HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-01-04 Agenda
... > I
,
, .
,
,
i'l
, , 'I
,
I
" I.
'/:
,
..
\.
__U______
"... ....... .-- "" --""--:-. -~-- ~ -,-...-
~ ....
'....~.~ . rrtr.l r, ..Ij":',.... " . . ',' ,',
':.' -'. .
/
,
/'",:,
. '-. ;~
-'-" "::::":::'--.
......-~----.---
--_.... .~~
I
"
IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
. i
I
I
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1994
7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER
410 EAST WASHINGTON
~W_"'__~~\.......,..".",."",....~.,.", "~'''''_'~''_'' "'''._..' .." .._
-....'''..
I
:
,
i"
'I
II
. [,1
...
! i ~
.1
III
Ii "
Ii'. 1\:'
!I.-'Ii
I: . \
-': :: "1:\-"
i 11
I..
I
, ,
"
',.!,
I'
i'
i
.;,
,
\ ,
\';
"
""'If'''.
-- - -- ................-----.----illf~... -.......-~-
...... ~~~-. ~....~..~-J,....... ~~
._-~.~,
..-......... -,.-........--.... .~........ ,; ~ 1
I
, , . '. ','
r :,' J~r, i~J,,' J ''b,' ': .", ,< ",":" '
ITEM NO, 1.
ITEM NO.2.
I
I
I
I
....---.'--'.""...--.."..."....-""'-..-.......
/
,
/ / ~\
", 1
~. .
,
'-- --
~~
--'-" '-.-
7flMeo
4~
~
~
tJ
1lI~
CALL TO ORDER. ~
ROLL CALL. ~
~;",J7,~~ ,<J,k
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESEN'T'EifOR
AMENDED.
AGENDA
IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. JANUARY 4, 1994
7:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
a. Consider approval of Official Council actions of the regular and speciel
meetings of December 7. 1993 and of the special meeting of December
17, 1993, as published, subject to corrections, as recommended by the
City Clerk.
,
,
,
"
il'; !I
Iii I
i! . ,\
II 'I:
:1 I:,
" .
I;,
b. Minutes of Boards and Commissions.
(1) Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of December 2, 1993.
(2) Historic Preservation Commission meetingof November 10, 1993.
(3) Mayor's Youth Employment Board meeting of November 10,
1993.
Iii
.,
'I[ :
(4) Airport Commission meeting of November 16, 1993.
Ii
I I:
II
(5) Housing Commission meeting of N:mmber 9, 1993.
(6) Committee on Community Needs meeting of December 16, 1993.
c. Permit Motions as Recommended by the City Clerk.
; I!
I"
(1) Consider a motion epproving a Class "C" Liquor License for Iowa
City Entertainment, Inc., dba Union, 121 E. College Street.
(Renewal)
(2) Consider a motion approving a Class "E" Beer Permit for QuikTrip
Corporation dba QuikTrip #552, 25 W. Benton Street. (Renewal)
..
(3) Consider a motion approving a Class "C" Liquor License for
Cynthia B. Ocker; Temmy R. Moline, a Pertnership dba The Break
Room, 157B First Ave. (New)
(~) /;eL o..d.d..d1m
ii
-..
...
'.-,1
"
"
i
I
"')'
"
t,,!
~". -
"1
I
I
-
"1-----"" ~ .- ~.,..
-","
. ','
, ,
'" ' ~':"f' t'-f ' "I - . :~t' " ,"" ".,' '
. .' f: ~ ' I.t_ . R 'I .. ~ . . I .
/
/~ '\
, J,
" .\
'----:.,;:::,::-,
'-,._------,'-~,
Special Presentation page 1
Horow/(Special Presentation) I have a little different happening
in the agenda here. If you will bear with us for just a
minute please. I would like to ask John McDonald, Darrel
Courtney, Bill Ambrisco, and Randy Larson to please step
forward.
Kubby/ You can boss them around now, Sue.
Horow/ We would like to give you something to remember. For each
of you there is a lamp with the city logo on it. It seems so
normal and yet I miss you all. We really enjoyed each other
and so in that spirit that we would like to give you these
gifts. We would like to also like to make a presentation
(can't hear-presents gifts.)
Nov/ Come visit again.
Kubby/ Sue, we shouldn't forget that Randy was once nominated our
mayor. I thought Bill was here for the pesticide ordinance.
Fti/'I'1'1
I'....,...,-~.......,.....,.I'_',....i,'..~.....;. ,.".,'..._".-~,'"..'.',.. .
,-
.~
.._,-. .-.-
,;
I
,
,
I
I
!
, ,
11
! i
"
;il
I'.
I
I
I,
"
'I
II
II:
"
I'
H
'r
jll
I
I
II,
I,: .
'I
n'
n
V
,1"
/;
;
,
!!'
" I
,
I
J,
':'r,
)1: '
.,
I
"
I'
;j
I"
J,
,
,
i,
:;'", n ' h', - ,i I~': ,l~t" ,,' ,',' '" : ',",
-. -~. .-
/
I
/'],
, \,i.
" .~
-- --
.-""
-------
--......
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 3, 1994
TO: Mayor, City Council, General Public
FROM: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Additions to Consent Calendar
2. c. (4)
'l4~1
Consider a resolution approving a Dancing Permit for Iowa City Entertainment,
Inc., dba Union, 121 E. College Street.
**
**NOTE additions and deletions to Consent Calendar.
I
!
I
PlJS\-oA 1.3~9t
"I-:"f':1 ~'" Gl=.
,
,j
I
'w", ...w.... ..~___~...."".,,'~'...'"'....~..~.,....__.....
"""'''''''',.'
. -,- ....-,..
,
,
\, I
"
--_....,,~
I"
1'1
II
I'
1;1
Ii
1-:
Ii
'i
II
II
il
l' ~
It "
.: .. 'i"
I H ':- !
:1 "ii
II' "n '
',I)
"'/1
'.r
"".',11
I"J
i
I
I
I!:
I,
"
. r:'
!
I
1.
,"
.(/_-----~-----
"
.,
\1;
"
'1fI/If'I'. - -
--ij _ 3
I
I
1
1
,
"
,
,-.-.-......-..
'W"'I(----"'-= -~.... ~ -'.. -- - - ---.........-
~I ~.~ ~
- --...,f'....
...-- ~ ....
. ~lI"'"........------....--
I
, .
~ ., ." .
! ~' 'rt, ' rr '" I '"i~t ,,' '" "", ,", ",
.:'. ~ ''',._' " '_ \ - ',' . ' . .1,1
/
>' '1
(
---'"'' ..
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 2
d. Setting Public Hearings.
q". 2.
(11 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR
JANUARY 18, 1994, ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF
CONTRACT AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
THE 1994 SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER PROJECT.
Comment: This project consists of reconstruction of one storm
sewer and reconstruction and/or enlargement of existing sewer
pipes for four sanitary sewers. The project was bid twice in 1993
but was not awarded. It should alleviate sanitary sewer backups
at several sites throughout Iowa City, Total estimated cost of this
combined project is $650,000. .
(2) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR
JANUARY 18, 1994, ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF
CONTRACT AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
THE WHISPERING MEADOWS WETLAND PARK PROJECT.
Comment: This project consists of the development of a wetland
park on 17 acres of existing degraded wetlands dedicated to the
City as part of the Whispering Meadows subdivision. This project
will include native prairie and wetlands restoration, end construc-
tion of welking treils, a slough, en observation deck, and e
waterfowl island. The projected construction cost for the
Whispering Meadows Wetland Park Project is approximately
$136,000. ru minimize cost, the boardwalk portion of the trail
and some wetland plantings will not be included in this contrect
and will be completed at e later dete at an additionel cost of
approximately $38,000. For further information pleese refer to
the attached memo to Council.
e. Correspondence.
(1) Lutterlr0m-68rl-Beyerhellll-<<lgarding Towncrjlst-Moblle I-lnmA rJ
fJ )~~,j~~m1 1M.lA. of Lowdl BtiMdI- J'Mo",jJAlq. 'f/~';;'"L,~
71 -fcIniihlg.w)l. :P'MW>(};.MIJ4I.~ 'a/rld avtS/elL ftCWl{)
m-L8tter-ff6m-earol"n-G'orliin,-bi~kiIlSrlPC.r<<lgarding-lownerest> .
-Moblle-Home-eourr.-
I
I
I
141(3)Letter from Robert C. Carlson, Chair of the Board of Appeals, I
regarding proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance I
~~w~~~n~~ri~~~r~c~~~~~e~~.tov i4t...'f1'f1M'1 ~~.
~ ' .J/W c(1) &fO,f;;j dt?.Idi"", J"dl) ...(,:l) oj. ;,,~ tVj:5b; I
~ % tl.dcL &O/fJdf u:iIvJ tltfm tJ}~.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR P~f evncL 1PJiJ.;, /Aorn
f1\UJdlflj.. /lJ16iJr,.'
l.3J(:! )Letter from Cherles and Doris Lisle regarding tree removal for the
widening of Rohret Road. '
" - 1
i'
I
Ii
oJ
Ii
"
"
i
,
,
I
,
;
I
\'
I'f.'"
'.;
1,1 I'
" ,: ~ ;"
I'
,
Ii
II
1
I"~
1':
I;.
.Ii
.I'i
"
,
I
I" '1'/
I \.
,: J.
;j
I
,
i
"
"
~,. -- -
I
I
...,.,-----..-:-, -~.... ~ --.'....... -~ ---- ~.... - - - ~~ ....
...-....._. ...
(:. ',',; F/",,-,':,.,-/',' ,',-I, "/;-1 ' ' ",: " ' . ,"
, ,I I " ' V, ,,' ,
:. -- .- _ _. '\
/
,
1-,
" 1
~. .{. .
, .
--- .'-...--,,-
- ---
--....._.-...~-.
#2 page 1
Horow/(#2) Consider adoption of the Consent Calendar as amended.
Moved by Throg, second by pigott. All in favor-
Kubby/ I asked a question yesterday about getting some assurances
from the police chief that everything was in order with the
Union Bar.
Atkins/ There should be a memo. There is a memo that outlines
that Chief has spoken with the folks and he is satisfied
with what they have been doing and it should summarize that.
Karr/ Is it not in front of you. I will see that copies are
made. I do have it.
Atkins/ Would you like to pull that item and vote separately
until you read the memo.
Karr/ I don't see the memo.
Atkins/ It evidently did not get placed there. It addresses the
issue that you raised last evening.
Kubby/ I would rather read it before I vote on it.
Horow/ Okay. Pull-
Kubby/ Item c.1
Horow/ And the amended consent calendar is for items a, b, c (2),
(3) I d (1), (2), (3) and the rest in that order.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes).
Karr/ This is a roll call because there are resolutions contained
in it.
Horow/ Thank you. This is my first blunder of my first meeting.
way to go.
Roll call-(yes)
..............,..._~.,..._...,..,,"...;,,-,.. ;.".,.-.-.,..,.,,,.--.,.. ~.,..",,--." .
I,
roo
" '-
-
...
. ,..........-.....---------
I
..!
,'.:/
I
r
II
Ii
!.I
I,
4;'
I
Ii '
II II
II! ,11
I' .{
" 1\-
':\. : ,'.
il I:
II fi
, I
I
I
I '!
I I,
1',.,
(I
II
~ '.' " '. ~ , . ' ' ','v - c..~. ...::,' . .
I _ \, . _' _ ,"' 7\"
't f "t I ',I' t' , ,,',.. ,
, ,,', j(... :t ',,', :, "
. . ," , ",.' ., . , .
:. -~. -. \. ,.....,;.. . ,', '- ". ..'\~ ,.
/
" "
J,
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting -,
January 4, 1994 /: ')
Page 3 Ja ,&fjW 1l~//~ ~ ~'~~
ITEM NO.3- PLANNING jND ZONING MAT,{R~. ~
a. Consider setting a public hearing for January 18, 1994, on an ordinance
vacating the northern 212 feet of the alley located between Burlington
and Court streets, west of Dubuque Street (Block 1021.
b.
Comment: At its December 16, 1993, meeting, the Plenning and
Zoning Commission, by a vote of 6-0, recommended that the northern
212 feet of the north-south alley between Burlington and Court streets
in Block 102 be approved, subject to resolution of the issues related to
utility relocation. The Commission's recommendation is consistent with
the staff recommendation.
Action: -YlIHJI/1J / ~.keJ
\.. !
'_ ~.b f~.J ~4(P
Public hearing continued from November 23, 1993, on an ordinence
amending the Zoning Ordinance by conditionally changing the use
regulations of an approximate 7.B6 ecre tract of land located at 2312
Muscatine Avenue (Towncrest Mobile ~ome Court) from RFBH, Factory
Built Residential, to CC-2, Community Commercial. (REZ93.00101
II
1,1,
"
1('
I,'.. I:
ill
ii
!I
II
J!
, ,
,
"
i;
,
II:
'I
"
I:
II
i.'
f~
'.I
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of an ordinence
amending the Zoning Ordinance by conditionally chenging the use
regulations of an approximate 7.B6 acre tract of land located at 2312
Muscetine Avenue from RFBH to CC-2. In e staff report dated Septem-
ber 16, 1993, steff recommended that the proposed rezoning be
approved only if concerns regerding the improvement of the First
Avenue end Muscatine Avenue intersection and the loss of an erea
zoned RFBH are resolved. Comments were received at Council's
November 23, 1993, public hearing on this item.
~w~ rJlIQjJf r~~~ i
11()tl<.du z<' att~ft
c. Consider an ordine ce em ndlng the Zoning dinence by conditionally rr fu)"
chenging the use reguletions of an epproximate 7.86 acre tract of land ~I I
loceted et 2312 Muscatine Avenue (Towncrest Mobile Home Court) 7 I
from RFBH, Fectory Built Residential, to CC-2, Community Commerciel. I
(REZ93-0010) (First consideration) I
I
,
I
I
I
I
, ,
I':
"
~ !
'I
I
I
1
!:
Action:
Comment: See item b. above. Consistent with Council policy, first
consideration of this item has been placed on the agenda immediately
following the continued public heering.
-KuMut (~
Action:
ddfA)
~~
dU~~
:1
t';
"'If'''. - -
I
I
.J.;
"1---": -~..... ~ ...-'......---
.-.-. .....-- -
"'
--.----
I
"
,
!
,
I
I,
I,
i
Ii ,I,
II' ,II:
!I
ii
, ii ~
d
I,
I'
}-
j;~:, .
)'
'I;
j
:!!.
....
1-1
" . . '. - I,'
I ' -', ,'- ,-" '-t ,,',,', '.',', '
r I If '~ ' , , ,
" I 'j~ "I'" ' " .'
. ~: \ . . ~ ' ...:-' . ,~, '. ,~-:' " '. " .
, ,
/
I
/1,
"'" .v
':::..---~ :::::::- .--
--.........-..
#3a/i page 1
Horow/ (#3a/i) Ask council members if they would be agreeable to
switch the order of P/Z issues so that item #i on page 5 is
moved to the front before item #a. Does anyone have any
problems with it. Okay.
Nov/ What is the reason.
Horow/ The developer has asked for this to be on the agenda due
to personal commitments. That is all. I would like a
motion then to switch the order of P/Z Matters so that #i
comes before #a.
Moved by nov, seconded by Lehman. Any discussion.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes). Thank you
very much.
(Reads agenda item i.)
'-"
'1
f 'I:, .
'/
. -'!f 'i;
I
I I
!
. !
-',I
"
"
~,\;.......":.,;."'/..,,.;..,:..,.,..,: h'; t~,:;.,h'.....,__c,;.....,...._,. .., . _ .n", ....._.'.. . .o_~, '. '",'. .,',.:. .
-
i,
"
,
I
!
"
, ,
",
;,'1
p.
~ .-
, \
~----.... ~........-
. ~ '. .. " '. ,.". .
I _ I _ -. '-. "'. / '
, i I . [I ,.;...I. ,d' " ' , ' '
. ~ ,"'..' ",. " ~ I ~ I' :', . ""
l '_' '. '_ _. \ , l,
/
"
, ^,
/~/ "
{,
'-'--..
......~._----
~,
#3a page 1
Horow/ (#3a) Moved by Nov, seconded by Baker. Any discussion.
Throg/ I would like to make one comment, Madam mayor. Is that
the proper- Just as a point of clarification. This is
connected to the Near Souths ide Commercial Revitalization
Plan as I understand it and it is connected to the proposed
development for the Clinton and Burlington intersection.
So, just as a point of clarification, it is my understanding
that just because we are acting on setting a p.h. for this
at this point does not necessarily mean that we are taking
any affirmative action with regard to the Clinton and
Burlington Street project. Is that correct. Okay. Thank
you.
Horow/ Any other discussion. All those in favor signify by
saying aye (ayes). Thank you.
.....,.",.~,,'...;:;.-..,. .;;',..'" v .-.', ;,.....,.
,M..
1>..
~~--..._-~
I
!
, !.
il
; 1
"
l'llj! . ~
I II:
Ii j
H -. ...l
\, 'i
, 'I '. j,'~
'1,1' ,
' i':
!I f:,
I ">IL
,\ '
'I.,
"
I '
"
. ~',..
,
il
I
I
!
!",'
r,
'"
, .' 'cf: ' i~l" ",-1' ",I~', , ':.-" ", ".":'
, :' '____' "I...~ ~'. ''0.1'" ,l ,', .' ' I'
/"
",
#3b page 1
Horow/ (#3b) Public meeting is continued. Anyone care to
address this issue.
Mr. Leff, I neglected to preface opening the hearing by
saying for the p.h. on this I would ask each person
testifying to limit their comments to five minutes. After
everyone has said what they wish if there is someone who
wished to speak again to make any points that were not
covered they are certainly free to do so. Thank you.
Phil Leff/ Madam Mayor and members of the council, in view of the
time limits I will try to address mostly those things that I
did not discuss in the last meeting although I recognize
some of you may not have been there to hear those comments.
We have provided some new information to the city staff and
I presume it is in your packets of materials now. Those
included a traffic study report by Shive Hattery and
Associates; a updated report on the number of mobile homes
involved in a relocation; and an updated real estate tax
calculation prepared by Mr. Brosman. I assume that you have
those materials and that you can ask questions about those
if you desire. Basically, as you know, this is a project
that has the basic approval of the staff to the extent that
this proposal meets the existing comprehensive plan and land
use policies of the city. We believe that the Eagle Food
Company has in fact addressed concerns that appear in those
reports and that this issue really narrows down to issues of
concern that deal with the traffic and potential increase in
traffic in the intersection of First Ave. and Muscatine and
on the relocation or potential relocation of the affordable
housing units that are involved in this mobile home park. In
reference to the traffic report and the traffic issue the
Shive report basically indicates that it agrees with the
city staff report. You can find a summary of the report
from Shive Hattery on page 8 and it is an easy to get a
quiCk fix on the conclusions reached by that report. You
can review those and judge them for yourself. They do
indicate one important fact and that is that Shive Hattery
also felt that the area of impact on this intersection
caused by this store would be limited to the area north of
the intersection rather than the north and south of the
intersection. And that impacts upon a calculation one would
make of the potential share of costs for the changes in that
intersection. Keep in mind that in addition to the monetary
proposal to contribute towards those intersections and
improvements Eagles has also agreed to dedicate two parcels
along each side of the property to widen the intersection at
both of those points. The proposal by Eagles remains the
same as far as monetary considerations are concerned. You
have that information from the last meeting and you have it
in your packet of materials. The affordable housing or
displacement of affordable housing appears to be the most
critical issue that is involved at least from the standpoint
. ,,-..~. .,-".. ',.,
-
_U".IIJ::".J!&
~ ;
i:
I I
II' Ii
I' ')
i,' 'I'
I".: ' [','
. Ii
.' ~ I:
,I
"
I!
I
I
I
1':
I:
.I ~'l
I
I
II
'1
,
I
;i
-
,,'
,,'
"
..-...'"
. ,,"
' ,
f, t~1 'It '"'7'/' '",-, "1'1':"" "t ,', ,., ',,',,' <
' 'I~' " C'"
., I j ,.0, t I
,.. . _." I.....;'. "~ ,
/
"1
'..
#3b page 2
of discussion and pUblic response. Let me respond very
briefly to a CoUple of things that were said at the end of
the meeting after we spoke the last time. I have attended
all of the P/Z meetings in connection with that. My clear
impression other than Chairman Scott, all of the P/Z members
who voted against this particular proposal based upon their
desire and beliefs that the city should in some manner
assure that there was replacement of affordable housing
immediately available to all of the persons involved in this
park. Not at least verbally on the basis of land use
decisions. Secondly the proposal to use a tax abatement
procedure to help fund the two areas of concern is not
something that was created by the initiative of Eagles. It
is a response by Eagles to a suggestion by the city legal
department that this is one method by which funds might be
raised or furnished for the project when it deals with the
issue of affordable housing. It is not, I assure you, an
attempt at smoke and mirrors to make the contribution by
Eagles appear to be larger than in fact is because tax
abatement simply a method by which the applicant can provide
funds the city does not have or is not willing to allocate
now to affordable housing. Front that money now and then
receive it over a period of years in the form of tax
abatement. So it has been proposed in that way. In written
documents in that way and verbally and I hope that there is
no misunderstanding about the motivation behind tax
abatement. It is not a tax abatement in the sense that it is
asked to be an inducement to bring this project to Iowa
city. It is not to be used for mortar and building costs but
as a method to deal with the issue that the city also faces
on a much broader scale than just this narrow particular
issue before this rezoning matter. We provided you with
some additional facts about the number of units that are
involved in the replacement if the project is approved and
Gene Bartley is here and will speak on that on behalf of Mr.
Camp.
Horow/ Mr. Leff your five minutes are up.
Leff/ I will return if time permits. In conclusion let me just
say what may be the obvious. It is my belief that this is a
good beneficial proposal for the city. It has run afoul
only of an issue that involves a problem for the entire city
and it is not a problem that is created by or exacerbated by
this proponent. If there is a problem about affordable
housing in Iowa City it is one that the city has and one
that the city has allowed to exist and we hope that the city
would be an active partner in solving the prOblem as
suggested by your staff. Sorry if I have been over my five
minutes.
Jean Bartley/ I appear here in behalf of Towncrest Mobile Home
''''''d,
I:
, ,
i
, ~
!,
I,
II' 1\
II
"
" "
I, '/
,I 11'
I:.' j'
I ! " 'i
! I
i tl"
I ,,'
, (:
,
I
I "
"1
I !I Ii
\1 I,
Ii
I I
i
,
II ,I
;' Ii
f
I
I
,
I
I
I
,
I
!
,i
...,.". --
-
"'I:J~-- ~~ qr. :.~' ..~-
--. ...- ---
-'Ff .
...- -' ..---'
. , ' ~,',.' "
'. ::-~-"-I':. i~/":'~" ,j~', :,,' ,', "':,:
.', ,I ",- L.-, , , '
'. ~ .
I
#3b page 3
Court and Sales, Inc. Madam Mayor and Ladies and Gentlemen
of the council, I appeared before the council at the last
p.h. in November and although we have new members on the
council now I will make an effort to not repeat things that
were said then. As Mr. Leff said, I do particularly want to
address the matter of the relocation of the existing tenants
at Towncrest mobile Home in an attempt to perhaps abate your
concerns or to lessen them at least. There are at the
present 66 home sites or 66 residential units at Towncrest
Mobile Home Court. Of those 10 are owned by and presumably
under the control of the owners, Towncrest Mobile Home Court
operation. Of those 66, 4 units are abandoned and are no
longer being occupied; 5 units have advised the owners that
they have alternate housing or an alternate location for
their units if necessary that they move; 6 of the units are
owned by absentee owners; and 3 of the owners have indicated
to management that they have already obtained alternate or
optional locations for their units. Of those 66 there are
15 whom I am told my management who are facing eviction for
non-payment of rent, failure to cure rule violations, for
other violations of the rules and so on. These are people's
who tenancy at the court are certainly threatened and are
uncertain at best. These leaves 29 units for which there
is no obvious or apparent relocation. But it does certainly
serve to reduce the number of tenants for whom you need to
have concern. As I told the council at the last time I
appeared, my clients have been very mindful of the position
that the closure of the mobile home court will place the
tenants in. They at the present time are operating under no
leases that exceed 30 days. There is a state law, however,
that requires the giving of a 60 day notice of termination.
But beyond that my clients negotiated a provision in the
contract with Eagle Store to provide a 6 month notice to
tenants to give them even additional time to relocate or to
secure alternative housing. I say you just to let you know
that we are not unconcerned or that we are not unaware of
the position that this places the tenants in. We are, never
the less, came to the conclusion to sell it, as I told the
council previously, because of the fact that this operation
is no longer a profitable operation for my client. The last
income statement that was prepared indicated that the loss
to my client was 16 times greater in the six month period
from January 31 to July 31 than it had been for the previous
six month period. This is due primarily to the increase in
fixed housing costs including the cost of water and sewer.
Of the total expenses, 38.75% of the expenses, fixed
expenses my client has, are for water and sewer. These are
things that will not go away. To increase rent to a point
where it becomes profitable for my client will result in a
situation where it is no longer affordable to these people.
We are in a catch 22 situation. The ultimate goal, of
course, of this council and of good citizens of this
,
!,' ~
;1
i' Ii
11 1\
( 'I
, ir
, "
( Ii
i" 11
.i 1';
"
il 1:/
i!
I,
1
i I
i
Ii \
I
.
,
--
~_... -
'r
I
I
,
I
!
!
,
I
i
I
~
.........
-
'l~--,.,.-- ~ ...~' ..... -
- ....... - ---
- ~'~ .
...-
"~'''-''.T -. -
\
" ','.'
!~, 't-I":'t'-, ";":'l,:,-t.'" .~, :'..,',':' '.'
. '. t '-. I " ' I ,,'j ,
.' , , , -,', ,
.'. '_'" ,_, I" "
. ,
i
, "
#3b page 4
community is to see that there is affordable housing for
people. Our position is that it should not be the
obligation of my client to provide that affordable housing
if it cannot be done at a reasonable profit. Thank you.
Ed Murphy/ Good evening Madam Mayor and members of the council.
I would just like to address a few things that I have come
across since the last p.h. on November 23. Ed Murphy. I am
a former tenant of Towncrest Mobile Home Park. I have been
asked to represent current tenants continuing what I started
from the very beginning. As I said, since the last p.h.
before you I have come across some addition items which
pertain, some directly, to this proposed development and
others indirectly. At the last p.h. Phil Leff said that
when a person sells their home they must purchase housing
which is affordable to them. These homes are not being
purchased. They are asked to be moved off a lot. They want
the land. If you buy a house-if they bought a house that is
on a lot, that house could be moved, not cheap but it can be
moved. Okay. These units are affixed to the land. They
have to be tied down. If Eagles would have offered $2,000
to $3,000 to most of those unit owners we wouldn't be before
you right now. I would have sold mine for $3,000. With the
costs that it cost me to move I had been able to purchase
something feel that I could have been comfortable with. Mike
Camp said that most of the mobile homes would be welcomed
elsewhere. That is not so. Bon Aire made 12 wide move out
I know over ten years ago because my brother when he moved
out of there and purchased a house it had to be removed.
Hilltop, I contacted them when I was trying to find a place.
They are not accepting any 12 wides. They are making 8 and
10 wides move out currently but they are not accepting any
12 wides. Breckenridge will accept 12 wides but they are
going to have to be inspected, be told what needs to be
done. I have also been told by tenants that live at
Breckenridge that there was a letter stating that older
units must be removed or upgraded. My mother lives at
Forest View. She has had discussions with the management
there. It is my understanding from those discuGsions that
Forest View has land available that they would have expanded
but they have been refused by the city on expansion. Mike
Camp also said that all of the units have axles and hitches.
I did receive a call from one tenant expressing concern that
their unit does not have a hitch. The hitch was removed
when the skirt was put on it went flush all the way around.
There wasn't anything extended. This is the case for that
to be moved, there would be additional cost to reattach the
hitch. I have also seen adds asking for the purchase of
mobile home axles. And it makes sense. If I bought a
mobile home I am not planning on mOVing it. I might as well
get a little bit of money back selling the axle. One other
regard is with citizenShip. Right now these people are
-
T. ~...,
, ,
i;
, ~I
I,
I
Iii
11
I,
'I
I!i '"
I'
i
,
v
I "
r,;
I r
II "
I
I 1;1
!
I
II' !I
'I
,
,I
~ - "1~~---
.
,-
f , " -'-='-~-/' "':'1' ~-~"f's-t-" ,,: ' "
. ,'., ' j I ' 't, ..j',,;:, ,..-' :-: ,,' "
. ..-
'1
#3b
page 5
I
I
citizens of Iowa city. Most of the mobile home lots are
outside the city limits. We are now chasing citizens
outside the city limits. I feel I have been chased out by
this project because where I am residing right now is not
within the city limits. But I feel like I am a viable
member of this community. In addition to the Club Food that
we all know about, there is one more grocery store that is
going to be coming to Iowa City. Fareway Foods, there is a
sign up on Westwinds Drive. coming soon, Fareway Foods,
Iowa's Finest Retail Grocery Establishment. It has also
come to my attention that about a year and a half ago there
was a 15 acre tract of land abutting Highway 6 east of Bon
Aire which is currently zoned RM-20, part of the Sycamore
Farms Annexation. The developer wished at that time to have
that zoned CC-2. They were turned down because they were
told that there is enough current CC-2 in the community to
meet the demands. Can we justify rezoning a new area, CC-2,
when that wasn't done at that time. That grocery store
could have very easily gone in on that 15 acre tract. I am
not saying that this is a bad project. I have never been
against it. I would like to see it go in there. I think it
would be good. At this time there is too many unanswered
questions. If you have answers to the questions, support
it. I don't think you do because I don't have the answers.
Nov/ Mr. Murphy, can you answer one question for me. Where is
Forest View.
, :
i,1 I
,
Iii [I
" , ,I
i J ~ ,
" "
! r
I,;
:1
, :1 .
': :;.
I,
r
"
I I,;
L ,
,
, 1
I }
,I
I 'I
'!
I
I
I
f
I
j
i
I
!
!
Murphy/ Forest View is located North Dubuque Street off Boyrum
Drive. It is the one you see off the interstate when you
come onto North DUbuque Street.
Horow/ Anyone else who wishes to address council.
Jay Honohan/ Mrs. Mayor and members of the council. I live at
2503 friendship. I am not here representing anybody. I am
a resident. I live within 200-300 feet of the particular
property that we are talking about. I have lived in that
neighborhood since the spring of 1962. Since that time the
trailer court that is in question here and another piece of
property owned by Mr. Lee has been a thorn in the side of
the city and that is 32 years. And for 11 years when I was
city attorney we tried our darndest to see what we could do
to this area. I think that the project that is proposed
here will improve the neighborhood. I think the city is
trying to make Eagles responsible for something that Eagles
has no responsibility for. If there is any responsibility
for lack a zoning areas, lack of these kind of trailer
courts, it is the responsibility of the city, not Eagle, to
remedy. And I think you are doing something wrong if you
prevent an improvement to the neighborhood because of the
city's own neglect if that the word. Also, no offense, but
d
.
~-t,-/i -":"'.-.t'---,' ,,-I' Lt'....' " '::, '-;,' ':', '.-"',
. ,- - ,- '" " , '
' , " ".. ," '" . ,
0" . '.-,', ._'" t..
.
.,
#3b page 6
I think I probably will offend some. This is not good
housing that we are talking about. This is substandard
housing. It has been and if you turn this down it will
continue to be substandard housing. Not to argue with Ed
but the reason that the other courts will not accept these
trailers in many ways is because they don't meet good
trailer court requirements. Good housing requirements. I
am not a novice to trailers. I lived in a trailer while I
went to law school with my wife. The first two years, one
of which I was police judge of the City of Iowa City I lived
in Forest View Trailer Court that Ed was talking about
earlier. I know what living in trailer courts are like. I
also know what a substandard court is and that is what we
have here. I think you need to take the bull by the horns
and do something but I don't think denying this particular
request is the thing ~o do. Thank you.
Horow/ Is there anyone else who would like to address council.
, ,
Jim Conklin/ First year I would like to wish you all a Happy New
Year. (Can't hear) First of all I would like-I don't really
know how to explain this but I am not a politician and I am
not that all educated like most of your people are. But I
would like to say this, I will refute Mr.Honohan from what
he said. Now I understand and I knew Mr.Honohan, about the
first time I have seen him in about 30 years maybe. But
that is beside the point. When he was a judge. (Can't
hear). I don't hold it against him. I don't hold any
grudges. But he says he lives up there. I don't know
because I don't get out and around. He says it is right
near the trailer court. Now he did say that as far as the
court is concerned and which I am pretty sure the Camps will
agree. Because it has got run down. But a lot of that is
their own doing. And not only that it is the people, these
are a lot of us good ones there and you know just like the
barrels. It only takes one bad apple or so to spoil the
whole barrel. I grant that that is not, you know, he is
saying it is getting into the slum deal you know. Well it
is not quite a slum yet but it will get there. That I will
guarantee you. But it is us people mainly. Like I say, I
said this, I have only been up here once before and it is
probably my last time. But, I just can't understand all of
the rigmarole on this about an Eagle Food store going in
there or a factory or anything else. It comes back also to
the, which I spoke before the Zoning Board. They did. They
turned it down, 6-0. And the main concern was that I threw
the hammer in there because yes, they could rezone for all
these businesses that come in and everything else but there
is no rezoning for us people that go. And that to me is
ridiCUlous. Now you are dealing with many people out here.
In other words they just say here, here is the door, we want
this. Bye, Bye and you look out for yourself. Now some
Ii
Ii
I'
"-
ii'
i' I
/\1 . 1';
;' 1
I; I.:
,I I_
:1 f,
Ii
Ii
'i
II
I,!
,]
I
,
r
iI
i'
:i
'"l
dill
1.HIIL
I
I
I ~~'
;,,1
"
, .
t.', ,if':' i~f' '4 ~ 'p ::, ,'..', : :, ...,
:.. . . t- : I,: ~~--=-'u ,_v. L , , .
/
'/ \
" 1
! '
..-----
#3b
page 7
!
i
'I
!
I,
I
I
.
people can and some can't. I live on pension. I get by. I
pay all of my bills. I don't owe nobody a dime. I just
live on my pension. And I don't understand this and not
only that you pick on your own and especially where I have
lived for 18 years I made that my last home. I explained
that to the zoning board. And now to pick up, I am 65 now,
and handicapped anyway. I haven't been able to work anyhow.
Where am I going to go and you want to tell me and the sell
that and we got to move and maybe that is fine. We got to
move. But listen you are not going to put me out in the
street or you are not going to put me some place where I am
not happy, throwing me out of kilter in my life. No way. I
just don't understand a lot of this. Now I can understand
the business of it. Heck, yeah, that is fine. But if I
have to move or something somebody has got to pay for it. I
don't have the money to pay for it. Now I see they are
going to cost the city or Johnson County or some welfare.
Somebody is going to have to pay for it and not only that, I
am not going to just move into some place where I am not
happy and it is not decent eating, you know. That is what I
brought up against the Zoning Board. I didn't mention the
trailer court. But I said that it would be an awful dumb
move even if one was available for me to move my trailer or
something into a deal that has got flooded out and
everything. No. I didn't mean to offense to Mr. Honohan.
Like I said, to him because they own property. Well, it has
been an eye sore for years and years and years anyhow.
;1
, i
:
,
I I
I!i
'I
" II
p '"
"
i: ir
,
" r
"
, \
"
': , ,
'I ,
" "
, ,
:1 !,
"
I I;
, !!
i
I,'
'I
,
i' I
: 1
,
II
i
I I
Horow/ Thank you very much.
Conklin/ I hope I get a chance to come back because (can't hear).
Throg/ Thank you for coming down Mr. Conklin.
Horow/ Is there anyone else who would like to address council on
this issue.
Conklin/ (Speaks from aUdience-can't ;ll:lar)
Horow/ Really the question for the aUdience. The question is that
on this vote you are confused as to what you read in the
newspaper about it would take two or three votes on this.
Conklin/ Two yeses and one no.
Gentry/ I didn't read the paper but it takes three readings of an
ordinance and if for example, the council were to vote yes
on this reading tonight, there are two other meetings where
they would have to vote. If, for example, the second one
they vote down, that is it. There is no-
Kubby/ There is a first reading tonight.
;1
"'~-"""~.""'..."",- ""_.~"-""" ..,.. ,,"-,.
"
'i
"
,
.
,
"
-,... ---- -- -- ~ - --. --- - ~ ~""-----......------ lit&: ...
""fIIf"""" ------ ---...-, - --., -,. ...... ....... . \~
...--
r _. . ,."...........--;--
\
. ,. . ',"
r ,,;;.., ':- ' ' -," 't " ", ',' " ' '
. 'U' L'"i' :I ' ".. '
" . '" ,', .' "'" .""
. ~~ ---'-,.- ~ I
- _. -, -
/
/
/""
J '
:1'
~"
_"_h.., ,_.
#3b page 8
Conklin/ (Can't hear)
Gentry/ That would be at three different meetings and people
change their minds. Let's face it.
Conklin/ (Can't here)
Nov/It takes three yeses for any zoning change to pass. And as
soon as there is a no, it doesn't pass. Only one no can
drop it.
Conklin/ (Can't hear).
Horow/ I wonder if we can continue this p.h. and I will get back
to you. Let's talk about this because right now it is
difficult for us to explain it to you from here and I
understand that. Let me make sure that everybody has been
heard first. That is understandable.
Is there anyone else that wishes to address council right
now. If not-
Kubby/ Sue, we had discussed last night that we -we don't know
what the conditional zoning agreement has been signed or
not.
Horow/ I want to give second chance to those people who want to-
anyone who wants to address council on issues that have not
already been touched upon this evening. In other words,
those who have already spoken who wish to continue on
something that has not already been discussed.
Leff/ (Can't hear)
Kubby/ The answer was that it has been signed.
Leff/ It has been signed by the applicant. It needs to be signed
by Towncrest Mobile Home Court. I believe there is somebody
here who can sign that tonight. It could be signed by them
whenever you want to sign a copy of that document.
Kubby/ We cannot close the p.h. until it is signed by everyone
that needs to be signed.
Gentry/ You either opt to continue the p.h. or not.
Horow/ What is council's pleasure on this. Do you want to sign
this right now.
Nov/ I would prefer that we continue the p.h. and explore this
idea that Forest View does have space to expand. his is the
first time I have ever hard that....
-~"'"''':'\''''' """
~.l ~
-'-,-----
i
I'
Ii: II
'Ii
I'i I
I: Ir
:!
"
I' I;
" "
"
"
, "
" :"
I "
'il "
i"
"
,"
",
..
Ii ,
.'(f
I
I'
I
Ii! ,i
,i;-
;/
,
;
"
"
,
,
"
~~ -
I
!
I
~"""" ".~,
-
~
-
...
, "
' ,
I' ,', 't-/ " t'-l ',.,-/' ,~t" ,',,',',' :,.'
,.,', -', foo:l ".' .'
"~ : ~~ '. - ., .~- '. _::! . "
I
/
:. 1
I.
........."-.-
--.-....... -
#3b page 9
KUbby/ I want to make sure I want to know what the options are,
too. Our options are if the conditional zoning agreement is
signed we can go ahead with the First consideration or we
could defer it if we wanted...another option is if it is not
signed we could close the p.h. and that means the issue is
dead.
Horow/ And the issue is the current and future use of zoning of
that issue...we are dealing with a zoning issue.
Kubby/
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-5 SIDE 2
Karr/ Could we have a motion to accept correspondence as part of
the p.h.
,:, i
!i
Iii
, II
I "
I :1 Ii
ii I"
I :! I'
I'
I i " - 'j
'(I : \
I "
! ,I '"
, 1':
I ! . i,;
I, ,
"
,
!I
'i.
'i
;, I
I: I
I
,
Horow/ Chair would entertain a motion to accept-
Moved by Pigott, seconded Nov. to accept correspondence. Any
discussion. All those in favor (ayes). Thank you.
Leff/ Mr. Camp who has to sign that document is not prepared to
sign it tonight. He hasn't had a chance to read it that
thoroughly. So I have to tell you we have one of two
signatures on the agreement. So that requires you to
continue, that is the only procedural alternative that you
have.
Horow/ The alternate is to close the issue and that stops it. Or
to continue the p.h.
Nov/ We cannot vote tonight.
Horow/ We can't vote without the conditional zoning agreement
agreed to.
Leff/ The staff hadn't advised us that they wanted it signed at
that time. I am sorry or we probably could have arranged to
have it available before you. So we ask that you continue
it or reset the hearing or whatever it is procedurally you
need to do get the matter back on the next council meeting.
Kubby/ I am hesitant in a certain way to continue the p.h.. This
new information about Forest View is something that we need
to work on or to investigate whether we vote on this issue.
I just feel like this has been going on for quite a while
and that it has been very stressful for the residents of
Towncrest Mobile Home Court even over the holidays. I would
like not to continue the p.h.
Nov/ If we are going to explore the Forest View area and consider
moving anybody as best as possible and you close the p.h.,
"
:I
:i
;
!
I
"
. "",'" \"
..
-..'
,
I
i,
3
'"
""'If'''. -
"';"",.:".'
-
"1-~-----~""'~ ...-'.......-----.- -......... ..- - -
. I' ...... ~.
I ' ...., -, 4- '-~'" " ' , ' ,
" ~: . till: :.., :, :~, ' ' " : . ~ ""
.. -~.'
/
,
"
,~ .
#3b page 10
what do you do next.
Kubby/ I would be voting for the rezoning so that is not really a
relevant issue for me. I believe the land use should remain
as is.
Pigott/ If we close the p.h. and this issue is declared dead,
would there be an opportunity for the Eagle people to corne
back. They would have to start again from- what is the next
step if- It is dead but what can they do. That is the next
step. Do they go back to P/Z on this or what happens next
from their perspective so I have an idea.
Gentry/ What is going to happen in the interim. They could
always corne back and reapply. I would doubt or I don't
know. I am not going to speak for you but I would doubt
that they would reapply.
Kubby/ And in terms of probably good process here we probably
should continue the p.h. I don't like the added two weeks.
I,
::,
Ii: I
,
Ii I
I
ii J
"
"
"
I, 'I'
11
, . 11
i"
i;'
I,'
!.:
r
' .
(j
/'1
I If
j' If
II
Gentry/ In all fairness to the applicant, they were waiting for
some direction from the council as to whether you were even
interested in the conditional zoning agreement. You know,
we were not pressing them to sign today, so-
Nov/ We also had discussed the possibility of Changing the
conditional zoning agreement.
Gentry/ That is true. still subject to amendment, if you have
different conditions.
Kubby/ If this p.h. is continued and council has additional
amendments to the conditional zoning agreement, I strongly
urge us to define what those are so we can proceed in two
weeks and not prolong this any longer. I just don't think
it is fair. '
Gentry/ And if you have to do that at a work session.
Pigott/ My inclination is to, if this were to be put up for vote,
would be to vote against this zoning ordinance, Changing the
use regulation at this time based on the best use of this
land and I think right now given affordable housing. But I
still feel that to close the p.h. might be something I am
hesitant to do and I guess if I were to vote tonight I would
be against this change in zoning. So I am not so sure how
closing the p.h. would be, in reality, any different from a
no vote should the council carry. So I suppose I could-
Kubby/ If the majority of people would vote no there is no sense
of us playing bureaucratic game to negotiate a new zoning
agreement.
ii
,4
"
I
';.1
'I
"',d,,,_..,,'
.
.' .', .,
r .' ' : CI ";-:-{'. ,~L/: ,!~t ':' . ....': ..~--~
l' ,~ ._ f' _~ I
/
"
i
..
#3b page 11
Horowl The p.h. is still open.
Caroline Dierterlel I live on Walnut street. I just wanted to
briefly reiterate my absolute opposition to giving tax
abatement to Eagle should this zoning be passed. And since
it doesn't seem that being an existing business in town
precludes granting of this kind of abatement, I was
wondering whether the people who own the Towncrest Mobile
Home Court have considered the idea that if their court is
in some way substandard that they be granted tax abatement
in order to upgrade the housing there so that the objection
that it is substandard housing for these people is overcome.
In any event, please do not give Eagle tax abatement. As a
tax payer, I strongly object but I would be in favor of
giving it to the mobile home court.
Horowl Thank you.
Throgl I would like to indicate where I stand at this particular
point in time. I don't want to slam the door on Eagle's
proposed store. I would agree that this particular
intersection would be a good location for new development.
however I cannot support in good conscience the proposed
rezoning. I wouldn't support the proposed rezoning so long
as land zoned for affordable housing would be removed as a
result of the rezoning and so long as several or at least 30
low income people would be displaced as a result of the
'action If I knew that the residents could be successfully
relocated then. I would be open to considering rezoning. I
personally really like to see the rp.zoning be apart of a
larger effort to redevelop the Towncrest area as a vital
neighborhood center and it seems to me that Eagles could
playa wonderful role in that. I would strongly encourage
that for Eagles to kind of adopt that perspective. That is
outside the represent discussion I believe so I will just
leave it with me saying at this point I would oppose the
rezoning if it came to that.
Novl I think we all are not ready to rezone and put people out
based on the fact there is no place else for them to go.
And if we continue the p.h. and we get a new set of
information that changes this, that is different. But we
may end up two weeks from now voting no anyway.
Horowl Are there four votes to continue this p.h.
LehmanI I would like to comment first. I think anything the city
does that facilitates one losing their place to live puts a
burden on the city to see to it that help is offered to
those people and I think the biggest objection from
listening to the council is where are these people going to
go. But tonight I hear something else that I am really kind
, '
, ,
~' , Ii
i
I'
II:
( 11
II
II If
:!
1
" II
I' ."~
,
I: I,'
:i f:
, I,!
1\ d
Ij
11
II
I,
:i
I
"IIff". -
-
'1--"-'" --; ""W\...... ~ ..-'....... --- ~ -- .......,...,....----,.,---JIt'~...
~
'" ,,',' ,/," "
r, t-/' 1 f-l~' 4 1-::' - .!. '. ,': , '
, ' , ,',' . h: '," ',,',
,:."" ,~..'I "_ '_,:: l~~l<l. ."" 1\' r'.
/
"
,I
#3b page 12
of interested in. What happens, and Mr. Leff or whoever,
what happens if this property is not rezoned. What is going
to happen to those people.
Leff/ Let me just interject a moment. You now have a signed
agreement. You have a draft of the agreement that is
signed. It has not been signed by the city but it has been
signed by the applicants and I am sorry that we put through
that gymnastics. Truly we did not know or suspect that you
would require this document signed tonight. We didn't even
know that the document-the details that it contained was
agreeable to you or whether you wanted to modify it. That
is why we did not have a signed document. So, but you may
want to address that same question again to Jean Bartley
that Mr. Lehman asked.
Horow/ Ms. Bartley.
Bartley/ I will attempt to answer your question Mr. Lehman and
members of the council. We are not making-giving any
ultimatum here at this point that you know unless this goes
through that the court will be closed. I think it is
realistic though to recognize that this business cannot
continue in this loss mode and if it is to continue it will
have to be done so that it can operate at some kind of a
profit and in order for them to operate at a profit the rent
will have to be increased to a point where it may no longer
be affordable to the present tenants.
Gentry/ Jean, can I ask you one question. Have you given the
statutory notice to terminate to the tenants.
Bartley/ No. We haven't given the statutory notice to terminate
because of course our contract with Eagle Store is
conditional upon the rezoning and at such time of the
rezoning occurred then we would give a statutory notice and
beyond that we would give a six month notice. I mean a
total of a six month notice.
Horow/ I would like to ask that council consider anymore
questions or discussion w~th the lawyers or with the owner
take place under considering the ordinance. The conditional
zoning has been signed.
Nov/ I still have a preference to continue this based on the fact
that we have received information about Forest View that may
be pertinent to the vote. If everybody else wants to
explore whether or not Forest View can accept this
expansion, fine. If not we will close the p.h.
Baker/ Mr. Leff and Mr. Honohan are correct in one very
particular way. It is the city's responsibility to solve
'J1
.h..
-
till
, !
! :
I
!:
1
i II: II
, !:
i ! ~ II
" i!,
"
:: II'
,
f' "
I:
"
, i;
,
,I I:
"
"
I I:i
:I
II
, ,j
'I
,
,
I J
"
"
,
:i
- ---
i
!
,
I:
Ii
i
i
I
"
" ,
I' ":"'t '-,"':4 ",'" ',:",' ':'
, " - '; I ~:.. , "~, ' :",Q; ',,',,: ,;,','
-
/
\
1
.I.
-,
---- -----~,--
#3b page 13
this problem. Eagles might be able to help in a certain way
in some sort of conditional zoning but it is our primary
responsibility and it is a land Use decision. What is the
best Use for that land. I am not sure that a mobile home
court in that location is the best use of that land. But I
am not about to vote to change it to displace people that
have no place to go to. So I don't want to rule out that we
are never going to change the Use of that land but at this
moment Unless we come up with some other alternative, we
can't do it.
Horow/ Are you willing to keep the p.h. open.
Baker/ Absolutely.
Kubby/ Even if Forest View can expand, you would have to go
through a rezoning process and a development process.
Baker/ How long would that process take.
Kubby/ Six months, eight months, nine months, a year.
Baker/ Are you saying that you would never ever change the use of
this land in Towncrest from mobile home to something else.
Kubby/ I am saying that my viewpoint is not dependent on being
able to find alternative housing for the residents of
Towncrest. My contention that this should remain
residentially zoned is not totally based-even if we can find
more trailer court space, I don't want to back pedal on what
we currently have.
Baker/ Are you saying that the status as it currently is is the
most appropriate status for that land.
Kubby/ I am saying I do not want to change the current Use of the
land. My decision doesn't have to be that I have to change
it to the highest and best Use. I am saying that the
cUrrent Use is acceptable and I do not want to change it to
CC-2.
Horow/ I am still interested in keeping the p.h. open-
Throg/ It is not clear to me why we would want to continue. I
Understand what Naomi said. My sense is that we have
already had two p.h.s and there is always the chance that we
will discover that there is some information we didn't have.
So, we could comeback two weeks from now and have exactly
the same kind of situation occur or two weeks after that or
two weeks after that.
Horow/ Then I take it that there are four people who wish to
......~~..,_.v~__~~,,, L '.~......;..... '
---'-"'- -
! I .
i Ii, \
!
i Ii Ii
,
I
" ii
I "
I Ii '..
,I I
" r
I I
" "
l
i , 1\ '~ 1\
! ,.;
I"
il I'
"
j'i
II
!!
I
':1
,
,
"
,
,
"
11
"
,
;{
,
,
i
,
,
'.;
'"
I
I
I
1
I
"'''''''~''''~''''''"''''
-~----
, ,
' "
I ,rof:' ~~f' ' ,>/1 ,':;:"1., ~u", "I '", ~ ,~' ,
. -. r", t.. . :3, \, '1'.P . .,' , " ,
/
" \1
,
\.
....
#3b page 14
close this p.h. Is that true.
Baker/ I am quite willing to continue it for another two weeks.
Beyond my enthusiasm dwindles for continuation.
Horow/ There are right now three people for keeping this open-
four people for keeping it open. The p.h. will continue.
Gentry/ You need a motion.
Nov/ I move that we continue the p.h. to weeks from today and no
longer.
Baker/ Can you literally say and no longer.
Nov/ Time definite.
Baker/ What happens if you discover SOme bit of information that-
Nov/ At some point we really have to vote.
Baker/ I would just like to say that I understand the frustration
level of anybody that has to keep coming in front of the
commission and the council. But I think, in his particular
case, two weeks is not an unreasonable extension. But
beyond that you are right.
Throg/ What is it that we hope to discover within two weeks.
Nov/ The information that Mr. Murphy presented was that Forest
View had been denied expansion. I would like to find out why
were they denied an expansion. Was this because it was in
the flood plain or some reason that we absolutely cannot
amend. However, if we can amend it and if in fact the
premise that we have been dealing with there is no land that
can be rezoned RFBH is false, I would like to know about it.
Baker/ Is there a member of this staff that would have that
information right now.
Horow/ No.
Nov/ Our staff member is not saying yes.
Horow/ All right, let's take a vote on this.
The motion is to continue the p.h. for two weeks. Seconded
by Mr. Lehman. Any further discussion.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes, Kubby voting
nay) It passes 6-1.
,..'. ,,'....,..,......,
---~..... ~
i
i
,
,
I
I
I ;
1', I
"
"
, J1!
, I
I
I I
ii I
"
I Ii ir
I "
, Ij I
I .1;
, , I: ,
I " "
,
! ! ~ i;'
, !:
I 11
I
I "
I
, II
"I;
"
,I
'''-'''lIIllJ'''''''fI('r. -
i
i
,
,
"
-- "" ---,..
-9\.-- ~ .,,-, ......
~ ........ .........----.,...----...,ff"... -............ ... -~
~ . ',' 1 . "
I'. " f"/" ,t~, ""I, Fr ',' "',', ~ 10 ,< '
:' . '. '-r '. _ . 3. .' D ."" .
/
. '1
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 4
d. Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to
redefine "family care facility/family home" by including "community
supervised apartment living arrangement." .
Comment: At its November 1 B, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 4-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a proposed
amendment to allow unlicensed, but state.regulated, supervised housing
for persons with disabilities in all residential zones. The Commission's
recommendation is consistent with that of the staff, included in a
memorandum dated November 12, 1993.
Action:
Y'\ 0 MI "" a.fr.Au"f
e.
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to redefine
"family care facility/family home" by inuluding "community supervised
apertment living arrangement." (First consideration)
Comment: See item d. above. In a letter dated November 23, 1993,
William Gorman, Executive Director of Systems Unlimited, Inc., requests
expedited consideration of this ordinance.
f.
v
~ l V1~ twlf ~J
. vfp./.tk<t/ iI~. m
Consider en ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance Section . B, Off-
Street Parking Requirements for Multi.Famil wetl ngs; Sections 36-
11 (gl, 36-12(gl, 36-13(g) and 3~ , e special provisions sections
of the RM.12, RNC.20, BM-20'8nd RM.44 zones; Sections 36-17(c}(1)
and 36.20(c}(1) e1lrovisional use sections of the CO-l and CB-2
zones; an tions 36.19(d}(5) and 36.23(d}(31, the special exception
secti s of the CC-2 and CI-l zones. (First con~lderation)
Action:
I
i
,
I
;
I
i
\
i
I
I
,
,
j
i
I
!
i
IHlteJd l
!
,I
,
'j
.)
j
,\
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the
Planning end Zoning Commission recommended epprovel of an
ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance requirements pertaining to 1 )
the number of off.street parking speces required for multl.famlly uses;
2) the screening requirements when parking spaces ere located on the
ground floor of or under e building; and 3) the requirement that access
to individuel multi.family dwelling units shall be from enclosed lobbies
or corridors, except for townhouse-style units. The Commission's
recommendation is generally consistent with the staff recommendation'
contained In steff memoranda deted October 15 end November 4, 1993.
Comments were received at the Council's December 7, 1993, pu~ic,
heering on this ite~. rte(plltAl( ~
Action: V /p' (/
., "''',''''
I.M.L
, !
I
II: II
I'
" II:
i!
,
r
': "
III i
Iii .
"
I;'
Ii !.:
"
I 1::
I
I r1
1, II
"
"
!!
i
I~r.--~ ~~, _ _ '
"':"~"",.."... ...... ~"1---",-" ~-- ~ ,;',....... -- - -- ........ .......------:--~...~ ," ___ '
, .' , I" ': ' , ',',
i ' ,-' '- ,I n, "
",'!',t;I';"fI ,'"]' :~} ,;, J ',' ,,- '
/ "'_'>"'_ - I ,
/
/j,
", '1'
'~_:"::~'-~-'"
--"-
--,
---'-" .--
f/
#3~ page 1
Horow/ (#3e)Moved by Kubby, seconded by Nov for first
consideration. Do you wish to deal with expedited-
Kubby/ I feel that we are because we just held the p.h. I would
feel uncomfortable cOllapsing it at this point.
Horow/ You would, all right.
I
I
Karr/ You have a motion on the floor for first consideration.
we just go with roll call.
So
Horow/ The motion has been made. Any discussion.
Roll call-(yes)
I.
1\
:1
(,
Kubby/ I don't know if I am willing to collapse further or not.
Baker/ How many votes do you need to collapse.
111I
',I '
" I)
ii II'
11 ' 11'
I,
n
Gentry/ Majority.
;:
"
"
,:1,.
ii'
il.
I
. ;.(
i;f'
I:
"~I"~;
. !i-
,
:),.-
I
I
I'
I
, ,
II!'
\'.' "
<'- ,
, ,
i
, ,
i
, '
:1
'I
"
T
I,
,
~ :'
'1
I
1
......'''-'01..;, ;"";''':I,L;'\'_~'';''';\I-,.<" .,;;;.....',:.; :;
I,
,
:
"
"".:,
......-
'-' "
i,
'I
I."
",
lL
,l.dl<l.'
-..........lIfIIIJ//It"'"r. - ~~""----.... -~"""~';I.....---.- ............. - - --,~...
'9''''
... ~. . --;--y-' ---~----- --
I
I,. ". ~-I <, i~ll 'r i ' ""lit', ", ,','!'..' . "',
~~, : ' ,~ \, . '_. ',7 ,J'.",. ,\,' ;"
/
#3f page 1
Horowl (#3f) Has been amended. Moved by Nov, seconded by Baker.
Any discussion.
Bakerl Madam Mayor, I would like to raise a question for the rest
of council and see how you feel about this. I have some
serious questions about section 3 of this ordinance. The
access to individual multi family units shall be from
enclosed lobbies or corridors. We have gotten some
correspondence from various people about this voicing
raising issues that might have not been discussed earlier in
the staff and the commission process. Having talked to
various members of the zoning commission who seem interested
in reconsidering this, I would like to see us delete section
3 of this ordinance and vote on the other half or the other
two thirds.
Novl We deleted everything except the dense zone, the RM-44.
Bakerl The way this is worded now would prohibit any kind of open
walkway on any side of the building is my understanding.
Novl Only in the Rm-44 zone.
Bakerl In the RM-44 zone. There is a couple of questions. If
you look around town there is lots of apartments very
tastefully well done, safe apartments, with outside walkways
in the rear of the building. And this ordinance, as I read
it, would prohibit even those from being constructed. This,
in my mind, might be too comprehensive but could possibly be
worked out for some sort of revision or accommodation to let
certain kinds of walkways be allowed maybe in the rear of
buildings away from public view and things like that. But
that is the thing that the zoning Commission would like to
rethink and I know the staff wants us to do RM-44 tonight
but I don't perceive the same immediate dire consequences if
we don't pass this tonight. I would just like to bring that
up or discussion that to delete this one section and let
them rethink it and come back with an amended version of it.
Lehmani I agree. In the original proposal there was like six or
seven zones that this was going to apply to and it would
appear to me that there was not a great deal of thought
given to what this says and I would like to see an ordinance
that addresses only exterior entrances. Whether it be in
RM-44 or any of the rest of the zones. But this I thought
was suppose to be primarily a ordinance regarding the number
of parking spaces required for and this was kind of tacked
on and I think it enough that I would like to move that we
amend it by eliminating item 3.
Bakerl When I suggest eliminating three it doesn't mean I
eventually would rule against it. But I certainly don't
',\'
~,
Ii
,
I
I'
I:
'1': '
II
\1
Ii
~
1\
II
I"
'I,
h
1\
P
"
(;
"
II
I,i
11
I
II
,I
'I
Ii
;1
! '
...",.". - -
I
!
!
I'
,
!
I
c
!
I
-...",.".,,',...
"1-~-; --~..... ~ llr r....... -- - ---""'QII"' .~- ~. ----~~...
...~. .. ~ .~."..~---
\
- ...
....' ' 1
.. ~ \' " , ' . ','
, ~rl : ' FI .. tj ',: :t"lc ,';" : ":,' "',' "
;' , .; _ . _ " ~ .:\ -' " ' ',' '. ~~ .
;'
;
"
,
----....
#3f page 2
Nov/
want to see walkways on the front of buildings or the side
of buildings that intrude on the side yards of other
properties and things like that. But, you know, rear
entrances might be appropriate and work.
I don't really think that rear entrances are always
appropriate. I think a front door blends in to the
neighborhood in many instances better than a rear entrance
and a real front door look with an inside corridor can be
something we really-
Daker/ It can be.
Kubby/ We can still get to that point. I think there is some
sense in dealing with one issue within residential zones as
a whole group. It makes some sense. I understand the staff
wanting to take RH-44 out to protect the northside from
anything happening between now and we get feedback from P/Z
staff and the Board of Appeals. But I would second your
motion.
i ,
, ,
I i!
,
; ,
I (i
I
1\: I
,
I 'II I
; 1,: !
I It.
, 1"
, 1;
, I:: II,
I 11
J
, "
I I ; ~ I'
i "
I r
i 1',
I !I ,;
I I' I';
II h
"
I 'I
I r
"
II
l!
,
,
Baker/ I would encourage this revision.
Horow/ Let me make sure about this then. You wish to adopt just
the first and second portion of this proposed ordinance so
there would be an amendment on the floor to do that.
Gentry/ It is on the floor.
Baker/ So you need a motion to amend the ordinance.
Karr/ No. You have one.
Horow/ The amendment has to be passed first before we take the-
pigott/ I would be amendable to sending it back but with the
understanding on my part that this RM-44 zone may indeed
come back as is in this and that it may not change at all.
certainly dealing with one issue at a time is fine with me.
Throg/ The way I understand it is the access provisions of this
proposed ordinance are basically aesthetic in nature. I
understand that they are designed primarily to make multi
family units more compatible with the existing s.f.
structure of the neighborhood and I am certainly all for
that. I would encourage that. I think we should send a
message back to P/Z as well. I would support the idea of
separating access from parking. But I am also curious as to
whether staff has any insight they wane to present us with
regard to the separability of the two s~ctions of the
ordinance. I don't want to put you in a spot, Monica, but
would you like to tell us we are about to make a stupid
:1
,',
"""IIf"""" - ~""'111 ~- ~- qa. ...-'........-----
..... .....- - - - -~ . -- -- -
--r -.... .... -. . - ~. I" .. ~
\
I _.J, I.;,. ~ , .' .
',' f-'/" 't-I" 'tg' '~I'" ,', , ,"',
I ,,"
'"," '
'. ,"
, '1 "I .
t.. ,~~,' .........1 ~ .'t..' . ,~: . .----- . "
,
.'
'1
.!
#3f page 3
decision here.
Kubby/ Or a project that is going to happen soon that this would
be relevant for in terms of RM-44.
Horow/ Monica, you were out in the hall. Do you understand what
we are about to do.
Moen/ Yes, I do. I understand that you are contemplating
amending the ordinance as I described it at your work
session last night and that is basically in the ordinance to
incorporate the parking amendments that have been
recommended to you by the P/Z Commsion and also to retain
the access issue for the RM-44 zone but at the present time
to delete it from the other zones that are identified in the
ordinance that you originally received.
Kubby/ We made a option to take the RM-44 out to-
Baker/ To take all of section three out of this ordinance.
Moen/ The two issues, obviously, are not related to one another.
You are asked to contemplate two different issues. Because
both issues received the support of the staff and the P/Z
Commission we incorporated them into one ordinance. Hey can
easily be separated from one another. Within the RM-44 zone
there are prospects for redevelopment that are occurring.
They may not be immediate but there are some properties that
have been sold for which development is anticipated.
Baker/ And don't you have some review process on multi family
plats.
Moen/ We do through the existing development plan process.
certainly our opportunities for prescribing aesthetic
concerns is much stronger if the council has adopted an
ordinance that specifies exactly what should be done. So it
makes out interests and responsibilities a little bit
easier. We felt that the RM-44 zone could be distinguished
from the other multi family residential zones and the
commercial zones that were originally identified into the
ordinance because of the location of those zones which are
primarily in the near northside or the north end of the
community. And as you are all aware that is the oldest part
of the city and is the home to many of the community's
historical or significant or historically contributing
structures. And therefore we felt that additional concern
should be paid to redevelopment in that area. We have
suggested to you the retention of the RM-44 condition with
the recommendation that the issue be forwarded back to the
P/Z commission for the development of standards to guide
construction within the other residential zones and the
......
I: ~
II Ii
Ii Ii
Ii! I'
Ii r
, -
I .
H
:
" I;"
"~I L
'il "
:!
I I,!
II
I ,i
r
"
I r
l
,
,
"
,
.
r ' ..' . .:. . " .
I, ' , t-/ ,', t-",. L_/ ,:~1. " ',', ", ,",
.. .' . t . .
: \ - . .,- .'~' '-", " ",'
"
!
--
#3f page 4
commercial zone with the expectation that some of these
guidelines could also be applied to RM-44 zone in additional
to the restriction that the staffs recommending.
I
I
!
l
1
!
Nov/ I would like to leave the RM-44 zone in here. i think that
it can always be deleted if it comes back from P/Z saying
this is not the right way to do it.
Kubby/ If any development comes up, I am kind of a-I think I want
this to happen in the RM-44 zone but it makes sense for my
thinking to make sure we have had a full discussion of it to
arrive at that conclusion in terms of all residential zones
and that if a development should come in between now and
when this comes back t us I guess I want staff to know that
we are leaning in this direction and then that should guide
your review in the site development process.
Horow/ What teeth does that have for staff to deal with-
Kubby/ You still have some-
Moen/ In comes in negotiating.
pigott/ I would also like to see the input. Last night we talked
about a letter we received regarding this issue and I would
like to see the input from that fellow on this issue.
, I
;i
Ii I
,: I
I ,
Iii I!:
'i
i' i
"
;ii7
'I
:1 ij'
I!
I, r
II i
"
,:1
1
I
J
I Ii
Lehman/ The other thing is I am sure the same thought process
that ended up with the RM-12, RNC-20 and RM-20 and RM-44,
CO-l, CB-2, and CI-l-now those were all included originally.
That apparently this was all one thought process. Now all
of a sudden we take everyone out except one. I am saying
that I think the entire issue should be addressed with all
of the zones at the same time. My understanding is that
this would forbid any outside stairways from any side of a
building. Is that correct.
Moen/ That is correct.
Lehman/ I don't know of any but I guess I could foresee there
might hesitations where an outside stairway would be very
appropriate. Maybe not, I don't know. I just think that
this should be thought through a little more thoroughly
before-and all of the zones done together which is why I
made the amendment.
Baker/ And Monica, is this only for the multi family units.
Moen/ Yes, that is correct.
Baker/ So a house that has an addition or a granny flat or
something that wanted to put an outside-
,i
......,.......:._."L,.J,:
.,.,.,... ""'If'''.
:i
,'i
---- --~-----...
-~-- ~I.......... -- - ~ ~"'--.... - - - -.,~...
~ r
.... -..
(,-", '-, ';4' I~" , ',', ,"',
" r. 6:' , .,' " . "
,':, ,t/.,lI, ,,'",,:;.,, ' ,,''''
. - "
;'
1
I
'I.'
i
\
!
r
t,
!
~
S
i
!
i
I
!
#3f page 5
Moen/ It would affect anything of a tri-plex or greater.
Baker/ Is it appropriate that if we are talking about esthetics
in that neighborhood in particular there might be a lot of
development at the level below the tri plex level with this
same sorts of designs and maybe they should review that as
well. If you are going to rule it out for multi family-
Horow/ I would like to try to move on this issue. Let's take a
vote on the amendment that has been proposed toot the main
motion and that is to-
Kubby/ There is someone from the Board of Appeals here who I
guess, before I vote on the amendment I would like-
Gentry/ You were mentioning the fellow-
Horow/ All right. Would you care to-
Robert Carlson/ Chair of Board of Appeals. I guess I called by
staff and told they were going to make this change and that
took care of some of our concerns. Obviously I would like
to have some design rules or requirements so that the
consideration for exterior stairs or balconies can be taken
into account. The idea that possibly we hold RM-44 in
abeyance right now and write the rules for design and then
roll those rules Rm-44 and change this. That is kind of
that I understood. Was what we were going to do is pass
this, not allow exterior stairs temporarily in RM-44 and
then when the rules are written and change the rules so
those rules apply to RM-44 and this requirement comes off
the code. That was how I understood you were going to do
this.
;':
,
, ~
I',
Iii ,
I
i
!! i
'I
" l
i
r: 11'
(' Ii
" I"~
ii !',
II IIi
'I
l
I
I
I I
i'
I!
I
KUbby/Like the conservative way to go. The most safe.
Carlson/ Which I thought wasn't too bad. You would hate to see
some thing put in the near northside that are as bad as some
of the things that have been done. But on the other hand I
hate to stop anybody from doing things. This isn't a bad
compromise. The question is how fast can staff-P/Z and
staff come back with the requirements. I wouldn't have any
objections to you doing this if you give direction to staff
and Zoning to come back in a certain period of time with
written rules. And rewritten rules would be very difficult
to write if you haven't figured that out already.
Horow/ Thank you very much. There is an amendment to the main
motion on the floor.
<<J"r~'I.(-sc.~
Tom Woodridqe/ I am also on the Board of Appeals. And three
things I would like to bring up I guess. I know the council
,j
-
i',
- --""------....
I
.
I
i
i
I
~
j
~
I
.".".,.......,..:,...
~--~..-,~...----- 'QIIJ' ...-- -
.,~~
-
- .
! ' -.' '-' "i ' 1- -:, ',' , " ",
, .', ,t,I" t ,I, . ,21 ,lo"i " '..'. ", "
\ " ,t ' I r ,,,.71 ," ,~~ ' ',' I , . I
" -....-,
",
"
#3f
page 6
has especially newly elected council has had a proclivity to
be all inclusive and get everybody's opinion. It is my
understanding that when we came to our last Board of Appeals
meeting that this item #3 was not apart of the original
zoning ordinance when it was put in the p.h. and therefore
the Board of Appeals knew nothing about it. It was tagged
on. I may be in error but that is what I was told. And I
guess an issue like this is a safety issue too which is a
code issue and I think those on staff and Commission and on
council who would want to have a heavier hand or more
inclusive hand in designing how these structures are to be
must, in my opinion, balance fire safety issues along with
the personal preferences for design. And i greatly fear for
that because as most of you know I am in the building
business. I don't do apartments. I don't own any. I don't
plan to do any. But I have been around construction for 27
years and fire safety and any kind of safety is number one
and I guess I am fairly disappointed that this would seem to
me to sneak on the agenda and I think that if you are going
to be all inclusive, you the boards that you have appointed
whether it is our board or another board. And the other
thing that, this is on a personal basis, I have a personal
problem with non-design professionals, and I am not one,
necessarily taking the lead in deciding what is good design.
My opinion is leave it to the professionals and the owners
who are spending their funds. You know, there have to be
certain applied guidelines, I agree. But my preference for
design might be entirely different than anyone elses and I
worry that people on commissions and staff sometimes take
those issues to be their own personal prerogative and I
think you ought let the professionals. Thank you.
Horow/ Thank you.
Throg/ Could I ask a point of clarification. Not of you, sir.
Did we in fact combine two items in the manner that he just
suggested when we were considering this item. And when it
first came up did we combine.
Nov/ No, it was that way before we got to it.
Throg/ I just wanted to be clear about that. I guess I would
like to make one other point just to signal again that I
think it is extremely important we have that P/z Commission
and we encourage design that is compatible with existing
neighborhoods. And if that means-and that would apply to
multi family units. It should apply to multi family. I
just wanted to say that pretty clearly.
Horow/Let us move on this. There is an amendment to the main
motion. Made by Nov, seconded by Baker. The amendment.
The main motion was made by Baker and seconded by Lehman-
" ~
I'
" ,I
I; 11
T
I: I:
I", I'
!: I'
, I;'
!:
"
,',
I,~
1,1
I
I
, Ii
,
,
;1
--P' - ~.... ---., ~-
~ ,., ~ ;'.....
~ ........ ...........-------- ...,~. ... --....----- ..--.... -J.........,.-.......------....-
'I'" I ....' - ,
i " " 'C/';" 'i-I' 'LI " f':' , :,' ,', .",
;.: ' L, ,',L, ,~, J, , '.,' , ',' J, '
/
""]
"
'-.
_._h... ..__
#3f page 7
Kubby/ Made by Lehman, seconded by Kubby.
Horow/ All right- To delete section 3 from this ordinance.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes). Opposed
(aye)
Karr/ I am sorry, I couldn't distinguish the voices.
Horow/ Once again, all those in favor of deleting signify by
saying aye (aye). Those opposed (aye). The deletion has
taken place.
Baker/ What was the vote.
Horow/ 4-3, yes. It was Baker (Can't hear).
Now we go to the main motion as amended.
Kubby/ I do have one last comment about the ordinance that we are
not going to be voting on.
Horow/ Let me open this for discussion. We have already got the
motion. Discussion is open. Go ahead.
Kubby/ In the ordinance there is a table that says what the unit
height is in term of number of bedrooms and then in the
other part of the column is the number of parking spaces.
And the parking spaces are for motorized vehicles and we
have requested that P/Z look at adding another column in the
future for bicycles. That we are in our infrastructure
encouraging different modes of transportation so that people
have a safe and weather sheltered place for non-motorized
transportation. So I am going to let people know that we
are going to be investigating that.
Horow/ Okay. All right, we are voting on this in terms of the-we
have already deleted section 3.
Roll call-
, I
,
i i
,
,
"
t !: I
1 I
I II II
J
"
I t
i I,
. I: J'
, :1
!
, - Ii
I I:
, ,
i 0,
j v'
I,'
I i
,
I (i
,:j
1
r
I I
, il
]
" ,
Baker/ Sue, before you do that I raise a question here. We had
allowed people to speak on this issue and a gentleman
stepped up to the podium and I am wondering if he was
wanting to address us on that particular issue as well.
Horow/ You have remarks specifically to this particular
ordinance.
Gene Grebe/ First of all I want to congratulate all of you people
on the council. Nice to have you here and I am glad we have
some left over to have some stability on the council and I
would like to address you people on the fact- I live at 612
Park Road. The P/Z Commission talks about affordable
housing in Iowa city and yet they want to change the rules
I
I
!
I
'...
i,:
J
. .' ","
:.. " cf" h, t{, ~l,," '" ': ,"',.',- ','
." '-. -'. ~ /.
'1
i:
#3f page 8
I
I
,
I
~
!
,
~
!
and regulations to make whatever available plan and
development situation that are available in Iowa city so
costly that it is almost impossible to build what we would
refer to as affordable housing particularly with this new
amendment that you are discussing now. Inside stairwells
are very dangerous in particularly within a population such
as Iowa city has where we do have a lot of problems with
trying to take back the night and things like that.
Horow/ excuse me Mr. Grebe. But do you understand that we just
deleted that section.
Grebe/ I understand that but I am working up to where I am. I am
just going to put in my-I believe I have that right. I just
wanted to thank you for the fact that you had deleted that
part of that section. Also I want to discuss the part about
parking. Most of the city parking problems are not caused
by housing developments or apartment buildings that have
been built in the last five or six or ten years. Most of
those parking problems have been caused by houses that were
either substandard to start with and then m=were made into
apartments and with no provision for street- off street
parking. We do have a project in the inspection bureau
right now which is being held up because of this particular
amendment. We submitted it not knowing this amendment had
been put before the board. And when we submitted our plans
according to all of the regulations of Iowa city and all of
the P/Z rules and regulations with safety in mind and
parking in mind we still didn't have the opportunity to
build the project because of this new ordinance. I would
ask the city council to send this back and let the people
who are going to build affordable and decent housing in
Iowa City the opportunity to start on it. I met with you
people not too long ago about moving a house from North
Dubuque street and we were very interested in saving the
house because it was part of Iowa city. One of the oldest
houses in Iowa city. That house could have been torn down
last summer without any problem but we did want to save the
house and save the history of Iowa City by moving it and by
causing that-by doing that we have ran out of time until
this thing carne in. What I am aSking you people to do is
take a look at it and take a look at the long range part of
iowa city. Do we need affordable housing or do we need
affordable parking. Thank you.
Horow/ Okay. Any other discussion from the council.
Kubby/ Yes, I guess I do have one last point. Our city is run by
cars. Our budget is over- a large percentage of our budget
is dictated by the private vehicle. A lot of development
issues, affordable housing issues. Get on your bikes
everybody and it will decrease problems. Or get on the bus
; I
i,
, ,
1.1 ~
I,
"
II: 1\
II
I
!;i Ii
\'.'
Iii '\'
11'
I' 1\
"
I';
fl'
h
r
"
I
I r
Ii
!
Ii
I;
:i
'I
,,',
r !
1,_\
i.,
J
I
t',l',
1,1
i
"
"
.,~
,
i
I
I
......;,l..,.;'~l,'..~..,> ,\",. ',"<;i,;','i
"
,
'i,
, .,
\,;
- ~.~
~~..;r_..-
. . '" ,
", ',' tl' "t/' 'id ' i~", ',' ,:: ,":'
:, _. -
/'
/~
..... .t'
'-2:::: .~-::.:..-::.
............,
-~
#3f page 9
or walk. I just get frustrated that so many of our
decisions are dictated by something that decreases our
quality of life overall.
Horow/ Roll call-(yes).
:';;,";"":."i_"',.:.,:;;':,:,."
"
---....--.
.;, c.',',.,","
I
I
I
i
, i
I'i
I;"
"
Iii !
II II
I! - II:
., \
II" I
ill ';
'I;'
, <i.i'
",I,
','I";', '
'I"'"
, ,,'If
"L
>,),1.,
;)!:,\:/L:,", '
;
I,
I
,
)
I
I
i
.' .",
,""
,
,
i!
, '
,
I"
,
"
.
{', -,' . rl' ,.j-,':L{' '!~, , .. ,. ,',: ,~'"
:" _ ,_. .', ~ t,'''' ,
..
/
'1
}
"
'- .~-
",
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
, Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 5
I
I
~'f.3bot
9'1- 'i
0l~1t ~
1:0 ~a. (J/JI/
artAL)
....--.".c.....c".. ,,:
g. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by affirming the
single-family character of the RNC-12, Neighborhood Conservation
Residential, zone and restricting the number of principal buildings
permitted on a lot in the RNC-12 zone, (First consideration I
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the
Pianning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the zone. The Commission's recommendation
is consistent with the staff recommendation contained in a memoran-
dum dated October 27, 1993. No comments were received from the
public at the Council's December 7, 1993, public hearing on this item.
~/~~/ f/It;d;
Action:
IshV/~
~%
h. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by changing the
requirements for hard-surfaced driveways that are eccessed via an
unpaved alley. (Second consideration I
I.
Comment: On October 21,1993, the Planning and Zoning Commission,
by a vote of 5-0, recommended approval of amendments, as proposed
by staff, to Zoning Ordinance Sections 36-58, Off-Street Parking
Requirements, and 36-4, Definitions, changing the requirements for
hard-surfaced driveways thet are accessed via an unpaved alley_ The
Commission's recommendation is consistent with the staff recommen-
dation contained in a memorandum dated October 21, 1993. No
comments were received at the Council's November 23, 1993, public
heering on this item.k~ ~
A~'", t1:it:/ p~:: v~ $ t ~
Consider a resolution approving the final plat of Whispering Meadows
Subdivision, Part Two, e 103 lot, 26.14 acre residential subdivision
loceted on Whispering Preirie and Nevade evenues extended. ISUB93-
0020) (60.day limitation period waived indefinitely)
I
+1 '1'/10 I
Comment: At its October 7, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 4-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the final plat
of Whispering Meadows Subdivision, Part Two, subject to staff approval
of construction plans and legal documents prior to Council consider-
ation.' The Commission's recommendation is consistent with the staff
recommendation Included in the staff report dated October 7, 1993. It
is anticipeted that the construction plans and legal documents will have
been approved by the January 4, 1994, Council meeting.
I(~ / (ldlJ
I
Action:
;,k/J
,
~
,"'.11-
-
!
Ii II
,)
i: "
1\
'I Ii'
I,: 'I'
I'i
I: n
ij ,
,
:1 i,"
!;
..
il ,
"
i
'I
, I
I
" II
I,
i
:i
""IIt'~...
','1,
I
I
I
, "
....
-
'1
-- " --
I .:~ ' t'~/'" t':-/ ,C '(,-I ' ,: :: ."": :',
'" " T1 't ' ,
; / '_." \. _ 1 . -.' --. . ,
/
//\
", ~{. .
---:-:.-:: ::,:;-.
......~---...-.
~
#3h page 1
Horow/ (#3h)
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-6 SIDE 1
Baker/ Is the one you were talking about last night about
collapsing the readings.
Horow/ Yes.
Baker/ I would take six votes to do that. And since collapsing
readings sometimes facilitates process it helps government
and I think this is one of those times. And I just wondered
if there were six people on the council who are interested
in getting this out of the way.
Throg/ I would support it.
pigott/ I would support it as well.
Nov/ No objections.
Horow/ Moved by Baker, seconded by Nov to collapse the two
hearings, second and third. Any discussion.
Roll call- (yeses; KUbby-no)
Moved by Baker, seconded by Kubby that the final
consideration. Any discussion.
Roll call-
Hurray, it has been passed. That is it for P/Z.
,'"""'''';'''.:O'"H~:;,; ",' .....,. ~.:'OJ,...,:,."...< ,_, ,',., ..:,-,'.:".; ",~.",_..-,,-
\.i
-~-_. .-
. '..,~
,
,
I
I
!
I
,
I
I
i
I
I
I
!
,
I'
II
Ii
'i
II'
" ~
Ii
I
If
Ii l
Ii
,I
, il "
'i , l
il
" i
'l"-:
i
I
"
ii,
,
,
,I-
,
"
\:'
"
( , , - "- '-:-',' , " ' ", ' " "" ",
" ~ J' t I L :I l " -,
~". .,'~ t '_ ' H~.": '.-.,' V'. ,.': '" >. .'
, .........,
,
J
'1
.!.
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 6
ITEM NO.4- PUBLIC DISCUSSION.
ITEM NO.6-
ITEM NO.6-
~ U'.00-1I\05
,.~"...,~,." r' _'.....,~'. _n'_'-
, ~f! '_I/irLl~ .
PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER
34, ENTITLED .VEGETATION," CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IV, DIVISION I ENTITLED
.COMMERCIAl PESTICIDE APPLICATION," WHICH ARTICLE SHALL
PROVIDE FOR REGULATING COMMERCIAL APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES
AND ENFORCEMENT THEREOF.
Action:
rJ/N-;f ~hr~.v
~~
CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE A ENDING CHAPTER 34, ENTITLED .VEGET A-
TION: CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY
ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IV, DIVISION I ENTITLED "COMMERCIAL
PESTICIDE APPLICATION: WHICH ARTICLE SHALL PROVIDE FOR
REGULATING COMMERCIAL APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES AND ENFORCE-
MENT THEREOF. (FIRST CONSIDERATIONl
Action: (~/ Yl.1rI~;) 1~~1/11
,klflAJ .5 ~
ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES. ~ ~'
n~ <no
e. Previously Announced Vacancies. YllrJi;;.v
J! 9r~ 7
I~
/di,'uw/
&ft.W
(1) Broadband Telecommunlcetions Commission - Two vacancies for
three-year terms ending March 13, 1997. (Terms of Tim Finer
and Joyce Patton end.)
121 Assessor' 5 Examining Board - One vacancy for e representative of
lowe City for a slx-yeer term ending December 31, 1999. (Alan
Bohanan's term ends.)
(3) Senior Center Commission - One vacency for e three-year term I
ending December 31, 1996. (Re-advertlsement) ";-1;;,, i
1l\~1-V/ ~ V<"'Vr"/ ~'
These appointments will be made at the Januery 1 e, 1~94, meeting of
the City Council.
'.dill
I,
,
i
I:
I,
Ii II
il '11
[, II:
ii I
;
I:: .1:
F' ,
1,1,.1' !',
')
II" , ,i'
.i
'/'
II
'.'11
ii
,
I,'
,
d
I
I
I
,
i
j
1
,
,
i
f
I
,
,
1
1
!:
;;
i,
,
i
i
i;
l
/
I
I
.'...,.,......,.l,.
.
, "
( 'f f7f 't '-I" 'c ", ':~ "" ';,'" .."
' ' , '""1' . , , '
I,. , ._' _" '~':' .
,
I
#4 page 1
Horow/(#4) Public Discussion
John Watson/I represent the Neighborhood Open Space Committee and
with me tonight is Ann Bovberg and staff, on behalf all the
committee, congratulations to all the members.
Congratulations to you Madam Mayor. We want to thank the
former and current council members who voted for the plan.
It was approved unanimously last July 20 in this room. A
summary of the plan is the brown sheet that's been given to
you and the full plan is available. If you do not have a
copy of that, let me know or staff or one of the committee
members. I would like to take this opportunity to just read
that summary. We're on TV. I know you can read it, but I'm
going to go ahead. (Reads statement) As the summary
indicates, we believe that the plan provides a sound basis
for the next logical step which is the passing of an
ordinance that will implement the plan. Without the
ordinance the plan is just a good idea. Our process in
developing this ordinance this ordinance, just like the
process in developing the plan, will be a very open process.
We will seek the views of pUblic at large, of all the
constituencies, neighborhood groups, city commissions,
developers, Realtors, and last and not least, you members of
the council. We're not seeking that tonight. You don't have
to speak. You just have to listen. For your information, the
neighborhood open space committee has been expanded. Two
members, Casey Cook and myself no longer are members of the
respective commissions that we no longer represent, PZ and
Parks and Rec. But we both wish to stay with this process
through the ordinance stage. Two members, Jane Jacobsen of
PZ and Deb Liddell of Parks and rec are joining. Ann Bovberg
of PZ and Dee Vanderhoft from Parks and Rec. So we now have
a six person committee. We of course continue to receive
excellent staff support from Marcia Borman, assistant city
attorney who's helping to draft the ordinance, Melody
Rockwell associate planner, and Terry trueblood, the Parks
and Rec Director. Our purpose of being here tonight is
really just to remind the old folks that we haven't gone
away, and to let the new folks know that we'll be coming
back, probably in early SUmmer or late spring with an
ordinance that we think will be acceptable and viable and a
good thing for the city.
Horow/ Great.
Pigott/ I'd just like to say, I really watched from a distance
the process you went through to go through the plan and
noted how open it was and the fact that you took it
everywhere and sought the input makes me really confident
that you'll do the same sort of jOb when you're working on
the ordinance. I'd really like to congratulate you for that
,
, '
;
!,: !
"
I,
Iii II
l'
r II
"
, I"
I' "
" If
ri "
" !\
"
"
" ~. ,
,I t'
I !'
:1 :1
il Ii
!!
i
I I,:
I
, I
,
I
, I
:\
~". -
I:
-
~
-
"'
, . '.
," .. -,,'- t-" "1";' "", : , ,,',
, ,
,'.', tJ 't/": ',"1, <'_','; ',,",
; ._.'. ,,_. f
1
'(
#4 page 2
because I know it's got to be significant and look forward
to seeing that again.
Watson/ Thank you. I might just add, I think I believe two
neighborhood groups started as a result of all of our
neighborhood forum that held. people corning together and
finding they had some common issues and starting then a
neighborhood group after that meeting. We've enjoyed it.
Thank you.
Horow/ Thank you.
Harold ingen/ senior Center Commission. Madam mayor and members
of the city council. I read with interest the Press citizen
this morning that you gave unanimous for the mayor. It's a
sign of unity. I hope that you have unanimous votes when the
senior center comes before you on issues and we can carry
through on that. I'm here for the monthly update and to give
you information about what is happening over at the Senior
Center. We too have elected new officers of the association
and Tom Mueller is the new chair. I am the co-chair and
Lackender is the other member of the executive committee, so
I think we're in good hands. We have been reviewing the
visionary committee reports. I want to inform you that we
did have 54 prominent citizens including our city manager
was at our first meeting. We do have a number of items that
they brought forth. We have to sift through them. We did
meet the second Tuesday in November and brainstormed under
the direction of Jude West, a very excellent meeting. We did
meet again on the second tuesday in December, and at that
time we developed strategies for implementing various
aspects of the proposals that were made by the citizens of
Iowa city and Johnson County. Jack Newmann who is a member
of the Visionary Committee suggested that we now have three
members from the community, the Visionary committee, and
three members from the commission that will piece through
and review our mission statement and develop our three year
goal statement. We will bring that forth to you as soon as
that is available. We do have two or three or four different
issues we passed. I want to keep you informed of them.
because of equipment needs and equipment repair, We found it
nece~sary to initiate on a six month trial basis, fees for
equipment usage. For any city department, nonprofit agency,
or private group who uses it, we want them to contribute to
the purchase and maintenance of the equipment so we pass
that one statement. The Senior Center Activity Fee, while
this will keep in mind the charges for classes and equipment
so that the center can continue to provide the equipment
such as in the shop area where we have equipment that needs
repaired, these sorts of things. We're proposing that that
will be available. We are also initiating a waiver, fee
waiver statement for those persons who find it impossible to
i I
"
,
i ~
,:
I
II II
Ii "
'I
,,,
, ilj
!~
I'i
I:
,
f,
"
I,:
1:/
I
II
II
II "
"
Ii
"
.
.
" '. \, . ,',
r:-' -' - ~- -" ,- . '. . . .
--rf~/0J " ,L, 1 t' " , :,'
, ' . ~ , "
' . , " ,'7t, : ;", "',,
'/'. . ___ ._' _ I .. , I
/
'1
I
#4 page 3
pay those fees, but I think that might be a minor process
but we still want to keep that appropriately in there, The
other two items deals with letters of agreement with
affiliated senior groups. We've had some unwritten rules
about people using the facilities. But now we're going to
formalize it for senior groups that want to be in the center
at night and weekends and holidays and staff is not
available and we want them to have a designated leader, be
responsible for the building and safety of members who are
in their meeting, and encourage them to contribute to our
gift center, our gift fund, so that we can have, in lieu of
rent. The last one would be letter of agreement with non-
affiliated senior groups using the center for one time or
irregular use on weekends and evenings. this pOlicy's
directed at seniors who want to use the facility for a
party, or a memorial, a activity or something of that
nature. We did put these in on a temporary b~sis and we
wanted to inform you of that. If you have any questions, I'd
be glad to respond.
NoV/ Thank you.
Horow/ Thank you very much.
Ingen/ Get my name in here. Go pay my fine at the parking center.
Throg/ Mine's double for late at night.
rngen/ I thought maybe you could speak in my behalf. Thank you
very much.
Douglas Jones/ 816 Park Road. This would be easier if I had a
rubber stamp for signing the sign-in sheet. I'd like to talk
to you about water. In part what I'd like to do is say
something that I said to the council a year ago but with the
turn over in the council since then I thought it was worth
raising again, particularly because of the water issues that
have come up between then and now. It's been fairly obvious
for awhile that Iowa city is going to have to do something
about its water and treatment plant and the current plans
for a new plant may be indeed be necessary but there's some
other considerations that should be taken into account. The
current five year plan for the Johnson County Soil and
Conservation District contains in it an extremely
provocative proposal which I believe has become more and
more appropriate as more and more things happen in the Iowa
city area. That proposal is for a green belt corridor
between Morse, Iowa, which is northeast of town and Kent
Park which is directly west of town. They estimate that this
greenbelt corridor could be built for roughly 1/10 the cost
of the proposed water treatment plant and they estimate that
...... ."...,..... ".,,".
..
" ,
-
i
~
.,
r
"""". -
;,
f
)~
f
,
,
i
,.
I
~
!
~-~---"""~.... ..-'...... -------~
i, 't-/'" t''':', '1- :,-:"' ',',," ," ,,<",
. ~ . ,..' .; " '.' .. .: .
\l ,..;.,.... "'_1' l'.. .) ,,',', "j
I
I
'1
,~ .
#4 page 4
it would result in a decrease in the peak turbidity of the
Iowa River at the Iowa city Water Treatment Plant of roughly
40%. Now if you'll look at the problems facing the water
treatment plant, it turns out that peak turbidity is
correlated with the peaks with all the other nasties in the
river. Specifically, peak turbidity is correlated with peak
Atrazine. it's correlated with peak nitrates, and it's
highly likely in my mind that building this greenbelt along
the river could at a rather modest price give the current
water treatment plant a lease on life that would give us
perhaps a decade of leeway. Now that doesn't address the
question of new federal standards for pesticide removal. My
current feelings about those are that gee the people who put
the pesticides in the water ought to pay to get them out,
not the people who have to drink the water, but that's a
separate issue and i don't believe the city can address the
issue. It's a state issue. Now the second thing is that this
proposed greenbelt would involve restoration of
approximately natural stream banks and natural stream side
wetlands so that the primary treatment which the greenbelt
would give to improve the water quality in Iowa City. That
restoration has tremendous potential particularly along
Clear Creek to reduce the impact of flooding, specifically
increasing the upstream storage of the Clear Creek basin,
restoring the natural wetlands along that creek, we could
gain a tremendous amount of leeway on the flash flooding
that Clear Creek has delivered so effectively this summer
and what five years ago when it did a very good job floating
the Sinclair dinosaur down Highway 6. I also serve as the
treasurer for the Friends of the Iowa River scenic Trail and
it's very clear that the potential for a recreational
corridor in the greenbelt could attract funding. Between all
of these benefits I think that the Clear Creek/Rapid Creek
greenbelt proposal deserves serious consideration by the
city. I believe that the Soil and water Conservation
Districts report is worth reviewing because it addresses
Iowa City'S water problems in considerable detail. I would
like to see a consortium. It's going to take Coralville.
it's going to take the county Conservation Board. It's going
to take probably federal ICETEA funds for the part of the
trail or the Greenbelt that would parallel highway 6 for
significant distance. It would take I think REAP money if
the state can ever fund REAP, is quite appropriate for this.
Between all these constituents though I think we can make
something work. I think we can do it for a lot, we can do
something very good for Iowa City'S water quality at a
price that if nothing else would be easily afforded if
you're going to afford a new water treatment plant. Thank
you.
Horowl Thank you, Doug.
, ,
"
I,
I
II: I
,
!
I: !I:
I'
Ii
"
" I,;
I, .,
I' Ji
I::, : i;'
II I'
"
" I'
I.
il fi
II
i 1:/
I
"
I
,
d
I
I
I
I
I
!
~
i
I
!
~
~
,
R
I
I:
I:
!
I.
q
i
~
I
"''''- ~J,...,.. .
; ,
"
.
, ,
,,' , 'cl ,i-I' ,/,- ",'/~,
.,;1: I,' -r", , ...:J,: " , " ,
.. . ,-
. ,
"
,
-'-"
#4 page 5
Nov/ How about sending us a copy of that one.
Jones/ I don't have a copy but Mary Summerville is the chair of
the Soil and Water.
Horow/ I get their mailing. I can send away for that.
Jones/ She should be able to get it to you.
Kubby/ Does everyone want copies.
Pigott/ Yeah I'd like a copy of it.
Jones/ It's excellent reading.
Horow/ Thank you very much. Anyone else wish to address council.
It's the time for any subject not on the agenda.
RiChard Rhodes/ On a considerably more trivial note than the
previous speakers, after I first became aware of the new
sign advertising Pizza Hut downtown, I went and looked at it
and then I called Housing and Inspection Services and was
very politely told that if I didn't like it I should bring
it up with city council. That's why I'm here. r would think
that even the application of a minimal amount of common
sense would indicate that that was an advertising sign and
not an awning as Housing and Inspection Services claims. If
you go and look at it, it's fabric that's very tightly
stretched over some sort of internal strut work. there are
brilliant lights inside. And the bottom has florescent light
diffusers on it. So to my way of thinking, it's a box sign
advertising a business, not an awning. I think that's the
way it should have been regulated. Th4nk you very much.
Nov/ Let me tell you, you're not the first one who has brought
this to the council and we are going to put it on our
agenda.
Caroline Dieterle/ It's probably one of those things where no
matter what kind of a rule you make, there's going to be
somebody who will pervert it to the point where it will be
obnoxious. I'm here to make four brief comments. One is, the
water rates, especially if we have a new plant. I think that
especially if we have a new plant we need to do Some strong
looking at the water rates schedule. I'm using myself as an
example here. I live by myself most of the time. I have a
lot of visitors but basically it's one person living in my
house. But I've kept track of my bills and I have found that
I can get by on 300 cubic feet of water every 60 days. This
works out to 5 cubic feet of water every day. That isn't a
lot. I flush toilets, cook, take showers, do the things that
other people do. I do practice water conservation and I do
i;
i i
I
l,1 ~
I:
1
I: Ii
Iii
I.
Ii "
I: I)
\;.
,I iI'
"
'I 11
,
"
"
, j"
,
I (.:
I ' ~
I
,
11
I
'I
I
;, I
I
"
, "
,
d
;....-..-,",....,,-;:j.
h_;:"
.
. '. . ~
I' ':...'" ': - "1- -t' , ',' , : ':
, -, t I : t1 .7 ' ,~I ,..' " ," ,,' ,,' ,
. . ... .
" "
.
,
I
f
i
I
I
!
!
I
#4 page 6
use low flow things. I recycle regularly and find that I do
even fill half a 30 gallon garbage thing per month because I
recycle everything that's recyclable. For this I pay over
$46 a month to get rid of half a can of garbage and to get
five cubic feet of water per day. Now I'm telling you that
if this is the way it is and my rates are going to go up yet
again, I think that it can't be just me that thinks there's
something out of kilter here. I think that it should be like
with the gas and electric. You get a break if you're a
consumer who is careful about the consuming end and tries to
minimize. I will be strongly resentful if there isn't some
sort of scale built in so that the people who are the
biggest users, which are often again industries, pay so that
the average person is not sUbsidizing them by helping them
pay their water bill by helping build this huge water plant.
It's really offensive. Second thing is, I strongly support
Karen's reiteration that people should do more bicycling. I
think more people are. The problem is that we have got, I
think proportionately exceedingly rigorous and overly
punitive standards for bicycles in this town in terms of
where you can park them. It's getting to e a problem to find
a place where you can legally park your bicycle downtown.
I'm referring especially to Linn street and Dubuque Street.
there's and awfully lot of businesses on those two streets
and it goes all the way up to Hamburg Inn because there's
enough businesses there: Pearsons and the QuikTrip and all
kinds of things there. You can't get a place. If you go to
the Cottage to have some coffee or something, full. You
can't even conveniently park a bicycle outside the Civic
Center half the time. The other thing is, if you're coming
into town from east side and you want to get on to the west
side of town and you want to get down to let's say where the
University Library is or the Daily Iowa or the Engineering
school or any of those places, the Union, you find that
there's a huge block where's bicycles are not welcome. You
cannot ride your bicycle through the downtown plaza. There
isn't even a marked lane that people could use that they
would coast their bike or something. If you ride your bike
up the alley where cars are parked all the time and do cross
the pedestrians' area a bicycle will get ticketed and it's a
huge fine for doing that. So you need, I think we need to
have some kind of a way to get people across that sort of
desert of one ways and enclosed streets for bikes, if you
want people to ride them more. Another thing is I understand
now that parking tickets as of the first of january are
going to go from three to five dollars if they're not paid
within a certain number of days. I would like to suggest
that you have a convenient place downtown where people can
drop their parking tickets. I tried to put parking tickets
in the slot where you drop your water bill, like in the
Drugtown depositories. People who work from 8-5 it isn't
very handy to come to the civic Center to pay a parking
,
i
I
Ii II
i'
I a
I' ir
" 'j'
1,1 ji,
, I:
i i"
I (,
'.
,
I I ,
I "
"
j (
"
.
I
I
I
I,: I)
1
"
,
I
r
.
1
t
~
i
I
I
I
il
.......
, ,
I
"
~".
j
I
1
I
!
!
~
I
I
, ,
...... -
...,~- --""W\--
.
, ,
I :' 'r~/' ",,';7"1' ,:' c ' , f=t' ;- i .. , ",: .' ' '
- "71,' , lJ "',
; .',. ~,. <:l _~ : _.
/
/
,.:' ''1
.1..
;
.......---
#4 page 7
ticket. You have to find a stamp. You have to mess around if
you're sUpposed to send it to Cedar Rapids. I think it's
sort of offensive to me anyway. Bill paying center in Cedar
Rapids. Get out of here. Why do we have to have a bill
paying center for the city of Iowa City in Cedar Rapids.
Horow/ It's cheaper.
Dieterle/ That's awful. Surely there must be some business that
provides space so that we can have a place that we can have
a drop box for our stupid bills in this town. Just a safe
outside the Civic Center in the parking lot where you could
cruise through and drop it.
Horow/ We have one right out there.
Dieterle/ Where.
Horow/ ,In the lobby.
Dieterle/ Yeah. But you have to be able to be able to get into
the Civic Center. That means you have to find a place to
park. It's inside the building. Right. You still have to
find a legal place to park, get out of your car, and haul
yourself in.
Pigott/ May I interject for just a second. I know another city in
Iowa. Muscatine has small yellow boxes right under your
collection point so that if you get a ticket, you can pay
your ticket immediately.
Dieterle/ Un-huh.
Pigott/ I don't know whether.
Dieterle/ So does Ann Arbor and they have a draconian set of
fines. They do have a good way of paying them at least. You
can pay it on the spot and forget it. The other thing is
that i'm wondering if there is any possible way that, in
view of the landfill situation and so forth, that it would
be possible for people who are doing minor repair projects
and making patios and doing this or that, to reclaim brick
and scrap lumber from the landfill, if they were to pay for
it by the pound, just a set number of cents or whatever per
pound. Because it seems to me that that would get solid
waste off the city's hands, and make, if you don't need new
lumber and you don't need new brick, it would be a Cheap
thing for consumers. I know there's a lot of people who
would like to use that material and right now it's illegal
to take it out of the landfill. Thanks.
Horow/ Can we look into that.
n........,...." _.__~",..' ;',_...., .
.,
;: \
I,
'I:
II
,I I
" , i
..
Ii , Il:
"
"
:'
, " ~
I I, ..'
I , I;
d "
I' ~
II ,
I ;
II ,"
I I,
;
;1
I I
, I
II" I'
I
i
Ii
-, ....-- ~ -~,........-
~- .... - ---"-'
(" ., , '..,
I _' _, ....;, ,_ ,,',: "
, tl tf I ~ " '
:' ,'." :3'.'; ,,' :, ' '. ',' ,
:. _., "_' - _. .' I", " . I,
/
/
i, \.
, ,),
"
.....----
~~.....
#4 page 8
Atkins/ One of the options you may recall was to have a
construction material landfill spot. We've had requests in
the past to allow folks into the landfill and I've rejected
them routinely simply because it is dangerous . The
liability for us is high. The point is well taken that in
fact construction materials can be reused, the extra foot or
so.
KUbby/ And they're a big percentage of waste stream in this
community.
!
I
I
~
!
I
I
Horow/ Okay. Let's look into it. Thank you.
Kubby/ And it's not just liability really in terms of trucks.
That is there but also just health of digging around in the
landfill.
i
i; ~
I
I: II
l!i "
I' II
1
'! I,
i; I::
I; Ii
"
:, . Ii
, il "
, "
, I(
I:
"
I,!
"
,
11
I
I
,)
,
,
Atkins/ You simply don't want folks down there at your landfill.
It's too dangerous.
Horow/ Is there anyone else who would like to address council.
Caroline, you'll have to corne up to the podium.
Dieterle/I don't know how many of you have actually went out and
hung out of the landfill at all. Probably not a lot, but I
wouldn't either except I had a friend who was working out
there for a while. Anyhow they put this stuff in piles. It's
not like you have to go out where they dump the garbage and
get ahead of the bulldozer and sllatch it out from in front
of oncoming machinery or anything.
Kubby/ Even with that, it makes most sense to separate it out and
have it in a separate place.
Dieterle/ Exactly. And it seems to me that's not that hard and it
seem to me that if you'd sign something saying that you
would not hold the city liable if you cut your finger or
something, it wouldn't be that hard.
Horow/ Thank you. Is there anyone else.
Robert Carlson/1122 penridge. Since it's snowing again, I bring
in my pet peeve and that's people who clean their snow
blowers and blow the snow back on the street after the snow
plows gone by. Would it be possible to write an ordinance
that would block that. When you drive down some city
streets.
i,
I
Atkins/ There is one, Bob.
Carlson/ There is one.
, ~
.A.A1Ji111.
I
J
"",,,. -
I
I
"'-'~"-.-",.
-
"1-~- --""W\.... ~ .;'...... ---------------.......
..- -
i" t'-I' 'I"~I'" t"'" 'f,';'t', ,,-':,'A, ,"',
. '...,. , , ,,'
';.... _. ,""',-'.', ~!. , -.,," ,'. ,;
/
1
{.
-. . '-~
'-....~-..._-
#4 page 9
Atkins/ It's handled on a complaint basis unless you're caught
redhanded.
Gentry/ It will be even stronger after our new code.
Carlson/ I'll just turn in my neighbor now.
Kubby/ The first thing do to seems to be talk to our neighbors
that have snowblowers or rake leaves into the street or blow
their lawn clippings into the street that catch in the storm
sewer.
Horow/ Thank you. Is there anyone left.
Bob Elliot/ 1108 Dover. Your pen's out of ink. I understand why,
but I do find it rather ironic that it's illegal for us to
blow our snow into the street when it's not illegal for the
snowplow to fill in my driveway after laboriously dug it
out. I understand but it still pains me. I appreciate coming
down the opening meeting tonight and I want to say that I
was active in the last campaign. I was at several of the
forums and the candidates representing very diverse views
and very diverse peoples said more than once that none of us
are up here for with ill gains in mind. You're respectable
people trying to help our community. I think as perhaps
never before 'you represent a group of people that are a
truly a diverse Iowa city. I would just ask that you have a
dangerous challenge before you because you do represent a
diverse Iowa. You do have very diverse points of view. And
perhaps sometime later this year or next, when the
discussion gets a wee bit heated, you might remember the
little guy in the red sweater who said please have respect
for points of view. Radical to some might be innovative to
others. So please keep that respect that I heard in your
campaign. You will please make us all proud of you. Thanks
a lot.
Horow/ Anyone else who would like to address council.
;......... ,.'
, 1_
--
\
Ii
II'
i "Ii;'
i. \
I
i'
::'
[,
:j
II!
'/
!;1
I
I J
\,; ,ii'
Ii
I
I
I
i
1
i
;
\
i:
r.
~
I
I
I
I
I
,
I,
"
I
".-'.".!I' '
\'
"
-----...-~ ----.... ~ ..-'....... -- -- --- ~...- ......- - --
~f' ~
......- -
.. --. ,.... ......-;---
\
, .~
I~, -, 'rf' t~1 :h ,:It,', : ", "~,',, ,:
':' . _~ ,_, '- 1..... I
#5 page 1
Horow/(#5) Would anyone like to address council. Let's keep our
testimony to five minutes. Make your cogent points at the
beginning. After everyone has spoken, if you still have more
to say I will permit you to come forward.
Curt Moore/I live just north of Iowa city. I was here I believe a
year ago when I believe this whole issue seemed to come to a
head and I thought it was laid to rest but obviously it
hasn't been. I have a couple points that I'd like to touch.
This appears to single out one business, the lawn care
business. That doesn't approach anyone who sprays bugs or
anything else. It just happens to be one business. People
trying to do business. It appears to be a micro-minority
that's pushing this issue, trying to control the people of
Iowa city and their lawns, what they what to do with them. I
believe a year ago, there were six complaints for the entire
state. And this was an issue that Iowa City has taken on its
shoulders meanwhile you've got water and sewer that we just
heard about which I think would be more of a concern than
six complaints for the whole state. As was brought earlier
on issue when Miss KUbby, this has gone on too long. Time to
move on down the road. Take care of the business at hand.
Water and sewer I think would be appropriate. One thing I
heard on the news today, I'm not sure if it's true, maybe
the attorney could answer the question, you want to press
this on the two mile limit. They brought this up on a talk
show today. I'm not sure if you heard it. If that's true.
Gentry/ I heard that. I don't know where that came from.
Moore/ Whatever that issue is, it deeply concerns me. I live
outside. It's bad enough I want to do something now. I don't
want any more of it.
I
Ii,
II! I
!
II 'i
II I..
" -I-
" b
,
f'i 1\
f\ I.'
'"
"
,;;
1'1
\1 II
"
j
I 'I
:'
, I
,
Gentry/ We have no authority.
Moore/ Well you do in the respect of your fringe agreements and
everything else.
Gentry/ This has nothing to do with.
Moore/ But you have to vote on this issues and that's just one
more step. Now if it's wrong by the news, I'm sorry, but
that's what they said.
Gentry/ It's just a question that I think they raised.
Moore/ It's something that deeply concerns me when you hear that.
That's why I'm here. Which kind of brings me to the last
issue. The last meeting in December when you set this up and
your new people were coming in, the issue wasn't pesticides,
.u.
;i
!
"""'..y..
. . ....'
I' .' - ','-, 'I' 8 "'."".-
, .,,' : t /,' t I D ' i ' ; , ' ' " ' , ", : "
.j' . r." _ _. ~ .
"
#5 page 2
it was whether the state was going to put the thumb on you.
So you've already gone beyond the pesticide issue. Now
you're worried whether the states going to pass a law that
may affect you. Well, you're going to do the same thing to
everybody else. So once again, I'd urge you to vote no and
move on down the road to more pertinent business. Thank you.
Horow/ Thank you.
Gentry/ Susan can I clarify that please.
Horow/ Yes please.
Gentry/ What i heard on the radio was the question of whether we
would have the authority to regulate pesticides in
University Heights and Coralville and two miles outside the
city. The answer is clearly no. The only authority we have
over the two mile beyond our jurisdiction is under zoning
and sUbdivisions. So I don't know where that came from. I
think the question was raised a long time ago was obviously
the drift of pesticides into other areas. We can't regulate
beyond our jurisdiction.
Horow/ Thank you. Anyone else who would like to address council.
I; \
Ii
11
"
i1'
,
I' ' /I
';\ - i'
h
j' ~
II I:
"
:'}
I
i , j
I
"
':
,
Holly Berkowitz/ 612 Granada ct. Good evening madam mayor and
members of the council. Please support the ordinance.
Pesticides are classified as an economic poison. Toxic agent
either desirable or actually used in our daily life and at
the same time a hazard to health. We need to balance the
costs of benefits of using the pesticide with the costs of
the hidden risks of using pesticides to health and other
social ramifications. Not normally included in economic
equations or annual financial reports. Health care costs in
the United States reach beyond 12% of the GNP. Inflation
rates are much greater for health care costs than other
sectors of the economy. Many of these health care costs can
be traced to geriatric chronic diseases. Environmental
contamination can lead to pain, stress, expensive chronic
and undetected acute disease, disability, rehabilitation and
premature death. Symptoms of contamination can masquerade as
every day general medical conditions. the effects of this
environmental contamination on health care cost are often
hidden and left out of discussions of health care reform.
Preventative measures and research in environmental
toxicology is often spotty, minimal, and under funded. If we
are serious about reducing health care costs, then the
hidden costs of the effects of this contamination must be
included in these calculations for our economic planning.
Prevention is usually much more expensive than crisis
management. Information for research of health effects is
critical to accurately diagnose and effectively treat
i
"'..,......'fIIJ('~.
"
"
...... --.., -...
,,-- ~ ..-, .......
........ ........,.----- -- -Jf' ...
-...---
...~ ~,--r-""'~---~._----~
I
I . CI ' i:-" ,'t ,::t ' . '"" ,', '>
,'~ ~.'.L ,',1_, '.3',.~~J' ". """ '.r'",
/
, ~' "
j,
#5 page 3
I
I
I
I
,
i
!
r
~
Q
;:
t
i
"
l
~.
~
I,
r,
(,
"
,
r
I
I
conditions resulting from environmental toxins.
Environmental toxins can lead to symptoms that mimic other
diseases and could be misdiagnosed and ineffectively
treated. Misdiagnosis and ineffective treatment are costly
to the health care system and to the consumer. I encourage
you to work toward making Iowa city a model to illustrate
that prevention can be a powerful economic stimulus.
Throg/ Thanks Holly.
Horow/ Is there anyone else.
Evan Fales/ 1215 Oakcrest. I'd like to support what Holly just
said. The suggestion was made by the gentleman preceding her
that this issue is one that really concerns the private
interests of people who own property in the city and what
they want to do with their yards. I want to be a little
provocative here and ask you to indulge me in a question
which involves what is admittedly a fanciful, and may seem
to you rather peculiar, thought experiment. The fanciful
thought experiment is this. Suppose that it turned out that
spraying active cholera bacteria on your lawn did wonderful
things for your lawn. Ann suppose some company was to
manufacture such a solution and had some evidence that the
risk to public health was not very great. Would you be
willing to allow either private citizens or companies to
apply this to the lawns in your town. Now I want to suggest
that if I were in your shoes or if I simply a citizen of
this town, I would far prefer to allow the spraying of
Cholera bacteria to the spraying of these pesticides. And
the reasons are fairly simple. Cholera is, as you know, a
potentially fatal disease. However it is a disease which is
very well understood. The symptoms are easy to recognize.
They occur very shortly after exposure. They are dramatic.
Once the disease is diagnosed, it is easy to and cheap to
cure and after it is cured, there are no long term after
effects. I want to suggest to you in the case of chemicals
that are used here although there are a lot of claims made
to the effect that studies don't show them to be
particularly toxic, there's an awful lot that is not known.
There are effects that are likely to be long range effects.
They are likely to be quite disguised effects that are
difficult to trace. The effects may involve diseases like
cancer which are extremely expensive to treat and even lf
they are treated successfully often leave very great impact
permanently on the people who are involved. I have two
children in this town. I have neighbors who have sprayed
their lawn. Frankly I would much sooner see them spray
cholera on their lawn than what they're using now. Thank
you.
Horow/ Thank you. Does anyone else wish to address.
,
I
,
"
'"
-"'--
,I I
II ,
I
! ,
,
" ;1
I Ir
i'
1\
/,
~ I - t,
:' ,
:i i,
,il ,
" I'
" I,;
il l.~
I
" I
II J1
I
'-.,'
I" ~
- ~-
V". -
I
I
I
I
,
,
!
I
r
i
,
1
,
~.
~
.'
"
\
I
(
t
~
,
i
I
!
~
l
-
"1'~---~---~ ~-r__..-.-
i" . - ','- ..' 'I't" , ,:,' ,: :",
. '.. ~. ~.." ' ' '" .'"
,:.', t"I, U b :" _',', ,,:-",
. -. "
./
" '1
I
l'
--"~'--'----
#5 page 4
Mark Phillips/ 1165 Oaks Drive. I am not a representative of any
kind of a lawn care company. I am a private citizen. I was
before you the last time this ordinance, a similar ordinance
came up. I have not seen this ordinance. As I understand
this is virtually the same ordinance as the last time except
the provisions for the individual homeowner been dropped.
Basically true.
Gentry/ It consists of the signage and the registry.
Phillips/ Advanced signage.
Gentry/That's right.
Phillips/ 24 hour advanced signage.
KUbby/Prenotification on a 8 1/2 x 11 sign.
Phillips/ By 24 hours.
Kubby/ Before 24 hours.
Gentry/ All of the requirements for the contract signing and the
disclosure are out.
)
I
; ,
, I
, ,
: I
\" .
;: ~
Iii II
'I . ,t
II I',
I:!, \'
Ii:
, i:'-
:1
I
,
i
i:
"
I;
Phillips/ Okay. I do applaud the fact that the individual
homeowner provisions have been dropped. It doesn't seem to
make a lot of sense that you would do that other than for
political reasons of potentially getting the thing passed.
My objections of individual homeowners. But I really viewed
the prior ordinance as an invasion of my property rights in
not being able to do what I wanted to do on my individual
property. Again although it doesn't seem to make a lot of
sense, I do applaud that.
Gentry/ Excuse me. This only applies to commercial applicators.
Phillips/ No. I agree. I'm sorry, I'm sorry if I confused it.
You've got to get back to the real purpose of the ordinance.
As I understand the original purpose of the ordinance was to
prevent the accidental spraying of someone's yard. Not to
prevent the usage of chemicals or pesticides within the city
limits. You're not here to argue the merits of whether
pesticides cause cancer. You're really here to just try and
find an ordinance that would protect those individuals that
do not want their property sprayed, prevent that from
accidently happening. The arguments of other people that
said it causes cancer is to my jUdgement, neither here nor
there. You're not qualified to assess the actual damages of
chemicals other than what you've heard or read. This
ordinance seems to be to me an ordinant burden to the
commercial applicator. It's extremely expensive for them.
,
,I
I';
"
i
"
I
I
,I
I,
d.
).,~ ."...-,...., , .- '. ".''''''' '.., .
,
""'If"". -
-
"lI'l
-
~....--~ ;'......-
--. ..-- -
~T~ -
...
... --.
i " t-/ 't'-I":~~t~""~~I-" :",' ,', :',
" "" '&.,;,:' , '
- , '.'..v . ,. . '" " "
l'," _. . '~, . l' 1',1/ (~_, . ., " "
"1
#5 page 5
The prepost the yards. The color of the sign and the size of
the sign isn't a big deal and it's not a big deal to comply
with posting the yard when you spray it to prevent people
from accidently walking across it after it's been sprayed.
But to advance post a yard is and expensive process that I
use a commercial applicator and I'm going to pay that bill
for that person to come out and post my yard. I just think
it's inordinant. If you really want to prevent the
accidental spraying of a yard, why not come up with some
kind of a fine arrangement to where. Part of the problem now
is that the state doesn't have a very good mechanism to
punish lawn care companies that commit what is an obvious
problem or sin. The state is working on that. The Chamber of
Commerce and the Greater Iowa city Area passed a legislative
policy that they encourage the state of Iowa to enact rules
that would basically fine or punish a company that did an
accidental spraying. It seems to me that's a whole lot
better alternative than to create inordinant costs to this
company to come out and post when there's very few
occurrences of accidental spraying. If a local company were
subjected to a $500 fine by the city of iowa city for
accidentally spraying I think that they would think twice
about checking whether they do that. I think they're fairly
good about checking people now. Somehow or other on my
invoices from my lawn care company originally it says, do
not spray chemicals. My intention on that was I didn't want
to pay the cost to spray. I just wanted organic fertilizer.
It took me awhile to figure out why they were calling me
whenever they wanted to come out. Like this last fall weeds
h~~ become a problem in my yard and they called me to ask me
permission to put pesticide on my yard. When I figured out
what was going on, I told them they didn't need to do that.
I think that they companies are fairly responsible. If you
punish the ones that are irresponsible by a fine arrangement
would be a whole lot more constructive than trying to pass
an ordinance that requires excessive cost on everybody. The
state as I understand that's probably going to be what they
wind up acting upon anyway. If they're going to act on
whatever you do anyway, if you would set an example as to
fine arrangement that would encourage the state to act
quicker to not make themselves look bad. It just seems like
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94:6 SIDE 2
It's a neighbor against neighbor issue to some extent. It's
just an attempt for one group of people to try to use
government to enforce their values on the general public.
Let's get to the real cause, let's get to the real purpose
of this ordinance. Not get into the jUdgmental values as to
whether pesticides are good or bad.
,-......
...1.-
I '
,--
-
\\
"'...".. 'I/f("'. -
, ,
\",.
-
"'" -----.. -~...... -- ~ -'.. -
. ..
--. ...-- -
- -'ff ..
~
-
.. -
(. \- "'~ '. .', '.'
~' 't J.:, t, ,'h':: h ,',',' ":', ,,:': '
.. -~ .- -. \'-' .' "
/'
'1
I
'"
,
--'-'-~-,
#5 page 6
Horow! Mr. Phillips, I want to clarify something because you kind
of caught me here. This is not 24 hours prenotification. It
is to be applied prior to the application but it is to
remain on the land sprayed for at least 24 hours afterward.
Kubby! So it is prenotification but there's no time.
Horow! That's right you can put it on just as they arrive at the
property and post it. Then spray but it must be left on for
24 hours.
Phillips! Okay. So there really isn't any difference between that
and the current state requirements of just, other than size
of sign.
Kubby! Practically no. Technically yes.
Nov! It would be larger, brighter. Instead of a small green sign,
it would be a large yellow sign. And that sort of thing.
Also this law will require a commercial applicator to
register with the city and someone who really wants to be
notified before their neighbors lawns are sprayed because
they have asthma or any other reason can have list of those
applicators and then can notify those applicators. So we
will have the list available.
Phillips! Okay. I don't disagree with the intent of it, of what
you say. I do disagree with the idea of us having a separate
ordinance that somebody's going to have to pick up the cost
of administering. But the content is not significantly
awful.
Horow!Your suggestions on the options for the $500 fine is we
cannot do that as a city. We do not have that authority.
Making an ordinance for a mistake in application, I did
research on that a year ago and it's not possible.
Nov! We did want to do it though.
Gentry! And we did look into that.
Phillips! okay.
Jack Tank! I'm not representing anyone here tonight. We'll say
that I'm an Aggie. I live in Iowa city. Not very many of us
Aggies live in Iowa city. I'm fairly familiar with some of
the herbicides and things we talked about. I guess my
concerns lie with that it's, some of the ideas that Mark
Phillips talked about, some of the unevenness and some of
those things, but I've been around the extension service for
some time and I talked about the last time I was here. I
find that extension service in the ag field has done a very
.... .......-.
I
!,
, I
;'!
I'i'
"
Ii
Iii
Ii!
,i
"
"
I
I
,
!
I
I:
;
i
,'j-
,.
,
Ii
"I'
!I
I
I
r
,1';
'I',!
i
:1
,.\
:;;
I i
,.
;1
'..., fb""ll :', fur <~L "" :,,'-,, " "
, ,
#5 page 7
good job of working with things when there's some
confrontational type of arrangements. They have done some
fantastic things and worked with Soil Conservation Service,
a number of items. And I find that the ordinance is just one
part of a total program. I'm a little disappointed that a
larger scope isn't looked at on some of this stuff. Anybody
that has an axe to grind can talk seven ways to Sunday about
how we feel and not change anybody's mind here on. People
pretty well have their minds made up. I have a problem, you
know we look at the total picture, and if the Extension
Service was doing this and sitting in your shoes, what they
would do is say where is the best lawn contest. Where is the
home or awareness night so that when they're applying their
own insecticides or herbicides. Where is the bus tour. I've
gone on I don't know how many bus tours talking about
conservation projects and we take a bus at 7:00 and go
around and see Frank and George and Sam and Sally's farms
and we see what they're doing. It's a great cooperative
deal. It's a very positive deal. Everybody gets together to
share ideas. I learned more in there than in any classroom
situation. I think it's fantastic. Maybe we should have a
best bulb planting contest sponsored by the council. We're
looking for alternative arts I see it. We don't just want
monocultured grass that needs to have certain things done to
it or it gets crabgrass. That's what some people's agenda is
and maybe that's fine to do some of these alternative
things. The Extension Service has dealt with this thing over
and over. You can either take your nose and try to lead you
alone and you can try to use a proactive approach and that's
all I'm aSking of you. I just have a real problem with the
big stick approach to all these sort of things. I'm not a
commercial licensed person. I'm a private licensed person. I
have it with my job. I've had a private license. I don't pay
anybody to ever put things on my lawn. I will never do
anything on my own house. I own a house here in town. I
just have a real problem with, I can just go down to K Mart
or someplace else and buy things, pretty bad, have somebody
age seventeen sell me anythinq I want, don't even know what
the heck the label says. I've got the label in my hand in
many cases and they haven't the foggiest idea, and so a
person like Mark Phillips, he doesn't want to put on
herbicides. He doesn't know anything about them, not being
Mark, he doesn't know anything about them. But he's going to
put them on himself because he doesn't want to pay that
extra price associated with that. So we actually force him
by dollars to put it on himself and he doesn't have any idea
what he's doing. Sorry mark. Okay. He's a good accountant
but he doesn't know much about putting on herbicides. And
that's my point. I guess I have a little problem with the
other ordinance ideas in that if I'm a concrete, I don't
know anything about concrete and maybe I should make a
special ordinance for Nate Smith to pour concrete but I can
, ,
, ,
I ~
I,
1
I,: II
II,
I'
I: II
i: I"
ii'
I:
f: 1\
I:
{-
II "
, I I
"
;
I
II
I'
I~
i
."'''''''..
.,.,.,.... 'ff'''.
I
I
,
;
I
,
\
I
I
j
r
,
"
"
f
,
I'
I
,
i
i
; i
,......~~-~.
--.......~7J......
~ ~ ~ .........-------- "'"l~ .... ---...--......- .
...~ -,---"--....------,,...-
I
. ..' ','
I:. " f"'f;'" tl ',h,~",'Ft' ,',' ',' ,',.,,'\,'
i. . IL. ._ .~ _ _, I.
/
/
, "
,
'"
~,
#5 page B
do anything I want because I don't know anything about it. I
kind of find the same scenario when I look at this thing. I
have some of the they don't know anything about it, they're
not penalized or anything done to it, but someone who does
and is trained has a different set of rules. That's my
problem. I think the biggest focus is I'm not going to
change people's ideas. I just want a more proactive. This
ordinance is fine if that's what's going to go on. I'm not
going to change people's opinions. I have a real problem
with it being the only spoke in the wheel. Let's have a
total. And I'm saying that I like the prairie grasses I have
on my own yard. I think the Soil Conservation Services has a
bulletin now, you can buy all these mixes, they do a very
good job. It's available. You can sponsor it. They'll even
pay you to do it. You can use the money to do something
else. A great program the Soil Conservation Service has it.
Talks about that. But we have a proactive approach. More
than one angle, five or six spokes, the Extension way, the
Aggie way. Hey it's worked for 100 and some odd years. The
most prolific program in the US. And everybody's using it so
why don't we try it here. That's all I have.
Horow/ Thank you very much.
Caroline Dieterle/ One thing, I agree a proactive approach is
great.
Horow! Caroline Excuse me. Could you please sign in.
Dieterle! I did once. Do you want me to keep doing it.
Horow! This is for a different.
Dieterle! Oh. Okay. I'll tell you the big stick that really
frosts me though and the state telling us that we can't pass
an ordinance regulating something that affects us everyday
in the summer. that's big stick to me. And the fact that
they can do that, and get away with it tells me that
somebody's paying hefty bucks. And what it is is there's a
lobbying group that has a lot of money and it's the chemical
industry. I have here an article that was just published
this last month in utne reader which is sort of a Reader's
Digest of the more esoteric publications in the country,
publications that really have something to say about what's
going on in research and so forth. They're saying here,
first I ought to give you some background. There's basically
four kinds of pesticides that can be used and they're not
all used in lawn chemicals. The common ones are either based
on heavy metals which have mercury commonly or copper in
them or they ar organochlorines which do not in general
smell as much but are very persistent in fatty tissue so
they don't break down. The break down products are not well
i'
""'-"'~'. .....".0 -d'" .
-
'"'"' -..,
~ i
Ii
,
t.' I
;' ~
II! ,1\,
:1 !It
I:
'iii'
',' (;'
I I:
1,'1' If!
i
II i
I
II
:1
~..""...~,. .....
.-....
-
~
-
...
"",,:,:,,~---, , .'
. "-~,~:,;':':":"":',. j '. ,',
f -',
'-~- Id " , , -
:. , ~,I f.{.h' ,: :'7V ';, ,"', ,'",
:" ,~r~. " . ~ , _' ~ ~1'" ' " ,.
'1
#5 page 9
understood in many cases either. Many people think that the
breakdown products are as toxic as the original. They are
organophosphate which are more detectable than the original
by somebody because they are basically what nerve gases are.
These are the things that give people headaches and diarrhea
and asthmatic problems and things like that. They're
instantly available but they degrade more quickly. Then
there are the hormonal type like 2,4-0 which maLes the plant
grow in a wrong way and kills it off that way foe example.
If you're a biologist and you're acquainted with respiration
and metabolism and how some of these things works at all,
you become quite concerned because it's not really that easy
to say, it's just plants it's killing. All right, so we're
focusing on organochlorines because they're commonly used
and they do not smell as much but they are the ones that are
persistent. Organochlorines concentrate in fatty tissues. In
less than two decades of their use, these synthetic
pesticides were so thoroughly distributed throughout the
animate and inanimate world that they're virtually
everywhere. This was rachel Carson that wrote that and now
including in the human body more than 177 organochlorines
have been found in the tissues of the general population of
the United states and Canada. Few of the women who
participate in the Breast Cancer Awareness Month are aware
that an international chemical giant, Imperial Chemical
Industries, Inc., ICI, pays the events bills and cashes in
on its message. It has been the sole financial sponsor of
BCAM, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, since the events
inception. Altogether the company has spent several million
dollars on the project according to a spokesperson for the
company. In return ICI has been allowed approve or veto
every poster, pamphlet, and advertisement that the BCAM
uses. Not surprisingly, carcinogens are never mentioned in
breast cancer prevention literature. A study of 229 New York
city women showed that those that developed breast cancer
had higher levels of DOT and DOE, a by-product of DOT, and
slightly higher levels of other organochlorines in their
blood than women that did not develop it. They have found
that high rates of breast cancer have been found among women
professional golfers whom have played daily since their
youth and have spent their entire lives on pesticide treated
lawns. So the purpose of this ordinance is not to cure all
of this. The purpose of this ordinance is to make a start
and it's to educate the public as well as to regulate
application, to make people aware that the gentleman ahead
of me who mentioned cholera as an example was not far off.
Cholera looks good because we think that's curable at least
we know if you treat the patient right and know it's cholera
the person's going to recover without any later problems.
You can't say that about pesticides. People who talk glibly
about how they have property right, you know, don't really
understand either that if the labels are read correctly and
; i
, ,
"
I
I' I
II, ,
I
1
I., ri
I' ','
:' ii'
r'
I I;
r
"
!
"
Iii I'
"
" I':
II 1'1
,
I
I
I
\I
it
,~
,I
""'If'''.
- ---..-.--~ -~ - ~....
r -- :'-t;'/' ~t'-I""':',":"I f;-f ,:, 'j>' ,,' ::..:"".:;~:':
<:. '. ~_ ...~:'. ,.t___ ~~. ."., ~.~ 'A"~'::'; ~
1
#5 page 10
i
I
I
I
I
I
!
the application is done correctly, there aren't that many
days in an Iowa city summer or spring or fall that you can
legally do it. Because the wind direction and wind speed is
either too high or the temperature's too high or they're
both too high. And so it gets put on when it shouldn't be
put on and the spray kind people say oh we aren't spraying
anymore we're putting out granules. Well the stuff that's in
the granules vaporize in the heat and then the wind carries.
If you've got things in your yard that are very susceptible,
there's a principle called bioassay which is that certain
species are more susceptible. One you might all be familiar
with is lowering a canary into a coal mine. If the canary
faints, you know that the gasses down there are too
poisonous for people to go down even if people can't
initially smell. It's the same way with grapes, tomatoes,
asparagus, some kind of lilies. If you have those in your
yard, you know that somebody nearby you has treated
pesticides outdoors because yours will show it. Peonies are
another one that it is really sad to see plantings yourself
because if you haven't put them on yourself but the
neighbors have. The neighbor could say, oh well. It's just
my neighbors tomatoes, so what. It's not his kids, but I'm
saying it could be his kids. So I'm saying pass this
ordinance.
Horow/ Thank you, caroline.
Angie Madsen/ Chemlawn Lawn Care, owner. I haven't read the
ordinance, but if it requires that the signs be posted prior
to the application, right prior to the application, most
companies already do that. We don't have a problem with
that, and I'm speaking for myself and I think I'm speaking
for the other companies. The larger signs which you are
proposing, is that right. We don't have a problem with that.
It's an increased cost for us but we'll do it. No problem
with that. The registry with the city is a good thing. We'll
go register with the city as will all the other reputable
lawn care companies, I'm sure. At the beginning of this last
season, a pamphlet or a lot of names were sent to us. I
don't know if they're on the city registry, but quite a few
names with addresses were sent to us with a request. I don't
know if from the special interest group you belong to or
not, but requesting that we prenotify you if we're going to
spray in your neighborhood. As it was we didn't have to
prenotify anybody because we didn't spray in those
neighborhoods. We don't do hundreds and hundreds and
thousands of people in iowa city, so we kept that and we
made copies. All the lawn specialists, everybody had a copy
of that. It's kept up on our bulletin board, and we were
more than happy to make that effort to do that on our part,
to notify the people who wanted to be notified. So we are
willing to work the, I don't know if you really represent a
-
-
~ :
l:
ill
i'
11,1
Ii
1'1
I'
"
f
~I
Ii
ii,
I!'
I'
I'
.,;
j,j
r,
r!
l(i
Ii
"
,
j
.I
,I;
:i
"
,
~
r
~
,
t
,
f
I'
f
.",n.....,'-"..
. ".....~
, ,
I,'. 'L":'I' ,,'t'~/" ,-" "1, ': " ,;", ,,'
'! '''~'. '. _, ...,',' 'I: -' '. 1 .
"
#5 page 11
good cross section of Iowa city as far as one special
interest group wants this ordinance. If you want it and it
seems like acceptable measures to us, than we will certainly
follow these guidelines. Any more regulations than this, you
know we have a state that regulates us and we try to follow
those the best we can. Not all lawn care companies, or lawn
care professional, technicians, are big corporations, big
business. There are quite a few of us that are like myself,
average people. We don't do a whole lot of people, but we
make a liVing do it. We'll never be big business. We'll
never be big time. We'll never hit the million mark. We
don't want to, don't plan on it. We know our customers first
hand. We can probably tell you their children's names. We
can tell you where they work. We make a living with all the
customers we have, so whether we have 200, 400, or 600
customers, we know a lot about our customers. So the
likelihood of a lawn being misapplied by our company, as a
lot of other companies also, it's really unlikely. That's
why i think any other regulations other than what's in the
ordinance would be excessive. But most of us you're going to
fin, we're going to agree to this. Obviously especially if
it's passed as an ordinance, and even if the state preempts
this, we're still going to get those larger signs to appease
the council and maybe some of you and the special interest
group and maybe other homeowners who are concerned, but I
don't believe there is a lot of concern with the homeowners.
But we will do this as long as you're not asking excessively
for excessive regulations. We'll certainly work with you.
We're not here to keep butting heads or anything. that's not
us at all. We want to work with you. We want to make a
living in this town as I'm sure all other lawn care
companies, and most of all I guess we don't want to see lawn
care banned from this town, trying to set it as a precedent.
I think it's wrong. It is not good and I don't know if you
will work towards this in the future 0 not but I think this
ordinance is a good start on good communication between the
lawn care companies and council here, the special interest
groups and the homeowners. Thank you.
Baker/ Ms. Madsen, can I ask you a quick question. A voice out
of the- That prenotification list that you have talked
about. Do you remember approximately how many names were on
it or how many people were asked.
Madsen/ Many 60-I think it was three or four pages long and
maybe 60 or 40 or something like that. We all kept copies. in
fact I know another lawn care company who i very rarely talk to
called and said they had lost their copy, they had just go it in
the mail. This must have been last February, March or April and
they said please immediately fax us a copy. Which I did. So,
see, we are all willing to work together to please you.
"
: !
, ,
I
i:
I,
II'
/1
!:
~
1\
\'
k
II
I;
:;
:1
i'
/'1
'j,i, '
"
i
1,1
Iii
II
I
I
"
,
"
i;
."1
1'1
"~I
I
I
..,
I
I
:1
"
,
I
}
\<!
""If'''. -
I
I
I
l
I
i
!
i
f
"
n
~
I.
~
~
I
I
.
i
I
I
"""'~'"'''''.
-
---- ---. ---qJIIJ-"--
"'1---...- -~-- '& ..-'.......
. ~'''~., ,"
i " "-f '':''" -, ,'-t,' , " ,.. " ' '
. -~. ~... '--/- -... ~~I ',' '. ',. I' , .
;,', .. _,/iJ , I" , '
. .. '. I r:.', ,..:.. . ',' ,~., . ',,-.':' .', 'j'
/
,,/ "
,i.
"-'--",
#5 page 12
Baker/ Thank you.
Gentry/ Susan, can I clarify something. The question raised
about whether we were working to ban pesticide application.
The answer is no, we cannot do that. We cannot work to ban
pesticide applications. We don't have that authority. So
that is not where the city if going.
Tim Madsen/ Mayor and the rest of the council. I am with
Sunshine Lawn care and I guess I basically just have a
couple of questions. Before that I would like to make a
statement because I guess I have been coming to these
meetings ever since last year. I guess I have been pretty
much to all of them and I have heard a few of the people
speak here on behalf of how chemicals and how they are
awfully scared of them and it is going to cauee cancer. I
am just going to speak from a point. This goes way back.
This goes clear back to my great grandfather. All of my
family on my dad's side have been farmers. My dad worked at
a fertilizer company. They all worked with chemicals and
not my great grandfather, my grandfather, my dad, any of my
uncles or cousins who are all farmers or any of their
children or anybody has eve had cancer. So everything that
they have thrown out as far as or that is going to or
whatever. A lot of the things that the other woman spoke
about as far as the companies using mercury or copper or
these kind of scare tactic type things that we are putting
that stuff on. We have never used mercury or copper and we
never will. And so where they come up with the facts that
we are all doing that you know don't know. But as far as
just my couple of questions is, if an ordinance passes, who
is going to regulate it.
Pigott/ HIS.
Madsen/ Housing and Inspection are going to. Are they going to
have just a person or-It is already- You don't have to
assign anybody else to do it. It is already, they have
enough man power to do it.
Horow/ This is something that we will have to work on after this
particular-
Madsen/ So it will be an increased cost to do that.
Kubby/ We were told by our Department of HIS Director that this
in and of itself would not cause a need for anew employee.
This, in combination with some other things that we are
doing could cause the need. But this in and of itself would
not cause the need for a new employee.
Nov/ They are usually done on a complaint basis. The enforcement
'--
i
,
I ; i
i . :
i , I
, ,
Ii \
i I,
I ,
I " II
I:
i :, :1,
I Iii l
I
I'
I (
i
I ' I:
i f:
I I Ii
Ii
I I
i
I 1"
I Ij
I
,
,/
II
"
'I
,
"'1
i!
\..:
,
,
I
I
!
'.~..*,..""..".,...,..._; "
, ' .
I' : '~:"'/" 'i":'l : '"-,,.., : ',::i ,,', , ,:', 0', :":
),' ", t..:.. .' .'_ ',-', '.' . .J' ." , ", . I"
/
,
" I
{..
....- ----...
#5 page 13
of something like this is usually done on a complaint basis.
Madsen/ Correct. I was just curious. I was just curious on how
it was going to be regulated if you got a complaint. That
was the basic thing because you are making a rule and
somehow it has got to be enforced. Basically the only other
thing that I really had to say is as far as an ordinance
like this I don't know if it really represents the whole of
Iowa city or all the people that make up Iowa city. I think
it is a small group so I just like to make sure that if an
ordinance passes that it is for the good of all the people
of Iowa city and not just one small special interest group.
Thank you.
Russ Wise/ I am with Quality Care here in our community. I would
like to thank you for this time to express some ideas and
concerns. First of all I would just like to go over the
ordinance itself. It is larger, brighter signs, a central
registry, prenotification by placing signs before treatment.
Okay, thank you. This ordinance then states that all
professional applicators will be included. Correct. That
will include interior pesticide control applicators if they
are doing foundation spraying or any spraying on the outside
of the building.
Kubby/ Any outside applications.
Gentry/ outside, yes.
Wise/ So that will bring them into posting also.
Gentry / yes.,
Wise/ And does it include farms of less than 10 acres.
I,
I "
1,
Iii I
,
,
I I
,
Ii ii,
I II
" I,
" 'I'
I r: 11
'! -
I ;;:
I ';
:1 I'
I :.~
I I' 11
i II
I ,
I
I 1
., II.
II.' "
I,
'I',
Gentry/ No.
Wise/ No agricultural farms.
Gentry/ Farms are out.
Wise/ I guess that kind of brings me to homeowners and I guess I
have sensed that you really want an ordinance of some sort
and I guess my question is why leave them out. The trained
professionals get more laws. The homeowners who use the
majority of lawn care products get no restrictions
whatsoever. What do homeowners do with the extra products
after they have used their allotment. Well, usually three
things. They dispose of them and how they dispose of them,
they dump them. Number two, they put on a little extra
because they don't want to have to store that little bit
more. Or number three they go ahead and put it in the
,
iI
-
"
I
I
~
i
,
I
I
, "
' "
':.< 't'~/' 't'"':"", :,' ';/ :tJ, .', ", ' '",'
. . '. ,V . .. .
.. r ,_ . .~ r ..
/
\,
{.
#5 page 14
storage container, maybe or maybe not one that was marked
the proper way. This ordinance deals only with a minority
who are trained, certified, and licensed. If we must have a
new law that will cost everyone more money lets make it a
good law where everyone uses the same product, plays by the
same rules, and professionals aren't singled out because
they are easy targets. We will work with whatever you decide
and lets just make sure it is something that is really
wanted and needed. Thank you.
Baker/ Mr. Wise, can I ask you a question. Because you have
anticipated one of the questions that i was going to ask
later which is who actually applies these pesticides in Iowa
city. You have made the statement and I have heard it
before that professional pesticide operators only apply a
minority of the pesticides. How did you determine that
factor and do you have a portion or percentage which you
could give us.
Wise/ It comes mainly from the people who produce different
products and their figures range anywhere from 70/30 to
85/15 that homeowners themselves buy the majority and put it
on themselves.
Baker/ So it is 2 to 1 homeowners over pesticide.
Wise/ Basically, correct.
Baker/ okay. Thank you.
Joe Rob~son/ Good evening. I am also with Quality Care. We
would like to make this brief. As to the percentages of
homeowners to professional applicators it actually comes
from sales. So it is not actually who applies but who buys.
85% to 70% of all produced herbicides and pesticides are
purchased at the private K-Mart or true value. So that is
how that-
Baker/ That is a national figure and you just assume that it
will apply to Iowa city.
Gentry/ Would that include farm.
.
I~
Rob~son/ I would have to look that up to really get that.
Audience/ (Can't hear)
,
Roba~son/ He was just trying to clarify the figures or whatever.
Kubby/ So that figure came from lawn care industry.
Audience/ (Can't hear)
.......,,,......... " :.. .:...~......~. ....c'..,..
\.i
,
--.........-
I
I
i
,
r
I
I
,
i I, ~'
I'
I r II
II
I
:1 'I
I' II:
I ;I
! 'I :;
I,
i: .i
I !\
'!
'q j"(
, II r~
,
r
I ..
"
I I ,
i
I II "
i
,
, I j
I
" j
I
I
; II
I
. . . "
. , - .
t. . . "
I', -,' _ -" 1-' . , " . " \
'. ',~ /, ,~'I 'I, ,'1 ", ' ' ',.' , , , ','
.t' .,-.. .,_ ','"'lo'. _. - I
#5 page 15
Kubby/ But you are saying that that figure includes only
chemicals that go on lawns, not on farms. That is the big
point you are making.
ROb~son/ Basically, I would just like to say that personally I
do appreciate the goals that I think we are trying to obtain
here. I guess I don't know if I am being cast in the light
sometimes depending on who I am talking to as to wearing the
black hat or whatever. But, you know my life up to this
point, essentially it has been really based upon an
enjoyment of the outdoors. Not that I necessarily need to
prove my credentials but you know I do sometimes feel that
when I come forth to work with this industry primarily
through the love of the outdoors that then it is oh, you are
with Quality Care, you help them put down chemicals. That
is really a shame. But I guess there have been a lot of
good points brought up as to the carcinogens or to this or
that or the rates or how dangerous this really becomes. I
don't know if any of us are really qualified to manipulate
that right now and that is probably for other agencies and
those better trained really to determine that status. As it
is I guess we have determine that there are specific rates
and rules that if we sick to those we necessarily taking
care of our own personal safety and the community as a
whole. As far as what we are doing tonight or what we are
looking for. The signs and things I really don't have a
problem with that bigger signs. When I am out I do have
some questions with enforcement. You know, we have complaint
basis and I guess it is going to be like a building
inspector stopping by and you know if it is the housing
stuff. But sometimes I worry about I guess just how far
that can really go and how that can sometimes be used as a
weapon against those who are applying as to those who would
rather not see you be applying. And I think you could
really have a potential bogging someone down with complaint
after complaint after complaint. I guess we have talked a
lot about increased cost. Cost of business and if we do
have to go buy it. Actually I thought we were going to have
a 24 hour prenotification posting but I guess I know that is
kind of a nice thing to hear. But if we are going to
increase this cost of the personal applicators to put these
down another side track is more people are just going to
turn to applying it themselves, you know. And thus not be
trained and that. But basically I guess as these
regulations stand now it is an-I have really no complaints
with this ordinance that we are going to pass. I would
rather not see it be a stepping stone to something. You know
larger, much more, conducive to I guess bogging down the
business. And I also don't want to set precedence for the
university heights, North Liberty, Cedar Rapids where we
have different size signs, different times, and different
sets of regulations for everyone. And I would like to see
.'
, I
l;
i,
i.
I
)1:
"
:i
I,
if
\
II
'i
I"
I'
I,'
i,
11.
I
;\
;1
II
I
I
i,
I:
,
,
I;
J
I)
II
I:
:i
, '. ','
f : '."f-f' i-f' '''1-/'' ."/~: .., , ,:, .' , ,.., ,,'
.; , "(" "'-'U,'" '.' , ,','
:' _~ , _' . '- '__ . , " I
/
/
",
I
#5 page 16
if we want to increase I guess some of the rules that we are
playing with. I would like to see you focus your attentions
on the state and use you power to go across the state so at
least we are all uniform. But, thank you very much.
KUbby/ Someone in Coralville doesn't have a similar ordinance in
terms of the size of the sign. Is there in the state law
that would prevent a company from using the larger sign as
long as it also met the requirements of the state sign.
Gentry/ I don't think so but again it is going to depend on how
the state reads the language of the size of at least four
inches by five inches of letters and the sign of at least-
The language of at least such a size. If it is larger I
can't see the state objecting to it being larger.
ROb~son/ I guess the point that I was trying to make was really
with this, as far as I have understood, I haven't had a
chance to read it and it keeps to be changing all day. I
have been hearing it is this way then that way. And I
picked up a few points sitting here tonight but I see it as
perhaps. You know I don't see anything wrong with this
particular instance a sign being larger. I don't think
anybody would be opposed to bigger signs you know unless we
got too big. But I guess what I am trying to say is if
Coralville comes out and they start passing and we start
running into conflicts this way. you know, and then we are
just crossing basically the street and you have to really
start focusing on all of this different things.
Horow/ I think at that point it would probably come to JCCOG and
look for some sort of uniformity. I have no question about
that. Thank you very much.
Kubby/ 8 1/2 by 11 sign. I am interested to even see a shake of
the head if people in the lawn care. That is not 8 1/2 by
11 though. It will be bigger than that. And I am wondering
about the stakes because the stakes used for the smaller
size that are kind of a paper clip style of technology or
whatever I don't think will be enough for an 8 1/2 by 11.
or even for that size. Sometimes I see them flop over.
;',
, ,
: :
;
t.; \
!,
J
I: ,
,
II: !
,I ,
i ~ I
:1 If
"
,i
..
'\: , Ii
"
, t:
i:1 I'
" ; ~
II ,
"
"
i
1
I
I
II
~
, "I
I
Dean Moore/ (can't hear). It takes a little bit heavier stake to
hold that up. A little bit more of an expense. And as far
as the signage you have to send them into the state. They
will look at it and send it back and tell you if it passes
their qualifications. Even if it is city state we would
still have to send it in no matter what the new sign-
Kubby/ My question was, the stakes are not talked about in the
ordinance and to make any ordinance with a larger sign
functional the industry needs different stakes.
\- ..
--
-
~
~
"
!,i
I
p
l~
,
~
t
I
I
~"."..,..., '"
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
.
l'
~
. '..-.. ..,.~ "
'. . . . , , .
i.: ' ,",it':',!'.' J 't ~-I' ";-1" /;t" ': ',""':
' . .' .,. \ " ',' ,)
." .' ,-,.," .,'...,
.-
/
",
,
,',
#5 page 17
Moore/ It will cost a little bit more. A little more paper. A
little more plastic.
Kubby/ I guess what I am asking is would you be doing that.
Moore/ Well, we would have to hold them up.
Horow/ Right.
Douglas Jones/ I guess I represent one of those micro minority
groups as Curt Moore put it. I am the Chair of the Iowa
City Area group of the Sierra Club and the member of the
state executive committee of the Sierra Club and having
identified myself clearly as being associated with micro
minority group I also would like to say that Sierra Club had
nothing to do with the drafting of this ordinance. And we
have only been involved after the fact testifying last year
and this year at p.h.s.
Kubby/ Doug, are you making a statement for the Sierra Club.
Jones/ I am speaking on behalf of both the state and the Iowa
City area group. We have passed, at both levels, strong
support for the rights of local communities to make
legislation in this area. We pay a lobbyist in Des Moines
who is charged, among other things, with fighting the
preemption regulation. The lobbyist is badly outgunned on
this issue and we, in the local group, we have voted and
support the original pesticide ordinance as proposed a year
ago which is much stronger. The ordinance that currently
stands here essentially had all of its fangs pulled and all
that remains is a slightly larger sign which I strongly
support. The other thing that happened between the debate
last year and the debate this year is the tremendous change
in the tome of argument. Last year the arguments from the
lawn care industry opposing the pesticide ordinance were in
some cases remarkable. For example an argument was made
that without the lawn care industry lawns would die, lawns
are essential to health, they make oxygen, they recycle
carbon dioxide and all of those arguments would be equally
well met by a lawn full of dandelions and pig weed which
very few people really want. But more to the point. I am
extremely impressed by the argument made by Evan Fells with
his thought experiment concerning cholera. There is an
alternative thought experiment. I own a half an acre on
Park Road and it is tempting to think about using a well
known proven lawn care chemical on that half an acre which
has wonderful value as a fertilizer, fresh pig manure. I
don't know that anything would ban that right now and yet if
I took to doing that I bet that if I did it regularly we
could get a law passed prohibiting the use of fresh manure
within the city limits. I would be in an area of
I
I, I
': ii
:! I'
" 11:
t'
I' "
I g
,
1'"
Ii' 1;'
I,
II "
J' ,
!I I'
"
II ,i
"1
I
!
!
I
i'
I
,
"
,
( ,:',:'- - '~~".' . ':'.
': fl, ,F/ ," /',:,,: 1'1,,'- < " ,,',
:'. .1_... _, . ~"'~. I
I
/
, 1
.1.
i
,
i
I
I
i
I
I
t
i
I
!
.
!
,
~
,
I
t
~
I,
"
!
;
!
fr
!
~
#5 page 18
switzerland where they apply it with fire hoses to farm
fields instead of trying to plow it into the dirt as they
apply it. They blast it in the sky and it rains down into
an area within down wind of he fire hose. And yet, the
health risks of fresh pig manure while real, are
significantly less than the health risks of the chemicals we
are talking about almost not regulating. And the benefits
of the pig manure are clearly as well proven as the benefits
of any of the fertilizers regularly applied to lawns. In
fact they are the same chemicals imbedded in the matrix of
wonderfully smelly organic. The other interesting point
which I hear is this mention that Angie Madsen made of
banning lawn care. No where is there any proposal to ban
lawn care. As I said i own a half acre on Park Road. I
would rather not mow it. I am tempted to hire someone to
mow it. And in fact my understanding of the law care
industry is that a vast portion of their income comes from
mowing services and that fertilizer services account for
another large portion of their income and that pesticides
are somewhere down near the bottom because most lawns don't
look half bad if you simply fertilize them and mow them.
And the weeds, if you keep the weeds about the same height
as grass they don't really detract a whole lot. because of
that I think it is very clear that you should pass this
ordinance. And finally, I agree and highly with Caroline,
that simply out of spite for the state government passing
this ordinance and getting something on the books before the
state sits down and tries to preempt you. It might indeed be
a wise thing to do.
Kubby/ Doug, what is the local and state membership of Sierra
Club.
Jones/ oh gosh, I don't know the figures for the state chapter.
Our local mailing list comes to a bit over 400 pieces of
mail. Some of which are to family members. The local area
chapter is Johnson County, Iowa County, Cedar County and
Washington County. But the vast majority of that is within
Iowa City and I don't remember the zip code count the last
time I did a mailing to work out the exact numbers.
Horow/ We get these Sierra Club mailings. Have you ever taken-I
don't ever remember a survey however in terms of this
particular issue.
Jones/ We have not involved ourselves very much in surveying
because it is expensive.
Horow/ Okay, so this position is based on a national position.
Jones/ No. The position is based on a vote of those present at a
meeting last early in the fall and a vote of the state
, i
, I
;
t.,
" ~
II;
1\
,
:t i'
II il.
!! II,
r
"
\
- ,
I "
j:'
1':
:1';
I;
I)
,
:} ,
I
J
I
"
I' ,I
"
I
-..
..,....... .""".". -
I
"
t
!
"
.,
,;
I
,
I
.,
"
,
~-'-"."''''''''''''
-
'1'---..,-, ~- ~ ..~'...... --- -. ----'~
", ,F/ .,', h ,] '~g:,:, ';", ","~' ; ,:: ",
: -~.- ,
;
.(.
. '., ~
#5 page 19
executive committee. So these are positions taken by
representative bodies.
Kubby/ So they represent that membership through a vote.
Jones/ yes.
Horow/ Those that came to the meeting.
Jones/ Representative government works that way.
Horow/ Views of those who take time to go to the meetings.
Jones/ Speaking of representative government a statement was made
that council is probably not qualified to make technical
evaluations of hazards. That argument applies to all
representative bodies and I think it is an argument which in
a democracy we have to take with a very strong grain of
salt. We are a democracy. We rely on a educated populace
and we rely on the general education of our representatives
in government and if w can't rely on that to make technical
judgements we have nobody we can rely on other than the
experts who speak before you and we trust our elected
representatives to in fact seek such expertise when
necessary. I didn't think remarks that say we are not
experts therefore we can make no decisions are at all the
right kind of remark in a democracy. We cannot leave things
to experts. We must take the issues into our own hands as
voters, as representatives, and make the best jUdgements we
can in light of the evidence we have available. Thank you.
Horow/ Anyone else.
Craig Hanna/ I am going to try to do this without stumbling all
over my words. I am not much of a pUblic speaker. I sat
here tonight all night long and I have heard you talk about
not wanting stairs on the outside of buildings. Okay.
Wanting people to ride bikes and conserve and now you are
telling us rather than use a sign that is about this big you
want us to put something up this size. Somewhere in there
there is contradiction. That is not a pretty thing to look
at in your yard. And the signs that we are using now we
have never-no one has ever mentioned to me and I have been
doing this for a long time, that they got a problem with it.
I can drive up and down the street and say that is Quality
care's lawn, Chern Lawn's lawn, that is Nitro Green's lawn,
that is my lawn off that sign. I guess I don't see wheat
you are trying to gain by going to a bigger sign. Okay.
Then you want that sign to remain for 24 hours. Who is
going to keep that sign there for 24 hours. Kids running up
and down the street. That sign is just another thing for
them to get their hands on. Okay, that kid takes that sign
'-
-..-.-.. ...-
,
i!
, ,
,
Ii
I
'I:
II
Ii
,I
"
!
1\
,I
I'
,I,
Ii
I'
i;
'i\ :
i
t,
"
f'
,
Ii
,Il
I
I
, I'
,I
, "
I ' i
I' .'
ii
"
,
"
,
,
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
~
f
,
- "-'--'"'''~-'",-",
.,.,~
. ..
' ,
""~' , rI \ ,fr, JH": ,1],",' ", '," ," '
. -. .-.
/
\1
";
#5 page 20
and moves it. That sign has been there since I applicated.
Okay. We roll around till-I was there at 8:00. 4 o'clock
in the afternoon along comes a child and picks that sign up
and sticks it in your yard. Now you are mad. Now we got a
complaint. It didn't need to be there because that sign
didn't need to stay there for the extra 24 hours. You are
saying you want that sign there 48 hours.
Horow/ 24.
Hanna/ How does this ordinance differs from what we are already
doing other than the bigger sign.
Gentry/ The registration, that is all.
Kubby/ does nothing different except those two things.
Hanna/ I guess I can't see the benefit of a bigger sign. And the
question I have is how long do we got to respond. In other
words, obviously in business you want to cut your costs.
The more you can cut your costs the better you are going to
be. We have got signs now of this size that we have got in
inventory. Now, are you going to pass an ordinance that is
going t make all of those signs go to the landfill because
we can't use them.
Kubby/ You can IIse them in areas other than Iowa City.
Hanna'/ I think they are labeled for Iowa city with a Iowa city
phone number. Where are we going to use them. I can't use
them in Cedar Rapids.
Kubby/ You can use them in Coralville or where ever else around
here.
Hann~/ But what if I don't have that many accounts in
Coralville. I have got space requirements that limit me to
what I can inventory. If I am inventorying something that I
can't use readily it is more of a hindrance than a help.
Nov/ You are allowed to pick up that sign and use it again.
Hanna./ If I can retrieve that sign, yes. Then you run into he
labor costs. There again, we are a business. Iowa City has
got to run as a business or it don't make it and we are the
same way. I cannot hire a man to go back around and pick up
them signs. We are not a large enough company to do that.
make sure that I have gone through everything. I guess that
is really all. I am hearing a to of talk and i don't see
where anything is going to benefit. you know. I guess
signing with Iowa City most lawn care companies do that on a
volunteer basis without an ordinance. you now this is just
-
---..... .--~
JJ:jtl.'
i":
, I
i'
, i
,
I,'
!I'
I,
II! ,
Ii !
I ,
II,
i!
:i !,
I
I" 'i
i:
jil
fl ,
i,t;.
i'
:1 (,
',!
I ,
i!
i
,
i' I
I r
, ,
,
"
II
,\;
"
r,. "(I .t~l t-I'. , ,:,"~' , '" :',',
l . .., 1_~ :_ ___. 1" ,
"1
I..'
#5 page 21
so much more paper and it is more time.
Kubby! Already do what, I am sorry.
Hanna~! Most of the lawn care professionals in this area would
voluntarily come in and register without going through all
of this to get us to do it. A simple request would work.
Has it been tried.
,
i
!
1
I
I,
,
~
U
i
~
~
~
I'
I
Kubby! On the other hand you can counteract and say we have been
talking about this and there is only one company that I am
aware of that has changed any of heir operating procedures
in terms of sings on a volunteer basis. That it is a two
way street. That you could come to us and say we want to
have a registry.
HannaM! In terms of signs that, there again, I ordered now for my
yearly supply. The more volume you buy the better discounts
you get. I can't automatically dump what I bought to make a
change. But for the volunteer register I am sure we would.
I have no doubt in my mind that without all of this we would
come in and sin up.
Horow! Thank you very much. Anyone else who wishes to address
council.
Chuck Murray! I run Barefoot grass lawn Service out of the town
of Ehly which is just north of here a little ways between
here and Cedar rapids and I just currently just started
doing business down here the past couple of years and I just
wanted to reemphasize some of the things that the gentleman
just before me had said. I don't have too much of a problem
with the new ordinance that you are talking about with
bigger signs and everything and a registry but I also feel
that the state is doing an adequate job regulating this and
making sure that we are doing everything as proper as we
can. So I feel that
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-7 SIDE 1
Dean Moore! We moved to this size sign and I think it is pretty
good. I think everybody can see it 'and it is no out of
line. It is not huge. It is not ugly but it almost glows
in the dark. It seems to do the trick. And it is not
absurd. We want to work with you and we are all in this
community together and we want to work for the health and
vitality of the community and we are all environmentalists.
We want to live here. We want a better environment. We
want to be good to our environment. That is what we do for
a living. And we are just a service business. We are not
chemical companies. We are just a service business just
trying to do the best thing we can for our trees and our
"""",-,-,
~--'"'' u. ~
,
I
I
1
,
II
I
I,
, -
r- ','
).,
I I;i (1
! 'I! I,:
j II
I ,I
I 1
I
I
1 :1
Ii
-
"
,
; ,
"
J ' r ' "
., ", . \ r' :", "
",.--, ,',L-/,' f~/,' H, j:(, ."'" ',,' ,
: >, r:. ~ . '. _ " . _.' _'::' \' " I
" "
.j,'
,
,
I
I
I
;
1
r
i
r
!
I
,
,
.
r
,:
,
l
i
I;
;~
#5 page 22
plants. I would like to clarify some of those things that
seem to be a said about us. It just seems let us say 50% of
the lawn pesticides are used by homeowners which national
average is 85% according to the sales of pesticides. So
what are we trying to do. What is the reason for an
ordinance is it is not going to include homeowners and all
use of pesticide so the homeowners have to abide by the same
rules that you are requiring us to. So if you want to one up
on the state, why not just do exactly what you are doing, go
with a sign like this which is bigger and it is a color that
you wanted, and include the homeowners on the same thing and
they get the same signs. Iowa city makes them, charging us
or whoever on the registration fee. Homeowners just have to
post, too. If we are worried about children and worried
about safety. If we are going to write an ordinance or write
a law, let's accomplish something if we believe we need to.
Thanks a lot.
Ii Ii
II
, i"
,
;;
I, I,
"
"
, ~ '
'" Ii
"
I r/
I !:
"
I I,i
I
(
, ,
I
I
I
.
II
"
,
~
"
,
?
h
"
f
i
P
"
~.
Ii
i!
t:
I
Jack Tank/Just a point of interest. I am a private- I have a
private pesticide license. Would I need to go to the state.
Kubby/ No. You are not applying pesticides in a business
atmosphere. If you were having monetary gain, the
definition of applicator is in the ordinance and you would
then have to comply with the ordinance.
Tank/ There is a list. All you have to do is-
Gentry/ You have to be engaged in the business of applying it.
Tank/ Engaged in the business of applying it. Okay. Thank you.
Horow/ Is there anyone else. Caroline, again. You have something
extra that you didn't say. Okay.
Caroline Dieterle/I do think that it is a good idea to have
private people regulated. I don't think you can do it in the
same ordinance that was all hashed out last year I think. I
think you should pass a companion ordinance that does
something about private regulation. And I think that
probably a lot of people would support the chemical-the
applicators position on that that it should be that way
because some of the people that I know that do the worst
applicating and applying are indeed private people. The
thing is is that if you know that some of this stuff is
listed, if you read the label, is being toxic in parts per
billion. It is like things like mega-death. You know you
really don't understand that. It is hard to grab the
numbers. it is like trying to imagine you know that we are
putting out tons and tons of stuff all of the time that we
have no place to store the waste from that has a half life
of 10,000 years. I mean that takes us 8,000 years before
i,
II
h.'..".....'":,,LH
~"""""'If'".--- '-"l -- ....-...';.'_".
~ ~"'-......-------..,~..... -....
,..--.........- --;-Y---""- .......-----.--------...
\
., .. "
",....,h h',~" t:J ',!~~ .':' "",'''' ','
:', -- ,.- . -; _.. "
/
>'1
, ,
"!'
-,~
#5 page 23
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Christ. You know, if they would have put it out in 8,000
years before Christ, it would just now be extinguishing
itself. Most people don't have-you know, for nuclear waste.
It is the same kind of thing trying to gage parts per
billion toxicity for pesticides. There is an add on T.V.
now where it says-whatever it is. I am not going to give
them free advertizing. Use less. Why can they use less.
Because it is even more toxic. So, you know, when you go
through somewhere like Pleasant Valley or K-Mart or anywhere
where they sell this stuff the music ought to be Chopin's
Funeral March. it should be whatever it is that they are
playing. And, you know, how about an audience that says the
city is requiring anyone who sells this stuff to have a
prominently posted sign in the aisle notifying the buyers of
the fact that the city has passed an ordinance regulating
commercial applicators because of the possible risk to
public health that these chemicals pose. So that people who
go there to buy this are aware of the ordinance and they are
aware of why you passed it because of the possible risk to
public so that they will not buy this stuff and put it on
with a flit gun, you know, without knowing or reading the
label.
Horow/ Thank you. I think we have heard enough. I would like to
close the public disucsison and move to consider the
ordinance.
Karr/ Madam Mayor, could we accept the correspondence.
Horow/ Kubby, Pigott seconded. Any discussion. All those in
favor (ayes). Okay.
'i
I
. .,~ '._~""""_"".-,..," -C;..,'. . .-
,
i--:
~._-" .--.
UB. ",
!
,
!,
i
,
..
I
I
I
1
!
I, f.
I,
III II
it
" II,
Ii
"
Ii' I"
"
I" (
,:1 Ii
"
, ii'
;, I'
II (i"
I ,
'I l
"
:I
I 'C
, I.
:1
ii
,I,
i
""'If".
...... -
~
- ~
.
.. .' '. ",'
f _ '- -' 11 .,',', . .
;".U,',U' OtH "~" '... ',' "", ',:': ':"
,
-'
#6 page 1
Horowf(#6) Moved by Kubby, seconded by Nov. Any further
discussion.
Kubbyf I do have a few things that I would like to say and I will
try to be brief. There has been mentioning of special
interest groups and the majority of people who spoke the
last p.h. and this ph. against the ordinance are also a
special interest group. The majority being people in the
industry and so I think it works both ways. That there are
people with a special interest on this issue who are here at
the public meeting. But I know that I have gotten lots of
calls from people who aren't a member of any organization
who had had trouble seeing the signs. That that is one of
the impetuses for this ordinance is that lots of kind of
general public people, whatever that really means. A lot of
citizens of Iowa city, both who are lawn care companies and
members of organizations and unaffiliated people have views
about this issue. So throwing out the term special interest
group kind of stops the dialogue instead of helping create
more dialogue about it. And I would prefer a more
comprehensive plan. i was very supportive of the more
comprehensive plan that we looked at that we didn't have a
fourth vote for. That comprehensive plan included
homeowners having to comply with the same rules and it also
did a lot more to protect water ways. You couldn't use lawn
chemicals within 30 feet of a water way or an old well. And
I would like to have four votes to do that kind of
comprehensive ordinance and we don't have it. And I think
that urban areas need to begin, at least in some small way,
to take some responsibility for the use of these chemicals.
It is so easy to blame the rural sector for non point
pollution sources and I think that urban communities need to
start taking some responsibility in doing some more
proactive education as well as an ordinance like this if
this should pass. And I think what this ordinance can do is
that it balances different kinds of rights. People talk
about property rights to do whatever they want on their
property but people have to realize that what you put in
terms of lawn chemicals or even natural fertilizers on your
lawn does not stay-it does not understand the jurisdiction
of that deed or that title to that property. And so it is a
balancing of people's rights to do what they want on their
property but then to notify their neighbors in some way or
to allow their neighbors to the registry to get
prenotification in a more safe manner so that some of their
rights to control their exposure to these chemicals can
become more powerful. For example, with air emissions you
don't really have the ability on a daily basis to do
anything about air emissions. You can join organizations,
you can get involved in the political process. But today,
right now, I can't change that and no individual behavior on
my part will do anything about that particular exposure.
,
,
,
i
"
" Ii
I'
I,;
II; 1\
i\
( ','
jr
I
, l:f
/i, 1\
I'
I, ;',
;:
i)
"
:
"
I
"
I
I
,I
"
\ Ii
I I:
:i
,.
, 'i
,
, ,
\.;
..
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
l
!
I
i
!
\
I
I
t
Ii
"-.,~"..,... '~'..J.._
.
, "
, .
>, ~'Cl','ll hi' ,S ' . , " " ' .,',,":
/
'1
,
#6 page 2
with some pre notification or even though in a certain sense
I believe that in this ordinance prenotification is a bogus
concept, at least with a registry you are more guaranteed
that you know all the lawn care companies that work in Iowa
City who use lawn chemicals and can get that
prenotification. You can control what you do that day. You
can choose to not be around. You can choose to watch your
children or pets more closely. You can choose to close the
windows, etc. And I am going to support the ordinance.
Horow/ Thank you.
Nov/ I want to say something about this business about homeowners
posting signs. There is nothing in the ordinance that
prevents homeowners from posting signs. We will be happy to
have them do it. I think part of the education process here
will encourage them to do it. If you tell your kids that
bright yellow sign means you must not walk on that lawn
because there are lawn chemicals, he is going to say okay
daddy, why don't we put up a sign when we have lawn
chemicals on our lawn. It will work that way eventually.
We can count on the kids to make sure that their parents
obey the-
i,
~ I
"
;
,j ~
Ii Ii
I " 'i
i :1 Ir
i i:
. ::
I i I~
, r; I:
I
! ';1
:i "
"
:1 I;
I
" I
"
'I
I,
Lehman/ Well, I wasn't here when this was originally drawn up so
I don't know a lot of the dialogue that has gone into it. I
see that under the purposes in order to protect the health,
safety and welfare of the citizens of Iowa City, Iowa. I
don't see where this ordinance does a thing to do that. All
I see it doing is controlling the people who know best what
they are doing. I do my own. I am sure if it says good for
10,000 feet and I have 8-10 is better. I am sure most of
the people in Iowa City who do their own thing. If we
really wanted to do it we would put signs in our yard. I
agree with you Naomi. If the signs were available, I would
do it. But it seems to me that this ordinance really
doesn't serve any purpose and I can't support it.
Horow/ Is there any further discussion.
Pigott/ I just wanted to reiterate some of the pros and cons of
what I heard tonight regarding the lawn sign ordinance.
Overall from what I heard in the discussion there wasn't a
lot of-there was a willingness to participate by the lawn
care companies and I appreciate hearing that. Some of the
objections that I heard was the larger sign doesn't do a
lot. That signs can easily be taken away. That this is an
increased cost to business. It is an inordinate burden to
applicators. It pits neighbor against neighbor. It applies
to only a minority of applicators. And that it invades some
of our property rights. Some of the positive statements I
have heard in favor of this were that it educated the
! .
il
,. ..."....
""'r. -- -
I
"
i
.;,)
""-~~ ~""'~~-,......-
-.--. ...- - - -- ~ -T~ ...
~ ---. ...-
r~, "'n, ',)-, ," ..t J"/~,' :,,', , '~
-.--. --, ._, -' ,...., . .
/
/
"
.i.
#6 page 3
people. That of the dangers of lawn care chemicals. Of the
uses of lawn care chemicals. It provides for larger and
clearer notification for those of us who have bad eyes,
perhaps. And, important enough, it does provide a registry.
And so what this ordinance does is two things. It enlarges
the sign, requires registration. And while I agree with
Ernie that this ordinance is weak. It doesn't do a lot. It
does not prohibit the application of chemicals. It does not
require to say the list of chemicals that are applied on
your lawns are on a sign or that you know what chemicals and
I think that that sort of an interesting point. It does not
require the homeowner or the applicator to put these things
on. Because of all of these things it is a weak ordinance
and i agree it is a small almost insignificant step but yet
it is important. And I think we have to do more to protect
people from the risks that these chemicals may provide or
pose to pUblic health. Also, if you look at it on a larger
macro issue, you have to look at how lawn care chemicals
affect us. How they affect decisions we make-not only on
our lawns but on our rivers and the pOllution in our rivers.
How does it affect the way we treat our water and how does
it affect the way we debate our water treatment plant. All
of these issues are connected in a larger way. We have to
start addressing this somewhere. And while this is a small
step I think it is important to get it rolling. And Mr.
Tank here said that he wishes that this is part of a
comprehensive more large way to talk about these things and
I can say that I really endorse that. That this is only
insignificant but we have to really address this in a larger
way and why don't we do some pro active measures as a
council in addition to this ordinance. I would support
doing that as well as passing this ordinance.
Throg/ I would like to state what my position is and why. My
sense is that we want to protect the pUblic from the risk of
any direct harm associated with chemical use. And to
protect other humans down stream from unnecessary uses of
pesticides and other related chemicals. And the cost of
removing from river water which we are going to have to bear
as we build a new water plant. To reduce the rate at which
chemicals percolate into the ground water below our city and
pose a risk t future generations of our children and
grandchildren. And to play our part in reducing inputs of
highly toxic or persistent chemicals that biomagnify their
way through the food chain. The chemicals that we are only
gently regulating, proposing to very gently regulate here,
have to be produced somewhere and that production conveys a
risk. Over 2,500 people were killed in one night when a
chemical leak occurred at a pesticide manufacturing plant in
Ohpa, India in 1984. These chemicals also have to be
transported. Here I note that our water supply plan worries
about the risk of a chemical spill on the I-80 bridge over
I
,
.
I
I ~
I; ,
I
I: I
;! i
ii 11:
:; I,
" Ii
"
-
"
."
f;
,I t
"
"
" .
'I ,
II "
,
,
I 'I 'I
I' I
I
:1
,
'I
"
--------'....
--.
""""'- -.r ".
....... -- "" -----..,.-
,
1
!
I
I
!
I
!
I
!
I
~
~
,
f.
~.... ~ .,_'-..:....__ - _ ~...-......_ _ .....-r~...
~..........
,.. -..,.......,....'....-.
\
I ..', '- '. . ' 'I" >",
:';" tl' U t:f ,~~t " ", ,~.:,'
/
---0_" __,_
#6 page 4
the Iowa River. It is transporting of chemicals somewhat
similar like the ones that we are proposing to regulate. I
also understand that the application to chemicals to lawns
tends to increase the need to water lawns. So I really like
the idea - I really like Jack Tank's agi ideas of
encouraging alternative lawns in a variety of ways. So we
have an opportunity to make the reduction of chemical use,
the reduction of the demands of water, and the reduction in
the cost of supplying drinking water. Rather than create
lawns that carry the risk of harm both to human health and
rivering ecosystems, why not encourage alternate lawns. One
ending point here-however i am also aware that many people,
including experts, disagree about how great a risk
pesticides pose to humans and to ecosystems. We have seen
some of the disagreement tonight. Given that disagreement
my sense is that the wisest course of action is to clearly
inform people that pesticides are being applied. That way
people, informed people, can act according too whether they
think pesticides are risky or not. Further more competitive
markets presume that consumers are well informed of the
costs, the benefits, and risks of products. So this is a
wise thing to do with regard with operating in a good market
economy. The sign ordinance just simply informs people that
pesticides will be or have been applied. We require
property owners to notify neighbors when they are seeking a
zoning change. So why not provide a similar courtesy to
neighbors who fear pesticides. So I will support eh
ordinance.
Baker/ I have to apologize to Karen and Sue and Naomi because you
all went through this for months and months and months and a
lot for these questions were answered. A lot of questions
that I had on this were answered in the p.h. I have two
quick questions. What is the penalty if somebody violates
this ordinance.
Horow/ This is something that we have yet to work on. As I
understand it- Linda says we don't have one.
Gentry/ No. It is a municipal infraction.
Baker/ Which means what.
Gentry/ Municipal infraction probably came in after you left.
It's not a criminal matter. A simple misdemeanor is a
criminal matter. You could do it that way but-a municipal
infraction is much easier. You file a citation. The
penalty is $50 for the first offense. And $100 for the
second. The state allows us to go more. If we send the
ordinance to the state DNR and concur with them and then we
can file it as an environmental infraction of a $1000 per
day per offense.
..-.-.-......."".,.--
'.
-.
-
,
I
,
,
i
,
,
,
,
,
r
I
i
I
!
"
"
!
i I
"
" \
I
)Ii I
,
" i
I'
i! I"
'I,
I,' h
Ii
, I,
"
,I I,
(,
"
1 1,1
i
i 1'1
I
I
, I!
I;
r
,
1:
L
i'
I;'
I'
'.
i
, '
I
I
I
I'
I:
I
I
,
I
I
:
:i
'I
,
--.~._,..,..,..., ....
.
, ,
.-.........:- ' " "
l ..., n "n,: t: r "Et ''',:' , ".. ":~'." "
: ~- . ~
\
1
.{.
,
--
#6 page 5
Baker/ Is this handled through magistrates court or what-
Gentry/ yes. Our office, the city Attorney's office, would
prosecute, HIS would prepare the citations. We use a the
service of a process server to serve them
Baker/ And a citizen has to make a complaint and how does the
housing verify. It is just the absence of a sign is the
violation.
Gentry/ They would go out and do an investigation like you do
zoning, housing, or anything else.
Baker/ But the absence of the sign is the violation.
Gentry/ Right. If they new the application had been done.
Baker/ Second question is and this came up about home owner's
application here. Karen you said you were one vote short of
including that in the previous discussion. Was in simply
one vote or was it ever part of the pUblic discussion to
have homeowner's involved in that.
Horow/ It was definitely one vote.
Nov/ It was a bunch more complex than that. It wasn't just this
ordinance with homeowners added.
Kubby/ But still we were one vote short.
Baker/ What is the deadline for the state legislature action.
Kubby/ I spoke with Rep. Osterberg who was chair of the
Environmental Committee in the past and this gave something
as part of the Legislative Committee and it is going to be
moving along very fast. I was aSking him about a time frame
because I was wanting to push for a more comprehensive
ordinance that would be a little bit more significant and I
told him what our time frame was and he said that they are
going to be dealing with this very quickly after the session
opens and that by the 25th of January this will be on the
floor.
Baker/ Basically whatever passes tonight is about all we can hope
to get through.
Nov/ It will still have to pass again.
Horow/ But we would have the ability to do an amendment as I
understand, if necessary, in terms of any enforcement. That
is not specific in here. But we would have the ability to
do that later in here.
..;.,;..',......',.,.....
-.-..... ..-
I
I
,
I,
,
; ,
I.
I'
, '
I;
, ,
I
I:
I;
~ '
I
i
i'.
,
i'
II
I
'I
II
:!
,
I,
'I
"
!
Ii,
11'
i\
'"
j',
I,
, i;
Ii
:1
"
Ii
i
"
,
,
j
I
I!
I
,.i' 1:,
'/"
i
~, I
;(
i
....... --"'1------....
~...... ~ .,-,...,.-- - - ."qIIJ....-....
---
~.~
.......-
... -~-
f" , '" " " ,",: " ",
; -F/', rl' ,'t-j. ,q, " ,"':,: ,'.'
.. _. ._- _, I ~ I
,
/
I, \
1
"
#6 page 6
Nov/ We could do a resolution -
Gentry/ Wait a minute. I am not understanding. If this were
passed and published this would be enforceable. There is
nothing left out of it.
Kubby/ It was changed that they would pay a registration fee.
Horow/ Registration fee is one thing. I am talking about the
enforcement.
Nov/ Enforcement is in here. It is only the fee that would need
a resolution.
Horow/ Okay.
,
,
,I
fi
I
"
!,
I
Iii I
I
" ii,
'I
I,
II
I' r
"
I:
!:
Ii ,,'
:1 I;'
I.:
II j,
"
1
I 'I
,.1
II
"
Baker/ Now let me get clarification on something that you said
earlier. When you were talking about including private
homeowner's application as being regulated, it was part of
the p.h. process before.
Gentry/ Yes, at several meetings.
Baker/ One of the luxuries I think I have got right now is that I
am not the swing vote on this particular issue. If I thought
I were I would vote for it. I am not though. And this goes
back with a long history, not just about this particular
ordinance but about the process of writing ordinances and
what you hope to achieve with them. I don't think you
necessarily write ordinances to educate people. You
regulate behavior and if there is a public demand, a pUblic
concern for health, safety and welfare, you try to write an
ordinance that accomplishes that clear goal. This one
doesn't and we admit that. It doesn't do as much far and
away from what we really want to do. In a sense, my
opposition has become symbolic opposition because i think
basically this is a symbolic ordinance. And I think that if
and when we revise it to include homeowners because I think
it is patently unfair to regulate the people whose
profession is the application of this and not attempt to
regulate the majority users of it.
Kubby/ Although I would slightly disagree with that. I think
that there is a logical basis to regulate people who make a
profit from being in a certain business vs. private
homeownership.
Baker/ If your goal is public health, safety, and welfare, it
doesn't matter whether they are making a profit or not.
Kubby/ I understand. I agree with that. But I think there is a
basis for distinction.
I
,
ii
...
I
"
,
..:
.,
, " I'
'~, Ct-' {-/, 'tl, : 'I'~t ,',., ,',' ,',:,
: f J .1: 7t,.. . ' '
'. ,_ ,_, .. '_., I r , "
" . ,- .
,.
/
1'\,
),
,
"
#6 page 7
Baker! I don't see that distinction at all when you are dealing
with health, safety and welfare. So, it looks like Ernie
and I the conservative block on the council will oppose this
for different reasons and I think Ernie and I might disagree
about a different more strong ordinance but I think for the
record I would like to be as opposed to this as being too
little and too late.
Kubby! Would you support adding homeowner's to this ordinance.
Baker! Sure. It is not opposition to the principle. It is
opposition to this ordinance. I don't like symbolic
ordinances.
Kubby/ Would you support this ordinance if it were amended to
include homeowners.
Baker! Homeowners, notification-there are lots of things we could
do with this. If you want to play with amending it, sure, I
would be glad to look at that and look for supporting that
sort of thing. I don't think you need to pass this
ordinance right now as it is. You don't need my vote. But
I wish it were stronger. If you want to do that in any form
you want to that is fine. I would be glad to support it. I
am not going to support this ordinance.
Kubby! Would you support this ordinance tonight if we amended it
to include homeowners for notification requirements.
Baker! Would you require a different p.h.
Horow! You would have to have another p.h.
Gentry! It would be a fairly substantial amendment without public
input.
"
Baker! The answer is if we had time, sure. Once again I think
this is a symbolic expression on a symbolic ordinance.
Horow! I think you are right. Is there nay other discussion on
this. Let's have a roll ca11- (yes: Kubby, pigott, Throg,
Horow, NOVi No: lehman, Baker).
-",~""-,,,,",,~,,-,,^,.,~.,.......,- ..,.....
. J
-
i
I
,
,
1
,
I
;'1
~' I
I,
l ~
"
Ii ~
I
I:
[I
;I II
"
If
II F
"
,!
i:
il
I
i
(;"
"
,
,
"
i,
"I'
II,
"'11
. ' II
, I
"
li
L,
,II'
, ~ I
"
'I'
, '
,
)
',I
I
,
t...)
"
~',
. .', t'-/ t' ~I I-, ';:,':'t"'" .. ,~:", ; , ,',
II: ....,.. ,..._ '
-.. ' - - .. .'"
, , '" . 'Ii, '. .. ',.' . .,,:..... ,f. ",
l'. _. ,_ '. ~ . ,"I' . '. ":-,,.' ',,\'>:".;'.
/
/
/F'\
" )
>- .,.'
-- --::._._--
.......
-....
ap ;fit/(; iI- 6
#2(c)1 page 1
Horow/ (#2c(1)) If you will recall we took it out. You received
a memo from the Chief on this particular bar. Permanent
motion as recommended by the city Clerk. let us take a
break for a little while. (BREAK)
you received a memo during the meeting from the Chief. The
Chair would entertain a motion to approve this permit
request.
Kubby and Nov moved to consider this item. Any discussion.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes). Thank you.
I
__."" ",., ...,!-\....,....~ ..""....~..~.~..,~...".'..h."~. .',.,,,., .___......
.........,.
......
LI
---.-..---
..,.-........"..."..
.LI
I
i
,
i
i.
Ii I
I
I I
II Ii:
i "
, I;
; :1
, II-
I
"
I'
I
','
".1
'./.
, ,>
,
"
:f
i
,
,
,
(:
'i
"
""'If'''.
~ -
....,---...-.....-=--~......
, ,
r ' '. . :', . _ 0 ',.'
, , - - .-' t ,',"" "
t I t I H' '"
'_ . .' ',0'-, .. . '. . .
", , ' ", , , ; ,,' , " '
; _~'. _ I ~ . _. _.
/
.i '1."".
'"
. ._'.
-----
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Reguler Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 7
b. Current Vacancies.
(1) Historic Preservetion Commission - Two vacancies for three-year
terms ending March 29, 1997; one for a representative of the
Woodlawn District and one at-large. (Terms of Douglas Russell
and GinaHe Swaim end.)
These appointments will be made at the February 15, 1994. meeting of
the City Council.
ITEM NO.8. CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS.
i
,
~lt
~ b,bl1P{
a. Consider an appointment to the Airport Commission for a six-year term
ending March 1, 2000. (Pat Foster's term ends.)
Action: ~td&y! tF do;fJN c1 ~
t2#' dtfPA}
b. Consider an appointment to the Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment for
a five-year term ending February 26, 1999. (Catherine Johnson's term
ends.)
Action:
A/f-t)~ ~ l' ~
c. Consider an appointment to the Board of Adjustment for an unexpired
term ending January 1. 1997. (Larry Baker's term.)
Action:
1ttW_ ~.J.(fUAAJ
.
c1,1~(# Ih~ IOu
d. Con.idei dn appointment to the Board of Appeals for a five-year term
ending December 31, 1998. (Re-advertisement).
Action:
Ihvud .&uxt
.rid,1) I{J ~/:tn, sf'
e. Consider the recommendation of the Johnson County Board of
Supervisors that Donald Otto be reeppointed to the Riverfront end
Natural Arees Commission as a representetive of Johnson County for a
three-year term ending December 31, 1996.
Action:
~~
..".........', .~I~I<',..""_" ""'0', ,.....' 'H'~.~ J...;............. ....,__..
....L!. .:::t. J:i..
ii'
i
,
1:
'I
1
/,
I,
I'
I'
I
t
I
1
I
1
!:
I,
,
!
,
Ii II
"
1 ,
Iii
'1
I Ii
"
I'
d 11'
" if
.'
! ~ 'I
"
il 11
i: ..
, i<
" i;:
I !'
, ,,::;
.It
.(
. ,/.
j
r
, t.
!,
,
!
! I
I,
, '
I'
I:
I
'":".....,.,... ~"" ..... -,-...,., --,. ,---- t;lI; ;' ...... -- ~ ---... ...........-------
',---.- "t'~/~' 't-/' ':Lg' ":'1-' ,,\",: , ' ' , " ,',',
, "."
'., ..." .'.\,'. " '.
,} -- . " - . ~' ~,.....' ... ~ . '
/
/,. "
\. J..
,
'.,"-: ,.
.....-----
---
----., .~-
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 8
ITEM NO.9- CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
,&.fJ, (8A.-/
i
I
, '
I
I:
I,
I.
I:
, ,
I!
ITEM NO. 10 - REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY.
e. City Maneger,
-0 -
'b. City Attorney.
-0 -
ITEM' NO. 11 - CONSIDER A MOTION APPROVING A TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE POLICE LABOR RELATIONS ORGANIZA.
TION OF IOWA CITY.
Comment: This tentative agreement was reached on December 21, 1993,
and provides for a three-year contract with across-the-board Increases of 3 %
the first year, 3* % the second year, 2% at the beginning of the third year,
end 2% In the middle of the third year. It elso provides for a 4% of premium
co-payment for officers electing family health Insurance coverage. These end
other contract amendments are explained In a memorendum from the
Asslstent City Menager included in Council's agende packet.
Action:
'1&I#~.J .I 1/u'1mn:b-w
~'j6d~
~~
It/;
"
"
j
,
,
"
.h"."l,-'''.,,,,,.,.;,,,) .'.,..
">'.., .,.'..
"
\\j
....
...L1J_
..--.
,
I,
,;
II
ii
I!
:'
\;
I'
'ii'
.1
i
I
I
I
i:
"!'
, ..
:'.,
I;' .
U
"
'I'"
,
"
I~
,'I:l' ,
~
" I
"
i.'
;\
\:
--" -~...., -~. ~-- ---- - -- . - ,...... .........--------..,w::""'" .....
'-.... . - -, ~.'_.' .~
........-
.. _.- ,...........-......-.------........ ,_..... l'
, ., ..
i , ' , ,("I' i:I' L: I ' ',CI ,'" '. ", "',, " ,'.'
:' . q, t: -, . I..:.. . ."1' ~fl. \. .",
/
, '"
,I
""
#9 page 1
Horow! (#9) city Council Information.
Baker! yeah I have seven items here but I am only going to talk
about two. One short one and one a little bit longer. A
concerned constituent asked me to ask publicly if indeed
there is nothing that the city councilor city can do now
about that Pizza Hut sign. Even though there is nothing we
can do.
Atkins! To my knowledge there is nothing you can do. It is
applied for in a responsible fashion. It was given an
interpretation in accordance with the code and was installed
properly.
Baker! And is therefore staff and the Zoning commission going
back to review this.
Atkins! yes. It has been sent back to P!Z. A couple of you have
made that request and I am not sure whether it is on their
agenda yet but it has been sent back to them.
Baker! I know that the chair of P!Z always loves to deal with the
sign ordinance.
Nov! I want to review the awning ordinance. That qualified as an
awning.
Baker! you are right. I thought it was a sign for some reason,
excuse me.
Second thing is we talked very briefly last night and I want
to bring up again the possibility of us perhaps moving some
of our informal meetings out of the Civic Center into other
areas of town to increase accessibility and public
participation. In particular and this is something I talked
about in the campaign, I would like to see us use the
neighborhood association groups. Not necessarily
individually. Maybe two or three can get together and have
a joint meeting and we can be there. Something to do with
the student body. Maybe a meeting in the student union,
coordinated with the student government over there. But I
would like to get a sense that that indeed that this is
something that the council would like to pursue and in
particular one of the things I would like to see us is
possibly do at that time is sort of coordinate another issue
which televising informal meetings. I don't necessarily
think we should televise all of them but these particular
meetings I think would be ideal for some sort of taping if
not a live presentation then certainly a taped presentation
that could be used and shown over the system. Also in that
meeting would it be possible to have a particular part of he
agenda, sort of do this with trepidation, a particular part
of the agenda that allows public discussion at the informal
. i
,
.....,,'.,.. ~.
,
- ---_'-!_-
--'-"'.-...-.
j
I
I
I
I
I
i
, :
" \ :
" I"
i li !
i I
! II
, I;
i
,{ I'
" Il,
. ii
, I "
1 " 11'
,
.:; :1
~ : , I:
.'
; , I ~ - I'
~ " ..
i' I ,
! I'
~ ';
I, ,',
l.
Ii i I';
I
I 'I,
" I
,
, . I
III
1111
I' .
i
i!
"
"
~
~
,
,
~
~
!
\
/
~
11
~
!.
I
I
I
-
-
'1 ~- ""'W\..... ~ .;1......-- - -- ~"......- -----..,~...
...--
I ' . -' , "'- '18' I"': ,. ,':"", ~",
,~ ' f r ' 't ,,~ .',' ff ,"",,. " "
.: -' ,- .
/
,"
I
";
~..._----
--.,
meeting since we are in an area you know people are there
for others reasons as well.
Horow/ I think what we would have to do is ask staff to give us
the pros and cons of it because at that point it would cease
to become an informal meeting. I think we would even
question the purpose of the informal meeting. It would more
be a workshop. The original idea of the informal meeting
was for council to ask questions of staff.
Baker/ Maybe we don't need to put it on the agenda but maybe we
need an informal agreement about informal meetings that if
there is somebody in the group there that has something to
say-
Horow/ i would like, with your approval, I have been thinking
about this and I agree every once in a while like every
other month go out on the road. But I think we need to be
realistic about this. I would like to ask staff. marian's
office as well as the cable office and any other staff that
would be impacted financially by this or logistically.
Baker/ All of those things have to be considered.
Horow/ I think that would be a good idea.
Baker/ Senior Center and groups like that.
Pigott/ I whole heartedly endorse it. Larry, I think it is a
great idea. I think that there shouldn't be a lot to get
in the way of doing it. I think getting it done is a matter
of figuring out some technical issues and I think maybe if
we do an informal meeting and having a space for public
comment after an informal meeting ~r before would be a nice
way to fit that in. I ;/ould whole heartedly endorse it.
Baker/ That is all.
Atkins/ I will take that as direction to prepare a memo.
Pigott/ I had two issues. One short one as well. I heard from a
constituent today that mentioned and this may be more a
Library purview sort of question. They had called me and
asked me about drop boxes for books and is there one that a
car or bike can ride up to and drop off their Library books.
Atkins/ The d.t. Library has one. You have to get out of your car
but there is a drop off.
Pigott/ They wondered if we could put- or if the Library would
consider putting one next to the street so it was accessible
by car and by bikes.
Horow/ We went through the library. We went on the tour of the
.....
--.... .."-
i'
I ' ,
l:
, '
i
i Ii ~
I I,
'Ii II
I
"
, jl
I Ir
i !I
j :' 'i
,
" ,I
, i ~ ,
I i.:
il t:
II 'f
"
I,
, {
'1
:' I
I J
I
,
,j
"
:
I
...",.". -
,
,
I':
,
"
I
I
I
!
I
,
~
\
,
,
,
.'
~
!
i
-
'1
_.--.............,;,.......---~---........... ....-- -
-~~... -..---
...-~.~-.....--.......--....
i .
r:, ~ t':"'"f" t"':""," ',', '17/ 'f" ,:' , " , ' ' ','.-',
.. " ." , , '
. , . I .. ,'I
t,' ....~ . ,_,' :.~ ,'-~' ,'..' - .
,
/
/
>\
'I.
,
--
#9 page 3
library. They have got problems in terms of the existing
drop off box right now. It is so clogged y the time the
morning comes.
I
I
I
,
I
,
1
Nov/ It is the size of a small room and it fills up twice on the
weekend.
Horow/ You would have to literally take space on a sidewalk in
order for a car to dropoff. Unless we had them for through
the alley way which I think-
Nov/ Alley way might not be terrible. The library does have a
wall against the alley, if they have room which they
probably do not.
Kubby/ I think going to the Library Board to bounce them off of
them.
!
II
II.
I'
pigott/ Most likely handled.
Horow/ Especially since they are in the stage of designing-
pigott/ My second issue was similar to -
Atkins/ Do I understand you that you would like me to pose the'
question to the Library Board.
pigott/ I would like to, yes.
Atkins/ Fine, I will take care of that.
pigott/ My second issue was one similar to Larry's and that is
regarding public discussion time at council meetings. We
talked a little about this last night and I would like to
again seek the sense of council that the public discussion
time which is now after our P/Z Matters in our formal
Tuesday night city council formal meetings be moved up to
just after the consent calendar so that people have a chance
to come down and Susan's approach of having a five minute
limitation and so forth may be a good way to deal with that
in terms of the possible downsides of long time speech but I
think that moving that section up would be something that i
would like to see done and wondered whether -
\,
I
I
\,
Ii
!
i
I I;,
'I\'i' ;'
,I i:
Iii I,;
II
il
I
1
,
"
:i,
1
!
I
il
I I
i'
I
Horow/ As we discussed last night we have two options. One is
doing an absolute change in the form of a resolution. We
would have to take a look at the original one.
Karr/ I have that in front of you tonight.
Horow/ Or the other one is based on our knowledge of the issues
of the concerns of people out there. making the request at
;,
...
-.
i
,
"
I',
','
-
,
I
,
!
~
l
~
f
t
.
i
!
-
"l~~' -""W\.... ~ ;' ......-
.... ....-- -
~ff -
...~
... --. ,..... ~.... -
\
--
, "
! . ': ':,("/ .'t~l "LI' ,<(t,', :,... 'I : :"
.:' ,'_." '._.'. ','. ' 1-. , .
/
, '1
the beginning of the meeting.
Pigott/ I thought those were two separate issues. One was
whether we move individual issues which would require a
change in the agenda or may not be possible. Second was
moving the pUblic discussion period up to before P/Z issues.
And I thought from what I heard last night which may not be
accurate that there was a large agreement or not a lot of
disagreement to moving the public discussion period up above
the P/Z Matters. And if that is the case, that separate is
separate and distinct from the other issue of hat you just
raised, Mrs. Mayor, I would like to consider.
Baker/ Just simply change the order of the sort of things that
not only the agenda the public wants to talk about but-
Horow/ You want this to be consistent. Is sense four that that
carries. Let's go with it.
Nov/ And that is an easy revision to the resolution. You just
reverse #4 and #5. but I would like the opportunity to
consider the whole resolution and maybe we would like to
move something also.
Karr/ Do you wish us to prepare a resolution, switching #4 and #5
for your discussion and then you could amend it further at
that time.
I
i ! I
, i,
, ;,:
! ~
Ii
I ; I,
I 'Ii II
I
'I il:
II
, II
I ,
i , !'
:1
I I'"
I ",
, 1,-
, :1 !:
,
I
! ,';
I I[ I,:
! i
,
" I
I
I,
!
NoV/ Would that be okay. It is a 1978 ordinance.
Karr/ Just schedule it then.
Throg/ I will be brief. I want to praise our Mayor for the way
she has conducted the meeting tonight, her first.
Horow/ Oh, thanks. Wonders at the beginning but once on a roll.
Nov/ I noticed everybody got a copy tonight of the letter to me
from Mr. Nelson and this is basically a budget letter.
Everybody is to take this letter and bring it on Thursday
night and we are going to talk about it because he has some
concerns about where our money is being spent and he makes a
good point.
Horow/ I have two items. Number one I want to give sufficient
advance notice the Iowa city HR Commission is presenting
ADA, It's The Law. nd this is what employers need to know
and what businesses need to know about accessibility
requirement. This is taking place on Thursday, January 20,
Iowa City Public Library, meeting room A, 1:00-4:00 in the
afternoon. It is free. January 30. 1:00-4:00.
Nov/ You just said 30th.
:1
--
M'
, i,
. ,'j
,
I
,
,<,!
"
, ,
\.'.
--'~--
~,
, -"'-' Ll . I~t' ", ':.
'~ ',Ff. ,t I: :,: ,,:-:1' ,7~ ,', ,',:'
. ,-~ .-
I
'/J, ,
"--" .'(
--"<:':::.=.::-',
....--.--........-----
#9 page 5
Horow/ I am sorry. January 20, 1:00 -4:00 is for businesses to
learn more about how their facilities can be made more
accessible and what the employers need to know about the ADA
Act.
Also there will be a special meeting right before the budget
workshop on Thursday for council members. It will still be
at 7:00. That is all.
I
\
i
I
. -.........................l..u.. ,,~, ,:,...,'~'-..;..."..........'.k.H......."'_'._ "'....~.....
, ,
---" '--.
I
I
!
,
!I
1:1
1':
",
-i.
Ii
il 1
I!,' I
, I:'
"
d r,
,
\
>;
r't-
o I{:
II
,.1
,'I
",;
"
I,
j
,
[,
!
,
I;,
"
, i'
,
, fl'.
'I,
i',
i
,
"
:
"""""'''II/If''I'.
,
"
'1"
'I"
"
"
:!
,
\
I
----- ~"'1-----....-. -~...... "4Ia -;;'........ ---
~. ....----.
"'f" -- .. ----
. . . .,'
, ." "CI' 't-", t{ Ct "...., :; "",
.: . r.,. . _. \ ~. . ~l _. j , ,,"
/
/
/'1,
, "
':'.~ -~
-----.......-....-
I
I
#11 page 1
Horow/ (#11) Moved by Nov, seconded by Throg. Discussions.
Kubby/ I will be voting against it. This is the first time that
the police union will have a co payment for family health
insurance and I disagree on a philosophical basis that there
should be any co payment for family health insurance.
Baker/ One clarification. All the other employee groups have a
co payment now.
Kubby/ Last year was the first year. As well as administrative
employees.
Baker/ And most everybody else in town.
Kubby/ Doesn't mean it is right.
Horow/ There is a motion on the floor.
All those in favor say aye.
carried 6-1, Kubby voting no.
~.'...,~""...oIW"."';""-"'--'.""""'" .
-__4__, .__
.'1
I
"
i
,
,
!
i
IIi
Ii
q
,
\j
\,
, i I '~
l
I
r
I!
II.
Ir
Ii
f.!
t:
p
,.J
,"i
;'. I'!':
, 'i.
" j"
I:
"/
J
',it
"
"
iI
"
,
,',I
"
\
(: ~ CI"~; I" nfl':",,' "", ',: ,," ':,
:' .' r~ " ,,~~. ,...... .
/
, "
,
~i'
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 9
ITEM NO. 12 - CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DETERMINING NECESSITY AND SETTING A
'1'1 - c, PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 15, 1994, ON A PROPOSED NEAR
SOUTHSIDE COMMERCIAL URBAN REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR A
PROPOSED URBAN REVITALIZATION AREA IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA.
Comment: The City Council hes received a request from Hieronymi Partners
to grant property tax exemption under Iowa Code Chapter 404 for a project
located in the Near Souths ide Neighborhood. The proposed urban revitaliza-
tion area includes the area zoned Central Business Support Zone, CB-5,
located between Burlington and Court Streets. Designating this area an urban
revitalization area would grant property tax exemption to qualified improve-
ments as designated in the proposed plan.
Action: Y0::dv I ,IJ,~AUd~
h~.J k %
ITEM NO. 13. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE AN
94- (. AMENDED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ICDBGI PROGRAM
STATEMENT FOR THE USE OF $1,055,000 DOLLARS OF SUPPLEMENTAL
CDBG FUNDS APPROPRIATED UNDER PUBLIC LAW 103-75, INCLUDING
ALL UNDERSTANDINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTAINED THEREIN, AND
DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED CHIEF EXECU-
TIVE OFFICER OF THE GRANT.
Comment: This is the second allocation of CDBG Disaster Relief Funds to
Iowa City (first allocation: $175,000, second allocation: $880,000 - for a
total of $1,055,000). These monies will be used for repair, replacement,
and/or elevetion of flood damaged homes throughout Iowa City and
particularly in the Baculis and Thatcher Mobile Home Courts. The funds will
also be used to demolish homes damaged by the flood and to acquire and
rezone vacant lend for manufactured housing development. The, Committee
of Community Needs ICCN) has reviewed the plenned use of these funds,
and a public notice has been published to inform citizens of the intended use
of the funds. ' Preliminary guidelines for the program are included in the
Council packet as well as a memo regarding use of the Supplemental CDBG
funds.
Action:
JL~/ (i~
4/~ %
'.."
:..1........
AJ.
91~7
I/.' 3t;
, '
, ,
, ,
i:
I
ii' ~
II! II
I;' 'ii,
II: II",'
I:' I'
,:
. :'
I
,
j j'
I
i
I
,
,
:;
I
"
"
,
,
I!
i
I)
II
!,
"
I'
i
"
" ,
I
"
"
, " .
, ,"
, .. '. ~
' " .
!; "', n ','/:, t 1,:,,[ , " : ':".' ", ,',
/
"
),
I
i
~
1
~
,
1
.~
f
,
i'
I
,I
I
I
#12 page 1
Horow/(#12) Moved by Nov, seconded by Lehman. Any discussion.
Kubby/ I do need to clarify something. In the resolution it does
say that we are voting on the necessity for this designation
as an Urban Revitalization Area. And I understand it is in
there because of state law. And I find it ironic that we
would have to vote on something saying we know the answer
before the p.h. and one part of me doesn't want to vote for
it because i am not convinced that there is a necessity to
designate this area as an Urban Revitalization area in terms
of tax abatement benefits. But because I support having a
p.h. I will do it anyway even though I am slightly
uncomfortable with it.
, ,
, ,
I j
i !
I:
II! II
" il.
I:
I:
, I!'
I
"
:' I:
r
, "
" i,'
;1 I'
,II : :~
I I,!
Ii
. :t
j
I
I
;
Baker/ We all want to make sure we are not endorsing this. This
ain't a done deal.
Gentry/ No. But you are making finding in here. That is fairly
clear.
Pigott/ That this should be an Urban Revitalization.
Gentry/ You are making the legislative-
Kubby/ In the legal sense. I mean in terms of if we should vote
to 'not have the plan are we legally liable.
Atkins/ Can I comment. I have always understood this as you
pointed out last night that it was the code language and I
understand the issue of findings. But they are calling a
p.h. at which time the findings and any other information
are either reaffirmed, expanded upon or whatever and then
based upon that body of knowledge they ultimately have to
pass the resolution deciding yea or nea on the actual tax
abatement. This simply creates the mechanism to make the
decision. I understand your concerns.
Gentry/ It is preliminary but it is quite important.
Atkins/ The looks are such that it appears done deal language.
Gentry/ It is not.
Atkins/ But it is not. But it is also we have to write it up in a
fashion that satisfies the state code.
Kubby/ In essence what it is saying is that I believe that it is
necessary and if during the p.h. somebody that says
something that might trigger a change of heart. That is not
how I feel. So I want to make that clear to the public that
I will vote for it so that we can have a p.h.
,I
'" 'I
,.;',
, ,I
..}
,
,
, :
,<"
"
I
I
,.....-- - --- ........ ...
...... -..-...,-...-....., ~--~.-.....
~~~...
~
-y ,..
; . .-"'L~j', ~/I ,'n' i:t,' :'; " ",' ":,' ',',
:, ' r'~ l"'" I __'" _~ .. I
/
/-j,
\,- .~.
"':::::::---
-
--'--
'.
d.
#12 page 2
Gentry/ You would have to have an ordinance anyway and then you
could again vote that down if you chose to.
Horow/ Okay. Roll call-
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-7 SIDE 2
I
'--"'.~::;':':;''':;'~'~;'''':''''''''"''' \'".1 ',;::. _' "',, "J ,"~', " r...'.:.."'''''''- .~,..
"
----...-.-
,
I
,
!
I
i'l
\1
J.i
r I
II !
" ,
Ii - 'I
II Ij:
',I'
j
I
r
"
,
'.il"
ci ..
r
!
i'.
I
.'
""""""~r. - -'1--
WO\--""""--
~..'.....
- ~ ~'" ......-----~-
-,~..
~
,
, . '
'",rl ",'/' n~",:r ' " ", ",' ,'.. ':,
~': I _ .,-~'.::r.: .J.. . I,' ",',
, '1
.I
. . ~-- .
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
January 4, 1994
Page 10
ITEM NO. 14 _ CONSIDER A RESOLUTION WAIVING DEMAND THAT CABLEVISION VII,
'1"1-1 INC. SUBMIT A FORMAL FRANCHISE RENEWAL PROPOSAL TO THE CITY
OF IOWA CITY BY DECEMBER 27, 1993.
Comment: On December 15, 1993, the City received a request from
Cablevision VII, Inc. to enter into informal negotiations. That letter also
contained several new proposals in the area of funding for local access and
the institutional network, two areas given little attention in the company's
initial informal proposal. The resolution before Council waives the deedline
for submittal of a formal proposal in the interest of entering into informal
negotiations. However, should the City at eny time determine that informal
negotiations are not progressing satisfactorily, it can require submittal of a
formal proposal within 30 days. Staff recommends adoption of this
resolution.
Action:
~/ fJftI-
%
i 1
;
1:
I
II: ;
I I
I
,I II.
"
"
I "
I' 11'
(
"
I ,
1 :: 1\
, Ii
I : , I:
i "
ii r
, Ii
I I' ~
I I,
II r
II
.l
I .. :1
j
! I
, ,
II
i
1
I
I
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AM NDING THE BUDGETED POSITIONS IN THE
'14 _ '6 WATER DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE AFSCME
PAY PLAN. '
Comment: Two new MWI-Water Customer Service positions will be created
in lieu of filling the Senior MW position now vacated. In addition, a new
position of Public Information/Education Coordinator will be creeted. These
three positions, in concert with the existing staff in Water Customer Service,
will work as a team to address the present and enticipated demand for
information and service from our consumers in such areas as water
conservation, backflow prevention, leek detection, water quality/pressure
complaints, water main replacement, meter change-out and leak detection.
Copies of memorenda from the City Meneger and the Public Works Director,
which further explain this change, are included in Council's Agenda packet.
Action:
,IJ~ / IF!.
~ rtlA/
1l.!J&/V %
I.
I
I
,
,
,
!
"'M NO.';' ;;';:J
:i
':
,
,
"
I
...... --~....,-~-~...
.
. . .'. .
r ' - -:..,. . , "
':' , n' .I I .. tl: !~t ,",',," " , :
'.. ,,'
/
/, '1
,(,
~. --'~-"
I
I
I
1
I
I
,j
f
~
i
t
l
l
I
#14 page 1
Horow/ (#14) Moved by nov, seconded by Pigott. Any discussion.
Nov/ I would really like Dale to go through the rigamaroll. That
we say it out loud in public. Just explain how we have been
going through al of this and what we are ending up doing.
Pigott/ And maybe the difference between the, a little bit
anyway, about the options available to you under the
informal process vs. the formal process.
Helling/ I will try to go through three years in two minutes.
The process starts three years before the expiration of the
franchise. The company can, and in this case, did ask that
we initiate the formal process. The company or the city as
I understand it can initiate an informal process any point
during that time and try to negotiate an acceptable new
franchise. In this case we have been going through the
formal process up until the time that we expected a formal
proposal when we received what the company labeled an
informal proposal. At that tie the council gave the company
45 days from that date to submit a formal proposal and in
the interim the company came back with the letter that has
been include din your packet requesting that the city at
least postpone the deadline of that formal proposal and
enter into informal negotiations. The resolution before you
simply does two things. It waives that deadline until a
period or until a time that you would establish based on
your judgement whether or not the informal negotiations are
going satisfactorily. Second, authorizes the city manager
through the staff to enter into those informal negotiations.
There has been some indication from the company that they
are willing to go significantly beyond what was in that
initial informal proposal and so we feel that-we had always
felt that we weren't going to accomplish anything until we
got somehow in a face to face negotiation with the
representatives of he company. This is the first
opportunity we have really had to do it. So I think it is
worth a try.
Horow/ Any other questions. Great.
Roll call-
Resolution passes.
, ,
\ I
j, !
,
"
"
I II
Ii
" Ii
1,
:i I'
II'
, "
': n
ii 11
..,
i ,
" r:
'I "
I, J.i
II
I
,
I
II
I r
,I
1'..0'......,........'..,.....,..
""'If"'. -
,
i
i
I
i,
)
I,;
.,
-
----_.---~....
...,----..~. -~-- ~ ~-'....'"
, ,
L '. . ,', ,
, - ',- "\(" .
, 't-/ " t '1 '~, ' , , ' :
-' ' ,', ,I ", ," '"
' ,,' " " ~,.. ".J "',, '. '
.. .'"
/
!/~
...... .~.
-,
.....----~-
-~-.-.. .- ~
;
,
j i
I , !
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
#15 page 1
Horow/ (#15) Moved by KUbby, seconded by Pigott. Discussion.
Kubby/ It is an exciting movement. I am glad we are doing it.
Throg/ I understand that in a large part this move is designed to
enable the Water Department or the Water Division to respond
to some of the questions that have come from some of the
various members of the city council with regard to water
conservation and I applaud the move. It is a terrific idea.
i
i
i,
,
l:
I'
I,
,
j,
,
,
.
Kubby/ Although you know I don't think it was in response to
those questions. I think these things have been online for
a long time and that we were kind of following you lead and
we want to magnify what you are doing and this is one way we
can show support.
Horow/ The amount of time Ed has been out giving talks to people
has been fantastic but it also takes him away from the
business. Any further discussion.
Roll call-
The resolution passes.
"~~'''''''I' . .;....;._.._-....~..,_"'v,."., ......,_ ".,...,~...._......_..... .u. __.._._...
, .
;
, I
l!
f:
I:'
1;
Ii
Iii
:1
II
,
. I;
II
II,
I,
I
,
"
i
;
.
I.:
,
1\
::~
ii
'1\ :
I!
i
I
, '~"
,j
I,
'i
'/
I.'
,.:-
,
, ,
ii
i
!
I'
"
I'
"
""'If'''.
~ --"" ~. ~....... ~ ..-, .......
- ~ ~"""""'------."'f"'"
..........
... ~ ~ . -.~'''''- .--..---_....--
i
. " "
, , .'., , ' " "
I _ ,'_ ~-I'" ,,-1/ rl ' I,' '" 'I """ ., '
'~'. "__' '. _ ~, f
/
\1
I,.
l.
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
December 3
Jenuarv 3. 1
5:30
6:30
6:3
7:1
8:0
8:3
8:
8:5
Januarv 4. 1
7:30
Januarv 6. 1
'l:Cl>
..
Januarv 10.
12:3
Januarv 13.
?,IOb
tifl.
Januarv 17.
DR.
Januarv 18.
6:30
7:30
PENDING LIS
Appointments I
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
December 29, 1993
City Council
City Manager
Work Session Agendas and MeetIng Schedule
1.1993
Frldav
CITY HOLIDAY - CITY OFFICES CLOSED
994
Monday
P,M.
City Council Organizational Meeting - Council Chambers
Separate agenda posted
City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Review Zoning Matters
Sycamore Farms Annexation Request
Near Southslde Revitalization Plan '
Melrose Environmenlal Assessment RFP
Council Agenda, Council Time, Council Committee Reports
Consider appointments to tha Airport Commission, Airport Zoning Board of Adjust-
ment, Board of Adjustment, Board of Appeals, and Riverfront and Netural Areas
Commission (,Johnson County Representative).
P.M.
o P.M.
5P,M.
o P.M.
o P.M.
45 P.M.
5 P.M.
994
Tuesday
P.M. Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers
~ Th~~
P.M. City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Discuss FY95.97 Financial Plan
1994 Monday
o P.M. City Council Goel Setting Session -Iowa Memorfal Union, Big Ten Room
1994 Thursday
P.M, City Council Work Session. Council Chambers
Discuss FY95.97 Financial Plan
1994 Mondav
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. HOLIDAY - CITY OFFICES CLOSED
o Ihe Broadband Talooommunlcatlons Commission and Assosso~a Examining Board. January 18, 1994
i
I..
.._ I:::..--
-----., .._~
,
i
! ,
I,
I
!
i
,
i
! '
I
i
j
- "
1,
"
;
f
I
"
,
::1
j
L
1 ~
1
,
I:
,
I'
, '
I:
i
I
I,
! !
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
I
I
,
,
, I
II
- II
1\'
1\
i.:
",
('
:-J
;,
"
'i
1
l
I
I
I
,
"
;{
"