But that way we would know what they
People will refuse to sign-in, even though there's a sign-in sheet, and say I didn't
hear anything about it.
We know that.
But we're the conduit, and it's our responsibility to make sure things are
happening and to speak for that.
And Ijust finished saying that I agree that it would be helpful for us to know that
so that we can say here's our process.
Yeah. You bet.
It might be helpful for us to know about and be able to attend one of those public
meetings.
Any other agenda items?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 74
Correspondence 3f(10) Jim Thibodeau: Alley on the 400 block between S Gilbert
and Van Buren streets
Correia: I have one, in the correspondence, page 6, the last correspondence on the top of
that page, #10, there was a letter regarding improvements to the alley at the 400
block between South Gilbert and VanBuren.
Bailey: It's horrible.
Correia: Yeah. They're, basically they're requesting that the City share half the cost of
improving that alley, so, I sense that there's not, if we could just get a letter.
Atkins: I'll get you an update on that.
Correia: Well, not an update, 1 mean, I don't think there's a sense that we wouldn't want
to do this, so we need to get a letter to them letting them know it came up.
Atkins: I think it's probably already occurred, but I'll check on that.
Vanderhoef: Steve, could we possibly have a memo, I think, about how the County charges
families if they want oil put down in front of their house, but they do the work for
them? And I know we've gone to a biannual asphalt overlay trying to get our
projects big enough to get good bids on them.
Atkins: That's right.
Vanderhoef: Is it potentially possible to have you know, an alleyway, a group of citizens come
and say we'd like you to bid our alley. We'll pay for it, and we just put it back on
to them, but if we could bid it for them and maybe get better prices than what
they have currently gotten for this particular alley? Maybe it won't be cheaper,
but it might be.
Bailey: It's a nice process, it gives them an option.
Atkins: Yep. I'll get back to you, yep.
Bailey: Great.
Vanderhoef: If it's possible.
ITEM 8. ASSESSING A 30 DAY RETAIL CIGARETTE PERMIT SUSPENSION
AND $1500.00 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST T & M MINI MART,
PURSUANT TO IOWA CODE SECTION 453A.22(2) (2005)
Elliott: I have a quick question for Eleanor on that #8 having to do with the tobacco
violation. Do we have a choice?
Dilkes: Mmm mmm.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting oOuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 75
Champion:
No.
Elliott:
I think this has come up before but, I think
Dilkes:
Mmm mmm. If you find that the violation occurred, and that's why the County
Attorney's Office presents you with a certified record of the conviction, no, you
don't have a choice. It's a shall in the text.
Wilburn:
Well put.
Vanderhoef:
You shall do it.
(all talk - can't hear)
Elliott: Yeah. But.
Dilkes: I think on this one the person who operates T & M Mini Mart may be, I have not
heard from him but I think Andy Chapel has, may be making an argument to you
that because the corporate entity that runs the business has changed in the
permitting year that it shouldn't be a third offense, it should be a first. I don't
think that's the case. In fact, there is case law on that issue, and the issue is
whether it's the same place of business, the same operation, then it's the same
series of.
Elliott: That's interesting, because at the presentation the other morning, that I heard the
percent of net income for those convenience stores from beer and tobacco is
significant. It's going to be painful.
Champion: It will be painful.
Vanderhoef: We have a little tobacco store downtown that got their third one and didn't make
it, went out of business.
Elliott: Yep.
Wilburn: Other agenda items? Anyone want Council time?
Vanderhoef: It's hot.
Wilburn: Ok. It is hot.
Bailey: Mmm hrom.
Wilburn: Urn. Future meeting schedule.
Schedule of Pendinl! Discussion Items
Elliott:
Well, talk about pending, I would hope that there are sufficient number of
Councilors who would like to at some point in the near future talk about liquor
sales other than in ground floors. We skirted that issue.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 76
Bailey:
I thought staff was working on it and was going to bring us something.
Elliott:
Yeah.
Bailey:
Are you going to bring us something? I think?
Dilkes:
That's the plan.
Elliott:
That will come to us?
Dilkes:
Yep.
Elliott:
Good.
Atkins:
Apparently. I've just got to find it.
Wilburn:
Ok. All right.
Future Meetinl! Schedule
Bailey: Future meetings?
Champion: Are we gonna try to set a meeting for the housing discussion?
Bailey: We have a whole future meeting schedule, 'cause that was in the info packet that
Marian put out.
Correia: Where is, where is that?
Vanderhoef: It would have been item 3 in the info.
Karr: IP 3 in the info packet of7/27.
Champion: Oh, here it is.
Elliott: Which one?
Karr: I just, I threw out some dates and some possible conflicts that I was aware of, but
we just need to firm up some dates.
Bailey: September 5th looks good.
Karr: The 5th is the combined, then we're back on schedule for the 18th, 19th.
Atkins: I will be gone the 18th.
Elliott: Where are you finding this?
Champion: Here on
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 77
Karr: IP 3 of7/27 info packet.
Correia: 7/27 info packet.
Elliott: July 27th?
Champion: There isn't anything new here - this is all stuffwe discussed before.
Bailey: No, it's just a carryover
Karr: No, we didn't discuss anything from September on.
Bailey: It's just (can't hear)
Karr: October, November, December, January: it's all new.
Bailey: So, 18'", 19'h?
Karr: Are the regular work sessions and formals.
Wilburn: Steve, you're gone when?
Atkins: I'll be gone that week.
Wilburn: Ok.
Vanderhoef: The week of 18th, 19th?
Atkins: Yeah.
Dilkes: I'm going to be gone that week too.
Champion: Oh. We can have a really fun meeting.
(laughter)
Bailey: I know!
Vanderhoef: Nobody gives us the eye!
Dilkes: Believe me, I will have somebody here.
Bailey: Free for all! I'm kidding. We can meet out in the alley.
Vanderhoef: One of the things I looked at then in October, when we do a special combined
meeting like we're doing on the 5th, it just seems like then we get further behind
on our work list, so I was looking at, Halloween is on the 31 ", but we could have
just a work meeting and maybe that's about the time that the housing thing would
show up.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 78
Bailey: On Halloween?
Vanderhoef: No. The night before, on Monday night, just do a work meeting that, there are
five weeks, Mondays and Tuesdays, in the month of October.
Elliott: So you want a meeting October when?
Vanderhoef: Oh I'd like to save October 30th for just a work meeting.
Atkins: And I will need from you a meeting, you know an hour or so, for budget
priorities and how we just
Bailey: Yeah. When are we going to do that? Last year we did it in September I think?
Champion: We should do it an hour before we start our regular meeting. It's not going to
Atkins: Put it in front of a regular meeting is just fine - you need a chance to say here's
some things that are on our minds, our collective minds?
Bailey: Which date do we want to do that? Let's set an hour before one of these meetings
now.
Champion: Yeah, because it just, it's finding another evening for it
Atkins: How about the 2nd or 3'" of October?
Karr: October 2nd work session starts, you want to start an hour earlier or you want the
first item to be an hour long that one?
Atkins: We need more time, but the first item can be budget '08.
Karr: 6:30 start time though.
Wilburn: On October 2nd?
Champion: I don't know. It depends.
Bailey: So 6:30 to 7:30 would be budget and then we'd start regular.
Atkins: Last time it was rather loosely constructed - what's on your mind - (can't hear)
Elliott: Ok.
Karr: So we haven't done anything special yet except set aside October 30th for a
special work session.
Champion: What I have to bring up though is the, December.
Bailey: We haven't gone through October yet.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
O'Donnell:
Elliott:
Karr:
Correia:
Karr:
Bailey:
Elliott:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
O'Donnell:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
Correia:
Champion:
Karr:
City Council Work Session
Page 79
Ifwe could do something with that ISh and 19th.
Well, before we do the 18th and 19th, can we go back to November, because it
makes a difference with your December.
Can we go in order?
I want to meet Election Day, does anybody have a problem with that?
I really think it's wrong to meet on Election Day.
I do, especially if there's an incumbent running. Ijust think it's very nnfortunate.
Well we don't this year, that's why I'm asking.
We don't have anybody running.
We don't have anybody running, that's why I'm asking. I wouldn't have
scheduled it if there was an incumbent.
And I'm
Ok. Good.
But I still think that there's
We have the governor's race.
Yeah, the governor's race and
Because I think you need to decide your November before you can go into your
December.
Have we decided our October?
That was like 2nd and 3'd, 16th, 17'h, and set aside the 30'h for the special work
seSSIOn.
I may be gone on the 16th and 17th, but I'm just willing to miss if that happens.
Again, if you have any absences let me know and I can record them and see if
we've got a number of them shaping up that we could reschedule.
What are we talking about?
What are we taking about besides the housing?
We've confirmed the October 2nd, 3'd, 16th, 17'h and 30, now we're on whether
we're going to have a meeting on 6, 7.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 80
Elliott: But Regenia said she'll be gone the 16th and 17th but that she would
Bailey: I may, I may.
Elliott: And you asked for us to let you know if we're going to miss any. Ok.
Bailey: I'm willing not to.
Champion: But that's not going to move
Bailey: Well, I'm not going to move any
Wilburn: Is there anyone else who would prefer not to meet on Election Day?
Champion: I would prefer not to. I think it's a patriotic thing not to meet.
Wilburn: Ok. So.
Champion: Could we combine 6th and 7th? Oh, well then we would have a meeting on
Karr: You would be combining it to the 6th.
Champion: Right. Maybe that's not good.
Karr: If you move it, you go to the 13th, 14th, 27th, 28th, and if you do that you're having
a packet Thanksgiving week, which is fine, but I know some of you have stated a
preference.
Correia: Do we have a Council meeting Thanksgiving week?
Karr: No, you would have a packet the week of Thanksgiving.
Correia: Oh, sure, I see.
Vanderhoef: You'd have a packet that week, during the holiday.
Atkins: Meet two weeks in a row? Do 13th, 14th?
Karr: You can do 13th, 14th, 20 and 21, meet two weeks in a row.
O'Donnell: I don't see anything wrong with that. You don't like that?
Correia: No. Kinda get
(all talk - can't hear)
Bailey:
So if! don't miss the 16th and 17th
Karr:
See what I mean? We need to figure out November before we get into December.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page SI
Wilburn: Yeah.
Champion: Why don't we do this? I've got a great idea. Not meet Election Day.
Bailey: All right.
Karr: So far so good. Go for it.
Champion: Oh. Was there more?
Bailey: You said that there was, you had a great idea!
Wilburn: When do we meet if we don't meet on Election Day.
Bailey: Oh, so let's not have any City business for all of November?
Champion: No.
O'Donnell: Well, we're meeting the 20th and 21".
Champion: The 20th and 21 ,t
Vanderhoef: Oh no, I'm the one who has sometimes talked about working a packet on
Thanksgiving, but when I look at what December brings up for us, perhaps that's
the best plan, doing the 13th and 14th and
Wilburn: 27th, 2Sth.
Vanderhoef: 27th, 2Sth. And then
Bailey: I'd rather do that.
Vanderhoef: That December 4,5 is League of Cities, skip that and go into II, 12. Does that
work with what you were thinking, Connie?
Champion: Yeah. Yeah. That works.
Karr: Then do you want to do just one meeting in December then, 11-12?
O'Donnell: That's good.
Vanderhoef: And then call a special if we need it.
Champion: Yeah, that would be great.
Bailey: Ok. I want to. Ok. I don't want to call a special if we need it. I want to book
something now so I can hold a date and then cancel it if we don't need it, because
it's hard to rearrange all of our schedules to call a special.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
O'Donnell:
Bailey:
O'Donnell:
Correia:
Karr:
Bailey:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Karr:
Bailey:
Champion:
Karr:
Champion:
Bailey:
Wilburn:
Bailey:
Karr:
Wilburn:
Champion:
Karr:
Champion:
Bailey:
City Council Work Session
Page 82
I think it's even harder to hear and try to talk about something that's going to
happen in December. It really is.
I'm booked a year ahead.
You do? Well, you're terribly well organized. I'm not.
What are we saying for December?
December 11 and 12 right now.
Will this get us through all of our work session items?
With all of the discussion topics we've got to cover, I really hate to see us pass
on meetings.
Well so far we're not through the end of November.
Yes.
Well we can go back and put in November 6th if you want to for a special work
seSSIOn.
Yeah that would be good.
Ok, for a special work session.
And not a formal.
And not the 7th, that gives us another, that gives us a special work session.
So November we're meeting on the 6th, the 13th, 14th, the 27th and the 28th?
That's correct.
All right. I'm not even trying to
That wraps up your November.
So, that's November.
And then December we could have one meeting.
11-12.
11-12. That gives us two, everybody keeps the 30th and the 6th for special
meetings.
And then can we go ahead and schedule what we're going to schedule for early
January at least, so we know how to handle holiday travel?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Champion:
Karr:
Elliott:
Champion:
Karr:
Champion:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
Elliott:
Wilburn:
Elliott:
Champion:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
O'Donnell:
Karr:
Bailey:
Champion:
City Council Work Session
Page 83
Well, it would be our normal meeting dates.
The nonnal meeting date would be I, 2, that's why I put it in there. The I"
happens to be a Monday. So I didn't know ifthe 2nd you wanted to do a
combined special and regular to get back on schedule?
I would go for that.
On what, January 2nd?
January 2nd
Wouldn't people be recovering from the weekend?
Well, that's a long weekend, that's the, or else you can make that a
I hope by now they have a great bounce back ability.
And see that also is Martin Luther King Day, too, so if you switch it to the 8th and
9th and 22nd, 23'd?
That sounds good.
I like that, 8, 9.
I like that.
I think that sounds better.
January 8, 9.
Ok, wait, we're not meeting on the 2nd, then?
No, we're just doing regular and fonnals right now, then we'll go back to that.
Ok.
8,9, 22nd and 23'" are our regular meetings, ok? Now we can go back up and is
there any interest to do anything the 2nd, or since that's the day after, just skip
that week?
Skip it.
Skip it, then you go to the 16th for budget, because you're going to run behind
real quickly on budget.
Yeah, we've already gotten behind.
Well we need to set meetings for budget too.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 84
O'Donnell: 16th is fine.
Karr: 16th is budget.
Bailey: We usually do a day meeting.
Champion: We need a day meeting, and we have a concentrated amount oftime before we're
all tired.
Bailey: How about the 12th for a day meeting? That's a Friday.
Champion: That works for me. Oh, Friday.
Karr: Is there anything that first week? Like what about the 3,d, 4th, 5th, since you don't
have, so we could do budget?
Wilburn: I'd rather do the 3,d or 4th rather than do a Friday. Friday's hard for me to get
away.
Bailey: Ok. I can't meet the evening of the 4th, but I could do it during the day.
Champion: We could do a day meeting on the 4th? Those are productive meetings.
Vanderhoef: Oh the 4th? 4th is a Thursday?
Karr: Yes. And you want that to be a day meeting?
Correia: I could meet in the morning until noon.
Karr: So like 8 - noon?
Champion: Yeah. Good.
Karr: And then the 16th would be a night?
Bailey: Yes.
Karr: Yes. Budget meeting.
Wilburn: Yes.
Karr: And then can we keep open the 29th and 30th for budget, if need be?
Champion: Could we, I don't know if we could?
Bailey: We talked about taping our CIP project meeting?
Correia: I'm sorry, after the 4th you said what day?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
Karr:
Champion:
Karr:
Champion:
Karr:
Elliott:
Karr:
Elliott:
Champion:
Bailey:
Karr:
Champion:
Karr:
Bailey:
Karr:
Bailey:
Correia:
Karr:
Correia:
Karr:
Wilburn:
City Council Work Session
Page 85
The 4th for budget is 8 to noon, then you have your regular meeting 8,9, then you
have budget the evening of the 16th, and then you've got 22nd, 23'd for your
regular meeting.
I may have to just, I might check tomorrow, I've got to check on, I might not be
here for one of those budget days, I, I
Which one, 29, 30?
No, it would be the one earlier I think.
16. Why don't you let me know and I'll put it in the info packet then.
You'll have a list tomorrow? Good.
I'll have it in Thursday's packet in case, that way Connie can let me know
tomorrow.
Good.
Yeah, I can let you know.
And we talked about taping the CIP project meeting for broadcast, and so we
should figure out which one of these meetings is going to be that, and that's
typically the day meeting.
Would that be the 8th?
Would we need a meeting before that meeting?
No. That would be, you don't have a day meeting but the 4th, Thursday 8-12.
And that's what I'm wondering, if we need another one, because that's typically
a day meeting because it involves so much, so many staff people.
So you're wondering about another January meeting, day.
I'm just suggesting that's what we've done in the past, because of staff time.
So the 29th and the 30th?
That's pretty late in the budget process. You're going to be setting public
hearings the next week.
Oh really?
Ah hah. I happen to have that here. We're going to have a notice of public
hearing February 9th.
What about the 16th, then?
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council
meeting ofJuly 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 86
Karr: Instead of meeting during the night, meet during the day.
Wilburn: Meet during the day, yeah.
Bailey: You're not available though, you wouldn't be available.
Champion: Well, I'm not, Ijust.
Elliott: A day meeting on the 4th, another day meeting on the 16th.
Champion: What day of the week is that?
Bailey: It's a Tuesday.
Champion: You know, it would be ok, because I know I've got to go to market because I
know I've got to go to market because I'm missing a market for my daughter's
wedding, but I can always go Friday, Saturday, Sunday. But Tuesday would be
good.
Karr: And are we looking 8 to noon again, or are we looking at a different time during
the day?
Champion: 8 to noon.
Bailey: We spilled over last time. How much time did we allow, and we needed more, I
guess is what I'm saying. I remember.
Wilburn: I remember it going into around 2:00, wasn't it?
Bailey: I think we should look back at how long that was scheduled for last time, because
we needed about an hour and a half in addition.
Karr: Why don't I look at it, schedule it, pencil it in, and still be January, and you can
take a look at the whole schedule and make adjustments off of that.
Elliott: Good.
Vanderhoef: Ok.
Karr: 16th I'll just schedule the same amount of time as the CIP did last time.
Wilburn: Plus an hour.
Bailey: Plus.
Wilburn: Plus two hours.
Bailey: Plus two hours.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.
July 31, 2006
City Council Work Session
Page 87
Karr: Plus two hours on the 16th.
Bailey: We, we had to break that up. We ran over.
Wilburn: We ran over.
Vanderhoef: We did it the next day before
Karr: Right, but I was going to look at the total CIP, both days combined.
Bailey: Oh. Ok.
Champion: Ok.
Karr: Then do you want two hours or that includes it.
Wilburn: Ok. That includes it. Yeah. Yep. Ok.
Elliott: It's been real.
(can't hear)
Wilburn:
Ok. See you tomorrow.
This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
meeting of July 31, 2006.