HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-02-01 Agenda
'; ).
, ,
, I
I
,
"
<
"
f
,
I'
I.,;
,I
". - '~ ~
........,....,........--..
- ,. ~---
: ,- ,-, '1-" ,,',
"~"~I ~" ,,'" h' ' , ,:,'
-' 'f-:-C'" '
': ' - '. '-' : .'~ ,.:.....:'. '. '. .
/
f/r,
;' ]
... \
'~~.::;::..:.~ "
........-...
-~""
IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1, 1994
6:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CIVIC CENTER
410 EAST WASHINGTON
,. n.._........__...."...., C'_.'., . .'
.. - ... ...........~.
__ '~L1.
--.-..--
.,....,...."..'.'".,:.;.
['
I
I
j.
I
I
I
i
I
I
I'
i
,
!,
,
'I!! ' I
I
I - ,11,
J'I,
il :!'
II ,4 ,
'. ,I'.
il -, (,.'
.1,._. .I'
i', '
i
!
,
I
\
I I
I,
, ~,'
,..
:\
II
, i'
I
,
, "
........,".',....,,~,,---'
I_ ," ,,;,'1" .1'71', ,d '/~:"" ': '::.'
, /" , ,
, . ).,. I '. .'
:. ...' . -', ,....., .
/
/
I "'1
,~
"
I,
.
.-- .
~_..._-
--...., .--
~
AGENDA ~~_
IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL ~
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 1, 1994 ~
6:30 P.M. a.w .
COUNCIL CHAMBERS ~
1l{~
~
ROLL CALL. Ij$I(
MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS tlJ;,0 ~ '
b. Black History Month - February, 1994 of ~ P
~ Sertoma's F.reedom Week - February 1 -19, 994 /' IUIa ~ I.
CON~R-tA~~o~ofTIfe g~SEN~ALENDAR ~ts~~D OR '41(4 .;.Ii& I,
AMENDED,
ITEM NO, 1. CALL TO ORDER,
ITEM NO, 2-
ITEM NO, 3-
a. Consider approval of Official Council actions of the regular meeting of
January 18, 1994 and of the special meeting of January 24, 1994, as
published, subject to corrections, as recommended by the City Clerk. '
b. Minutes of Boards and Commissions.
(1)
12)
(3)
Board of Appeals meeting of December 20, 1993.
Airport Commission meeting of December 21, 1993.
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission meeting of. November
17,1993.
(4) River(ront and Natural Areas Commission meeting of December
15,1993.
(5) Board of Adjustment meeting of January 12, 1994.
(6) Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of January 20, 1994.
c. Permit Motions and Resolutions as Recommended by the City Clerk.
(1) Consider a motion approving a Class "C" Liquor License for Motif,
Ltd., dbil Bo-James, 118 E. Washington St. (Renewal)
(2) Consider a motion approving a Class "C" Liquor License for
Vanessa's of Iowa City, Inc" dba Givanni's Italian Cafe, 109 E.
College 51. (Renewal)
(3) Consider a motion approving a Class "C" Liquor License for Mike's
Piace, Inc., dba Mike's Tap, 122 Wright St. (Renewal)
(41 Consider a motion approving a Cless "C" Liquor License for One
Poor Student, Inc., dba One-Eyed Jake's, 18-20 S. Clinton St,
(Renewal)
i
,
,
" '
.,
I:
i
I
i:
1 '
j
I
I'
, '
i'
I;
, ,
I
i
I
j:
, '
,
I'
I
,
,
I
,
,
,
; ,
I'
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
I I
i
I
,
,
I
!
a
'I'
I,
b
I~
i!
i:
"
"
. it.
i;;,
i'
,
"
i.
'I.
I
I
"!(
. I{
,
:'-i
!
ii
',I
}
, I
I',
"
I
I
I
"~"']"'."".,.~,'"'.'''~_'-''' ..
~.,.
.' , . \,
I ' ~ I' ,I: ',-f. ;:-1' , . ',':;' , '
- ,; 'r / , ~"
. , . " " '1-..;,- '. "1" , '
/
I/~
I j,
'. -,
...<:.....~-."
....------
#2a page 1
Horow/(#2a) Salute To Hospital Veteran's Day
/ On behalf of the VA and Medical Center and Veteran's Affairs
across the nation we would like to thank the council for
considering this and issuing this proclamation. Thank you.
Horow/ You are welcome.
(Reads other proclamations: Black History month; Sertoma's
Freedom Week; Girls and Women In Sports Day)
I would now like to take the time and council would like to do
this and on behalf of council we would like to thank the
staffs of both the city and the University and contractors who
put in monumental effort on the 23rd of January to get the
Water Plant back on line and ably managed the communications
efforts after flooding occurred in the high service pumping
room. Our staff from the Water Division (reads names); in our
Streets Division (reads names); in our Pollution Control
Division (reads names). We also had outside contractors: Hupp
Electric Company, AAA Mechanical, Holiday Crane, Shay
Electric. We also had at the University besides Ken LlOYd,
the Water Utilities Manager, we had (reads names). In our own
city employees in our Communications Division, many thanks go
to (reads names). Thank you all of you. That was a dramatic
time. You pulled it off and we couldn't have done it without
you. Thanks very much.
F02194
"
~--'-" .".-
i
i
I
I
I
I
i
}
;
I"
!i I
if 1\:
:1 -II
,'i. 11
Ii,
,I
I
,,)
"
J;
'"
"
I
"
!
'Ill
j
j
I
1
ii
"I/If"" -
'i
"I
I
"
,'.j'
,
I
!
:
I
I
I
i
:
~
.., -----.. ~~ '"W\--
, ' ,
: - <' I, ,tyj' I {3' . ',', - - - .
:. ,.. ~
/
/~~
.'
,
'- 'I.'
....,::-::_:--.~1:..-::...:::......_......
~--
"',
#2a page-2 Il-f../.vr ~ ~
Horowl (Prior to #4) I would to announce that council last evening
decided to defer the public discussion on the pesticide
ordinance. Therefore, if any of you are here to discuss that
we have deferred that. We will set a time and certainly it
will be in the newspapers as to when it will be.
F02194
.. _ "'..n_.. ~....",.._ '~.,,-_~.., .
, ,
--.-. '---.
!.
'1'
~
Ii
1;1
I
I,
II.
II
,I ,R r,
\! ,1
'Ii:
I
II,"
')'
1
H,
, i'
1,
. :';",'
"<11:
1':::>.
"--/'
'.." l~r .
. ).
;,1,
>1:' .
I'
,;':.
i' "
I;',
I,
IL
j
!
.."..,<..,.,...' .'..,.:,
,
i'"
~---
"''''lIIIr "'fI("".
, "
i
/,
)
\
l"!
"
....... --"'1 ~,
.' .,.;..,-".'.....------
9\--~ ~I
~ Ill..,........
- ~ ~.. ..........-------.--~ ... ----..---.....-
.. -~~~-;
\
"
, 1 Iq ....C I-I' '" " '
. ~ :;'. ' ' .~ ,(.;. ~,'.
~.' ", w . ,: ,."....;... , ,", ,.,' , . ' .
/
I
1\
,/ 1
I
"
......--.
-'-
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 2
(5) Consider a motion approving a Class "C" Liquor License for Nash.
Finch Co., dba Econofoods #473, 1987 Broadway. (Renewal)
(6) Consider a motion approving a Class "E" Liquor License for Hy-
VeeFood Stores, Inc., dba Hy-Vee Food Store #1,501 Hollywood
Blvd. (Renewal)
(71 Consider a motion approving a Class "E" Liquor License for Hy-
Vee Food Stores, Inc., dba Drugtown #1, 521 Hollywood Blvd.
(Renewal)
~Il
-,_~-
"
II
i'
l' '
!
- -- -- .......'--~ ~lOL", ~
'"'=-,......"""'I/!f"',.. ....... .........--"'1 --... -9\--- qjI; ..-""."" - ~~
.........- T ....-.......---I~--.--------.,--~......... 1-
I '
" '
I _; ,'I .Lr"~/,' n .'." -, "',
.:. ' ':, ~ '- ':..... _. " "
/
/
;'/ \
. ).
l'
--..>
. -,
---"--..
-.-'-" '_4.
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 3
d. Resolutions.
'1<1- z.I"
111 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CJTY CLERK TO ATTEST THE RELEASE OF A LIEN
REGARDING A PROMISSORY NOTE AND A MORTGAGE FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 919 NORTH GILBERT STREET, IOWA
CITY, IOWA.
Comment: The owners, of the property located at 919 North
Gilbert Street received a low-interest loan of $ 7,000 through the
City's Housing Rehabilitation Program on September 20, 1990.
The loan was paid off on January 21, 1994, and can now be
released.
,
I
\' ~
, ~.
Ii
II
" l-
I,
" Ii
i!
'i
, ii .~ I"
r,
Ij'
Ii
"
i
1;1
!' j
I
I' ' il
I:
e. Correspondence.
111 Petition signed by 216 people regarding the Iowa City Airport. All
signatures are on file in the City Clerk's office.
(2) Letter from Valda Gebhart regarding TCI.
(3) Letter from Dale Hibbs regarding parking in the City High area.
(41 Letter regarding paratransit services from:
(a) Goodwill Industries.
lb) Hillcrest Family Services.
(c) Margaret Lawrence.
ld) Systems Unlimited, Inc.
I
I
15) Letter from Ronald Vogel regarding parking on Third Avenue.
(~) k~
f. Applications for City Plaza Use Permits.
11) Application from the University of Iowa Animal Coalition for
permission to have a quiet demonstration on City Plaza on
January 20, 1994. (approvedl
<11r/ dCk~
~/I1AL 4--/~ ~u
~ ilJ.2P.}] CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM NO. VpuBLic DISCUSSION.
: ,
~ frqtf)" ~ "4'
(~fw 50-J ~OO ()J~~;
d
!'
),
"'.,......,.,..............
.,
-............,.". -
i
, ~
"
\-, ~
---~-
i
I
I
I
,
.-.....,"..,......---
~
"1~" '"'V\.....~-;;'.....- ~ -------............---..
---
~ff ~
....
~ ..~_w t""- ....
\
. .. I . ,
,. ,- - t ' " ' ,.
J. , ' ,'<..;..1 , " " I.
.' :, ,I ,Lr ,I, ',..
. '" ~ ' - I '-'-;.' ','j.. " .
I
I/\.
" I
", 'fe'
. .....,>...~: -~ .:::.:.::...- .----.
---'-" ~-
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 31, 1994
TO: Mayor, Council, General Public
Subject: Addition to Agenda
#23 -
Consider a resolution approving the East Central Iowa Council of Governments
Regional Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan.
Comment: As required by State Law, an update has been prepared to the
ECICOG Regional Solid Waste Management Plan. This plan must be adopted
by all entities that contrubute waste to the Iowa City Landfill. The
plan contains recommendations which may be subsequently considered for
implementation by the City of Iowa City as operator of the landfill.
Addition to the Consent Calendar:,
3e(6) Letter from Ray 'Novick regarding the alley vacation between Court St.
and Burlington St.
~. ol\l~
~d. {-.3{. tW
"1-,''-1-5 ("'\ OS F=-
i
,
I
I
I
I
j
1
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
!
,
J.
II
II
II
Ii'
l'
il
II
i
11
. iI .~:.,
;1 I':
II,!
i " 1-
,. 'It)
j
I
I
I
Ii
)1
~.
(
....' .
',:'
;
,
r:
'i
I,
"
, ,
,
"- ~".
':1,
I
, ,
\.!
.,
----------.;,.~-.
-- ~ ----.......,.,---..--------...-- - -
--...,- ..... ;.'.....
, .
, ' , "-.{ -.
I . -, - 4 " ,
. 1 fT l' ' " , ,
~ ,:/ .~. , I ~ '. ."
.,'. ',. ,<- ' '""".. ' ,~ , " ,
/
/
I.
/'/ '1
! '
.... '('
...... ~ ----.....
#4 page 1
Horow/ (#4) Public Discussion.
Robert Kemp/ 1122 Estron street. As I have observed the city
council at work I noticed that occasionally there are some
differences. Lots of different ways approaching issues,
approaching life maybe. But one common element in this city
council and I think an element that has helped the city
support your actions or sometimes your inactions is that each
of you has been elected by the people of Iowa city. What I
would like to offer today is encouragement for the city
council to go on record in the form of a resolution, non-
binding resolution, to support that in cases of elections or
resignations that affect Iowa city residents that elections
should be the priority and should be the presumption of that
occurrence and that we would discourage appointments to those
offices where elections by the citizenry should have priority.
Any questions or reasons.
Horow/ Does anyone have an opinion on this.
KUbby/ I like your sentiment and wouldn't even mind some suggested
wording of a resolution if you would like to submit a
foundation that we could talk about I would appreciate that.
Kemp/ Okay, I'll do that.
Throg/ I would agree.
Kemp/ Thank you.
Horow/ Anybody else.
Randy Neprash/ 426 grant street. I make my living as a civil
engineer. I have lived in town for two years and this is the
first opportunity I have had to speak before your body. I
wanted to speak in reference to the proposal for the new water
treatment plant and in particular some items that after one
thorough reading through the report felt are worthy of
consideration on your part before you move to the final design
phase of this project. The items fall into three major
categories. The first is more information that should be
researched and presented to the public. The second is
additional questions that should be considered in the course
of this study. And the third is the consideration of
appointing a citizen's advisory panel. Under the category of
more information that should be researched and presented to
the public would be items such as who are the major users of
water in town. Which organizations, businesses, institutions
are the largest users of water. How is water use divided into
categories. These categories would be industry, office,
F02l94
--
,;
; ,
, ,
!. !
!i II
"
Ii I;
i il iF
W Ii
I
I !;
I \.1
I "
I !;
I H
I
i i I'!
I I "
I I ~j
I ' .{
1 I ','1
1 I
I I
I
I I
.,
I "
I
i.
~.."""...~". -
--""1 ~,
,,--- If...1I. ..-r -'....
- ~..- ...--------- I~ .r-
( .', I' ~.., ..;,/. '.~- '.". ,', '~ ".:,
p ,.1 , . ~ ' ,~ .
. ..' I ' . . , . -.:' ,.,,:', . '.
. 'I ., , ' " .' ...."
-. ,,- -.,.... , ,
/
i, \
I
'.,
#4 page 2
institutional, multi family housing, s.f. housing. All of
this information could be very useful in cost benefit analysis
further on down the line as additional questions are
considered. Along the same vein when considering the forecast
in the growth in water use that also should be divided into
categories. The plan, as written, simply states that per
capita water use will increase by one gallon per person per
year every year for the next forty years. In fact, that
growth will probably not come from residential consumption. It
will most certainly come from industrial and business increase
in water use. To divide that forecast into the categories
would present that in a more useful and comprehensive fashion.
Another piece of information would be useful is how much water
is leaked in the water system. Average leakage in American
cities ranges from 10-20%. Ours may be less. Ours may be
more. It would be useful to have that information in the
report. That also leads to the question of whether some of
that leakage can be reduced in a cost effective manner.
Another item in terms of more information would be what will
be the operating costs of the plant. There is a great deal of
discussion as to the capital costs of the plant. There is
hardly any information that I could find in the report
regarding operating costs. Operating costs may vary in an
uncertain regulatory environment over the design life of the
plant. However it should be possible to propose a small
number of probable scenarios and then three or four possible
scenarios in terms of operating costs in varying regulatory
environments could be presented for the design life of the
plant. without that information it is impossible to come up
with such fundamental information as what will be the actual
cost per gallons of treated water during the design life of
the plant. If you haven't determined the operating costs you
can't determine the cost per gallon. Without the cost per
gallon you cannot then move to cost benefit analysis in and
any number of other questions that should be considered.
Another item that would be useful to have would be the
approximate increase in the average household water bill
because of the construction of a new water plant. Under items
of additional questions to be considered in further study. The
first would be the question of water shed protection. This
gets to be a fascinating issue when you consider that there is
a contribution to improvement of water quality at the
Coralville Reservoir. What that means-I should note that that
varies according to time of year and also the types of
contaminants that you are looking at. But what they may mean
is instead of looking at a vast water shed of the Iowa River
if the water quality at the outfall of the reservoir is
sufficiently good we are now looking at the question of
whether local water shed protection can contribute
significantly to the water quality and the existing water
F02194
-
-
I
I
,
; I
I;,
" II
J,
II
,I,
j;, H
Iii
Iii I'
II'
f'
I "
I'" I~
I .
;: .
'1 ",
,j ,I f:
'j I';
;l , II .f!
,
1 I ,.1
! , "
,i I J
i "
.1
i I
j i
; I
, 'I
I , I'
I
! , "
, I,
, i
~:
I
1
1
1
,
,
I
I
I
I
i
,
I
I
I
I
,j
""Ilf""
..... ~"1~-. -"'--~-"-'.....
--- ~"-...
----,~....
...--
p
.' r'" --.--,
\
1 , . .
, -
f 1 ~ '-, I~ " ,,'
. "~ I
.,:1 : '. ; ~. \,,'
:, ," "; ~ ,_' ...:..- . '1'" _ ',"
'l
#4 page 3
intake or the new water intake. There are existing plans in
place, particularly at the Johnson County soil and Water
Conservation District, for soil erosion control measures on
Rapid Creek, Muddy Creek and Clear Creek. Particularly Rapid
creek and Muddy Creek considering the location of the new
intake would be of tremendous interest. It may be that
dollars can be spent very effectively to meet a number of
questions and concerns in the area that would improve the
water quality at the intake. Another question to be
considered would be water conservation. Here I should note
that by water conservation I don't mean to discuss the
question of asking people to wash their cars only once of
month or to install toilets that are made only in Sweden.
Instead, I am talking about low flow water efficient fixtures
that are actually required in some states. There are a number
of states now that are requiring low flow toilets. I am also
discussing the question of targeting very specifically
particular types of buildings and particular types of
businesses. Again, you look at the question and look for
where you get the most bang for your money and it may be that
cost benefit analysis of water conservation could show that
that could reduce the capital cost of the plant, also the
operating cost of the plant and this is one of the most
interesting areas. By reducing the amount of treated water
that is used you improve the ability of the city to adjust to
future regulatory changes. You would be more flexible in the
long term if you can cut back on the amount of water that is
being used in the city. You should also note that there is a
extensive body of literature concerning water conservation and
there are a number of consultants nationally that are very
experienced in this field. The third question that seemed
worthy of consideration before moving to design phase was the
question of whether there are any major users of water in town
that could use untreated well water. If you look at the map
of wells that is proposed over the long term it extends
eastward along 80 and then south down Scott Blvd. By the time
you get down south on Scott Blvd you are talking about getting
close to some of the industrial users on the southeastern part
of town. It may be that some of those users can use untreated
well water in their processes. It may be cost efficient to
build piping systems to take water to them. The last point I
wanted to make was to ask that you consider appointing a
citizens advisory panel. I feel confident that your existing
engineer, the engineer that you have been working with, can
answer most of these questions. I think, however, I have left
a copy of an article from the American Water Works Association
Journal that discusses the experience of a number of major
municipal water utilities in working with citizen advisory
panels and their experience has been uniformly favorable. I
think the advantages in this particular instance would be 1-
F02194
- -
..
, I
,
J,I
!,
I
II: I
I
II' i
1;1 ,
il.
I!i 'I,
1'; I;
I'
il - 1\
, ;,'
: , I;
, I '.'
!;
i I':
Ii:
i
,
, IJ
i
, I
"
J
, I
"
,
I
I , "
!
.
I
I
! .
,
I
I
,
,
I
,
I
,
:!
~'..;.".~...,~. "....--.--
,
\\.
,
.
, .
I " -., __
, . - I I "
, ,;1, L' "-: '7l!" ,",,'
,~,:. " M ,"~,.=l '_. " '_. .' ,
/
/
.'
I" .\
. 1
{.
#4 page 4
a citizens advisory panel would help you with some very
complicated technical questions and 2- a citizens advisory
panel could help solidify public support for a very large and
significant public improvement. Thank you for your time.
Horow/ Thank you.
Kubby / Randy, in you knowing about how these citizen advisory
panels work, I was really intrigued by that and tend to want
to do things like that when we have big decisions to make
where the whole community will be affected not just
residential community but the business community too. Do you
think that doing that takes more time or do you think that it
saves time because we use to have a lot of time to deal with
this and recently we have learned that we don't have a lot of
time to deal with this. So even though it might be the best
idea if we start getting big fines because we are not meeting
the water quality standards. But if we can't do it with it
because of time frames, how do we work it. So, does it take
more time.
Neprash/ It is a difficult question to answer. The answer that
comes to mind is I think as a general rule democracy is
terribly time consuming. It would depend upon how it is
structured, how large it was. It would also depend on what
frame you look at. It may take a little bit longer. If
however, the public support of the entire project is more
solid and questions are better thought through up front you
could end up saving a significant amount of time.
Horow/ Randy, You have read the report from H.R. Green.
read the two previous ones which there was a
committee.
Did you
citizens
Kubby/ It was a focus group. It was real different from a citizens
advisory committee.
Horow/ There were non-government employees on this advisory
committee and that seemed to me to kind of help us steer our
way along here.
Neprash/The impression that I've had, I've only become aware of
some of the earlier reports. I picked up one copy of one just
this afternoon. What I have been told by one or two people is
that this panel looked at some specific questions, I believe
along the lines of the groundwater concerns and expanding that
capacity, and they did not deal with some of the questions
that are directly related to the water treatment plant that
I've raised this evening. But if your experience was positive
then then that should be a lesson for this application as
F02194
---..,., -. ~
,
;
" ~
I'
I I:
I II
, . ii'
i
II
I: j;'
, ! I'
"
f:
,:i
I
'"
"
!' /1
II
II I!
'! '
.I
I',
I
i
"
'~r
,,'.1
I
,') \
t1\ ~
"
fl.
,
-
~
".,~~--- '-e. -'.. ..-
1IIt."'-, ..
-
, ' ,
" "I ,L, ',,--I '/~: '. , " ..
:. I ,.;. _ \ . ~'JJ _t . .' ~" ".,, . ,'. I
#4 page 5
well.
/
(,."
I I
\.. '1..-
," .'(
'--:':;'~:-==::::.:_--
~
Horow/ Thank you.
Is there anyone else who wishes to address council.
We'll move on to PZ matters.
F02194
....~"'.-..~,.....'--,~.,.,...~,..... .....--... .
--'-' ~-
--",
,
,
,
,
;
,
i
"
,
I
I,
Ii
rI
Ii
I!
lil.. ",
.," \
"I'."
'i :
I
,
I
~ .
'I
!l:
j
,\
,
I
I,
I
I
I
"
, f
"
i,""
H
,
, '
, '
'.1
,
,
,
, '
. , ~ .
, .' ' ,J I' L,',d ,,'7t,,"'~'" .
:',' 'r'.~ . .~=J.. . I.:.J '. ~\.~.' ,'" , <.' - "
/
("
, i.
"
------..,
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 4
ITEM NO, 5 - PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
a, Consider selling a public hearing for Febru~ry 15. 1994, on an
ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by changing the use
regulations for a 12.5 acre tract of land located west of Sycamore
, Street and south of Burns Avenue from ID.RS to RS.5. IREZ93.0014)
Comment: At its January 20, 1994, meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 7.0, recommended approval of the requested
rezoning, subject to conditions. The Commission's recommendation is
consistent with the staff recommendation.
Action:
nitU / f~
b.
a..M I>.~
Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by
amending the PDH IPlanned Development Housingl plan for Walnut
Ridge, Parts 5 through 9, an 85.32 acre, 56 lot residential subdivision
located north of Melrose Avenue on Kennedy Parkway extended.
(REZ93.0015 and SUB93.0023)
Comment: At its January 6, 1994, meeting, by a vote of 5.0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of an
application submitted by Southgate Development Company for approval
of an amended PDH plan for Walnut Ridge, Parts 5 through 9, subject
to submission and approval of a Grading and Erosion Control Plan. The
Commission's recommendation varies from the staff recommendation
contained in the staff report dated December 20, 1993. It is anticipated
that the Grading and Erosion Control Plan will have been approved by
the February 1, 1994, Council meeting.
~~
.k.v IJJk,'l ;IV . -4- IJ ~
c;fpubiic hearing on a resolution approving the untary annexation of an
approximate 422 acre tract of land, known as Sycamore Farms,located
south of Highway 6 and the southern corporate limits. (ANN92.0003)
Action:
; t
,
,!
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6.0, the
Plenning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
annexation of the 422 acre Sycamore Farms area. This recommenda-
tion is generally consistent with that of staff as set forth in staff reports/
and memoranda contained in the Council packet. ~ tu d.
Action: ~~!~ 0ULpf (' ~rlJ4IJ 0
a.lR~
K~ /P1 Ch/IJ~ fl5
dt~
,,',.
i"
\'"
"
,--~
,
I
I
i
, ,
I
i j
I
I
I
I
I
I
ii,
11'
I
t:\
::,
I,
i;
I;
I
~ I
I
I
I
I
~,
,j
:1.'
r
.I
"
'I
"
I
, I
j ~
I
'J .'
I
(
"
'"1
"
':1
1 ~
I:,!
M'~_~""""'__'-_
~,'"
( , -, .:.... ,- ,', "
' L I .,
. ,if I ,', I' ,J, i ~ ' ' '_ I "
. ". ~ -
/
;,\
I' J
'""" ,~.
'--:''::-; ::::':::':~-~----..
#5a page 1
Borow/ (#5a) Moved by Nov, second by pigott. Any discussion.
All those in favor (ayes)
Karr/ Madam Mayor, can we have a motion to accept the
correspondence.
Horow/ Moved by KUbby, seconded by Throg to accept the
correspondence. Was it Throg or Pigott.
Karr/ I'm sorry. Who moved and seconded.
Throg/ Karen moved. I seconded.
Nov/ Which correspondence are we talking about.
Karr/ The correspondence the gentleman was referring to and I'll
see you get in your next packet.
F02194
--.-..--'.
;'., ,,;, ".',
i
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
I
I
1,\
!i
11
Ii'
I;
III
I'
,I
,I
'I
I
l,j
'1\:
I
!
I
I
I
..
i
~ -', .
!: '
I
.,i'
-"'..,.,... "'Iff',. -
,
I
I
~
',0
.--"1 ~,
,,-- ~ fIIf-' .....
-- ----.......---~---.~.... ---....----
p
I ' , , ' "':
- ',-' 1- '
- , ',,:; I' ~' '<-I' ',;, &..[ " , ' ~ , ' .,
" 'I . .
:. 'l'~' '. - .' '- :' ~I ,., ' , ,"-,
/
. "
1
,J.
#5b page 1
Horow (5b)/ P.H. is open.
Nov/We have someone here from PZ. We had asked yesterday for an
explanation of the decision.
Horow/ This was the sidewalk vs trails discussion.
Kubby / And has the erosion and control, erosion control and
grading. It's been approved.
Tom Scott/419 E. Fairchild. Chair IC PZ Commission. I think last
night if I remember correctly there were two issues that were
brought up and questions surrounded both sidewalks and trails.
It was my understanding that Larry Schnittjer of MMS was going
to be here tonight. He might have thought the council meeting
started at 7:30 as opposed to 6:30. He certainly is far more
familiar' with some of the technical aspects than what I am. If
you remember the map that was up last night, it was divided
into three sections. Part 1 was originally, the preliminary
plat and the design concept appeared as one large map if my
memory serves me right. It showed a system of trails
throughout the subdivisions parts 1-5 and 5-9 as a concept
plan. Part 1 was approved independent of two three and four.
When part 2 came in the trail systems were eliminated with
amendments to part 2 in the final plat 'cause 2 was approved.
It removed the trail systems from 2-4. I have to apologize. I
don't know if one included the final plat as it was approved
in 1 included any trail systems or not. The particular time
that the amendments to part 2 were approved or adopted, there
was an additional sidewalk if my memory serves me right on one
of the cuI de sacs. The sidewalk is from Melrose to the far
western terminus of Kennedy parkway as it abuts the land from
the west which it is my understanding is owned by Frieda
Heronymous. The commissions' feeling both on the trail system
in parts 1-4 dealt with the topography and the problems that
they ran into when they were doing the grading and excavation
work. That is my understanding why the trail system was
eliminated from parts 2,3, and 4. The developers had a
preliminary plat and a PDH approved on parts 5-9. The plat
expired and there was some question whether or not the OPDH
expired or if in fact that was still in standing. They came in
with a new OPDH and we went through, staff went through the
review of the preliminary and final. The commission did the
review and filed the new plat as well. In that they eliminated
constructed trails, but there are provisions on the rear lot
lines for 20 foot r. o. w. for grassed trails in parts 5-9.
There is and at one of the informal meeting that the Ie PZ
commission had and Larry arrived and you may want to ask him
to do this for you also, but what the commission asked him to
do was draw the connecting links so that it was more evident
F02194
'.,.lldlo:ll.
-
-~-------.---..........----~
\
---------
.....' . '\
, ,
1 !
II
I
II II
- 'I
II'
r L'
Ii
I: 11
;,
I: !:
I I,j
i
II
I 1'1
I
I I
I
, I
;,
, I I,! :,f,
:
,
~
i
(
i
"
)
: ,
;1
(
"
!
...",.,. -
~
"1'~-; -~....~ -.J.....
.
, ,
. ,
. .',.
f' ,- . :
.. '" I ,L. ,u'H. ,",~', . .
:\ : : \, ~ , ,:,21' . i .t '. ' .' _. ." .'
/
/
,'/',
, 1
,(,,'
--'-'--~'-
#5b page 2
to all of the commission members between the open space, the
sidewalk, and their interconnectability. And that was done.
The feeling on the part of the commission was that because the
density of this particular subdivision and it is extremely
low. It's a large lot sUbdivif;ion, containing significant open
space, some of which is private, a lot of which is private.
Some of which is public. And there is a interconnectibility
between the open space and the sidewalks as such. Granted,
that the sidewalks appear only on one side of Kennedy Parkway.
Horowl Excuse me Torn, which side is that.
,
; i
I,
, '
!:i
I,
Iii
II
"
f
( I'
/:i' ;:;
'II 1,1
! ,iiI
I
I
11
I' ,JI
Scotti It alternates. Let's see. You do that to me and I am lost.
Horowl You were between sidewalks and open spaces.
Scotti And I don't know what the total acreage is but the total
proposal. Parts 1 through 4, contain 46 lots and Parts 5
through 9 contain 56 lots. If in fact all of the lots were
developed it would be a total of lots. My understanding is
that in the first phase that a number of builders have bought
multiple lots. So in all likelihood it will not be developed
at its maximum density of 102 lots. Whatever is developed at
this particular juncture would only be speculation on my part.
I would tell you that last evening the discussion that
surrounded secondary access and the public request for
sidewalks in the neighborhood. The Commission to be very
honest with you and I asked two or three other Commission
members in addition to myself, not trusting my own memory, if
in fact the Commission spent any considerable time on the
question of secondary access or on the part of the pUblic
requesting sidewalks. I will tell you that even though the
staff report mentioned secondary access it was not an issue
with the Commission. staff did not necessarily bring it up or
push for it nor was it discussed extensively by the
Commission. In regards to the request for sidewalks it
appears as a sentence or a note in staff report. No one
appeared at any of the P/Z Commission informal or formal
meetings to object. There was no written correspondence from
any of the present inhabitants or property owners within
Walnut Ridge and no person or persons were identified by staff
as having made a telephone call to request sidewalks in the
present Parts I through 4. And I think that if staff would be
asked I think that as best that I could tell is that there was
a report of one telephone call. And whether or no that person
identified themselves, I don't know.
KubbYI So Tom, how will people get to the public open space. How
will they know properly where they can walk and where they
F02194
~
1\
Ii
II:
[,
\'!
,
t
,
i
i
i
,
j
'.
I'
I
j
'.
l
,
J
l
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
,
,
,j
',',
1..,;..."".,,'.....-..-'..-.
I, " "'I" H "f 1 ' l ' " '"".' , ' '
'I' t " .," ,
.' ~..' "~':, ,,' '_ J '. -~ , ' ',~..... ' , ,~ " : .
/
>,
, ,
"
'. ,~-"
~.,-------
--
#5b page 3
can't walk so that they are not on private property.
Scotti I would defer to Larry Schnittjer, MMS, because he has the
maps and he probably has a far fresher memory than I do of
that and I did not look up my final map today and Karen, I
would let him explain that to you.
Throg/ I would like to ask a different question, Tom. And maybe
Monica would be a better person to respond. With regard to the
question of pUblic notification and whether people and the
point that no one showed up for the p.h. that P/Z held with
regard to speak about sidewalks. I was talking with someone
who lives in Part 1 of Walnut Ridge today and what she told me
is that she and they had not, no one in the subdivision or in
Part 1, had been notified there was a p.h. tonight. Now, I
don't know if that is true. And I don't know if they had been
notified whether there was a p.h. before P/Z. I guess what I
am wondering is were they notified. If not, how could they
possibly speak. If so, maybe she misstated what actually
happened.
,
,
,
,
I
I
I Ii II
,
,
J ,I !I:
i:
i "
"
"
i: ,
i :;
I ,
I . i! ;
I I
i I f:
I I 1,1
1
I
I I
"I
" I
I
.I
II
I
Scotti Jim, there is no way that the Commission can go out and see
whether or not the signs are appropriately placed. Our
assumption is that is a function of staff and staff and the
proposed developer and that should occur. I am not going to
stand here and tell you that it did or did not. Our
assumption is that it did.
Throg/ We may have a difficulty that we would want to deal with
here. I don't mean with regard to this particular application
but in general.
Horow/ It has occurred. In different years we have gone different
ways of notifying people, increasing the radius around the-
Throg/ You can't speak if you don't know.
Scotti There is one other point that I would like to make before I
sit down if I don't forget it which I may have already done.
Lehman/ Tom, one question. What we are talking about tonight
really is no significant variation on what was originally
proposed. Is that correct.
Scotti The configuration of the lots are different. The Kennedy
Parkway has been moved from the valley to the top of the hill
for better sight distance. By and large they are not
significantly-the proposal in front of you is not
significantly different from the other. But there are changes
and they were substantive enough that staff felt with the
F02194
.-
:i
;.
,
,
'....11.
l::...M.L1..
" ",...-- 'f',.
~ -'- "1 ..--...., --..... QII; ..-, ........
-- _........'--~...~.
.. ~ -
.... -.
, ,
f,' ,,',' - ' '-I '" " ',' ',' "
" :; I L . L J ,''-\ ' , ' , ,,', '
,~. ",'~' - <C3.'. .'~:,7J. " ,..:), " ", ,.:.' '-' ;"
"
'"
,
#5b page 4
question of the plat expiring and the question on whether or
not the OPDH was or was not enforced that they required the
developer to go back and start over.
Lehman/ My point is if I were a property owner or homeowner out
there and knowing that this is happening. Also knowing that
it is not a significant change I probably would have very
little interest in going to a p.h. as evidenced tonight.
Scotti That is relatively recent-I think the whole subdivision age
is about two years old and it would seem to me that in this
particular instance public knowledge or public assumptions of
future construction would be greater than when you have a
rezoning or development proposal going in in an existing
neighborhood that has a life of more than two years old. But
that does not still negate the part that they mayor may not
have been notified.
Throg/ I would like to ask a different question. If I heard the
discussion last night at our informal meeting correctly, the
development is proceeding and looks like it is going to
proceed more quickly at Walnut Ridge than originally
anticipated. I guess what I am wondering is whether when this
proposal first came before council whether it was anticipated
that Camp Cardinal Road or its equivalent would have been
completed by the time that Parts 5 through 9 were finished so
that secondary access would not be a problem for a completed
subdivision. And here, my sense is it is not clear that Camp
Cardinal Road is going to be finished or even approved before
the subdivision is actually built out in which case there
could be a problem wi th regard to secondary access. Am I
misunderstanding here or that is the sense of what I get.
Scotti Jim, I am not sure that there was a conscious process that
people went through and I know that there wasn't necessarily
a debate of whether or not the subdivision is going to
progress to its conclusion and thus we're forced with a
situation of a street abutting the next property and when will
that develop. There was a general discussion about that and
I would also say that I think there was an intent on the part
of the developer to stage his developments so that it occurred
from Melrose Avenue in stages to its conclusion at the
northern limit of its property, north and west limits of its
property. Secondary access is a policy that the Commission
has bought into, I guess. That is something that has been an
issue ever since I have been on the Commission. There are no
absolute ordinances that are written that sets an absolute
limit on the number of units prior to denial of building
permi ts. First and Rochester, the Glasgow Subdivision in east
Iowa city contains an access of 128 dwelling units in that
F02194
\..'
'~1.1!1i
~---.-----
\ .
!i
"
Iii
,
~
Ii
'I
/11:
"
n
,
I"
f:
"
"
"
"
ii
1
I ,
i
:1
I,:
,
!ll
I
I
\: if
;
,
1
)
,
1 1
"
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
i
i
,
,
,I
..
'Ii
,
"~I
I
I
:
~. -
-
.., ----.;. - - ~....
.
, , ,
I' ": -" L I ~.;.. " ' "',', ,
, "I ,
.', :, I 'b' ,-. : ,:_ ,," ""'" ..'
./'
.- \,
.I
...., "I'
-- - ~---
#5b page 5
neighborhood and I don't know the exact number. You have a
number of developments that far proceed my tenure on P/Z as
well as most of your tenures on the council in Iowa City that
have this primary access point and there are a number of
apartment complexes that exceed the 100 plus or minus volume
for secondary access. It was not that big of an issue at the
Commission level. I will tell you that. Now, whether or not
there are concerns, I think everybody would have their own
particular opinion on that.
Kubby/ Although this would in no way pressure us to connect Camp
Cardinal Road by approving this. I mean I suppose if that
neighborhood should develop quickly and fill up quickly that
citizens might ask then. What we have decided as a group,
althOUgh it was a different group, that we wouldn't do
anything with Camp Cardinal for at least seven years and maybe
beyond.
Nov/ We did not talk about whether or not there would be an east
west street from this development to Camp Cardinal. What we
talked about at JCCOG was the extension north.
Horow/ Camp Cardinal to Melrose, right.
Scott/I think the problem that you will find is when and if there
is a connection to the adjoining property and that is under
discussion for development is when you will find the public
that is affected, i.e. those who live on Kennedy Parkway will
be in before you as well as before us. Hopefully I will be
gone but it will be before P/Z Commissions and councils
objecting to the traffic through their particular neighborhood
and I don't know how you solve that problem.
Kubby/ What is Kennedy labeled. It is a collector.
Scotti I think it is an arterial. A collector.
Kubby/ We have a winding arterial street that is not wide with
sidewalks on one side and-
Scotti It is classified as a collector.
Kubby/ Okay. It didn't make sense that we had an arterial-
Horow/ Does anyone else have any other questions for Tom. Or have
questions for Larry. '
Kubby/ Yeah, I would like that one question answered. I guess there
is two questions. How does the general pUblic know how they
can have general access to public space. Where they can walk
F02194
~._'-" '_4
i
11
i I
, )
: I
j,,1
,,'
'i
I,
I I
Ii I
'I I:
Ii
il "
"
i\
'i"
i ' "
il ~'
Ii
',I
,
I j
i"
,
I
'I
I
I
I
I'
I. !
,
"
,
,
~ '
j
I
I
J
i
ii
I,
, '
I
,
I
I'
I
I
I
'I
iI
I,
I
,'I
, ,
I':
"
TIfI///I('''~ ------ - ~'1'----"----: ......--~..-'.....--------""'QIIr~ ....-- ... --]~....
...~_.-...
i.., ,',','; I L, .L/",I...J '. .~ -.." "
. ,.~I' , ,:~~,' , ','
:. , 'j H . _ . ~ r.. .
/
"
\
J
,
#5b page 6
on-where there is a public r.o.w. easement and where it is
private property and how do different residences know where
that public easement is that they can walk between houses or
around house without getting on private property. Will it be
marked or anything.
Larry schnittjer/ MMS Consultants, primary designer of the project.
The walkways will be primarily along common back yard lines
and there will be landscaping of which we don't have
completed-don't have the design completed yet that will
demarcate these entrances to the walkways.
KUbby/ So there will be landscaping on either side so there is a
pathway kind of created by landscaping.
Schnittjer/ It is not going to be a continuous landscaping. It
will be probably at property corners or what have you. it
will cluster plantings and kind of give a person an idea of
where he is going and once the pathways are established and
people start using it and then they will understand where they
are.
Kubby/ You are saying individual property owners will be
responsible for doing that or it will be part of the-
Schnittjer/ The homeowners association will maintain all open
spaces out there and mowed and probably a mowed pathway in
this general vicinity. Some areas we will not probably
disturb because of ravines and steep slopes. This is one
reason we have cut out a lot of the improved pathways. The
original designs were probably not well thought out for
they're just too steep and only a portion of them were ADA
accessible. Rather than disturb the landscape, we decided to
leave them as natural areas.
KUbby/ I heard you say the homeowners' association will be
responsible for mowing, but who would be responsible for the
planting.
Schnittjer/The developer will install those plantings. I have a
rough illustration of what this is supposed to be here. A lot
of the line work has been completed in the drawing if you'd
like to see that.
Kubby/ Yeah.
Schnittjer/ This is the current proposal. Let me start out with the
original design. The original preliminary design had a Kennedy
Parkway taking off from Melrose and looping around the bottom
of the hill here and being very close to the creek and
F02194
-
~....--~
\
I i'
I \
, I.
I I'
j ! II! "
i I
I
, ,I
1 ,f i
, "
I 'I I;
"
I i W I;'
" -
;i
. , ,;
, . "
i " U
,
, "
I !I r:
,
I r
,
1 i II :::(;
I "
i J
I
I . I
.
I ;
i ;il,
II
"
,
,
)
':. ~
"
" ,
I ',' _ ' , 1_' '",
' , tr' I I " "
. . 1 ' , ~
, "', ~; I -: ',~. :.:,~" , , " "
. ".. -
/
;'
, ,
,:/ '1
,
'.,'
.
- .._---~
'~"
#5b page 7
crossing over the creek and going across another creek over
here and out the left side parallel with the creek. When we
found out that our preliminary plan had expired Mace asked me
to look at a better design and building this road and all the
stuff that goes with it next to the creek had some problems
because I didn't want to disturb the creek with siltation what
have you was going to happen. We've looked at bringing the
road up and bringing it out the high point over here so that
not only is it not by the creek but it also makes a better
location for extending over to Camp Cardinal Road.
Kubby/ stewart street.
Schnittjer/ Yeah. The other thing you can see the street situation
doesn't appear that is way out here now is because of down
here. There are bifurcations the street so there is a good
share of this street that is not one road. It is two roads.
So it is not as if we don't have-we have only one street to a
subdivision. We have potentially two separate lanes out there
for a good portion of the street so that you are not quite as
isolated as you are with single access. It all comes out. One
comes in. If one lane is blocked for some reason or the other
you can go backwards on the other lane to get around it. And
the new part although the street's not shown I'll just spread
it out it's two lanes separated for the full distance here.
Horow/ How many culverts are there.
Schnittjer/ There's an existing culvert here that was constructed
about a year ago. A new culvert right here is being under
construction right now.
Pigott/ Are there two lanes in those areas.
SChnittjer/ No. It's one traffic way over that culvert. It's a full
width pavement. It is not a narrow pavement there.
Horow/ Okay.
SChnittjer/ As Tom was mentioning
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-27 SIDE 1
SChnittjer/ It is all semi pUblic. There is nothing is dedicated
to everyone (can't hear)
Kubby/ But there is public. The public has the right to be there.
Schnittjer/ Essentially they are all outlots. So there would be
public areas for (can't hear) As we enter these greenways
F02194
(
[,
"
!"""""'4,"'" .__..
'-
,
, '
III I
~ I - 'I
:' I'
:!' II,
I,' '"
:: ~ .~
'. II
" !"
,I ~: '~ !;
" '
I
,
i
I,
I;'
1.:
I'
I'
,I
;J'
"
J
,I
',II
I'
!
,
"
'I
I,.
,
"
,
"
I',
----~--
~"..~,.",._...~.
, ",' .
: ,,' I. "L'j 'I' , ' ' ';,'
: : ,:' I It-r, '.' l.o,; , ,'" . ':'
, : -' ',..;'... !:_'., '. ',iJ) " , :',
/
i/ '\
.' '1
I,
"
-.
....._'~----
~
#5b page 8
there is a wider area on both sides.
Nov/ But they are all unpaved.
Schnittjer/ No, there is no paving here. The red line as you see
it on here is the walkway system.
Kubby/ So when you say it is on both sides of the street, really
there is just one cross over. It made it sound like it was
ping pong or whatever.
Schnittjer/ You cross over this first big eyelet that is out there
now. The original design had no sidewalks adjacent to the
street other than this area here and it was a pathway that was
set back from the street and then it was all proposed to
backyards. But the construction of that and the amount of
destruction we would have done to the ravines didn't seem
appropriate.
Kubby/ It doesn't seem like we should different rules for Parts 2,
3, 4 and different for 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
Schnittjer/ When we did a revision for Part 2 was the time we
essentially abandoned this.
,
,
,
I
I
, ;1
I
I,
"
I , J
!i t
'I
I I II
II It
, II
I I' .I
! I ir
j ,
I " !
" It
, .".
I q .
, i if
i I !:
11
I I' 1:1
I
I ,I
I '"
,
I
.1
, I'
'.
; ,
KUbby/ We just didn't catch it.
Horow/ That is right, we didn't. We have to move on, folks.
Nov/ Can we take one more look at this. All the red on this on this
is paved pathway.
schnittjer/ All the red on this is sidewalk that is to be installed
by the developer. Typically in a subdivision the developer
does not install teh sidewalks. The homeowners put them in.
Nov/ There shouldn't be any real problem on the cuI de sacs.
Throg/ I wonder if also there might be some way for this to be
displayed out in the lobby.
Horow/ Can we put this out in the lobby. Are there any other
questions on this. The p.h. is still in effect. Does anyone
else wish to address the council.
'.:'J
,."
Schnittjer/ One other comment in regard to I think it was Jim's
last question on notification. There are no existing
residents in the area that are within 200 foot limit meeting
the requirements of being notified by mail. So that is the
reason that none of them got it.
F02194
'i
".
i ,
~~.."".". ....... ---'-.:1~' --"'--~",-,I~.....---'-------...;;g,-. .,-- -
, ,
, , ,
I"~ ' '" I.' . L ,t71 ',', ;:t ,,',' ,,~ " ' : ' ,',
. . 'I'" ,
I \ " ' ,
: :1 ~ .'_ ': .', ' 'I .. " '_ ' \
/
\
,
'-"
-~~
#5b page 9
Pigott/ They might not have been notified by mail.
Schnittjer/ None of them were notified because they didn't meet the
notification requirements.
KUbby/ And the sign that would be on the property would be after
they would go to their place.
Throg/ I kind of thought that was the situation and it is a strange
layout. So vertical and so rectangular, if you will. (can't
hear)
Schnittjer/ And the lots that are adjacent to the proposed area are
not developed yet. Nobody is living there yet so nobody
actually meets the requirements because most of those lots are
in excess of 200 feet.
,
!
Throg/ We might want to reconsider the requirements.
Horow/ For a large sUbdivision. I have to ask you to keep it to
five minutes. We are kind of going over here.
Richard S. Rhoades/ Hopefully it will be less than five minutes.
I live at 2~14 Rochester Avenue. Exactly the opposite and of
town from this development. However, I have grave reservation
that does not include very basic city amenity which are
sidewalks. Rochester only has sidewalks on one side and
people are always crossing that street at unsafe locations.
There is a lot of traffic. Women with strollers, men with
strollers, joggers, walker, bicyclists trying to stay off of
a busy street and this is a problem even on such streets as
streets as cuI de sacs which have less traffic. In the winter
time they have sand and in the summer time there is often road
debris, broken glass, chunks of metal. It is not a safe place
for people to be walking. People who live in the sUbdivision
may be healthy and whole and (can't hear) when they buy their
properties but disasters can happen. They could become
disabled, they could lose their job and their house might be
all of their assets that they have left and they can't move
away and they could be locked into only being able to use
automobiles for transportation. I don't think this is a good
thing to happen. I don't necessarily want to oppose this
application because there are the questions of fairness about
the developer's plans that has been in the works so long. But
I really do have grave reservations about further sUbdivisions
without such basic amenities as sidewalks on both sides of the
streets and on all streets. Thank you very much.
Throg/ Thanks, Sandy.
F02194
, '
\".'
__L1J
--
'--.-",--
,
,
,
,
I
I
i
I
,
I
,1 !
1
)
!
,
I
,
';
! I
!
,~
,
I
Ii
,
I:
Ii
!
Ii
1",
"
i'l.,.
"
\.
,
I'
,
:1
ii,
'! "
Ii
, I:!
,d
. '(.
j
r
I'
,I ,II
,\ '
"
,
il
'.. .,
,
I
I
. I
I
'''I"
,"
q', '
'I
"
,
-:
---- .-
~----...-. -~...~ -,-...-
-. ~,"-
, ,
, ' ,
;.. L I "I-I' ,'." ' ,
.', ,~' ",L(, .-.:' ~:'f . " " '
,/~,.
<:::::-~; ::.'::.::---
-~
, --
- ,
#5h page 10
Horow/ Is there anyone else that wishes to address council on this
p.h.
The p.h. is closed.
F02194
\:.1..................,...__._,..
'i"
, ~"
j" .'
, :\
.
:1";' ,.
~
" .....,
".',,. ..~.'
--0_., ._._ ,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
j
I
I
I
,
i
I
I
,
,
i
I
I
I
,
i'
,
,
,
i
I
.1
,
. i
";.
,
II
':1
"
"
'Ii
I
II
'1
"
Ii _
Ii,
'\I :
. r: .
J,',
rt
Ie,
I,'. I,",'
l .,:.-',C>
,1..,'
If':
;1 "
. i
1'1'..
"
I',
,\,.:.,.
i:
';\,.:,.
"
,
I
I
}
,
. i
" '
\,,\
"
.....".. ...... -----..---~.~-. ____.... ~ ..-,I,...... -- - - '"'QIIIJ~
---- -'f"" -...
-. ...-
, -' "1-' " :'
'. , , ;' 'I_ . L' Lf ~l -',' , '. :
: . \\.. ,:1. ,~,,~ ~\ t, '."
/
1/ ~,
'" 1
....
.-- ",
.....-''"--~~
-.
Proclamation Regarding Girls and Women In Sports 1
Horowl I would now like to take the prerogative of the mayor and
suspend the zoning issues. We have had some visitors come to
accept the proclamation that I read before on the National
Girls and Womens Sports day. As you remember it is the 8th
Annual year for this celebrated on the first Thursday in
February of each year. continues the 1993 theme of Breaking
Down the Barriers that exclude girls and women from sports and
once again I would, therefore, like to proclaim February 3,
1994 to be Girls and Womens Sports Day in Iowa city. To bring
the attention to the achievement of female athletes and to the
issues facing females in sports. Thank you for coming. Would
one of you care to accept this please.
I Thank you for taking the time to do this. I know we were a
little late but we thought we were on time. As a President of
WISC, Women's Intercollegiate Sports council, I would like to
thank you all, the Mayor, the city council and the City of
Iowa city. A lot of us are from out of town but some of the
athletes are from Iowa and I am a senior here, a field hockey
player, and field hockey is not from the midwest and to have
over 1,000 fans at our games, to bring recruits, to have
parents come in. Iowa city is one of the best places for
women in sports, girls in sports and all of us today are
representing-I think we are all role models for girls and it
is communities like this that really like our athletics and
let us achieve the fullest as athletes and as students. Thank
you all very much.
r
pigott/ Thank you.
Horow/ Thank you for being here.
F02194
- --------
.I ,
\ ,
I'
, I
j 1
,
I!
."
i'
1,1
I
I'
II
1,1
n
,
"
,I
111-_
!I'
II'
l
,p
.1"
. J.
1"1 '
'--';
,--: ~t
,. 'I"
II.'"
,
i'
:!
\
i
j
.1
1:
I;
I:
~
I,
I!.
, '
r
"
\
i
Ii
,
'i
,.,.
Ii
,
,
!
'.
"
". . ',. ,~~'.
.
, ,
I', "', -"'.":" ":'/~t: ,,:' .',,' ' ,',
'., ,"'I '. 'S" .,', . :,'
I, ., "..I ""
\, '.,\ . 'L. , .:...._' ~ ,
" '..' -
/
/
\,
I
\'
'----.---
#5c page 1
Horow/ (#5c) I declare the p.h. open.
Kubby/ Sue, can we ask if people would speak speak to the
annexation and the zoning at the same time and then they can
stand up for the pUblic record.
Horow/ Item D. is the p.h. on the ordinance amending the zoning if
you wish to address both of those issues at the same time.
Please state your name and we would ask you to limit your
words to five minutes. If there is something else that you
need to say, please continue after someone else has had a
chance.
steve Bright/ Good evening. I live 4608 Oakcrest Hill. I am, here
to represent Sycamore Farms proposal. I think some of the
members of the council from last year will understand when I
say how glad I am here to be here tonight and with the 6-0
vote on P/Z. I suspect some money changed hands in Iowa city
on the odds of my being here. As Bob suggested in his memo
there has been a great deal of consideration to this proposal.
The memo that I picked up is only part of what I understand
you received which is about 375 pages. Work that has gone
into this has been voluminous. The process started for us
about two years ago. We owned two farms in the area and we
are considering buying a third. And at time we came in and
talked to Karin Franklin and the staff to how the city would
respond to a proposal for annexation and development of that
area. In the spring and summer of 1992 I started working on
a concept plan. We worked with the staff in that area and
developed a plan that was ready in August of 1992. And then
the Growth Policy Study commenced wi thin the P /Z and the
council and so we deferred action until December 1992 when we
appeared at a P/Z meeting and Bob gave you in your materials
a staff report for that and our accompanying letter. It was
the beginning of the process. Over the next 11 months, as
some members of the commission can attest to, we literally
hammered out this proposal. And I mean that literally. They
spent untold hours working on all of these issues. This is a
very big annexation. A number of issues we confronted and we
worked through them all. I would like to interest, just a
couple of minutes, two aspects of this development for you.
First is to address the land use questions. How did we come
up with the zoning that is set forth in the booklet that has
been approved by the staff and recommended to you by the P/Z.
Our guide to the development and our guide to the land use was
the CHAS report that the city developed over a number of
years. It started in 1988 with the study of housing needs in
Iowa City and concluded in the fall of 1991 with the CHAS
report and I would like to quote one paragraph of that. That
is the lack of affordable housing in Iowa city, both owner
F02194
i
,
)
" '
"
JlIl..~
~
i'
\,
I
;.
,
: I
i
: '
I:
!i
I
II,
ii
I
I,'
~
Il
;1
.,'
"
1('
"
Ii
I
I~
I
{,
I
j
1
I
,
I'
,
i"
i(
1:
1,:
i.l
I
I
,
I
1,1 11
II!
!I
'I
,I
j
,
I:
I,
~i
;
I
I.
I
i,
, '
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
:1
,I
..",.". -
I
(
I
,
1
!
!
1
:'
"
r
"
,
:
ii
,
r,
-~ ---...-
~..... ~ ..-'.......--. - -..-...-........---------,~...
.... ---
... -~. --;..........--....------~
! : '" :.-' . . . - ", " (' ......',
: ',:I I" L ,t..; :I t ':" I '
:""""'_ ,~2J ":~~ '.'I..'..'.~" . '~....,.,:".,'
,/
'1
,!
#5c page 2
occupied and rental, is truly a problem that is already having
an impact on the city's overall economic health. According to
one of the city's major employers, the cost of housing in the
area is seen as a major hindrance to employee relocation. The
key to economic development in the city or the recruitment of
new businesses and the retention and expansion of existing.
Iowa city will not be able to achieve this if affordable
housing stock is not expanded. That was the mission that we
accepted. That was the goal that we pursued in our
development. Was to come up with a development of affordable
housing. And I know those terms are relative to people. What
we are looking at in our development is housing in the range
of $50,000 to $100,000. We feel there are adequate sources in
the community for housing over $100,000. And up from there as
we all know. So what we have looked for is to create a
development that allows for that first time home buyer. Where
they can enter the market and I am not saying that will be the
only buyer. I think there are a lot of single households that
will buy into this neighborhood. I think there are a lot of
people who will choose to live part time in Iowa city that
will buy into this neighborhood. So there are a lot of users
in this. But the key is to keep the prices are the $100,000
and below. As I was going through the P/Z process I would
often come at nights with reports about houses for sale in
Iowa city. Today there are 29 houses for sale. Now these are
s.f. detached houses. I have excluded the condominiums.
There are 29 for sale under $100 I 000 today in Iowa city.
There are seven for sale under $70,000. So I think the need
is still critical. That is our goal. Now what have we
designed. We have not designed one type of housing. We view
this as a 20 year project. We are glad that we got started on
it young because we will be at it for awhile. This we told a
lot of people. We don't feel that we are clairvoyant about
the needs over the next 20-30 years. We see a need today for
the RFBH housing. I think that is clear. I think there is a
need for the RS-8 housing today. We also have areas of RM-20
and RM-12. Those may not be in such critical need today and
tomorrow but maybe in 10 years. So what we have designed and
I think what the staff has approved and the commission has
recommended to you is multiple zones. So that we can move
with the market over the next 20-30 years. And that is what
we intend to do. If we are allowed to get started this year
we are going to go into three markets this year. We are going
to go into the apartments on the highway. We are going to go
into the RFBH and we are going to start the RS-8 with modular
housing. And then we are going to pursue the market that
works. So if modular housing is accepted we will pursue that
and build more. If the RFBH is accepted and the demand is
high we will build with that. So that is our guide. Our
guide is the CHAS report and what will drive this will be the
F02194
, -1
I,
: '
,
!' ~
,
II, Ii
I, I!
I': - !I
Iii II:
Ii I
,
:
I'
, ii'
I
I
I I;
I i I,!
, II
I
! II
I
"
:"1
,
i
,
.)'
"
I
l\ ~
"'ff'''. -
i
I
,
-
"1~~ -~....~ ..~},.......-
, ,
, : , ': ~ L- , -, '" ' ", .-:
, , . . .~~ . " ,"
," I' L, '~t ' , ,", , ' , .-
. " 'I ,,' ,
" \ ~ , . ,
' I" _. .......
.. . ~ - -,
I~:
~>'~~:::_':----"-,
- ,
#5c page 3
market in the future. We have no quotas other than our
general zoning criteria of the RS-a, the RFBH, and our desire
to follow through on the CHAS report.
Horow/ Your five minutes are up. If you have some more points after
other people have spoken we would certainly like you to come
back. Is there anyone else that needs to address council in
this p.h.
F02194
---.....-,
'''''''",(" ",
,
, .
i
I
I
I!
I:
I,
j,
l:
, '
, '
I:
, '
i i
, i
j i
, ,
i;
, .
1 i
i'
,
,
I
fi
II
ill
111 1
,I -il
II ,IF
! ~ . i
[I .' ~
';,1:' ki
1;:
ill: .
I, 'I!
11".uj'
1.1
I.
!
"
"")',
\/
;!,
,
"
, '
"
;1
"
" ,
I"
i
. I~.
"'If"" -
-
"1-~-. ~""'~..-,--,....--
. . , ,
, ,:,:" '-', '-,', '-t " ,'" ':, ; '. "
. ,,", ,. , :'"" ',' .
.' , ,I ,h:, .:"1. ,';. '. : ...., ,
:. I'.. ,_ - ~
'1
,I,.
#5c/d page 1
Horow/ (#5c/d)
Ed Slattery/ I am a environmental engineer with Stanley
Consultants. I work out of the Des Moines Office. Formerly
I worked out of the Muscatine Office. I have been retained by
Steve Bright and his partners to prepare a wetland mitigation
report and that report is completed and it has been put before
you. I believe you have had an opportunity to at least see
the report. The purpose of the wetland mitigation report was
to address some very important issues that were brought up
early on in the planning process and the issue being that
there is an extensive amount of sensitive lands on the
property and roughly half of the property is what I would deem
a sensitive land area. That is a bottom land area that is
adjacent to the Waste Water Treatment Plant. To the north of
the Waste Water Treatment Plant. It covers approximately 200
acres give or take. The land is to be developed would be
above that. It is adjacent to the Bon Aire Mobile Home Park,
Highway 6 clear to the north and Whispering Meadows. The land
currently is primarily agriculture. It is plowed fields. It
is being pastured. That includes both the upper area, the
high ground and the lower area. Much of the lower ground that
is actually delineated wetland is currently farmed. The
wetland mitigation report addresses the issue of being able to
develop the land adjacent to the wetlands, the sensitive
lands, and its purpose it to find a way to allow both the
development and the wetlands and the sensitive lands to
coexist without detrimental impacts on from the development
onto the wetland area. So, in other words, what we are trying
to do it find a way to protect the wetlands and the sensitive
land areas. There is quite a bit of detail in the wetland
mitigation report and obviously we don't have time to go over
some of that. We are rather limited in time. But what I do
want to bring out is the fact that I have identified three
potential causes for the problems that could occur by
developing next to a sensitive area. The first of these is
obviously the farming the occurs on the land, both the upper
ground and the bottom land area. Second of these is the fact
that you have got storm water running off of the upper ground
and flowing down into the low land areas. That storm water
creates a third problem that it carries pollutants with it.
The pollutants could be harmful to the wetland vegetation. As
I indicated these elements are addressed in detail in the
plan. So the details are there if you are interested in
reading about them. What I would like to do is very briefly go
over some of the key concepts of the plan without getting into
that detail that you could read about at your leisure. The
wetland mitigation plan develops a lot of detail regarding the
farming operations. The farming operations are very
detrimental to the current sensitive land areas. We eliminate
F02194
-
-~-"'" "'-
:
;:! \
I
Iii 1\
I: il
i:
d II:
/" !
1': :i
J; (
-
1:1 '"
i I;'
I:
, "
" II I,!
j :;
I I:i
" I
,
~
,1 II
"
I
,I I
-.i ,
'I
i
I.
,
, .
i
i.
I,
, .
I
I
,
,
I
,
,!
f .' I '_ ....;.,' ,"". ',.' ,: " .'
'I S, I Ii " "
,:/ - , " 'to-. ,: ' ' '_', .-
~. , " " .....1" . , , .
.. , , , , \;...- I ,,,
., . ~, -'
;'
I
.....-
"-,
#5c/d
page 2
the farming operations, the current farming operations, you
eliminate the direct physical damage from the grazing of the
land by the cattle and the horses and also, obviously you got
plowing that occurs, so that destroys the wetland vegetation
that is trying to grow in the area. Elimination of farming
operations also eliminates the also of habitat for wild
animals that would otherwise be found in that area. Also
elimination of farming eliminates the storm water run off from
agricultural fields and that is an important point because the
bare agricultural fields create quite a bit of run off and
that run off in turn carries chemical pollutants with it and
sediment that can be harmful to the wetland areas. And also by
eliminating the farming operations you also eliminate the
detrimental affect to esthetics in the area. If you allow it
to come back to more of a natural state then it certainly
improves the esthetics of the area and this should be an
aesthetically pleasing area. storm water management measures
that the plan develops in detail are follow U. S. EPA Best
Management Practice criteria and what it does is-what we are
proposing for this property is a plan to build a pond in the
upper terrace, we call it the upper terrace in the high
ground, that will collect water that is running off of the
development. That water will pass through that upper pond and
flow down into the low land basin where it will flow into what
we call a created wetland area. This created wetland area,
particularly in the northern part of the lower terrace, 21
acre facility, is going to be a very large area. I call it
created wetland because the purpose of it is to establish
wetland plants in this basin, it is a shallow basin. Those
plants are going to be selected and planted to promote the
filtering effect and sedimentation of pollutants out of the
storm water as it passes through the basin. That water as it
comes out of the pond will be distributed throughout that
basin. So it will be kind of evenly distributed. It will
filter through the wetland and then it will pass out of the
wetland into the currently vegetative wetland. But once it is
released into the currently vegetative wetland the end result
is that we have controlled the flow. So we have knocked the
peaks off of the large storm events. That is number 1.
Number 2 is through sedimentation and through biological
uptake of nutrients by the wetland plants and through
filtering of the storm water by the wetland plants we will be
cleaning up the storm water and that is the key point. That
this is going to really serve as a kind of a treatment plant
and so what we are going to be releasing is controlled or
treated storm water. So that is kind of the basis for this
plan. That is kind of the guts of the mitigation plan. You
can see the details with some figures showing how it is
SUppose to work, how it is Suppose to layout. The end result
is that we are going to be cOllecting water off the entire
F02194
I
i
I
ii,
H'
Ii
Ii
1 ~
i:
,
v
I'
"
I,!
I:i
I
I
I 'I
I,' ':
"
1,
I
i.
, .
, ,
; ,
, '
'~ '
;1
i
,
,
'"
, ,:
"Yr. -
-
~------...----:---~--- ~ ..-'.......-
J '", I ,
I ' -", - 1- '",' ,,' '. '
'I'M' 'L . ~" ,'., ". ,"
",'" ,', ", I . "
":" "/""w', ,'_ " ,..:.,d'" .,.....,,' .) ,
/
"
.'
" '-..
"-'"
#5c/d page 3
upper basin and it is all going to pass through either the
created wetland that I just described or some additional
created wetlands in the southwestern part of the site.
Horow/ Thank you, Mr. Slattery. I sure will have some questions
afterwards. Thank you. Anyone else care to address us.
Richard S. Rho/des/ I live 2014 Rochester Avenue. I would first
like to thank the P/Z Commission, the PCD staff for their
extraordinary efforts on this annexation. I would like to
thank Sycamore Farms development team for making significant
concessions to protect the wetlands of the Snyder Creek
Bottoms. The concept plans and the three draft documents are
adequate to achieve this goal of protection. But, and there
always is a but, they still contain significant deficiencies.
That I have to ask city council to address these often
technical points strongly supports PCD staff's request that a
technical advisory committee be formed to assist Iowa city in
addressing these environmental concerns. And I would urge you
to get that set up and going. It could also help with the
Water Plant. I have outlines my comments in a letter to you
dated 28 January 1994 and won't belabor most of them. None
the less I feel four of these deficiencies are very important
to address. First of all the area under conservation
easement, 191 acres, I strongly feel should be dedicated to
the public as a park or wild life preserve. Secondly I feel
that public access should not be limited only to the trail
system regardless of who holds title to the land. It should
be for the enjoyment and benefit of all of Iowa city and all
Iowa citians. And then the third and fourth points, are that
the mitigation of the impact of the drainage from the upland
developments areas is well addresses for the middle drainage
way. But for the eastern drainage way and the western drainage
way, both of which are shared with other property owners, it
is inadequately addressed. This means for the protection of
the Snyder Creek Bottom that has to be adequately addressed.
Councilor Baker asked last night at the work session a
question that was incompletely answered. And if I may
paraphrase you, Larry. He asked, are wetlands protected by
state or federal law. The complete answer to this is, in my
opinion, only minimally. Why do I say that. There are a
complex set of overlapping state and federal regulations that
are mostly designed only to protect the wetness of the
wetlands. Nothing about the biota, nothing about the
environment. Just the wetness. These generally say, and I am
no expert of this, but they general say they must get a permit
to fill them or to drain them like ditching or tiling.
otherwise you can hay or graze the wetlands, both of these are
damaging activities to the biota, and you can often plow them
for row crops during the years they are dry enough. Not all
F02194
JL
, ,
I.
i
; :
, '
i i
i' ~
II: II
/;: ',I
Iii II'
;. pI
I I:;
I' I
'I' - L'
!;' I"
, b
Iii ,i
I II
I .j
I 'j
I
I "
, I(
,
i
I
,
,i,
, ,
i
I
.
i " ' ...: -'. I ' , , ; "" '-
' I, I' , , ,
" :; ,I L - ~-t- ' ~, ' ,'- . ,
:. . " '.'1 _ ' " -.:.ZJ '. '-. _:. , ":" ,
/
('\
" 1
.j.
,
~'--''''---
#5c/d page 4
wetlands but many of them can be plowed for row crops. And
along with the plowing are those applications of pesticides
which, again, are very damaging to the natural environment.
Furthermore for wetlands of one acre or more Iowa has issued
a blanket permit that allows property owners to do as they
wish to small wetlands. So that is why I say the protection
is only minimal. And you may have some questions on my four
page letter and if you do I will be happy to address them
either now or after someone else has an opportunity to speak
as you wish.
Baker/ Sandy, can I ask you one quick question on this letter.
Have you had a chance to present these concerns to staff,
Sycamore Farms people and the P/Z Commission and have they had
a chance to respond to these concerns or what is the schedule
here. In other words, are you concerned such that the
proposal in front of us now, in your opinion, needs to have
all of these things addressed before it is approved or can
that we resolved as we go further along.
Rho,des/ Some of them probably should be addressed before they are
approved, in my opinion, and others it is not necessary to
address until it is all done. But some things such as public
access or certainly that is a policy question that you all
have to decide. I have given copies of the letter to P/Z
staff and one to Tom Scott, the head of the P/Z Commission.
I only got drafts of the document I believe something around
the 19 January. I would have to look at my letter to remember
that right now. It took me awhile to prepare my comments so
I have not yet had responses from most people. But these are
points that I have been belaboring along the way.
Baker/ That was my next question. Have these come up before this
letter and they were not resolved in your mind.
Rholdes/ Only in generalities because there were no specifics to
comment on or respond to until sometime in the middle of
January or the latter part of January.
Kubby/ Did Ed get a copy of your letter.
Rho~des/ I do not know if he got a one from city staff. I did not
send him one.
II
I'
,
~, I
ii' II
Iii !
iI i
11111;
1:',.-, \;
. 'I l
i \ ~ i.-I
il I:.
!I!
"/ .
II
I
t.
Kubby/ Did you get one, Ed?
Throg/ A related (can't hear) is a document we received in the
packet from Bob Mik10, dated February 1, 1994, says that the
conservation easement and the three documents, including the
wetlands mitigation document, have not been fully reviewed by
F02194
d
I
,
,
,I
,
I
~r' -
-
--..;,~~ ~""~;.r.....---------- -.-.... - - -"f''''
....
I,' '" '
, , - -t '" "
' .. I y t ' ,,','. ,
" ., \
'" I, " ~ . , ',' ,
.". ,l . ';"..1 ..' , ". ': r
',:,.~.~ '_ - 1'- ,
/
;.. ~\.
" 1
1\,
.. '-,
.....--.--
~-,
"
#5C/d
page 5
staff and they may be revised prior to being finalized. I
assume that is still correct and I am looking at Karin
Franklin to answer that question. Yeah.
Kubby/ I guess is that it is my understanding that it is really not
part of the annexation or rezoning but the conditional zoning
agreement says those documents have to be done and meet city
approval. So that is where the flexibility comes in for
further discussion. Is that correct, Linda.
Gentry/ Yes. It would be nice to get some notion of-Sandy, if we
could get together with you and Karin and Marsha, my
assistant, and pin down some of the details. I could answer
some of the legal questions. others I can't.
Rhopdes/ I would be happy to get together with anybody on this and
I will be happy to answer other questions that you have later
on. I am sure other people want to speak.
Kubby/ Even though your preference is for public dedication do you
think that the conservation easement as proposed will be
adequate to protect sensitivity of the area.
Rhopdes/ If there are certain deficiencies that are addressed, yes.
I can say-
Kubby/ It is in the range of acceptability.
Rho1des/ It is in the range of acceptability. It is not ideal.
But it is acceptable if you address things like jointly owned
areas to the east and west -the drainage from those. In as
sensitive a way as the Sycamore Farms development team has
addressed the drainage from the central part of the area. And
that is just not touching that document and it is probably not
the Sycamore Farms development team's responsibility to do
that.
Kubby/ Right and it is good that we have been trying to move in
that direction with the property just north of that to do some
regional storm water detention. If we can get that together
that that could be a blue print for the area.
Horow/ All right, let's continue on.
Nov/ Do we need a motion to accept this correspondence.
Karr/ We should have a general motion at the end of the p.h. for
all correspondence.
Tom Scotti 419 E. Fairchild Street and again I appear before you
F02194
-
--'-" -----
I
i
I
!
.
i \
Ii
I,
d
" II,
I! j.
r
" 1
;i \,
"
" -
I! ;..
1 I;"
1,;
I ':j,
.;
/,
,
'I
, I
!'
I
.I
, .!I
, ' ,
,
. "
"'If'J'. -
-
'1~-:- ~""~..-.I.."..
, ,
r '.,:,,- ,-" ",', '
" "d I, ,1;d', 8 "'1" ,',' ': ',:'
: ' I., M . '"_ . __ .-.. '
/
''1
#5c/d page 6
tonight as chair of the Iowa City P/Z Commission. My
understanding, someone said your council packet this week was
382 pages thick. I saw a copy of it and I might add that my
packet on Sycamore Farms is about twice that thick, Karen.
So, I think what should be done is you all should have to
carry your packet around for the next 11 months so that you
understand when I say that I stand here before you tonight
feeling very very happy that this particular development
proposal has reached this stage in the process and that you
all now we have an opportunity to wrestle with it. The nine
condi tions placed upon this rezoning and the requirements
placed upon the development and the developer make this
proposal something that the commission is happy to support.
One of our charges is to provide a choice of housing styles.
Choices and price ranges. Just as Walnut Ridge provides a
market for one set of home buyers, Sycamore Farms proposal
meets other community housing needs. And one, that I might
add, is by and large, missing from the Iowa City housing
scene. As you might gather, this was not an easy task for the
Iowa City P/Z Commission. But the final result that you see
you before you tonight, even though it may be far from perfect
or at least imperfect at this point, came about because of a
lot of people's time, dedication and diligence. I would like
to publicly thank our PCD staff who many times go without
adequate thanks, to a number of individuals and I always hate
to cite particular people because you are going to forget
some. But it is not intended to be inclusive. But certainly
to Sandy Rhoades or RiChard R. Rhoades and I think by his
previous comments before you know what an invaluable resource
he was to the Commission in this particular process. Likewise
to Wayne Peterson and members of his staff at the Soil
Conservation service, to Carol Peterson, to Tim Thompson, the
DNR Wildlife BiOlogist to name a few. I would also like to
thank the developer and his representatives who in the spirit
of cooperation allowed the Commission to reach this particular
point. There were times it was a rough road. I will not deny
that. There were times when tempers flared. There were times
when people's patience were tried. But none the less the
process worked to this particular point and I hope that the
council takes the documents that have been presented and that
the imperfections in those are corrected and that we move on
so that housing possibilities that this particular SUbdivision
proposed to be available to the citizens of our community.
And lastly I would like to publicly Sandy's comments
concerning the establishment and appointment of an
environmental technical advisory committee. Thank you.
Baker/ Tom, can I ask you a question. You and Sandy have been
getting along so well. How do you respond to his letter. Are
there things there that we need to slow down the process down
F02194
, ,
I ~
I:
II!
II
Ii
Ii II
,: ir
:j Ii
, i'
I ~
;-,
','
1:1 i~
I"
I
I, II!
I
I
"
,
I 1"
,
I
'I
) ,II
,
I'
;i
.Ill
,
( , "- -' " ,'. '
- L . I't ,', ,
' I'M"" " &.. , ,".., "',
".,' :t',.",
~ . ., ' . , ,
' " "',. " .
'" . ,,'-'. -. ,..... .
/
"
,!
#5c/d page 7
about or can they be resolved fairly quickly. Are there any
major disagreements in his letter and your position.
Scotti The only disagreement that I might have with Sandy is that
I think that most of his concerns can be taken care of in the
fine tuning of the documents that are required to be submitted
and the mitigation plan that is to be submitted and approved
and all of the documents have to be approved by the city and
we have talked about kind of on an informal basis-I think
everybody would agree that the city does not have the
technical expertise in all likelihood to review these
documents and make some of the decisions on them. And we even
considered at one point of maybe making a recommendation, a
subsidiary recommendation that an outside expert be hired to
review those. But we leave that to your discretion. The key
is, in all instances, that the city has final approval of
these documents and that includes a mitigation plan. I think
Sandy's concerns certainly can be met and mustered in the
documents and in the plan as such. I don't think that it
affects either the annexation or the rezoning. It would
certainly affect some of the subdivisions when we get to that
particular state.
Baker/ Thank you.
Kubby/ Tom, we have to be really concerned about the guaranteed non
disturbance of land around the southeast interceptor because
of an agreement that we made when we got federal funds for
that. Do you think that the conservation easement will
guarantee those obligations that we have, the way that it is
currently written.
Scotti Yes. The conservation easement and the mitigation plans.
Now what, my understanding, what would happen in the
conservation easement area outside of the jurisdictional
wetlands, farming could occur in those particular lands I
think for ten years. But all of the activity in the
jurisdictional wetlands cease once they are identified and the
city annexes and rezones and accepts, basically, the property
for development. That was our understanding and that was
stated rather clearly. The difference between outright
dedication and conservation easement I think the arguments
revolve around the ability for the developer to complete his
mitigation plan and to allow him to utilize the
non jurisdictional wetland areas in the conservation easement
area to build parts of his mitigation plan if he is required
to build dams or swails or grass waterways. Some of those
types of structures. And when I say structures I am talking
about those structures, not a building structure. These types
of structures to be built and constructed in the non
F02194
\';
"
-.,.,~'. ,~ L
i!
; !
i!
II
"
Ii
(:
I
I
Ii
ll.
ii,
I:
H
~.,
"
j;
':-
I,!
'f
I
I
I:,' II
; .
,(
I
I"",.,'.....~,._,.. ..'
"
"
. ~--
, ,
' ,
(' " I" L ' 't ,.' ,-t', . '" ,> , ...,
:":,:/.:,, ,j " ::1',')," ','
I
/
;> 'j
... . . ~l'
~. --.
--..
#5C/d page 8
jurisdictional wetlands to handle the water run off for the
developed areas.
Kubby/So, if there is no third party that is found or comes forward
to accept this responsibility of the conservation easement, is
it an automatic thing that the city becomes the grantee of the
easement.
Scotti My understanding and if I say it incorrectly somebody scream
at me, my understanding is that the p.h. will be or should be
extended until either a third party grantee is named or the
city is named as the recipient of the conservation easement.
Kubby/ This p.h.
Scotti That is my understanding.
Gentry/Yes. I have it written right here. One of my suggestions.
Kubby/ But that doesn't answer my question. My question was if
there is no third party is it an automatic thing that the city
becomes the grantee.
Gentry/ No. I will recommend that it be inserted specifically
right here.
Kubby/ That that-what I just said is the way it happen.
Gentry/ The city is the grantee.
Scotti If there is not a third party I think that the ultimate
conclusion is that the city will be but that needs to be
spelled out and determined and agreed to prior to the Closing
of the p.h. as I understand it.
Kubby/ You are not suggesting that we automatically be the grantee
but if a third party doesn't corne forward and we don't find
one that we-
Gentry/ I want it in writing. Not implied, yes.
Horow/ Is there anyone else. Mr. Bright, do you have any more
issues to bring up. Mr. Slattery.
Slattery/ sta~ley Consultants. Just a couple of comments with
regards to comments that Richard Rhoades mentioned and they
have to do with the east portion of the property and the
southwest portion of the property. In the mitigation plan it
is addressed and Sandy, you have gotten an earlier version of
the report, there is a piece that does discuss drainage off of
F02194
-
~ -~--
-~-'"'' .-.-
;
I,
"
Iii I
!
!i I
I' hi
d ill
l" .j
"
~ ; ,
" i
, !':
, I'
II ['
I,
I 1;1
I '{.
if
"
,
II
I"
"
.-
ii
,
!
"'ff'''' -
'1\, ~
"
-
~~
~----""QIIII'
~.... ~ ,,-,''''11'''"-
, , ,
( '-' l " " '
. " .
'. :" I . L '. t." " :", ",,", ",
' \:'~I' .. .:,1 ".
':. '..~.. . '_ '_ '1'- \"" . .
/
/, \
, 'I
,
"
..,p-'"
#5c/d page 9
the east portion of the property. The plan is to collect
water that drains off of the eastern most portion of the
property that otherwise would have gone into drainage way that
is located in the property boundary between Sycamore Farms
property and the adjacent property. That water will be
intercepted before it reaches the bottom of that drainage way
and it will be directed into the created wetlands area and in
that way we are handling both the flow and the pollutants
aspects of the storm water off of that portion of the
property. There is, clear to the north, there is a 14.2 acre
piece of the property by Highway 6 that currently does flow to
the north underneath Highway 6 and it follows some drainage
ditches winding its way to Snyder Creek. That scenario will
remain under development conditions. That won't be changed.
What will be changed is the fact that the upper pond and the
lower created wetlands basins are designed to be able to
handle the total storage volume that would be generated off of
all of that developed land. So it is termed as compensating
storage for compensating for that water that is being directed
to the north off of the site by increasing the size of the
storage facilities that are being designed for storm water
management.
Horow/ Excuse me, then are you also taking care of the water that
is coming from those properties that are coming from the east
along that-
Slattery/ No we are not. And I might add that there is a problem
with the water shed, the water coming off of the water shed
into that eastern most drainage basin. It is a shared
drainage way. I guess one way to put it. We are dealing with
the water that is coming off of Sycamore farms property. We
are not dealing with the water that is coming off of the
adjacent property. That is another issue and I have stated in
the report that that is beyond the scope of what we were
trying to do. That situation still remains and we are into
dealing with it. A similar situation on the southwest occurs
where we are delaying with the water that is going to be
generated on Sycamore Farms property. We are directing that
towards created wetlands on the southwest. The fact remains
that there is a major drainage way that enters the Sycamore
Farms property from-it comes into the property towards the
southwest from off site locations and much of that land and
CHANGE TO TAPE TO REEL 94-27 SIDE 2
But we are dealing with the water that is being generated on
Sycamore Farms. There is still the question of what to do
with the water that comes onto the Sycamore Farms property
from outside sources. Again, it is stated in the report that
F02194
--11
---'~"-.., -
11
,
;,[ ,
" I
Iii
II
I
II il
" l
"
"
I;'
I ~ \
'(:i j'l
ii'
II Ii
I n
I p.
I
I
I
.
I I
I
J
II
I
ii
". -
, ,
I
I',
"
-
~
~--:--
. . I "
". ' ' ",' I" L' t.,. 'I';:~ " ,"". " ',::
.;,'., ., .. '. ;:I'l "_.J ,:.:." " '.' ~ '. ,,'
/
.... \
, '1
.J.
#5c/d page 10
that situation occurs and it is beyond the scope of what we
are trying to do within the confines of the Sycamore Farms
property.
Throg/ For me these comments lend even more importance to the point
about establishing a technical advisory committee. An
environmental committee. We think about our compo plan and
the intentions that have been stated in it for future
development to the south and then realize that the Sycamore
Farms development is only part of a much larger wetlands
complex. Then we have lots of technical complexity here to
deal with that we haven't yet been able to do.
Horow/ Or even to identify. It is almost like building blocks.
Throg/ But we now have an opportunity to do that.
Horow/ Does anyone else wish to address council.
Steve Bright/ If I may for a couple more minutes. The second thing
I was going to talk to you was what I thought was the hardest
part of the process which was the balancing the protection of
the environment of this sensitive area next to the housing
development. This had to be done in a way that still allowed
for the feasibility of this development. You can yes, let's
protect it but we had to balance that in a way that we could
still provide lots at this price range and houses at this
price range and I think that is the process that took so long
with the conservation easement and the mitigation plan. I
think we have a good balance. I would point out one other
thing to you that I think is very important. Tom mentioned
the conditions that are imposed upon us. Number 9 is that we
pay all cost of infrastructure installation. We have not
asked the city for one dime. As a matter of fact we get to
pay somebody else's dime. We have to pay oversizing for the
land that is in the county to the east and the west. That is
the condition of our development. That is part of this
financial balance that we had to do. I think we have gone a
long way. I think we have a good product here. I hope that
you can accept the recommendation of the staff and the
commission to go ahead. Finally, I am not just returning Tom's
comments. These were actually written before he spoke. I do
have to say one thing about the process. Everything that you
saw tonight was prepared by somebody and reviewed by somebody,
edi ted by somebody, critiqued by somebody and revised by
somebody and negotiated by somebody. The Planning staff, I
can't ell you how many times Karin and I have met, talked and
wished we didn't talk again. But we kept talking. The P/Z
commission, my wife wondered was I was doing at 10:30 at
night. My children wondered what I looked like. They have
F02l94
-
-.
,
\
----...,-.-.-
I
I
I'
\
II
Ii
II
I'
-I-
;
(
j
4 j
I
!
,
"
II
II
I',
I.:'
,
I'
I
"
'Ii; .
I
I,
,:1
I
I
;,
f:
Ii
i'i
':/
r
I
'I
I'
I
,
,
,
,
,
,,1
1 :'
!
'I ,
I
i
j ,
I
,
;
!
j
,
j
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
, "
~,. -
I
,
~
~
--:, --....;
, ,
I " ..:.: ~_ ,,,':,
" ",:,,-,,{ ,L, ,h,; ;" "'" ,',
. .r: ,:1 _ . _. "
/
'1
,I
#5c/d page 11
pictures now. I can't tell you the number of nights that we
were discussing these tough issues at 10:30 at night with the
P/Z Commission. I have to compliment that they hung in there.
The easiest thing would have been steve, go away, it is too
complicated, it is environmentally sensitive, etc. Easy walls
to throw up. They didn't do that. And if somebody put up a
wall we tried to climb it, create a door in it, and keep
working on the process. It took a lot of patience. Finally
without Tom Scott's direction I know we wouldn't have made it.
There were nights that he told me to sit down. There were
nights that he told me that we should talk next time. And I
am grateful for that because I think the process worked. I
think we have a good balance. I hope you appreciate that and
I hope you can approve it so we can start building. Thank
you.
Horow/ Thank you very much, Mr. Bright. Does anyone else wish to
address the council. I wish to remind you that we are looking
at both items C., the resolution approving the voluntary
annexation, and also item D., p.h. on the ordinance amending
the zoning ordinance. Is there anyone else who wished to
address council.
! I
, ,
i'
.' ~
r.
Iii
'I
I.
:, 'I
I,
I, \.,
:i jl'
Ii' "
" 11
" I:
0:
I
" I"
I (,
II ,j
I ' :1
i, I I
I
II
I,
Throg/ Sue, before you run away from this. I don't mean run away
but before you move away from it. I would like to make a
short comment which I would just like to encourage people who
are interested in flooding and the quality of drinking water
in Iowa City to read the two consultant reports about
inventorying conservation values of wetlands and about
mitigating the adverse affects of developments on those
wetlands. Together they speak volumes about how valuable
water shed management can be for controlling flooding,
erosion, sedimentation, water pollution. Wetlands act, as the
report says, as a natural kidneys. That in this particular
instance can be expected to remove 80% of total suspended
solids, 30% of nitrogen, 50% of phosphorus, 80% of lead, 50%
of zinc, 75% of pesticides and other substances. It is a real
guide to what we could do.
Horow/ Thank you. Yeah, that is interesting.
Kubby/ I have a question for the city attorney about the
conditional zoning agreement. And it is on page 2, #4d. I
want to make sure that I understand it so I can think about
all of this. And it says owner will establish 100 foot no
build buffer zone around all juriSdictional wetlands located
outside of the conservation easement except those for which
mitigation is approved set forth in the conservation easement.
#4d. I want to be clear about what that means. Does that
mean if there is a jUrisdictional wetland outside of the
F02194
, ,
,\
,
,',
\',;
""IC"'"
_____ '~""IIE1-~-: '"'W\"'~.,.......- -- ---.~....... ---
"'[of .
....-~... -~~~ .
f' "I ,~', 't '.. 'Id", ','",' ",
, " ,/ '-t', t'" " """ '
" , " r'" ,
':, '1 ~ _' -
/
/
/'1
,I.
"
'. --
.... ~----
-, ,
#5c/d page 12
conservation easement, if they need that land to do some
mitigation stuff to-I don't know another word to use. That
they can and if so, is that some of the land that they need to
replace the wetlands 2 to 1 if they do that. Or someone else.
And if someone explains it and someone else has a different
interpretation I would love to know that too.
Bright/ I believe the intent of that paragraph was that if there
were small areas of wetland outside of the conservation
easement tract. So outside of that 190 acres. Let's go up on
top of that upper terrace and there are small pockets of
wetlands up there. That what we will do is we will put a 100
foot buffer around those if we allow them to stay. Or we have
the right to mitigate those. In other words, subject to
everybody's approval we can go in and fill this in a go ahead
and add that to the development of the upper terrace. We then
have to go down to the lower terrace and create mitigated
wetlands in a 2 for 1 basis. So let us say there is one acre
'on top and everybody agrees that we can mitigate that and take
that away. We go down below and add two acres of wetlands
down below. That was the idea.
Kubby/ It seem like that is what that says.
Gentry/ It does. I mean I apologize for my hesitation. One person
that did not get mentioned tonight which should have, too, was
Marsha Borman, who has spent the last year and a half on this.
I think she did a really good job of drafting. I am proud of
her.
Horow/Karen, do you have other questions.
Kubby/ No. But you should add to the list Carol Thompson, Lon
Drake, steve Hendrickson. Throgmorton.
Gentry/ It does that what he describes.
Horow/ Is there any other material that we have accepted, Marian.
Karr/ All of the letters received in your packet should be
acknowledged as part of this p.h.
Horow/ Moved by KUbby, seconded by Throg. to accept the
correspondence. All those in favor (ayes).
F02194
-
--.-..--,-
.. " '. ~
Ii
j:
,
" I
I
"
'i
Iii
I'
,[
'I ii'
I,
d
:1 "
i " ',.
"
" ii
"
"
r: :Ii
,[ I';
,I I';
d
I' .r
. 'I
II (!
I .
"1
, I
, j,
: f
II
'I
I!
~ -I J
II
"
, '
":'-....... -..r,," ...... ~"'1 ~" -'9\--- qa. ...-.'.......
- ~ '"qIIt'.-.......---.-----:---..,~.....
......,.....
-.... -.. ,..........---.--.-----
I
( , , ': '- ' I":' ' " .', ,:
I ~ t I' .,' 'I '
.' ,:1 . '. I .' '
. ',' '7' 7u' I ,,',,""
:;, " "~ R '_ _ .\; ~_. ,I . ~ J ," .
/
I
/-'1
" {.
, '-..",
~,_.--.
~-
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1,1994
Page 5
d. Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by
conditionally changing the use regulations of an approximate 422 acre
tract of land located south of Highway 6 and the southern corporate
limits from County RS, Suburban Residential, to RS-8, Medium Density
Single. Family Residential (62 ecres); RM.12, Low Density Multi.Family
Residential (10 acres); RM.20, Medium Density Multi.Family Residential
(15 acres); RFBH, Factory Built Housing Residential (84 acres); RR.1,
Rural Residential (191 acres) and ID.RM, Interim Development Multi.
fl' Family Residential 159 acres). (REZ92.0015)
e.
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a proposal
to rezone the Sycamore Ferms area as noted above, subject to
conditions related to environmental concerns, neighborhood open space,
school site and infrastmcture responsibility. The Commission's
recommendation is generally consistent with that of the staff as set
forth in staff reports ~nq memoranda contained in the Council packet.
Action: ~ fLt&pf ('~liJfloYl rk ~
~-w ;1./15 ~~&J
Public hearing on amendments to Zoning ordinanc~~~~ions 6.58, Off.
Street Parking Requirements; 36.60, Sign Regulations, and 36.9, RFBH,
Factory Built Housing Residential zone, to allow certain commercial uses
as provisional uses in the RFBH zone, and to replace the incorrect
references to the RMH zone with RFBH.
; 1
l:
!.I
I,
H
I'
II!
I
])
Ii
ii
I
ii
!
I'
II
,I
ir
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 6.0, recommended approval of the Zoning
Ordinance amendments cited above. The Commission's recommenda.
tion is consistent with the staff recommendations contained in staff
memoranda dated February 4, 1993, and April 15, 1993.
:\ I:;
il ',!',!
, "/
I
I
J
"
,Ii
I" 'i
Action:
h___o ~4./1""},"1!.
"
I
:1
"
"
: ~
~~,~~, ~~. ,.--,...., .
I,:
"
.
... .
,',
i
"
'I
\
"
I
,
','I
~r __
~
~
__ ~ 9\-- ~ .;'......-
',.",,' :"1 "L' t'-t" I~;' "I" .'.:,>.", "
: :" ", ~ '-fl. , _!- , . ';"~".':" ." " , '.'.. I ,
/
,
,~ ~\
/' 1
, ,
'~'
-
'~,.,---------'...-
--.~._~--.
#5d page 1
Horow/ (#5d)
Gentry/ Madam Mayor, I might suggest that you entertain a motion to
incorporate the testimony and documents presented from the
first hearing into the second. And then you might entertain
two motions to continue both hearing.
Horow/ Kubby moved, seconded by Pigott. This is crazy. In addition
we are continuing the p.h. All those in favor (ayes).
I
!
i
I
;
,
,
!
,
Karr/ Now could we have a motion to continue C.
Gentry/ Just one at a time.
Horow/ Kubby moved, seconded by Pigott to continue-
Gentry/ To a date certain.
Horow/ What is your pleasure.
Kubby/ Who knows.
Horow/ Do you have. Is there anybody on for this.
I,
I
i
i,
t;'
!I . ~
!I F
Ii.! r,
\ I - ~.
'II. Ii.
Ilf;
I .. ',1;:
.1.
::':1,.
. .' f
,'iI'
,II"
I', .
I" ,.
Gentry/ steve, steve, do you have a date. Karen.
Horow/ Two weeks.
Kubby/ Is that enough time.
Horow/ Okay, February 15. It's being moved to February 15, continue
p.h.
Throg/ Who seconded.
Horow/ pigott seconded it. All those in favor (ayes). Now we move
to item d. Continue the p.h.
Kubby/ Move to continue the p.h. about the rezonings till February
15.
"1 -;
I'
: ,
Horow/ Moved by KUbby, seconded by Throg. All those in favor
signify by saying aye (ayes).
KUbby/ I did have a question about the rezoning and are you going
to open the p.h. separately or.
Horow/ We've already closed it.
Gentry/ She opened it and she continued it.
F02194
Ii
ii
i
I
I,...'...,__.~_h_._ .
..........,;.
t'.
.dUU..1L1IM
I
'i':
,I
"
" " -', -t ",I' , , '
,.' '.;/ ,~'h ,','",' '," ".' ,
'" . ~ '- -
/
,
,I, ..,
, ~.
,
""'--'-
--,-
#5d page 2
Horow/ We'll open the p.h.
Gentry/ But you already opened it.
Nov/ It's in progress.
Horow/ It is in progress.
Nov/ But then we continued it. It's still in progress.
Horow/ But we just got through making motions to continue it.
Gentry/ B. was opened and continued.
Nov/ Does that mean that you can't say anything anymore.
Gentry/ You can say whatever you want.
Horow/ From my point of view it has been continued to February 15
but- Go ahead Karen what is your question.
Kubby/ I have a question about the RR-l. Are those acres, the 191
acres that will be zoned RR-l if this passes be a no build
area. The answer's yes. Okay. Now there was some-Is it zoned
RR-l because there's really few choices of how to zone a no
build area. They don't have a, I mean I think Sandy, I had
this question but Sandy brought it up also to say we don't
have an area, a zone for an area that's a no build area or
natural area or a preserve or what ever.
Moen/ That's correct. Perhaps in the future there would be a
mechanism via an overlay zone that we could apply that would
designate it as a no build area. But, if effect, what we
would have is a conservation easement that specifically
restricts development in this particular RR-l zoned area.
Kubby/ So we didn't want to zone pUblic because it is not public.
Moen/ That is right.
Kubby/ And RR-l is the least dense kind of zoning we have in the
city that is residential.
Moen/ That is correct. And, in addition, the terms of the
conservation easement would restrict or prohibit some of the
uses or what is allowable within an RR-l zone normally.
Horow/ All right.
Kubby/ Thank you.
F02194
b...._
~--'-. .-.-
I
I
I
I'
:1
\ ,
I'
"
Ii'
"
Ii I
Ii i
1::_ r
, I; i l~'
, Ii '~ ).,
.1,'1 ,:,
I,:
:.!
I
, I(
/,
,;:
,
I
,1
I
I
, I
': ,I
II
,: '~
! \ l.',
I ",',
:i
i
,
..
.
, ,
I' , ' 'h f' Ig- , : "" " ,
. , , ':,1 I ' ,<' f$ 7J: ,', ,'_, ,", . , .. "
" . - , ,-
/
,
,> "
.j,
.....'..--
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 6
f. Consider an ordinance vacating the northern 212 feet of the alley
located between Burlington and Court streets, west of Dubuque Street
(Block 102). (V AC93.0005) (First consideration I
'1'1- 3~()~
Comment: At its December 16, '1993, meeting, the Planning 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 vacated, subject to resolution of the issues related to
utility relocation. The Commission's recommendation is consistent with
the staff recommendation contained in a staff report dated December
16, 1993. No comments were received at'the Council's January 18,
1994, public hearing on this item. k ~
Action: k/'l~ dtlbA) 1;; 715
I "k" 7J
KIPI'o&~Ii~~~--;JJ;:v atfau.uJ
g. CIonsllre?'n ordinance amending the Zoning 6idimjfi~e by affirming tf{e -
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. (Pass and adopt I
Comment: At its November 4, 1993, meeting, by a vote of 6.0, the
Planning 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 at the
Council's December 7, 1993, public hearing on this item.
~/~I~
(
Action:
f 01- a;
~%
--34; Z. 7
h, Consider a resolution approving the preliminary plat of Dean Oakes
Fourth Addition, a 5.11 acre, 1110t residential subdivision located at the
end of Quincent Street. (SUB93.00221
Comment: At its January 7, 1994, meeting, by a vote of 5-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the
preliminary plat of Dean Oakes Fourth Addition, subject to submission
and approval of a Grading and Erosion Control Plan prior to Council
consideration of the plat. The Commission's recommendation is
consistent with the staff recommendation included in the staff report
dated December 16, 1993. It is anticipated that the Grading and
Erosion Control Plan will have been approved by the February 1, 1994,
Council meeting.
Action:
~~~)Iw
JOD'> ili%4J
1~ 1/3 t?:
I
I
!
;,..,.,;;;,.,::;..,':,:,_,;..,..",_ I..,.'.','.
'~, I
-.-....- '~~
"
.,
,
,
i ~
I',
I' II
'II
II
II r
, I'
:' ~
, /l
, I,
'I ,:.
i)
I,
I (
I;
,
I "
I 1:1
I
I
I I
, !
,
i "
;1
,
,I
I
I
,
,I
'i,:
,_I
~. -
-
,'~~--- ~ "-,,,......-
.... ...- - --:-
,', ,
i 'I I ' ' : Lf'" , t'1" ID" '",~ - "I " "
.. " . . ZIJ ~
"'j'" ,_ . _,' I.f..... .
/
/'\] ,
'\'
-'" ~-,
-
........_-,
#5f page 1
Horow/ (#5f) Last evening council determined that it would prefer
to defer this issue. Do we do two weeks.
GentrY/15th, yes.
Kubby/ When are we going to be voting on the revitalization plan.
Do we have a date for that.
Franklin/ You have a p.h. on February 15. We'll put on the
resolution. However, it is up to you whether you want to vote
that evening or not.
Kubby/ So that would be the-
Franklin/ If you don't vote on the 15th then it is March 1.
Kubby/ Oh, you mean you are putting the resolution to vote on the
revitalization plan the same day as the p.h.
Franklin/ As the p.h.
Kubby/ Okay.
Franklin/ But that is at your discretion. You can defer that if
you don't wiSh to vote that evening.
Horow/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Nov. to defer this until
February 15. Any discussion.
Baker/ Not on this but I have a question after this.
Kubby/ I guess I would like-I am going to vote for this with the
understanding that I will ask that if we defer voting on the
revitalization plan that we also defer this because for me
they are connected and I don't feel comfortable voting on this
before-
Throg/ I completely share that understanding, Karen.
Kubby/ I am not saying that we should make that agreement but that
is what I am saying.
Horow/ Any other discussion. All those in favor signify by saying
aye (ayes).
Baker/ Now Susan, can I ask a question. Karen just talked about
putting the p.h. on the revitalization plan and the vote on
the same night. Haven't we talked in the past about not doing
that.
F02194
~_......~..-......,..-._,--., -,
-.J1:l.
,
\
~--,.... '-.~
, I
i;
I
"
1'1 I
II:
I' !l:
"
"
Ii!
'i
,i
, .
, I,
, it
"
,
11
II I';
I,
I, d
it
II
"
, Ii
"
".'
\:
, '
1_
"""- ""fI('''' -
"
If
I
I
,
:;
\ i
\.i
_ "J
---., ---." ----.... ~ -',"
~ ~.. 1I"
-~ ~.. ........----.......-- ~~ ..
...~~ ....
--. T"""'"'r.--~~~ "'" _ "
, . .'
i'., ',:;'1', 'Lr ,(-"', f:-:-t'" ,',' " ',; ',' '
. '.' I I " ' , ,", I .
:' "'.. '- . '. ", ~.', '.,'
/
,
It'\
.... J.
.,'
~'-<:::...-
--~
--. :
#5f page 2
Kubby/ Yeah, we have.
Baker/ And why don't we just go ahead and say we are going to have
the p.h. that night and we can schedule the vote two weeks
subsequent. Why even bother having the vote and the p.h. on
the same night. I don't think we are going to vote that
night.
Franklin/ Larry, the only reason we put that on is at the
developer's request. And if at this time you don't wish to
honor that request we just won't put it on.
i
I
I
,
,
.'
pigott/ I prefer to wait.
Throg/ Time to reflect.
Baker/We would not like to vote the same night as the p.h.
Horow/ I think there is a consensus here.
I'
: \
, ,
;,'
, '
I:
III II
II II:
,I fi
" - 'I
"
,
'I 1
~ :
I:'
I'
~:!
':j'
"
"
1
j
I
I
,
I r
"
Kubby/ If that is true I would like to rescind the vote. I don't
know the right parliamentary procedure. I don't want to vote
on this the same day or before we vote on the revitalization
plan. So can I move to rescind the 1ast-
Horow/ The seconder will.
Nov/ Move to reconsider.
Kubby/ Yeah, I move to reconsider.
Horow/ Motion to reconsider by KUbby, seconded by pigott.
Kubby/ I should have let you ask your question first.
Baker/ I was afraid I would be challenging or you would be shooting
back. One or the other.
Nov/ I think you have to re-vote it down.
Horow/ All of those in favor of the motion to rescind the motion
signify by saying aye (ayes).
Moved by KUbby, seconded by pigott to defer to March 1. Any
discussion. All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes).
F02194
."r_~,_M'_-'"
i(
I,
I
i
I'
.
g, "
I' ' , ' .
'. ";"1' L "1-" "I, ,,,,,", '"
:' :. , \;.. ' :,]:1 ' ) '.' - ') t~', . " ,',~ '. '" " I, ,
/
;~ \.,
,L
.... h_-..
#5h page 1
Horow/ (#5h) Moved by Baker, seconded by Nov. Discussion.
Baker/We got the plan.
Moen/ Yes.
Nov/ We have our grading and erosion control.
Throg/ I would like to ask a question that I asked last night or
make a comment. I guess I can't understand why the staff
recommends approval of this preliminary plat when it would
require such substantial filling of the deep ravine, of the
steep ravine, in order to make room for the road and lots 10
& 11. I heard an answer last night but I would like to here
it again in this particular instance.
Moen/ Both the staff and the P/Z Commission are guided by the
ordinances and regulations that have been adopted by the city
council. We do have a grading and erosion control ordinance
which places requirements on development that exceed certain
slope and those particular requirements have been satisfied
with the grading and erosion control plan submitted with this
preliminary plat. We do have policies that suggest that
additional precautions be taken but we do not have regulations
that presently implement those particular additional
suggestions are policies. Both the P/Z Commission and the
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission are interested in
pursuing additional regulations to protect the city's
environmental features.
Throg/ Thank you, Monica. For one, I would like to encourage the
work that you are just referring to and to just indicate my
support for it and I am curious to know if the rest of council
would agree that we need to be more active with regard to
ensuring that development on ravines or that the development
does not radically disrupt ravines of this type and other
sensitive natural features.
Horow/ I don't think there is any question about this. It is just
their work program has been so overloaded they just haven't
got to it.
Throg/I am not being-
Horow/ We have always wanted this and we just haven't gotten there.
Nov/ Maybe we ought to say it has been in the works for about two
years or so.
Baker/I think it has always been an issue with certain members of
F02194
: i
.,
"
----
-
-. ,
,
, ,
i
,
\
"
I',
j:' ~
I
II II
,
I I!:
I
'I
\
'! )
f':
(;
':'
ii:,
I'
"
':11
I
I
I
"
'I
..
:!
i
"
,
~l' !
':
". -
~
"1~-:--~---
.
, ,"', . . ' , , '
I It::.: -I -" ",', '
. .' ,',;' I' "~'I "(', il..~" ".',' ,'.
:' ,t" M' \"_ ,~_ .
//
, ~
.,' 1
I.
\.
----
-,
#5h page 2
the previous councils and it will probably get more
consideration with this council. That may speed up the
process.
Horow/ Their cupeth over runneth.
Kubby/ Although I think that there are some kind of pUblic health
and safety type issues when we fill in ravines in terms of
storm water. That when you fill in a ravine you decrease
natural drainage ways and natural drainage cleansing and I
guess because there is a Supreme Court ruling that says that
even though a developer has followed all of the laws, if there
is some issue of public health, safety, welfare that there is
some leg to say no. That I feel uncomfortable voting about
this and will probably vote no.
Baker/ Say that again, Karen.
Nov/ Yes, repeat that please.
Kubby / That there is some leeway. That even though a developer has
followed all of the city regulations that if a council
believes that it is detrimental to the health, safety and
welfare of the public that you can vote no and have some legal
standing.
Baker/ I am a little unclear about how this particular project is
a detriment to health and public safety.
Kubby / When you fill in a ravine and there is no storm water
management in this particular plat, is there.
Moen/ Not with this particular plat but that particular requirement
has been satisfied in a former development. So it hasn't been
excused in this case. It has been accommodated already. And
the concern about the public health, safety and welfare is
always a consideration that both the staff and P/Z Commission
take. It is a preamble to our regulations and I don't want to
suggest by the statements that I have made that that has been
compromised as a result as a lack of regulations.
Baker/ Certainly in general I agree with you 100%. In this
particular case I don't see the issue being that paramount.
Kubby/I guess, too, it is a way of me also saying that I don't want
to wait very much longer because ravine after ravine,
especially in the northern part of the city, is being filled.
I don't want that to happen.
Throg/ Another point about public notification. A brief point. I
F02l94
~~-'-" --'.
1:1
"
1
I
,
I~,
II
I
I - Ii
il II'
I' . L\
, i'i
i\
,
,;
I'
,
'!i '-:
I
,
I'
i
i)
If
I:
f:
Ij
I
I
I,! ,Ii
" "
',:'
.".,.. ""'fIf''''
',...:
-------':...--
-- - - ............- ~ - ~~~, .
--... ~-- ~ .-'-,,-' -' ,
....... --""1 ' ___.,.
... -- - ~ .... - ~. , ....- ....
\
, , "" ,
f ' , ' "L -1 '-t' . ," ,
' ,,' '1'1 ' ,:;" ,,- '. -. '
. " " I ' ( , ' , "
:... "! J.' ",_- ,,~.' "_. ' , . , ' ,
/
,
1
,
','
#5h page 3
understand that from talking with Kevin who lives at
1807 Quincent that the only notice of proposed rezoning and of
the proposed subdivision was a pair of signs tacked to a fence
60 yards away from the first house at the end of Quincent.
And this echoes a point we made earlier with regard to Walnut
Ridge. Somehow we have to find someway to show-I am going to
use the word courtesy, I don't know if that is the right word.
A little more courtesy to the people who might be affected by
a particular development to make sure that they are adequately
informed so they have an opportunity to comment at least, to
talk at least, about the proposed development. And I don't
mean that as a direct criticism of anyone here. We need to-
Franklin/ I think probably the council needs to talk about that.
If you do want us to expend more time and money on notice we
certainly will. So we need some guidance as to what the
extent of that notice should be.
Kubby/ Some of it I don't believe is time and money. If the
developer knows that when they put the sign up.
Franklin/Certainly, I think some of the things that you have been
talking about tonight have to do with letter notice which now
is 200 feet in the case of rezoning and would have been with
the Oakes rezoning that was considered at the same time as
this plat. It may not go far enough in your jUdgement now and
that is the case then we need to revise that process.
Throg/ All I know that if you drive to the end of Quincent there is
no sign. You have to get out of the car and walk 60 yards to
the edge of the woods and see a fence and there is two signs.
Franklin/ There are other measures that we can take, too, in terms
of sending notice by letter for sUbdivisions which we don't do
now. We do it for zonings but we will follow your direction.
Lehman/ Karin, I had just one question for you. Historically how
much of a problem have we had with people complaining about
not having notice.
Franklin/ I can't say that we have had a lot of problem with people
complaining but that could be because they don't know to
complain. They may not know until after the fact and whether
they let us know or not. I can't say we have had a lot of
people calling us and saying that they didn't know about a
particular project. We always, whenever there is a big
controversial item- I know that when we did the rezoning of
the entire city we have had complaints five years hence-well,
why didn't you tell me about it. Well, it was a very public
kind of process and it is hard to say. But we don't have a lot
F02194
-- ,.
; 1
t:
I,
"
i'
Ii
! ~
:1
I'
11
(
; ~
, i\ ~
1
i
ii,
Ii,
"
I~
:\
I
I
i/
!:
i.:
p
I',
"
,1'1
I
I
f
i
,j
,
I
" i
I
I
"
"""I'. -
!
I
I
I
,
i
\
\
l....\M.
-
"1~- -""'V\---~ ..-'......-
I . .' ':, I ' L ' '~-I ,LI i. ' "" >: ' . " '"
':..' )1-: "~ '~=' "'R: :17J) \ , ' . '. "
/
,:- "
I
"
,
'--.
#5h page 4
of calls that say you didn't tell me about this particular
subdivision and I was concerned.
Lehman/ Thank you.
Pigott/ I just have a guest ion as well. In the staff report there
is a mention on dated 16th of December about an issue that we
talked about regarding Walnut Ridge and secondary access and
it said that the Fire Department was concerned about the
topography of the area. I wondered if you could just explain
for people who might know about it what the decision was and
as to why this isn't a threat given the fact that there is no
secondary access even though the Fire Department was concerned
about it.
Moen/ There is a secondary access policy that was developed by the
staff and endorsed by the P/Z Commission that sets a variety
of thresholds as to when secondary access should occur. It
isn't just a matter of number of lots but there are physical
features that are considered. There are populations that are
considered. And in this particular case, the consensus of the
staff, it wasn't in total agreement, but the general consensus
was that this particular development which you are considering
this evening did not reach nay of the thresholds that would
prompt staff to suggest that secondary access be established.
The staff report does go on to say that any development beyond
this will have to consider secondary access. The Fire
Department has preferences as to what kind of streets, what
kind od radii should be included within those to maneuver
their equipment around easier.
pigott/ And in this case they decided that a sprinkler system in
each of the houses would be adequate to address the concerns
they had regarding the health and safety of the people in the
neighborhood.
Moen/ That was a suggestion made by the Fire Department as an
alternative to secondary access. It was not a recommendation
that was forwarded to you from by the P/Z Commission.
Kubby/ I want to make one last comment about some of the earlier
comments I made in that even though there might be water
detention facilities for that particular property, what a
ravine does is hold water and drain water for properties above
it as well which what happens to that water when this when
this ravine-and doesn't that cause problems for the people in
that neighborhood even though that neighborhood is taking care
of its own water. That ravine now can't take water in a
neighboring land. So that is part of what my concern is when
we fill ravines. It is not just one neighborhood that that
F02194
-
...... '
,
1:
I
i: I
Iii I
L !
r il
:1 I'
; I', I,
i i
I ;;
I I'
~ ,~
I I,i
I r
':1
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I ,
,I
lIII/IIf//IIr'I'. ......~""---....--= ~.... ~ ~~!.......-
........ ---, --'f"'"
-
-
... -..
'. ":;1" 'I.]' :~/".'C.:'" \,.", "
, . 'U " ,
:' f,.. _. . '_ ,'. ~' '_,' , , .
/
1/\
,. j
'>" -,'
'- -.~. ~
'-. -~
.
......--
-----,~
#5h page 5
ravine takes care of. It is lots of space. Lots of acres.
Baker/ Are you implicitly advocating that we have a regulation that
says you just cannot fill ravines in Iowa city.
Kubby/ I don't know if I would go that far or not. I think ravines,
especially in on the north side, are a real system of how
storm water is handled in a natural way and when you disrupt
that system if we let it go on and on and there are problems
that can happen on the north side with storm water and cause
a lot of property damage.
Horow/ This issue goes beyond the particular resolution we are
dealing with right now. I think this is another one that we
will have to deal with when we grapple with for instance the
environmental issues such as the Commission. There is a
option on the floor. We have had discussion. Any other point
that has not already been covered.
Roll call- Throg, Pigott, and Kubby voting no, the resolution
carries, 4-3.
,
F02194
....~ ......., -, -,
~
-
\ ..-
-.-'-. ..--
",...,.......,--.
I
,
"
,
,
i
,
i;'il; I
I,
I'
I I'
!, 0
II. :1'
:1 .,. \.
I ~., ' ,
'lj'= I ~
Ii:';.
1':.
, ,I;
I
1"
';Ii'
ii
t ~
I,
!
"
"
I
,
\',:
"
"IIIJIt'I'.
_ ""'--"1 ----..,., -~--- ~ Ilf-'......
~ -...... .........-----.....-- - ~~ ...
-
_. ...-..~-.....-i....--
\
, ,
" ,
I',. - -,' f ,. , "
.' ,'I', ,L:, " "71! ", '"", , ''','
':, 't..' ,,'=':. i '.'. . ...... "\ .
/
'1
\' '
......,
~~-.-.. ". ~
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1 i 1994
Page 7
q*- z q
'ill- 2.~
I
I
i.
Consider a resolution approving the final plat of Wild Prairie Estates. Part
One, a 9.84 acre, 20 lot residential subdivision located north of Rohret
Road and east of the Irving Weber Elementary School site. (SUB93.
00171 (BO.day limitation period March 14, 1994)
Comment: At its January 6, 1994, meeting, by a vote of 5-0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the final plat
of Wild Prairie Estates, Part One, subject to staff approval of legal
papers and construction documents prior to Council consideration. The
Commission's recommendation is consistent with the staff recommen.
dation included in the staff report dated January 6, 1994. The
construction documents and legal papers have been approved.
Action:
~/ ~CJAU
~~
j.
Consider a resolution approving the final plat of Wild Prairie Estates, Part
Two, a 12.05 acre, 33 lot residential subdivision located north of Rohret
Road and west of the Irving Weber Elementary School site. (SUB93.
0018) (BO.day limitation period March 14, 19941
Comment: At its January 6, 1994, meeting, by a vote of 5.0, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the final plat
of Wild Prairie Estates, Part Two, subject to staff approval of legal
papers and construction documents prior to Council consideration. The
Commission's recommendation is consistent with the staff recommen.
dation included in the staff report dated January 6, 1994. The
'construction documents and legal papers have been approved.
'lh1~/ ~
Action:
~
%
ITEM NO.6. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 33 ENTITLED
"UTILITIES" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA, BY ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 33.10.4 ENTITLED "TAP.ON FEE
FOR THE NORTHWEST SANITARY SEWER PROJECT".
\
\;. ;"', ""'~""....,.,."",.~."u_"
Comment: Section 33.10.3 of the Code of Ordinance of the City of Iowa
City, Iowa, authorizes the City to adopt and implement project'specific tap.on
fee ordinances to provide for the equitable apportionment of costs associated
with extension of public utilities. The City is proposing to establish a tap-on
fee for the Northwest Senitary Sewer, a trunk sewer serving the northwest
area of the City within the Clear Creek drainage basin,
Action:
k.; ~/
.L
.1111.
-
,
I
,
I
I
,
I
,
I
i
!
i
I
: ,
i i
: '
~I !
i,
I,
'Ii
:1
Ii
"
,I
"
!
II
II
I\,
')'
~
i
I
I
j
j
I
j
I
I
I
i
I
I
,
,
,
,
I
i
I
Ii ,.
'Iii I:"!: , ;.1
f:
"
I '0,
j
,
,
.
Ii
i
1
r
I
Ii
1 I;:
',i,
,.
;:
I
I,
<:
"
, .
,
\,,1
""'11I("'" - ~-
"1 ~_. -----..... - ---------~
,-~ ~ ,I...."
, ., " . '
, ,
'. ,:,-1 . L '-I ;;t .... ,':: ",: . "
i " 'I ' ., '" "
. " , " ~'. ' .
I' I M _ 'w ,~ , , '..'
/
i., '\
1
'"
~~- --
-~
j
#6 page 1
Horow/ (#6) The p.h. is open.
Roy Walton/ I live at 4520 Oakcrest Hill Road S.E. and I have
questions as much as answers on this. I am looking at the map
and I am seeing a couple of proposed tracks. One to go into
the subdivision at Walnut Ridge and another proposed one. Now
are these fees based on just that being completed and then I
own property out there and when it comes to our property or
moves on then we have to pay.
Kubby/ You only pay when you get hooked up.
Walton/ I understand that. But I am aSking Karen-By the way I want
to thank all of you. A couple of weeks ago I griped because
I didn't get anything going in on that property and this is
real quick. My question is, is the improvement cost for what
I just now see on this map. If it is what I see is going to
Walnut Ridge and a proposed stub sticking out which doesn't
come any where close to serving the entire area. So are we
going to pay a cost when we tap on later for this and then pay
an additional cost for moving the sewer on through the rest
for the area.
i
i
i,
"
I:
I
II
I!
,I
II
il.
I,
~
'i
,
';
II
;
'il ~ d
','1 ",
J:,
I(
! .{
II'
. I
" ..11....
Gentry/ The fee that you will be paying or have already paid will
only cover this area. Yes.
Walton/It will only cover what is in the map.
Gentry/Yes.
Walton/ The sewer that is now there.
Gentry/ In the event that there is an additional sewer line then
the council may choose to do another site specific tap on fee
ordinance in which case there would be another process.
Walton/ Then I have a great problem with paying for somebody's- a
tap on fee assessed to my property when and if it develops for
somebody else's sewer. That is my problem.
Kubby/ So would he pay a second fee for the extension if he has
already tapped on.
Gentry/ No.
Walton/ I am not anywhere near it yet Karen.
Gentry/ That is all calculated into- we figured it out in terms of
each time another arm is added on that a portion per use in
acreage. So that has all been calculated in our original
"
..'.
F02194
;/
i
.",.". ...... ._"" -----...,.' -9\-- ~ ;'........
- -- ~ ..- .........----......--
. ',' .
I " ,,- , ' -..;. , , '
" ,,:I I "4n- ':I" I~ ' .' ',.'
- " . .". " '
, . , .,.
:. \ - - , -. ' ,...~
/
/' ''1
{
..... '---
#6 page 2
enabling ordinance if you remember that a couple of years ago.
It is a fairly complicated formula and I-
Atkins/ If we were to extend the sewer beyond its existing position
it becomes a new sewer and a separate financing. You don't
pay for that. You pay for the sewer that you enjoy the
benefit from.
Walton/ Pardon me, I am still a little confused. This tap on fee
covers what is already drawn.
Atkins/ Yes. That is already built.
Walton/ Okay. Then if they corne along two years or three years
from now and service more of it.
Atkins/ If the city were to choose and that is at council's
discretion to add a section to that sewer. Say running it
further out. That becomes a separate independent project
similar to this. That if you enjoy the benefits of that and
there is a tap on, you would tap on to that and pay the tap on
fee for the cost of that particular project.
Kubby / Does that include some of the sizing of the sewer from
before.
I
,
I'
Ii
I'
I,
Atkins/ No. It is a separate free standing project.
Walton/ I got one more question then I will get out of here. On
the Camp Cardinal Road that Coralville wants very much to put
through and I see this subdivision going clear back and now I
see it crossing beyond the area where they started. They have
culverts going into the next farm going north.
Throg/ You are talking about Walnut Ridge.
Walton/ Yes. And I guess I am quite concerned that they are going
to put something back in there a mile back in it that there is
only primary access because that road is really narrow and it
is right on top of a hilltop and there is not very good sight
distance for getting on and off of there and you know that it
really bothers me that we don't go ahead and put-if you are
going to have this division that big why we don't open up Camp
Cardinal Road. And I would be losing money from doing that in
one respect because I have already in my deed and abstract
have agreed to give 30 foot free whenever it opens up again
the entire length of my property.
Kubby/ That is a separate issue.
I,
I:
'j
F02194
;(
, ,
I
, I
!
"
"
I,
~ \
I'
, I
I,
,;
,
Ii
P
"
"
II,
! ~
I,:
I
I
,
;
'I
I,'
'I'
Ii:
,)
"
ii
1;
1';
Ii
I
II
,
,-
h
-I'
I
I
I
I I
, "
i
------ ----..... ---~--------........--.- ~ - -
....... ~.., -. -, '-eI. iIt-.~....'"
~ftF ~
.. -- - ~ ..
.. i ... '~.
, . ", "';, : . . ", '
l , ' I L "1-'" I~- . ' ,,'," '" '" "
. ',' ,:l. 'I . I . '. , '
. , '< ' . ' .' , ~
, " , '.. I" ". " '.
:'. 'I' ~ -. .
/
//\..
)'- I
(,
':~'c, :i~=::,_,~___
--.-....--
#6 page 3
Horow/ Yeah, it really is a separate issue.
Walton/ I understand but it all goes together and how are you going
to continue to push the sewer up through there if we are not
going to have anywhere- there is no road for the part of the
property.
Horow/ The sewer won't go up there until-
Walton/ I understand. I will leave it go, thank you.
Horow/ Anyone else.
Fred Charbon/ 3518 Deercreek Road. I live on the northern end and
I own property that I stand on and see the Coralville sewer.
Why in the world am I transporting my sewage from Coralville
to the far corner of Iowa City when you have complained that
it is such a cost. I was in a meeting, it was generally agreed
upon a hill site out there that was Coralville's and the hill
site was yours. Now, you come out and stick-put her down in
there an awful long ways and you are going to be pumping
sewage when it could flow on over the hill. May I ask how it
got changed so fast and not notified us.
Horow/ You certainly may.
Atkins/ I am not so sure that I understand the question.
Gentry/ I don't understand.
Horow/The timing here on when you think-
Charbon/ One year ago they met with Clear Creek Development and it
was stated that they would go about a mile from the Coralville
sewer to Coralville. There on the other side of the hill would
go to Iowa City. This is in the Clear Creek Development.
Atkins/ I don't know who they are.
Charbon/ Clear Creek Investment Company.
Atkins/ That is news to me.
Gentry/ We have never heard of that.
\
Fosse/ The tap on fee in the area for this project is only what
drains into it by gravity. So there may some confusion as to
what the boundaries are.
Atkins/Let me ask you a question, Rick, maybe it will clarify it.
F02194
~ ,.",~,...:.;.,..,."...,.,.,~,._ '_.'n"'V
..<I>..
,
I
I '
1
I
I
I
,
!
I
'I
I
,
.j
Ii
,I
I'
,I
Ii
I'
,I
II,
ir
Ii
:i
i\
, 'I--
I' .
~' :
l(
"
I:;
:1
I'
Iii
, Ij
I
I
I.
I';
i',
i
,
.'1
~. :
"fIl'"'" -
I
I
I
I
"
-
'l-----...~ -~..... ~ .;.r..~..-
, , ' (', ,
'.,'.,' ,;' I' ,L, t I," I'] , >.,' .' !
,:.' I, :; ~ ' ':~="', : _., ..:.Ji" \, 1 ",
/
,
/~'\J '
'. ,I'
--
.' ._---.
.....'..-----.
#6 page 4
There have been questions all along about that portion of Iowa
city, up in that northwest corner that it would be easier to
have Coralville sewer that portion of the town than us because
of the ridge line. And as far as I know that is still subject
to discussion. Nothing has changed on that. Coralville has
not pursued that with us.
Charbon/ This here map comes into my property. My property lies
over there.
Atkins/ Is your property in the corporate limits.
Charbon/ Of Iowa city.
Atkins/ If your property is in the corporate limits of Iowa city
then if and when the council would choose to deal with the
issue of sewer that would be a legitimate concern. Coralville
may in fact may be able to serve it better. But right now
there is no plans for us to run a sewer that far out.
Kubby/ He is saying that the map shows that it is. So what is the
discrepancy.
Atkins/ I don't know the map.
Gentry/ I don't know. I would suggest that we get back to you and
him. Did we get his name.
Fosse/ Yes, we have his name.
Horow/ Is there anyone else who wished to address this issue.
Kubby/ So to be clear what we are voting on with the tap on fee.
The sewer has been voted on, the sewer is constructed. We are
talking now about how to pay for it.
Gentry/ To collect, yes.
Horow/ Okay, the p.h. for the ordinance is closed.
F02194
--",--
I
,
! .
Ii
I.
I,
, ,
i
I,
I:
Ii
I'
i'
I,
1
1 :
I
II
! i
, '
, '
il
I.
Ii
"
Ii
:1
"
"
I
!
Ii
If
)
\; - I
I' .I,'"
,11,_
!l - "
I i
I:,'
j
,:/
..' I
\ ' Ii
~ ! '~
;,/
;1
"'...,... ""'If''''
i
',i
...... '-"'1-~
I
I
I
~--- ~ ..-'......
-- ......,.. -......--------- ...,~ ...
...--
....--.---.----~---..,...--...~------~.........-----
. .' ,
(' " -' t-I' t " " ", " "
, I' L" , , .I' , .:, '
\'.', " .~I ~' ..:.'...:r '.,', ~~ 'r'"1 ...~, ~, ".' "
/
, '1
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 8
ITEM NO.7. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCEAMENDING CHAPTER 33 ENTITLED "UTILITIES"
OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY
ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 33.10.4 ENTITLED "TAp.ON FEE FOR THE
NORTHWEST SANITARY SEWER PROJECT". (First Consideration)
Comment: See Item No.6 above.
Action: 77\..~/ ':&JAW. I~ e. t/ II 1i
,~~~) ~t IIJ
ITEM NO.8. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34,
ENTITLED "VEGETATION," CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA, BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IV, DIVISION II ENTITLED
"PRIVATE APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES," WHICH ARTICLE SHALL
PROVIDE FOR REGULATING APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES BY PRIVATE
APPLICATORS, AND PROVIDE FOR THE ENFORCEMENT THEREOF.
. I
; , i
:
I. ,
; !,
, !,
, I,
I
I Ii I
., ,)
Ii
1 ,I iF
"
! :, I]
,
I~
, il - i.:
I ,I I;'
, I j,
j I;
I I
I Ii I,)
I ,
I ,I
, I t:f
"
,
"
I,
Ii,
ITEM NO.9.
Comment: At the request of the City Council, the City Attorney has
streamlined the "private applicator" version of the pesticide ordinance in order
to track federal, rather than state law. This version anticipates city.provided
signs, to be posted prior to application and to remain for 24 hours, with black
letters on bright yellow background, sized 8 ~" x 11". Farms are exempt.
Violations will be prosecuted as municipal infractions: $50-1 st offense; $100
2d.offense, and $200-3d and subsequent offenses.~~
Action: -rc6tlidu/7~ d?/p.J,j ~
k ~ atta<<.eJ
CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34, ENTITLED "VEGE1rA.'
TION," CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY
ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IV, DIVISION II ENTITLED "PRIVATE APPLICATION
OF PESTICIDES," WHICH ARTICLE SHALL PROVIDE FOR REGULATING
APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES BY PRIVATE APPLICATORS, AND PROVIDE
FOR THE ENFORCEMENT THEREOF. (FIRST CONSIDERATION I
Comment: 'See comment above.
Action:
c/(~! ~
.jv; 1'<
~ ~ 1ft)
aLfruF
i
.,
-.&d _____
':,1::
',':i
I
I,
'I
"
"
\,;
,I'
,j
"'ff'" -
,
1
I
I
I
i
-
~---;--....
. '.
". " " , " "
, ",', - , - '''''"('' "
, , I .'" t I' " ,
. , ",:', 'll-r - /":-,, . , '
, , '. . , '
: ','w ...:..' '_' _....,' I,
/
1/)
I'
" .'
.~:::::-:-=-:-:--...
....._~,-
-~
-~
#7 page 1
Horow/ (#7) Moved by Nov, seconded by Baker. Discussion.
Kubby/ The lots in Walnut Ridge, did the developer pay the
equivalent of tap on fee up front instead of the property
owners.
Gentry/ He has been paying them as they go along.
Kubby/ So there has been some payment for lots already to go.
Gentry/ Yes.
Horow/ Any more discussion.
Roll call- (yes).
Kubby/ And we will get some questions about the map discrepancy.
Different interpretations about how far the pipe goes.
Atkins/ We will Clarify that for Mr. Charbon.
Kubby/ For us and-
Gentry/ We need to talk to Chuck.
F02194
<'."
,-," ...
~---.
,
I
,
I
!
!
!
,
,
I
'i
'r
,
" \
1
:'t
. i,'
1 r,
, '1
I' 1;;\
, ';':~, r
,: !I
,I
Ii
,(
"
Ii
il
,:
" -
"
"
'Ii :
,
i
i,,'
- -._-~, -~--""-".-,,'1IlII.'--- -~ .....~_.~.- -
_, _ -.--- ... --'-T~"'-- .....--
... ...---.... I ....- -.
i
'. ',:" 'I ' ',6, " L I '::1" ,:', ,,' .'
" '. . :~r' 'r: ,,' IV' ., . . , I , .
:' 'I' ~ . -.' . -, . ."_. ." - .
"
/
>''1
! '
,.\.
-
-,
----...-
--
#8 page 1
Horow/ (#8) Is the public discussion about the ordinance, the
vegetation, the pesticide-the private application of
pesticides. Council, last evening, discussed this and
determined to defer it. Do we have to defer both the public
discussion and the consideration of the ordinance.
Gentry/ Separately.
Horow/ The chair would entertain a motion to defer public
discussion until-Ia would like to set this. A date certain,
right.
Nov/ We want you to set a date. I am asking you when-
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-28 SIDE 1
i
" !
II
I
I
I !
i
,i - If
, Ii
':
"
I"
(,
. I
!I
"
, '
.
I
)
I
II' '
I ! ,
, ,
Gentry/ I am almost finished with the memo.
KUbby/ What does our agenda look like for the 15th.
Gentry/ Do you want to wait until budget is over.
Atkins/ March 1 is the budget hearing night. I think you want to
be cautious about what you stack up that evening.
Horow/ All right, then we have to take it on February 15. Chair
would entertain a motion to defer until February 15.
Moved by Nov, seconded by Throg. Any discussion.
Atkins/ By the way I did hear a news account at 6:00 the Governor
did sign that legislation. So it is done.
Kubby/ I guess that I would request per my discussion last night
about the possibilities of the council as a body going to the
Depart of Ag. and Land Stewardship in terms of some rule
making for commercial applicators because of the issue of
fairness. I would like to know what that process is and what
are the issues that we can ask for different rules about.
Horow/ I would like to see a little bit more information about that
before I make a judgement on that. Whether or not this is
actually feasible.
Nov/ Maybe our legislative committee should do a little research on
that.
Kubby/ That would be great.
Horow/ Refer it to the legislative committee. In this case I would
like to suggest that you have a minute taker because this one
F02194
:i
"
....~.,.,",.."."__."4._"'"
"
/{
, ,
"~I :
i,'!
. i
;,
}'
,
,
\\
,
~' .
, 1
, ", 'I 'I'..' ,-," 'I~" ,.-,,',
. /. 'It.- . '. "" .
.,' -,' -..' , , ,,'
'.,' " '.' I ' , , ,,' ",""
. !'''' - -,,' , ... " ' '
,~:,
," "
,.~
r "--="~:::c._
, -.....~
. '......~~
#8 page 2
is going to be complicated.
Kubby/ It might be a matter of calling the Depart of Ag and Land
Stewardship and they might have something on paper that says
guidelines for changing state rules.
Horow/ There is a motion on the floor to defer until February 15.
All those in favor signify by saying aye (ayes). Larry, you
are not getting picked up on the mic.
I
I
F02194
-.-.--
I
i
1
!
I'
I'
I:
I:
!i J':
, 1
I: Ii
, 11
,!
" '" !
" "
U :,1
I: I II
i, I
I -1
I'
" . .
I' "
" ,,'
" "
"
" ,
'11: ,
!ji
I
l
,I,,'
"
'.'
,"
, '
Ii.
i,
,
}:
I'
_4 ,..',',.,..,',.~.____~.
,. -'-"',.,.',..,.
',.."....
,
. ,,' .__.....,.... h_...~'.._._~__
\;'i
, '
.,:,.,... --,. - -
~ -."., --,.." .~--- ""Go -
~ ,'......
- ~ ..... ~ .........---------
.,~.
~
-. ...
..~-.
';,:,'::,1., "h H ,!;' " '~", .'.'\
,,- _. -', ."',
/
/"
, I
\'
".. .---"-
......-.------.-
#9 page 1
Horow/ (#9) We also agreed to defer this and the Chair would
entertain a motion to defer this until February 15.
Moved by Kubby, seconded by pigott to defer this until
February 15. Discussion. All those in favor signify by
saying aye (ayes).
Kubby / Although we just did what we talked about not doing. Larry I
why the hell did you vote for it.
Baker/ I have no problems with inconsistency.
Kubby/ We talked about not holding a public discussion or having
public input and scheduling a decision of ours.
Horow/ We have discussed this. It seemed to me that the reason we
had them both on the same evening this evening is because we
have been dealing with them for like about two years.
Kubby/ We have had very little discussion about homeowners being
involved in this. We have had discussion about they should be
but not about the-
Baker/ I would suspect that this may get a lot more of a different
kind of public discussion than we have had in the past. I
hope there is a broader range in participation. But I just
want to point out also Karen that the item previous to this,
the p.h. and the vote, that we are all inconsistent here
tonight.
...
.' ,
,;
I
F02l94
'I
, I
"
.1
,
~,,' ,',...-~ "-~~....~..,--,,
, '
, '
'.
i
I
ii
i,
I
I
i.
,
i
!
r
,
"
,
"
i i
,.
"I'
,:
III I
Ii II:
ii. ,(
'1\\ :1,\
Iilri
'II:I:!
, "
/,
ll<':
II'
',i,:,"
',,'
,'"
,i
'...
if
,
!
1,
I,
i
,
:;
II,:
,'i
~.
I ...,
',. ';1 L" t'-f I" ',,' "",'.,
,,' ,',.~I -:-" lJ' , ,;','"
1 M' _ _.,,~. ' "
/
I~\
" J
.. ,:/'
. . , -~~ "
~U_'__...._
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 9
ITEM NO. 10. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES.
a. Current Vacancies.
(1) Animal Control Advisory Board. One vacancy for a three.year
term ending May 4, 1997. lPaul Cooper's term ends.)'
(2) Housing Commission. Two vacancies for three-year terms ending
May 1, 1997. (Terms of Paul Egli and Charles Eastham end.)
These appointments will be made at the March 8, 1994, meeting of the
City Council.
I'
i I
r..
I"
'Iii 1
Ii i, .
Jl '
\\ - If
:! r
'I:, ",
I j,',
, f:
'II" ,
I II
: ',.I~ :
b. Previously Announced Vacancies.
(1) Board of Library Trustees - One vacancy for an unexpired term
ending July 1, 1997. (Gary Lundquist resigned.)
(2) Civil Service Commission. One vacancy for a six-year term ending
April 1, 2000. (Norwood Louis' term ends.)
These appointments will be made at the March 1, 1994, meeting of the
City Council.
(3) Historic Preservation 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 Russel)
and Ginalie Swaim end.)
I'
'I
',. I"
.1 /.'"
, J
These appointments will be made at the February 15, 1994, meeting of
the City Council.
ITEM NO. 11 . RECOMMENDATIONS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
....,...,'..,_.,.___,"",',..-_u....h~,......"._' .
a. Consider recommendation of the Board of Adjustment that Board
Member Catherine Johnson be reeppointed to the Airport Zoning Board
of Adjustment, See following item.
, X!~ J ~
~~
'I
,.
"
I
t.
, ,
'I
I
"
'i
"
,
.
'i
\',1
"
lII/IIIIIff""" ..... --..., '----...-,- ~..... qa. .;',..... -- - -- ~..---..------....--,~~... ~"-r\
r _..~_..--
I , ,'" I t~, t-' ':;l' . , "'" . ' " " ,
" .' ,fl..-I _ '. .,,'
" .. I" .
.",', ' - ' .
4 'M C _ _'. 1- ,.." " '
/
Fl,
>-, ~'
: ::..:."-::,'.------.-- '-
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1. 1994
Page 10
I
I
i
,
;
,
!
I
,
: 1,
,
a.
~/ ILI~ >~
b. Consider an appointment to the Senior Center Commission to fill a three.
year term ending December 31, 1996. IRe.advertisement)
.4/.--4.4,.1/,,7;;, 0) ~5
, ~J~
ITEM NO. 13. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATIO;,
Action:
II
I.
Ii '
\, I
'III - i
': l
I \
, I, _ ~.,
I. "
! i:'
I!
;/
, I:
, Iii
,i
'<'1'
I,
I
\. /'I!
,
~ /!'deV
ITEM NO. 14. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY.
e. City Manager.
- tJ.....
b. City Attorney,
~P) ~.(J/
;1
I
I,
,.'j
IL._~
"..,...- "III/f//("'"
, '
I
, :'1
')
:{
.;i
.'L, "
\ ;
~, '
;;
--
'~""' ~.<
W\--- ~ ~.'....""
-- ......." ...-.---~--,f".... -~- -- -. ...
" " ~' ,
" '
, , I I II f::""l' I-:-t ," " ,
.' ;" , It...1', _ ,l.. , ' '
:', ',- :-',~. ,~...:.' ~.',',..:.. .... ,: \ "
I.
i
/
~'\
,: .l>
, "-,:-::~-,,,:"-.-
--....-----
, -~--
,''',
#12 page 1
Horowl (#12) Council has decided to readvertise and reconsider in
two weeks time for this position. We have one applicant.
There are currently five males and three females on the Senior
Center commission. In the spirit of obtaining gender balance
in this important commission we are going out to readvertise
and reconsider in two weeks. '
Kubbyl I want to thank you, Sue, for being strong on that issue
last night.
Novl I also heard from some of the Senior Center commission members
who are out there recruiting and working hard.
I
i
'I
F02194
, \~.,..,,,,....,.... .....,.~..~-~,_._-_._,.
..-......'......'-,..
.",',
,."',:,,,:,., '
'...d::.J
~".
\ ...
---, .
i
I,
Iii i
il '
Ii II,
'[ I'
I, ',I
II - ,1
, I";
I
l
",
~~
'j;
'I
'i
" !j:',
:(,
l'
I,
"
, i
:',
j"
,
i': ,
"
:i:
II..
II
! ~,
I
"
i
,
I,
"
-
"1---'" -;---~--- ~ ..-,_.....-
I . . .,' o.
.', "'1'1 ,12.." 1:.:10,: ,'"
:,' .;:_' . ,,:' '-, (] ;1 '\"~ .' - . ~. . '.: ,':
/
/
/,,\
" 1
I
:<
-~
-,
#13 page 1
Horow/ (#13) council Information.
Baker/I saved if from the last meeting since we are early tonight.
I have two quick things. One of them. Is there some-has there
been some work done by city staff in the past about bicycle
parking d. t. Finding additional space for it. You know
steve, you and I had talked about a particular location I had
in mind which might not have been acceptable to the public,
staff, the council, or the DTA but I thought that it was a
good idea. But in lieu of that particular spot which I am not
even going to raise because I don't want to generate too much-
Atkins/ So I can't say anything about it.
Baker/ You can respond to me. But I would like to see us look at
figuring out some way to get substantial increased parking for
bikes d. t. Especially, it may be a seasonal thing, a
temporary parking spot seasonally because of good weather.
But that is the first thing is there is a sense of the council
that it is a good idea.
Atkins/ Two answers. First of all if you are interested in seeing
additional bike racks which is generally the way in which we
would respond. They are not a major item as far as an expense
item. I think finding locations to place additional bike racks
in the d.t. is the greatest concern. Secondly, the seasonal
natural I think you probably have some merit. You can move
the things and move them out.
Baker/ Might as well admit to my first suggestion which is-
Atkins/ I wouldn't.
Baker/ Steve understands the prime directive of the universe which
is to make sure city council members don't screw up. To make
us good. To stop us before we say something that we shouldn't
say. I appreciate that.
Kubby/ For example when there was a redevelopment of a major corner
d.t. recently a bike rack was taken out and not replaced and
there exacerbates.
Baker/ I would like to see staff find some space and we can put
racks or whatever. But space ought to be there.
Atkins/ We have obviously heightened our interest in the whole
bicycle business. You hear that as it becomes more common
conversation amongst council members as you deal with
development issues. Of course this summer will be the third
year of our bicycle patrol which was met with reasonably good
F02194
~l._
, ,
; I
i:
,
J
i
,
I
, '
; ,
i
I.
" !
),11 II
I !
: It
Iii i"
'i . 'I,
Ii' I,
.,.. II
I:: Ii
!,l '
;;'.,
';1 I'
!:;
II
"
,',
I,:
!i
1;1
,
,
i
I
I "I
I I!
.\/ .:'
,
, '
;1
''':~~''~ ----- -----""~, -.--- ~ ..-,'......
~ ~. .......-'-~......-- -,~... ---.-....-. ...~_. -~.............-.~---- -".----....-----,."
'.., ":I 'I' ,,: ,L ~: ' ,t I : n' , ' ' " ..:,',
:.,' ":M . ,..[I ';'_, ,...... ,
/
,:',. \1
J
'. . .~.
---'-" .---
#13 page 2
success. So we do encourage folks obviously to use their
bicycles d.t. If it the consensus of the council we will just
try to find some sites and mark up a map for you and bring
something back and show them to you.,
Horow/ This issue has been discussed in other situations. There is
a consensus on council.
I
I
!
j
,
i
I
I
i i I
,
, I'
I ' ,
,
j I"
"
, ,
I II! II
I
I
,
! r
i I, II
, t r
I , r
I \\ ," I~
I
1 ' li ~ I'
I,:
I Ii
,
I ",l
"
. \ I'
I ' ,
,
, I,
, ,.I
i 'II/
" I
i I,
j ,
1
;j , I
, ,
, ,
II I i
! ,
,
,
,
"
1
I
I
,
I
;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
d
:
Atkins/ We will put something together. We will draw up a map or
something to give you some ideas.
Nov/ We don't want them on the light posts.
Throg/ Nor having bikes confiscated for being attached to light
posts.
Nov/ You have had that happen.
Throg/ No. But I remember when the police announced it I think
last September and when new students were coming in it upset
a lot of students.
Baker/ And this is based upon a discussion I have had recently with
the Housing Director, Doug Boothroy. It is a procedural thing
but I think it will be an improvement. There are other
communities that have an administrative process that it allows
minor adjustments or variances or exceptions to the zoning
code which normally goes to the Board of Adjustment and
require a substantial fee application. There are
administrative ways that staff can handle very minor revisions
to that exception or variance process without getting the rest
of the staff, without having to pay the substantial $250 or
$275 fee and accelerate the process. In particular, what I am
thinking about is very often you will have a homeowner who
wants to expand his or her garage and it goes into the five
foot side yard requirement by a foot or two. And what always
happens and this comes from my experience on the Board of
Adjustment is that they will go through the process. It is
once a month. They have to wait for the staff reports, the
filing fees. The neighbors all support it. It is a minor
change and other communities simply handle that, as long as it
is a very minor adjustment, administratively. As long as the
people involved directly agree to it. It helps the small-it
is not something that large developers will get involved in
but the neighborhoods especially would benefit by speeding
this process and making it cheaper for minor adjustments.
Throg/ Larry, how would you distinguish between minor and major at
the administrative level.
F02194
\"
\1
.
.
I "'1" L.' LJ ./!",' ;:.." "
.: ,:' " .', 'M ....2J ,~;7J' ", t, ". ' '. ' ,
/
i
,;' ",
.~, '
#13 page 3
Baker/ There is a percentage factor. This is something that Doug
would have to work out. But as long as it doesn't impinge X%.
If it goes beyond a certain percentage of the regulation it
goes to the Board of Adjustment. But below a certain amount
and you have got the neighbors all approving. There is no
objections and that is another important factor. When
everybody agrees to it. If the neighbor objects they ought to
have that right to go through the Board of Adjustment process.
But there is a way that you could do it administratively on
small items and it just saves neighbors having to corne in and
argue in support of the neighbors on a technicality basically.
It should be a fairly simple revision I think.
Gentry/ Are these cities within Iowa.
Baker/ I do not know. Doug would know.
Atkins/ Just to give you an example in another community that
I served, we have something like 105% factor that allowed
that discretion. There is no magic to that number.
Gentry/ Off the top of my head I would say it is not contemplated
under Iowa law but we will certainly look at it.
Atkins/ But under Iowa law don't we have the ability to have an
administrative review panel for certain matters. I know we do
the Zoning Interpretation Panel. We have that available to us.
Gentry/ That is an interpretation of the zoning ordinance. It is
not contemplated to decide whether someone can use their
property or not. Now I know other states do it and I don't
know if you could squeeze that into a special exception. One
thing you might consider is having two sets of fees.
Baker/ Doug and have have talked about that also. What happens is
somebody wants to go a foot into the side yard requirement and
they corne to the meeting and they have to make the whole
presentation and we are sitting there saying yeah, yeah, okay,
go. And they have to go through this process anyway.
Gentry/ Unfortunately the zoning law is state. Are there four
people that want us to research it.
Baker/ I don't think it is a burning issue but if it can be done
expeditiously with minor revisions and it is legal.
Nov/ Don't put it aside entirely. I would like to at least learn
a little more about it but I wouldn't put it at the top of the
priority list either.
"
,
F02194
I,,;
,
---....,. '~-
!
i
,
Iii II
Ii! I'
II
" II:
.,
~ i
i "
::
" .
II
, Ii'
i !\ I:,
.,
I "
I :
I i II "
:/
, :1
I I
i
I
I I
,
"
11/ "
.r
'"
:1
":'..........~,... ...... --"1 ------..., -'W\.... ~ -.;'....f-~ -- ..... ....-.--------.V ...
........".. .... - ~ . -,----y-' - .--- -- --...---
\
'. . ,- ,
i" , '" I : L" 'CI" ,.:t ' ,: ' '~' . ,
:,<,~:. ':,'.,'~, ' ',3".':'" ..~", _~.,,', \,', I .
/
l,' \
, 1
<,
'.----
#13 page 4
Gentry/ I will talk to Doug.
Baker/My assumption is that it would be a fairly easy thing to do.
Horow/ If Doug has it already written up, let's see what he
suggests.
Atkins/We usually survey some of the towns to see if they do it and
that gives us the general language. I do know, for example,
you do permit administrative review on certain projects by the
planning staff and that discretion is granted in that fashion.
I don't know why it wouldn't be granted in a similar fashion
or something here. I understand the zoning implications but
I mean the basic principle is not a whole heck of a lot
different. You grant discretion to staff on certain decisions
about- But not on this.
Gentry/ It is different because one is legislative and the other is
quasi judicial. That is-
Atkins/ I understand that. We will put something together.
Pigott/ Just a couple of things. We talked about his yesterday but
I would like to bring it up again to the public. Apparently
steve received a letter from the Army Corp Of Engineer, Robert
Kelly, the Chief in the Engineering Division, saying that they
are looking at interim measures, discussing alternative plans
regarding flooding in 1994 and looking to examine possible
permanent changes in regulation plan at the Coralville
Reservoir and they said that they would like to meet with some
of the local public officials affected in mid-February for the
purpose of discussing possible changes. And I would request
and understand that perhaps the rest of the council, too. I
would like to find out if the rest of the council would like
steve to reply to work to set a specific date which we meet
with other local government bodies to discuss their movement
ont his issue. In particularly what they are considering in
the alternative. Some of the data they were using when
determining how to change their plan for the Reservoir.
Atkins/ Other governments, Bruno, is the county board and the
Coralville city Council.
Pigott/ County Board, Coralville, JCCOG would be-
Kubby/The Urban and Rural Policy Board of JCCOG so we would cover
everyone in Johnson County.
>
"
Pigott/ And I would request that it be a public hearing or event.
Open for the public to-
F02194
,
,
"
'\,1
"
, ,
Ii _ 1\
II:
Ii
,I - \
I',
'ii.
".
l'
I'
!,i
"I
"I
I
I
"
'I
,-l,
:1
""""""""IIIf'''.
, ,j
i
, ,
\'<;
- ~~"1.-.... .~--- ~ ~-.',.....
~ ~.....,.......-------
" ,
;' '" 'I' '~'" 't I : :;],', .':''',''
-. ,. , 't .,,1 U' " '
:: ,; -' ,\- ..'~ '-, , - .'
/
i/J
"
'. '\.
,''-,
-.,----,~
#13 page 5
Kubby/ Venue would be a better word.
is set up the Corp for venting.
ask questions.
One thing I don't want to do
To give information and to
Pigott/ Thank you, Karen.
Atkins/ I understand that you would like Corp to be afforded an
opportuni ty, in affect, to say what types of changes they
would like to make and then, in affect, direct their comments
to you collectively and that being both staff and the policy
folks involved in this issue.
KUbby/ And the public is what I heard.
Atkins/ Once you all show up it is a public meeting so.
KUbby / But some meetings allow the public to comment and ask
questions.
Atkins/ I can inform the Corps. This is not intended to be a p.h.
That you are there to address but of course the public are
certainly present and entitled to hear what you have to say.
Horow/ What this be called at the pleasure of the chair of JCCOG.
Atkins/ It will be called at the pleasure of the Corps. You have
to deal with them first.
i
,
I
ill
Ii
:1
I
!
i
11'
'I'
"
'i
I,
'n:
"
i.':
I;".
I'
;"1
""I,.
'i
i;
i
I
I
I.
II '
.'1..
i.'
Pigott/ Could we offer a date. You have got our schedule.
Atkins/ I will get a call into them tomorrow or the next day and we
will find out what they are talking about. That letter just
came in so I am not real sure what they mean. I need to talk
to Rick about it too.
i
I'
Kubby/ I am confused about pUblic-if the public at this meeting
would be able to ask questions of the Corp.
Pigott/ If they were called to provide information could they do so
is the question I have, by any of the public. I mean I would
appreciate that opportunity to have-to be able to call on
members of the pUblic.
Atkins/ I will see what the Corp has to say. That is about really
all I can do. I understand your point.
Kubby/ Are you thinking primarily of the prOfessors who have-
Pigott/ Yes. Who have been involved in discussing with the Corp
already extensively some of the modifications or plans that
F02194
,
, ,
~ ' ,
:1
I
!
l""'"",,,,,....,,....,,.... ..
I
l'
"
"
'-
....
lI/IIIf/If""" ...... ----..., ---"-.. ~-- ~ "'-r...... -------'TQIIJ. ..,--
, ,
, ,
r' , ' .' 1~/' 'It" ";':,"',:, ','
, ':,[,: Il..-f, .- ,'- ',',',' "
- . " 'I ,I, . .,"
':" , ,,:'_ ,...~ .;, -, ~t.. "
/
" .',
'-'''-......
-,
#13 page 6
they have in the works.
Horow/ Doesn't that essentially put the Corp in an adversarial
role.
Pigott/ I don't think so because I think they have worked with the
Corp and they have talked to the Corp and I don't think they
have presented themselves as adversaries to the Corp. And so
I don't think that that is the-
Horow/If the Corp didn't adopt their recommendation wholeheartedly
they might be placed in a rather defensive position.
Pigott/ I don't think that this is a meeting to put them is a
defensive position. It is just a meeting to find out
information and as a result I think that because it is an
informational meeting it wouldn't put them on the defense. We
would just ask them questions about how they are doing.
Atkins/ I would think that the Corp's engineers are as good as the
professors from the university with respect to dealing with
this issue and I think that professionally if they are going
to have some sparring, they have sparred already and I would
think they are getting down to here is the kind of changes we
can accept and they have a- admittedly the Corp has a large
responsibility than just to Iowa City and Coralville and
Johnson County and I think we have to have an understanding
and an appreciation for that. I would think that the
technical aspects of their sparring should be over with long
before they ever come in here and say what they accept and
what they reject. I would hope that is they way it would
happen.
Pigott/ The other thing was we mentioned tonight but don't know
perhaps we could talk a little bit about where the technical
advisory committee that we talked about on a couple of
occasions stands.
Atkins/ The environmental technical advisory committee.
Pigott/ Yes and how we can facilitate it.
Franklin/ She is still in the hallway.
Nov/ Don't go yet Karin.
Atkins/ She got caught.
Franklin/ We have got the sensitive areas map done. We have got to
do some final touches on it but I want to talk to you about
F02194
'I ,~~, ;.,',......_-"..-,._..-..."
\,~ - --'
"
I
I
:
i
!
I i
I
i !i ~
I, 1,
I II!
I ,
I
I I
,
I !I ,i
,;
Ii l
"
i: Ii
I' :;
1 ': \
I 1; . d
I II l':
d 1
"
I ,I 'r;
1 ,.
Ii I Ii:
I
I .'1,
"
, I
"
r
II,
I,
I
i
,
,
,
I
, ,
^, '.
, , ' '-, LI 1- '. ",' ",
, " ," , " , " ,
. . ..f ",. I'....
',' ",I ..~, ,".' '__,'",' '.,'
'1 ' '~, _
/
/\,
I.,
~"_.----
#13 page 7
that on the 14th and also talk about the technical advisory
committee at that time. I would like to have the people lined
up by then. I didn't hear what your question was.
Pigott/ That was basically it. I wanted to know where we were.
Atkins/ On the 14th we will schedule a discussion of the sensitive
areas and then Karin can pick up the committee idea right from
there. Is that okay.
Nov/ One more comment or question. Would this committee be an
advisory panel of water mitigation, water pollution problems
as well as other environmental concerns.
Franklin/ I am not sure exactly what you mean by that. The idea is
that they will advise the staff on the sensitive areas as we
have identified them. And wetlands, hydric soils and drainage
ways are part of that.
Nov / There was somebody here earlier today who talked about an
advisory panel and a lot of the things that he talked about
were environmentally sensitive kinds of things.
Franklin/ When Randy Neprash talked about a citizens advisory group
regarding the Water Plant project, that I think will be
something very different from what I am envisioning the group
that will advise the staff on development projects.
Atkins/ The citizens advisory is intended to be more ad hoc, deal
with the issue, come and go. This is intended to be something
that Karin would be able to call upon this resource on a
regular basis. Become somewhat institutionalized into our
review process.
Franklin/ I think your citizens advisory group, although it may
have technical components, may have people who are not and is
very project specific. And that will be very time consuming
in terms of their time devoted to the Water Plant issue. And
as steve says, the group that I am talking about is on-going
for as long as we can coerce them into working with us.
Horow/ Okay, thank you very much.
Throg/ I would like to make one point. I was reading through the
Longfellow Neighborhood Association newsletter which we
received recently and I noticed that IIGE offers a program to
reduce residential energy use. It is called Home Energy
Advantage. And according to it, II would send out an energy
specialist to evaluate ones home's energy savings needs and
install certain devices as needed. It is interesting in that
F02194
i
,
, ~
i.
\':;
--.... ".-
Ii I
I
" . II
I'
,I Ij:
','
"
Ii
" 1
' "
; I' U
,
!;
i !.;
:r
" Ii
, I
i
I i I,
I I i
! "I
. r
!
i I
i
i II
I
I
I I,
;
I
I
I
I
I
,I
i,.'
"
~. -
'.M~'.~.'.._._,,_,
~
~
---~... ~ -'.. ...-
- 4l!'"
--. .-.-
- "
',<, "1:1 . lil., ,}.i, " h ' ," ~ , , . .'
\ "'.' . ",:,=1 1 ~ _.
/
,(/ .,
.L
"
"-
#13 page 8
it is a win win win kind of situation. You can save water and
save energy. You can save money by having them freely, for
free, install water heater wraps, water pipe installation,
high efficiency faucets, high efficiency shower heads and they
will give you a compact fluorescent bulb, too, at no cost. To
participate, all you have to do is call 354-3552. You are
going to have to wait for a few weeks to be able to have them
come out. But it is a win win win kind of situation.
Pigott/ Also, can I just jump in-
Throg/ You can indeed.
Pigott/ They will come tomorrow night. The E.A. is having a meeting
at First Christian Church and they will be a part of the
meeting discussing some of those auditing things. So if you
are interested but want to find out more, you can come
tomorrow night. First Christian Church.
Nov/ Well, I will put in a plug for Thursday night. Everybody come
here about the Iowa city Water Plant. A panel discussion with
lots of experts and pUblic questions are welcome afterwards.
Also I have a question about the parking situation around City
High. I had a phone call from someone who asked to be
notified when this was going to be on our agenda again.
Horow/ I was going to mention that. Anything else.
Kubby/ About six months ago we had an evaluation of our appointed
employees, the City Attorney, the city Clerk, and the city
Manager and we had talked at that time of having a six month
evaluation because we found those discussions very fruitful in
understanding how we all work together and how people are
getting along and I wanted to- I don't know how to go about
initiating that. Six months is up. It is time to do it.
Baker/ Can I express one reservation. It is up for you but it is
only one month for other people and I would be more
comfortable with a little bit more time before I started
evaluating the staff.
Kubby/ The six month evaluation would be a little different than
the one before, salaries and that. To learn about how they are
running their office and any questions people have. It would
seem like the discussion would be a little bit more
generalized but not necessarily us just critiquing people in
their positions. But letting them also educating us about
what the future challenges are for their offices.
Baker/ I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't expected to
F02194
-~-'-'- ----
I
i
l'.
II! II
I'
" I'
'I
I, r
II 'I,
" I;
,I
i;
I' H
I I
!I (.
!'!
I'
'I --j
i I"
I ,[
I
I J
I,' Ii
I;
"
;i
1___
I,
I
\";
...,.". -
------~
.., ----...-:' ----...--- ~ ;,'....
, , ,
i ',:' ' -,' Iq -t' '",,", ,'",
"'" '''':/, :'L ',t 'I,"" .'", :"', ,'::
.: . ," t~". , .~,' , . ", 'M " .
.', ',~ -
/
, '
1,'\
, 1
J.
,
-- --
#13 page 9
critique at this particular point.
Kubby/ If we wait a couple months to do it, it is okay but it is
just-you know, we said six months, I put it in my calendar.
Throg/ Perhaps June. That is six months after Larry and Ernie
started.
Kubby/ But then we will do it again in a couple of months. So that
doesn't make much sense.
Atkins/ Maybe like an April date. I don't think you want to go
much later than that. I remember the conversation, Karen,
specifically we were going to try to do it more often. We
will just get to the mayor on when.
Kubby/ The other issue I had comes from the Nation's Cities Weekly
and that there is this headline saying that Appeals Court
Rules Against Philadelphia where a mayor is asking other
cities to help them with some briefs. And I disagree with the
mayor's stance and I guess I want to ask us to write a letter
to this mayor as a city saying we disagree with your stance
and that the issue is that when Philadelphia was resurfacing
some streets they didn't want to do curb ramps and I am not
quite sure how the process went but they went to an appeals
court and saying they don't think they have to do curb ramps
when they resurface and they are trying to appeal that
decision. I want to say that I think Iowa city should do curb
ramps when we resurface a street and to create curb ramps when
they're are not and that it is a good public investment. It is
part of our obligation and-
Atkins/I am surprised that they are even doing that. We have taken
the position that curb ramps, regardless of whether you pave
or not pave or whatever, as an ongoing project. You all as a
council have expressed that.
Kubby/ I would like us to write a letter to the mayor of
Philadelphia saying that this has been our policy and our
actions and this is where we put money where our mouth is and-
Atkins/ Also the Philadelphia folks want us to jump on board with
them saying-
Kubby/ No, the Philadelphia mayor is aSking cities to jump on board
and say to the appeals court we shouldn't have to do this and
I want to say we should do this. And not to go tll the appeals
board but go to the mayor and say our city as a city feels it
is a good obligation. We don't want to jump on board with you
and fight the rUling.
F02194
JDIIJJ
Mill
,
,
"
I
!
II
"
II
Ii'
Ir
"
I ~
i
i
i
j :
, ,
)
J
I
. r
Ii
I
I;
I:
"
:,
:,
"
/'
~ :
ii'
il
[
\
,
,
I;"
1=
.,
I::
,j
q
I
i
I
I
l .(
I,' ,
"
:i
~,..
.... ---"1 ~-. ~..... ~ .-.'..... -----
, ' ,
. . .' .',
, - 14 fft- ' , , ,', ','
, ,:~' I ,,6 t ' ,'" ", ',',
'~, " ".~" ~' \'~21 ,.' '. ... ,.....', ',', ,
/
,
>\
!
f
,-,---,-
, -._-~....
#13 page 10
Horow/ I can certainly do that for you. I wish you would let me
know of these things in advance, Karen, rather than surprising
us of the issues. If you would have called me and told me.
Kubby/ We have to decide as a group to talk about these things. I
chose not to talk about last night because our hour was late.
So where do I go. I don't want to spend 50 hours a week on
the phone with people. I don't feel like this is a big
controversial issue.
Baker/ In Sue's defense here, her signature is going to be on the
letter and as a courtesy it might have been a way to start.
I have a problem with us and how that letter will be phrased
because I don't want to just start attacking Philadelphia.
Expressing our position and I am certainly all for and why we
like this but-
Kubby/ That is not what I am asking for if you would just listen to
what I said. I could just say forget it and I will write a
personal letter but you know where else can I bring up issues
that I think the group should decide. I didn't want a letter
from Sue. I wanted Sue to represent all of us. And if there
aren't all of us to agree I can write my own letter and I have
no problem with it.
Pigott/ You are seeking the sense of the council.
Kubby/ Yeah, if this were a big controversial issue I think a memo
from me ahead of time or a call to Sue or to other council
members is appropriate. Doing this is non controversial in
Iowa city and I don't really understand what the problem is
talking about this.
Horow/Just a friendly phone call would have eliminated this whole-
KUbby/I will bring up the discussion about the process so I won't
take any responsibility for taking up time tonight about that.
About the issue yes but not about how you go about bringing up
an issue.
Nov/ What is the date on this.
Kubby/ It is January 24 and I will give this you and I know that
Rick can give you specific numbers about how much we pay per
curb ramp and how many we do.
Horow/ Is this the Penn. court out there.
Atkins/ I suspect federal.
F02194
I
,.
, - '--"'~-'''' , "
, ,
",;
-_.,--
, "",..,
j
I
, ,
, ,
,
,
"
I: \
,
Iii II
It
Iii - "
II
ir
'I j:
" 1\
;'
'q -
:1 Ii:
Iii !:
,',
II r
,;'
"
II II
i.
"
r
, j.
"
I
1,1 ,
,
Ii
d
":..,.,... ""IIIf'"'.
....... . - "1 --......
9\-- ~ ...-'......
-- --..-. ....-------:-...,~ ... --.....--~
..-..~-f~-.----------.-- ."...1
, '
" ,,' '~/" L' . tl ,1[1 .' '.'- " .'
,;"" :.,,~ L' ,',2"': .~ '. ,~?1J ".,' '" ./' '
/
I
I
, "
/1
L
,
---.-
u_....
---
#13 page 11
KUbby/ It is United states.
I
I
!
,
I
I
I
I
,
Atkins/ Because ADA is federal law.
KUbby/ I don't understand why people get so upset when you bring up
something that you have not heard about before. It is just a
wonderment to me.
Horow/ To me it is a courtesy of just calling, a quick phone call,
to mention it. I would have looked at the article and it
would not have been sprung upon me. It is not a big issue.
It just a simple small level of courtesy.
Kubby/ I guess I hear what you are saying but I would like you to
hear that this is not something-when you use the word sprung
it indicates some inappropriate intent and that is not true.
Horow/ No, don't take umbrance with that. Any other items.
11
III ,
I
.
,! II,
i'
II
, 11'
II
i; "
1\
"
'I
'i 1/
~ i I;
\1 l'r
I,)
"I
:' !
I
I
!,
r
,
,
KUbby/ I don't have anything else, no.
Lehman/ I will pass.
Horow/ I have two items here. One is I would like to let council
know that the Iowa city Area Chamber of Commerce has pulled
together a task fore on the ADA accessibility compliance issue
in this area. The task force is cooperating with the
Institute for Social and Economic Development in procuring a
Department of Education ADA Research and Demonstration Program
Grant. I called them today to ask whether or not the
Independent Living people would be working with them on this
and I was assured that they were. I just thought this was
quite interesting and frankly I am delighted.
pigott/ I just wondered for a point of clarification and maybe the
letter you received doesn't answer it but and I would
encourage if they haven't to include people with disabilities
on their task force whether they are members of the Chamber or
not. I don't know if that is the case but if so,
congratulations, and if not I would encourage them to do so.
Horow/ The other letter is in this evenings mail. I received a
letter from Connie Champion, the school district school board,
and she is aSking that the city council reconsider the
decision regarding on street parking. I will get this letter
copied to you out and I think I would like you to read it.
There is a meeting on the 9th-
KUbby/ It is the 7th.
F02194
I
I
I
,,',
i
I,
"
-
":"..........""'IIf"'".. ..... ---'11'1~' -W\---~'-';'....."
-- ~-. ........'-~-- -y~ ..
.... .......- ~ -... ~.. . -,~ - .--.....---.......-----.-
\
'.'",:.1,'1' /"-, n n, ':,' "",; ',:
:" '.,,~." - '. ~. ~., '.'
/
/,\
/1
"
i
--
-"
....,~._--
--
~~-,-, ,-
#13 page 12
Horow/ The 7th but it has to do specifically with the design of the
parking area at city high. I will be going to that.
Baker/ So it is not on the 9th.
Horow/ It is on the 7th, 7:00, in the Little Theater.
Baker/ What was the 9th.
Horow/ There isn't. That was a mistake. And that is it. Okay.
Nov/ So we don't know when and if this is going to be on the city
agenda again.
Horow/ No. But I would like to get this on the city agenda as soon
as we can. If we can be ready to either move on it on the
14th or 15th of February or.
Kubby/ And you are talking specifically about the rescindtion of
the ban on parking on Morningside or-
Horow/ That is essentially what they are aSking for but they are
leaving the solutions open to us to come up with.
Kubby/ Will we also be throwing in Dunlap Court and Third Avenue in
the same discussion.
,
'I
Horow/ We certainly can.
,
i ;
,
Kubby/ I would like to.
Throg/ That is reasonable.
Atkins/ What streets did you add to that.
Kubby/ Dunlap and Third.
Atkins/ We just sent out another postcard from the last time on
Dunlap. So you may hear.
Nov/ The person who called me is on Dunlap and was lobbying for no
parking, eight to five, not no parking anytime.
Atkins/ At your last meeting you ask us to amend it and send it out
and we did that. So, it is out there now.
Kubby/ Okay.
Atkins/ Okay.
F02194
I
,
,
: ~
\":
"
'.-11
~~
I
Ii
'I
II
I'
!I
"
;i
I :
I
II
!
Ii
If
II:
;j
, ,
I,
I
f:
j:
.:: il
if
, 'I
I
I
Ii
l I
:1 .
':" ,
:-1
"
i!
>';
('
I
J
.t"
,'.1,
I'
I I,;
'I,"~
" '
"'{
"
.',~!
~,
'1
1'1"
"
..'
,', "'oi'I" L', 't"":, , ./ t" ': ' ;, '.', , "
," " ,1~1..' _ "to, , " ,
.< ... ,-
/
>"1,
" .+
"---':::::-::::..::-,.....
....._--.......
---.....,
, .
~.-.-..,--
#13 page 13
Throg/ We are not a perfect council.
Horow/ So, nobody is perfect.
!
,
!
,
j'i
Ii
i:
,) ~
i
I
I
il
, '
It _,
I'
1\\
I'
I
I
i
I
,..,'(
I
I
,1,
!
F02194
. ~' .
,
ii
1':'
...(_.._~....._.-._,..
,
,
;
I
."...."....',.0.
.0,..'.
I'
"
.. ." ;'-' ", ,~.-,-._' ,
, "
I,
"
,-"
"
,
;_.-'
I
I,
I
"~"~I
,!i
i
"
'r
, i
i'
i I"~
,'.
,';
~:.
, .
f: : ::1 I tr rf" ;~~ ' ~' ,:
.' \ - - ..,...... _. .
/
I/~
/' J
......~ 'f
"---'::::--:=:::::.........--
, --...-
#14b page 1
Horow/ (#14b) city Attorney.
Gentry/ I wanted to tell you that Anne Burnside who is here tonight
for another matter argued the Yeggy case in the Court of
Appeals today and she did it, of course, quite well and we
will wait for the results.
Kubby/Thank you, Anne.
Horow/ Thanks Anne.
,
I
I
I
!
F02194
r<:",~J"'~!'I';''''~--"'
"--...",,;,... ~ "I
"""...,.,
,,-,.,..
--....--
"'-"'- _....,......'^.,~
! '
,
!'
i
I
i
I:
II
! j
I
ii
t I'
Ii
i:
1
Ii
Ii II,
I',! . I"
~: ,
\i - i,
"!\:J
I' I'!
I"", '.":1:
'. ,-" >'"
, ,./..,
, !-,':'. :r~:.'
., I,"
'.':f'
"":''!,',
Ii
,
,""
,
I, I
I'
I
I,
":".......- ..,...". ....... '--"1 ~ .-..--- ~ "'-'WII.....
-- ........-..-- - ,...--
, .", '. , j,
r, 'M ,- -t' ' '
. ,,1,1 ' .' t,'/ ' 'I.. "" ',' "',: ' " '
:~ .,' ~ _, r~.:.' .~.',> '" ' ",.,'
/
// \
,. 1
{. '
-
- "-
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 11
ITEM NO. 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING FEES AND CHARGES WITH RESPECT
QJf-3'D TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF REGULATIONS OF PEDICABS AND TAXI.
CABS.
Comment: This resolution increases the fees for taxicab stands to comply
with current parking meter rates in the CBD zone and outlying areas.
Action:
1111w/ 1j~.
~%
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
qJf~ ~I THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A SUPPLE.
MENTAL CONTRACT WITH L.L. PEL LING CO. OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, FOR
THE JEFFERSON STREET IMPROVEMENTS PORTION OF THE 1993
ASPHALT RESURFACING PROJECT.
Comment: This resolution approves a supplemental contract for the
Jefferson Street improvements portion of the 1993 Asphalt Resurfacing
Project. This will allow the City to accept the street improvements completed
to date. The resurfacing of Jefferson Street was postponed to allow the
University of Iowa to complete its construction activities in the area before
the new asphalt is placed. The cost of the supplemental contract is
$29,374.21.
~/~y
,Ik~
Action:
~()%
ITEM NO. 17. CONSIDER RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE 1993 ASPHALT
q4~;, z., RESURFACING PROJECT.
Comment: This resolution accepts all work for the 1993 Asphalt Resurfacing
Project with the exception of the Jefferson Street improvements portion. The
final contract price excluding Jefferson Street is $795,348.94. Of this
amount, $42,091.89 was contributed'by the Iowa Department of Transporta.
tion for the Burlington Street section. Final cost for the section of Coralville
street resurfacing is $109,390.71. See attached Engineer's Report.
~1k . / MhllA~
G .
Action:
<B~.df ~
I
\
,
)
,.,....,.. "".',",," .", .~'..,_._,..-
\
\, ~
-------_...:.
','
\
i
i
i
,
,
i
i
i
i
,
i
I
I
I
I- ~
i'
l'j
Ii
Iii 'iI,
,,: . ,:
I::' 1\
", I,
Ii '-,:
;' /':
'II . I,!
,III
I
I
!I
I. .';
,
I,
:i
I
I
,
,
i,
r
i
"
~!
'I
,
I'
:.;
~.....-...,t.o~.......", ,,-"'"
, 'I' i ' t-" r.'{' , '"",', ,,:
. , ' J ""'I'" ~, , '"'' ',",
", "'.'
:' ',. - _. I" ,
/
i'\.,
.1/ I
, ....
" ,
, "
#16 page 1
Horow/ (#16) Moved by Nov,seconded by Kubby. Any discussion.
Nov/ Yes. I think asphalt is running very high in cost. Just a
tiny little piece of asphalt is costing $29,000.
Fosse/ Actually the unit prices are pretty good compared to some of
the years that we have had in the past. One of the
opportunities that the supplemental contracts give us is if we
have some streets that come out in the winter in very poor
condition we can take advantage of these unit prices that we
got competitive bids last summer and do some work in the
spring. Some additional work. So that opportunity is there.
Horow/ Roll call-
The resolution passes.
F02194
----....-.
I
I
i
I
,
','
: I
I'
.1
i:
Ii!
l'
I
I
!I !
III i,
II j,
:, :j:
i, 1
1\'" l.
II :i,'
'Ii:
i
\"',,
,',\
;
l.
i
" !
"
,~ --- ....--
~
...
I 'I _ _ .'"
.' ";I I ;, L . t. I 'yl'1' ,>.,..
:' . .: N C:I. _ ,"_. . ",
/
,I
\1
.j.
--
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 12
ITEM NO. 18. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN IOWA
94- 33 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR THE
I ~ ROHRET ROAD PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES PROJECT.
l
j
r
,I
,',
"
I
, q,-/--~
!
Comment: This agreement provides for a 80% Federal! 20% City funding
split up to a maximum amount in Federal funds of $481,487.00. Federal
funds will be administered by the Iowa Department of Transportation. The
project involves building two (2) free.standing pedestrian overpass bridges on
Rohret Road adja,cent to the existing overpass of U.S. 218. Also included is
the approach roadway pavement and some minor grading and sidewalk
installation. The estimated construction cost is $602,000.00.
Action: ~/ &Juw
.)(10) ~) 1~ %
ITEM NO. 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT.OF.W A Y
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA FOR
PORTIONS OF RIVERSIDE DRIVE, IOWA AVENUE BRIDGE, IOWA AVENUE,
WASHINGTON STREET AND MADISON STREET IN IOWA CITY, IOWA.
I'
, ,
\ i
!',
"
"
I,
i
I,
II
Ii
.'
II
::
I
II
I!
, 'i
I'
"
I
,;
\ i ~ I~
Iii: I';
'\i:!
I ,i,
...IJ
.. :1
I )'11...
I' .,
: I,
Comment: The University of Iowa (UI) desires to construct an underground
fiber optic communications trunk system that will link UI buildings on the east
and west sides of the Iowa River. The temporary closure of a portion of Iowa
Avenue Bridge, Iowa Avenue, and Madison Street is necessary during this
construction period for vehicle and pedestrian detours and safety. The
anticipated starting date for Iowa Avenue Bridge work is February 2, 1994,
and the Washington Street and Madison Street work is to start no earlier than
March 15, 1994. All work is expected to be finished no later than September
1,1994.
Action:
(?tf# / 7(&1~U
:t~!/:av
-&/cW %
Ii
v,. -
:1,
',1'
./
"
,
-:
\,;.
I
!
,
.1
i
I
,
!
~
~-----....--: -~.... ~ ~.'.....-
...... .... - ...
., . . ' ~
:;1" < /' tl ,:t/.: 'b, ',' ,,~, ' . ': .. ",
/
/\
,/ J
" ,--~-
.....-.-.'-----.-
!
,
#18 page 1
Horow/ (#18)Moved by Nov, seconded by Baker. Discussion.
Baker/ These are the pedestrian overpass bridges but they are on
both sides of the road, right.
Gentry/ Yes.
Baker/ Do they connect with sidewalks on both sides of the road.
Nov/ They are sidewalks.
Baker/ I know but continuing on.
Nov/ Yeah.
Baker/ On both sides.
Fosse/It will connect when we pave Rohret Road.
Baker/Those sidewalks are on both sides of the road.
Fosse/ Yes, they will be.
Throg/ And our share of the costs is about $120,000.
Fosse/ Yes.
Kubby/ Is it actually yet to be determined if those sidewalks on
both sides of the road because we haven't really voted on the
specs, right.
Fosse/ That is correct.
Kubby/ That is the plan that you will propose-
Fosse/ Yes. But in addition to serving the sidewalks, the
pedestrian bridges will be an integral part of the bicycle
lanes as well. we have got a fixed bridge width for the
roadway portion of it and if we widen Rohret Road out enough
to put a bike lanes on it we are going to lose those bike
lanes at the bridge so we will make lanes where they can peel
off the road, go across on the bridges and then merge again.
That is going to take some signage to make sure it works well
with the pedestrians that are using the facilities. But the
bridges will be designed to meet _____ standards for bikeways
as well as pedestrian ways.
Nov/ How are these things supported. Are there pilings going all
the way down.
I,'
ji
II,
Ii
,I
i!
'I
"
"
t
l
i
I:
I
,
'I
i
'If:
,
,
i
,
,
i;'
I;
Ij'
I
J
,I'
,) '1.,
,
F02194
;i
"
i'
,
I
I
,
,
t':
'", ,.,..,
.1 tIln
,
, ,
,
"
I
I,
I
,
I
, ,
1\:
\1
"""," --
\
-
""~-;. ~...~ --?....."-
, "
. '"
"., ",;1, Pi ,t.J '~'~t "> . ',' ,,'
.', -"
/
1/\
,. 1
, L
;'~,. -1
, '-'~::.::,:::::...~..--.
#18 page 2
Fosse/ Yes. They are independent free standing bridges. We looked
at widening the existing bridge out. There were a number of
factors that entered into the decision but the final decision
was it was best to go with independent structures.
Baker/ Are these enclosed.
Fosse/ Yes.
Horow/ Now, this is one of the projects that has to go through the
ECCOG intergovernmental review process.
Fosse/ It certainly goes through JCCOG and I think you are right
that I does go through ECCOG as well.
Horow/ Any further discussion.
Lehman/ I guess my only concern is and I agree with Karen, there is
I think still some talking to be done about placement of
sidewalks or whatever. But these bridges probably won't be
affected by anything we do as far as moving sidewalks one way
or the other.
Fosse/ If we move the sidewalk one way a little or the other we can
accommodate that through a transition. That is not a
difficul t thing.
Horow/ Roll call-
F02194
"'A~."',,,,,,,,,,.,,_,,,__,,,,_,
, ,
~~-'_.. .-.-
i
,
I
I
I
i
i
I
i
I
,
I
I
I
,
I
i
1 '
,
i
,
I
"
i':
,
II
'I
"
'I
"
ii
"
I
:1
,I[.
II' .
I
1
!I:
,;
,i
i
i'
I
I
,
i
!.
i',
i
I.
I
\'.!
---'-'--------
~-~-. ~--~ -,_ --
-.. -- ",. ......
"
, ,
, ,':;1' 'L,,"tl 'la,'" ,,,.:,,.,,
~,' .~'~ ',' '2' ,r~_ '" ZJ) . ~ :' ',' . '
"
,/
,.:' l
I
'"
I
. . -- -.
....,----..-
#19 page 1
Horow/ (#19) Do I have a motion.
Nov/ Go ahead. Go ahead. Do it.
Pigott/ Should I.
Baker/ You know what we have not done. We have not commented on
Bruno's new appearance.
Pigott/ Oh Larry, for God's sake, be a pal.
Baker/ Three hours and five minutes-
Horow/ Last time we started at 6:30.
Pigott/ It would be more appropriate to comment on your old
appearance.
Horow/ Gentlemen.
Move by Pigott, seconded by Nov. Is there any discussion.
Lehman/ Yes, Madam Mayor, I think it is imperative that we get
through with this before midnight because this starts at
midnight when it goes into effect.
Horow/ Good point, Ernie.
Kubby / I do have a serious question and that is how long can
streets be closed. I read the 168 hours.
Fosse/ That pertains to work through particular intersections where
we have them work extra long days to fast track the project
and get through those intersections where we expect
significant congestion while they are in there.
Kubby/ So, is there any provision in here that roads or bridges can
only be closed a certain number of days in a row in between
these two dates of six weeks.
Fosse/ The provisions for limited closure apply, I believe, only to
those intersections. The other parts the contractor wants to
get in and out of there as fast as possible because time is
money and because of the extensive traffic control that they
will be renting to facilitate this project. Every day is
another rental charge.
KUbby/ It will be self enforcing.
Fosse/ Yes.
F02194
-
--"''0,... _
A'
I
"
;
,
i
,
Ii!
"
,:
, I
Ii i
ii ).
'i ii,
I:;. 1'1
'1\\: Ij
1 ;;;
Iii I,;
1" . Ii
,j".
,I
). .....11...
, !,'
'. ,
i!
, ,
,
,
r,'
~. -
-
~
_. W\
. ,
, . , ',:, 'I ,1'-1' n I~ ,,' , ,< ,":, .' .
:. .,.~" -' . -' \...' .
;'
"
i
'~'
'~_.,--~
#19 page 2
Gentry/Well, we have limited them in the time that they can
interfer with the road.
Fosse/ Even on Madison street not with an interesection.
Gentry/ 168 consecutive hours they are going to get in there and
out of there in 16 hour intervals.
Kubby/ That is not just for intersections. That is for the roads
as well.
Fosse/ As I understand it that is just for interseotions only.
Gentry/ Across Madison street and Washington.
Fosse/ Okay.
Gentry/ That isn't what Rob explained to me.
Fosse/ When they are talking about crossing it that is when they
cross all four lanes. So when they cross Washington that is at
an intersection and they will cross Madison.
Gentry/ The traffic that is stopped on Madison will be diverted.
That will be diverted. The portion that is absolutely closed.
Kubby/ Will that screw up Cambus routes for six weeks.
Fosse/ There are provisions in the contract documents for the
contractor to make special special stops. In addition to that
the buses that use Madison as their route are looking at re-
routing during the project just to avoid the congestion.
Nov/ As I understood this we are not closing anything completely.
We are closing sort of half a street here and half a street
there.
Horow/ Does the contractor have to make the ability for pedestrians
to walk safely along the street.
Fosse/ Yes. Fortunately this is a University project and that is
very high on their priorities and they look after that in all
of their projects.
Horow/ Any other disucssion.
Roll call-(Yes)
At this time-Rick are you staying for any-is there another
item. I would like to extend congratulations from the city
council on the birth of your son, Samuel Addison. Emily has
got a brother.
F02194
--....,. ,---
,
I
!i
I I
"
1:1 ~
l'
, 1\
II
i! II:
"
"
1" i
:i \
I, \.
'I - I.
Ii ;,'
'I if
, \,
I
I II!
"
!
!!
,.....:i
, f.
,
"
I
,I
, ,I,
, .,j
,
, ! ~,
l'
;1
I.:
,j
,
i
I
,
,
, ,
l',J
"
,.",.". -
-
.,..,~- -~""1f..III. .-'.......-------.-"""QIlII'~
. ,,' " ,
:';,' '::~ 1 ,13, ",' r ,,'I], ' ''",:' , ,
/
i,"\
1
.J
r
Agenda
Iowa City City Councii
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 13
ITEM NO. 20 .' CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY A PORTION OF CITY
q~-35 PROPERTY TO GARY L. GAINES, IN EXCHANGE FOR ADDITIONAL CITY
LAND.
Comment: A survey performed by Bob Mickelson of MMS in October of
1993 revealed that several properties in the 600 block of East Reno 51. in
Iowa City encroach upon neighboring lots. More specifically, property owned
by Gary Gaines encroaches upon City property, and a portion of the City
cemetery encroaches upon Gary Gaines' property. Mr. Gaines has offered to
exchange encroaching properties which would clear existing title objections.
A tree easement would accompany this exchange allowing the City to
maintain control over vegetation screening the City property from East Reno
Street. This resolution declares the City Council's intent to convey the
property to Mr. Gaines, in exchange for his conveyance of property to the
City and sets a public hearing for the proposed conveyance for February 15,
1994, as required by state law.
Action: ~ I fridJ-
ld1J r JktJ %
ITEM NO. 21 . CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY VACATED PORTIONS
q"f-. 51; OFTHE NORTHERN HALF OF LAFAYETTE STREET AND THE EASTERN HALF
OF MAIDEN LANE.
I ~
Ii II
"
Ii i~
'I
h I"
"
i! !
:1 i
" i
" . I
I, :;'
.1 (;
II ,
II 1'1
I 111
, r
I
I
I II
,
Comment: On December 17, 1993, the City vacated
portions of the northern half of Lafayette Street and the
eastern half of Maiden Lane. The area vacated no longer
serves e public purpose. Kennedy Plaza, Inc., which owns
the property adjacent to the vacated right.of-way, has
, agreed to install public improvements, including a curb,
gutter, and sidewalk and remove existing pavement in return
for conveyance of the vacated property. This Resolution
declares the City Council's intent to convey the property to
Kennedy Plaza, Inc. for the above consideration and sets a
public hearing on the proposed conveyance for February 15,
1994.
Action:
~tMJ/~
,(j~. %
,I
I,
,:,,,.,,,.--...".'
'..~ .,-,,,..,..-...
, . . .
, .. , ::/' ,'. L. . " , " ' ':it ",". -',,' "
, . I ,[ , ' , , .
~, .~( w, _ . - ',' '.. .
/
l]
" ~' '
<~,:-::-
. --.....::'-----..-
#20 page 1
Horow/ (#20)
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 94-28 SIDE 2
Moved by Kubby, seconded by Pigott. Any discussion.
KUbby/ There aren't any grave sites involved in this.
Gentry/ Not that we know of. It is a very slim area and it is only
the very remotest possibility of 60 year old child.
Kubby/ A child that was buried 60 years ago.
Gentry/ But Jim Wonnick feels fairly confident that that is not the
case. And we are not going to be disturbing any of that. The
whole idea is we shift the ownership of the property and we
will still be encroaching on the same property. We will not
be going any further. We are just on his property right now.
Nov/ Oh, I thought he is also on the property.
Kubby/ That is what the exchange is.
Gentry/ That is what the exchange is.
Nov/But we are not exchanging a grave site of his property
encroachment.
Gentry/ No. This is to protect us as well as him.
Horow/ Any other disucsison.
Roll call-(yes)
The resolution is passed.
\
!
"
"1
, t'
F02194
i
.j
1'...",H'h'."".,..,-_.,....
'"'''' ..'"
\ \
, .
,I
\'"
---" ---
I
,
, :
"
i
i'
i
"
i
,
i
{,
"
I,
\,:
"
""'If"" -
I
I
!
~
~--~ .~- '410 - -
't':,.',.......
. ' , .
{ , '
, f L' I -t' '" -,
, " . . . ..
~' :/.. . ,."""",, '"
, I r ' ,/..1 . " "
: ' '. 'M . : _ ,\ ,~ ";';_. ' : . I ,.'.
/
/
I
//\
.. L.
... "\
"
--":::,::..-.,
.....,----~-
-,
Agenda
Iowa City City Council
Regular Council Meeting
February 1, 1994
Page 14
ITEM NO. 22. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 83.17 OF THE
G4-,3'1 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY.
Comment: Resolution 83.17 places 40% fare box revenue funding require.
ment on the Transit Division. The Division has not been able to meet this
requirement for a number of years. Strict adherence to this resolution would
require raising transit user fees. For this reason, staff recommends the
resolution be rescinded.
,Action: ~/~~J
y;....., F.;l:3 iu-~ ~ %
ITEM NO. 2t. ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
{4/~ "
1.'11 ~
.r .ad~
cfit / 1~.
-..:....
/~.' ;}}
~~
...."',,.,"-....-....,..--...-'-'-
__h'" ,_ ~
.AMI.'
!
I
,
i
I,
"
,
I
II
!'
"
Ii
II
'I
:1
I'
"
il
i,
'iI':-
,
il
I
I
!'
)'
\
\
,
..\,
,
,.
I::
i
I
I,
:j:
"
,
I
,(
,!-
I ',I.
I,
,
. ,,/,
, '
I
"
I
II
, '
~ "
":'''''''''-''IIIIIIIIIIII''''' - ---'" ---...., ...-- ~ ..-.',.....-- ~ ...... ...- - -----:---I~....
.....,...
.... ........,..,. ....
I
, ,
. . . .
" "':/1 H J" :~:J."". '~' ':.
" I,' U' ." ," ,
.' I. .~." "
~ I), ',~ . "_ . w ,~
/
i~ '\
" 1
, ,
'"
"
-
....~.---~
--
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 31, 1994
TO: Mayor, Council, General Public
Subject: Addition to Agenda
# 23 -
sider a resqlution approving the East Central Iowa Council of Governments
- Regional Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan.
Comment: As required by State Law, an update has been prepared to the
,ECICOG Regional Solid Waste Management Plan. This plan must be adopted
by all entities that contrubute waste to the Iowa City Landfill. The
plan contains recommendations which may be subsequently considered for
implementation by the City of Iowa City as operator of the landfill. '
~/~~ 7l~%
Addition to the Consent Calendar:,
3e(6) Letter from Ray Novick regarding the alley vacation between Court St.
and 8urlington St. '
, 'I
"
,
'"
I
~. ol\l~
~~ (-.3(. "ii(
"kl-/-S r.... ~ t=-
...,.....W~.,'"._,.......H'_..'
. ..".... '~.,
I',!
"
,-dU
-
I
!
1:1
! i
I;
" I
I,
Iii II
I! II,
:! 'I,
Ii I)
"
,
, " -
"
" Ii
"
. q: ;.,
"
I' ','
I f:i
,
, Ii
I
,
:,
:j
. I,'
I
;,,'
'I
/,
r
I
,
.-;,
.\ ;
,,,
,)'
"'If'''. -
\
~
----------'""'QIIII'~ - --
-~.... ~ -'....... ,
..,~-;. IIf."
, , ,
' ,
" 1'1 , ,
' '. " ..'
" ' ';" h ':, 1 '".., :,' " , "
/
1-'{
)'
.... .l,'
':>:':':':::,,:,~,
...._.----.~
#23 page 1
Horow/ (#23) Moved by KUbby, seconded by Pigott. Any discussion.
Kubby/ I just wanted to read one sentence fromm the plan. And I
know that the plan is a generalized thing and not every
community is going to do every plan but it does say on page 8,
"Local governments should invetsigate and consider adoption of
unit based Pricing systems." I support that strongly.
Throg/ I second that.
Horow/ Roll call- (yes).
F02194
, ...,..._-.....~.....,...,...,-.....".__....
-_._,--
I
I
,
I
I
,
,
i
I
,
,
i
i
I,
:1 II
Ii II
II ,-1/:
i: 'j
,I l.
, ,\ I: ,~-' !:L",
:l ,1/
I'" 'Ii
,1::,'
I
I
I
, \
t.:'
..,
, ,
1
I
'i,
J
~', ~
"
,....,.
.
, '
'.,.:",; ( " b" I . I~: ' "..,
:' ", ~ ' '_ . " . t . I ...:..~ " ",' . .
/
,
::/'."
,I. .
---..,---
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 28. 1994
City Council
City Manager
Work,Session Agendas and Meeting Schedule
January 31. 1994 Monday
6:30 P.M. _ City Conference Board Meetin9 - Council Chambers
Separate agenda posted
7:00 P.M. - City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
7:00 P.M. - Review Zoning Matters
7:30 P.M. _ Cultural/Conference Center Feasibility Study (Center Space)
8:00 P.M. _ Airport Economic Impact and User Survey
8:20 P.M. - ECICOG Solid Waste Report
8:40 P.M. - Aid to Agencies (Human Services) Fundin9
9:10 P.M. _ Private Application of Pesticides Regulatory Ordinance
9:45 P.M. _ Council agenda, Council time, Council committee reports
9:55 P.M. Consider an appointment to the Senior Center Commission
Tuesday
Special City Council Meeting - Council Chambers
Adjourn to Executive Session (Ongoing litigation)
February 8. 1994 Monday
7:00 P.M. . City Council Work Session. Council Chambers
FY95-97 Financial Plan Discussion
February 1. 1994
6:30 P.M. -
Thursday
City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
FY95-97 Financial PI~n - Board/Commission input/comments
February 14. 1994 Monday
6:30 P.M. - City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Agenda pending
February 10.' 1994
7:00 P.M. .
February 15. 1994 Tuesday
7:30 P.M. _ Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers
PENDING LIST
Appointments to the Historic Preservation Commission - February 15, 1994
Appointments to the Board of Library Trustees and Civil Service Commission -
March 1, 1994
Appointments to the Animal Control Advisory Board and the Housing Commission -
March 8, 1994 '
-
..
1
\
I
i
\
I
I
\
I
; ,
I.
,I
I.
"
,
~
I
,
1
J
1,\
, n
,:].- I
'I!
I'
.1\ H:
I'
:,1
II I']
.. .1
l.i,l
i
Ii
I'
,I
I'
I'
,r
;:
'..
;1
,: