Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-20 Transcription February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page I Council: February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session 5:30 PM Staff: Bailey, Champion, Correia, Elliott, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn Atkins, Briggs, Dilkes, Franklin, Helling, Karr, Long, Rackis, Trueblood TAPE: 07-20, Both Sides Bailey: Elliott: Bailey: Long: Bailey: Karin, we're going to start with the Habitat items first, because that is something that Ross will probably be abstaining on anyway, or not participating in. Sorry to mess you up. You're not. Oh, yes I am. Here he is. Ross, we're going to start with the Habitat discussion. So just take a breath, there's food over here. We figured. Go ahead. Ready? Yes. Habitat/Housinl! Fellowshio/Owner Occuoied Long: Champion: Correia: Elliott: Champion: Thanks. I'm here actually to clarify the policy, or what's deemed to be a policy for the placement of affordable or assisted housing in Iowa City using federal funds or city funds. Right now, as stated in the applicant guide, we basically look at the map that was dated November 14th, 2005, where it says the City Council reached consensus in identifying areas of the community where development of assisted housing would be encouraged. And so what we're, and we also have two proposals on the table right now, using fiscal year '07 money. And both of those proposals lots purchases are in Census Tract 18, which is an area that's not identified for additional affordable housing opportunities. I guess I'd like to clarify first of all what does encourage mean, and if these lots are not in those areas, does that mean they're discouraged? They're discouraged. Really? Well see I guess I wouldn't, well, I wasn't on the Council in 2005. But, from my perspective, encouraged to me would mean would be given priority ifthose applications came in. but I wouldn't want to discourage any particular ideas categorically from any particular area of town. My thinking was that was part of the scattered sites discussion, and that was aimed mainly at not clustering rent apartments, apartments that are getting rental assistance in one area. And it seems to me that when we talk about something like Habitat, where they're buying a home, that it will hopefully add stability to a neighborhood rather than detract. Tell me if- That's a valid point. That is a valid point. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 2 Bailey: Long: Bailey: Long: Bailey: Long: Champion: Bailey: Champion: Vanderhoef: Long: Vanderhoef: Correia: Champion: Correia: Long: Vanderhoef: Champion: Correia: Long: And I have heard - I was speaking to a school board member - that we have some demographic shifts in those school districts right now. And I think we need to be having some ongoing conversations over there, because things have changed dramatically since that Barriers to Learning conference occurred. From what I understand. You're nodding your head, so have you heard some more? I've heard similar as well. I haven't seen the information, but- Ok. So. You need some direction. Right. Between - are we gonna talk about all affordable housing? Rental? Owner- occupied? We currently have these purchase offers out there for lots, and in our fiscal year '08 projects, which are being discussed right now, we have a proposal in on Catskill Court, which is in census tract 17, also an area that's not encouraged. I don't have my map here. Can you tell we where those census tracts are? Urn, they're in the info packet. Oh thank you. I didn't bring my info packet. Ok. Tell me where Catskill is. Catskill is just east of Hy-Vee, I" Avenue Hy-Vee,just north of Musca tine. Oh. And what school- schools like Lucas, or? Horn. Horn. Hoover. Lucas. Lucas. Lucas, Lucas. Is that, what type of project is it? Home ownership. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 3 Correia: Home ownership. I guess, I mean, it's like when we were talking about the scattered site back in the Spring, I mean I have reservations about using that matrix for making categorical decisions. But, looking at these particular projects the data we were talking about, as Bob was saying, was related to more, not as permanent housing, rental. Although I would say investing in quality rental homes is, should be a priority as well. But we're talking about home ownership right here and so those, that data didn't even include home ownership and home ownership does have a stabilizing effect, the research says, for low-income children when their parents own a home it can increase their educational attainment and all those types of things. So I think, you know, I wouldn't want to impede progress. Champion: Our original- Elliott: My understanding, Amy - Champion: Our original concern is with the percentage oflow-income families in schools. And that was based on the free lunch program. Vanderhoef: And it was- Correia: Can I, but- Vanderhoef: - transitional too. Champion: Yeah, and transitional. But I, I have a little different feeling about the home ownership too. I might not have any, I might not have any problems with that in that particular location. Bailey: Dee, did you have a comment? Vanderhoef: Yeah. The, the home ownership part of it makes some difference to me. What I am trying to vision, and because I haven't driven out there recently I don't know how much rental and how much turnover there is in the area. I think when we talked about it we were looking at the rental or assisted housing. It was turnover was a big problem, so that there wasn't stability in the neighborhood. This would be a stabilizing thing in the neighborhood. Long: Right. Vanderhoef: But I don't know what the rest of that area looks like. Long: I can tell you that we've had, the Housing Authority has sold six of the homes, six homes that were rental are now home ownership, or owner occupied, in census tract 18, which is the Whispering Meadow Subdivision. That's in the last two years. Vanderhoef: That's in 18. Long: Yes. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 4 Vanderhoef: And you said this one is in 17. Long: That's, the current proposals are all in 18. The Housing Fellowship and the Habitat for Humanity. The one that's in 17 is for funds that you're going to be voting on in May that we're just discussing right now, so we don't, that's just part of the broader issue. Bailey: You want us to focus on the narrow issue tonight, correct? Long: Or - yes. Bailey: I think we probably can handle that. Long: Yes, if the time constraints - Bailey: Yeah. So do I hear a consensus that with these particular specific projects? Champion: I have no problems with them. Vanderhoef: I think it - I think it's ok. Bailey: That we should move ahead? Elliott: Yes. Long: Now- Bailey: And you would like us to look at the broader issue at some point before May? Is that accurate? Long: Well, so, any, if I get another proposal in next month for owner occupied in census tract 18 or 17 or one of those areas not encouraged, do I, does that applicant come to City Council each time? Or are you saying from here on out any owner-occupied housing project in any of those? Bailey: Can we put this on our next work session and clarify what our quote policy is? Is that? Champion: We don't really have a policy. Bailey: We don't. I mean we, and I think for staffs sake we should have some kind of policy, perhaps even in the form of a resolution or actual policy. Elliott: Yes. Steve and Karin should not have to come to us and ask. Franklin: How about if for these two projects, my hearing is that we go- Bailey: Go ahead. Franklin: For the next work session we will bring to you a policy statement. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 5 Bailey: Yes. Thank you. Vanderhoef: And real specific then, give us what data you have about rental and assisted housing, in case there are shifts in there. Bailey: And, if you heard some things about the school district, if you have that information, I think that would be beneficial. This was initially motivated by the school districts. That's a changing - it's very changeable. We're using old data to make decisions, and that's not appropriate, I don't think. Correia: And I also think we're using assumptions about what that data means. Bailey: Yes. Correia: In that, that some of the instability or transition, transitory nature of kids in some of the, moving in and out of schools may be related to there's not enough quality assisted housing for families to remain stable, because there's a lot of rental housing in some specific neighborhoods that are feeding specific schools. And so in some cities there's an investment to help stabilize both rental and home ownership, so I just think we need to think about what we're, with our orientation to thinking about what the data means or doesn't mean. And we shouldn't make assumptions that you can't make. Bailey: So we can have this discussion on our March 5th work session? Will that be quick enough? Atkins: Can you do this in two weeks? Bailey: Is that too quick? Long: How much, what kind of information, how many years back do you want to go back? Just current? O'Donnell: Important questions. Long: A snapshot? Bailey: I think we need a snapshot. I don't think we need to be operating with old information. Because we - it continues to change. I mean, you're looking at me - have a question. Do you want, do you want another - do you want the 19th? Franklin: No. No. It'sjust a matter of, when the scattered site group worked they had data that they used from the census. Bailey: Right. Franklin: Which is you know, like really old. Bailey: Old. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 6 Franklin: In order for us to, we will be able to tell you certain things that have changed but we will not be able to give you comprehensive data. Bailey: Right. Franklin: And that's you know, also one ofthe things that this consultant should be doing once this all happens. Bailey: Right. Correia: Right, right. Franklin: But we can tell you generally speaking in, for instance, in tract 18, some of those things that have changed within the time period since the scattered site discussion went on. But we can't, we can't give you an overall comprehensive - Bailey: So when we ask you for that on the 5"', you can say we can't give you that because it's just not available. Franklin: Yeah, yeah, it's just not gonna be there because we don't have that kind of data. Bailey: I think I get it. Champion: I'm not particularly- Vanderhoef: I think I'm ready to say as long as we get it taken care of for this funding cycle that I would like to wait until our survey is done before we put - Champion: That's exactly what I was gonna say, Dee. I'm not willing to make a big policy statement right now. I am willing to concede that this owner occupied housing that Habitat is going to build is fine with me right now. Because I think it's very positive. But I'm not willing to delve into that whole program until we are done with the study. Bailey: But are we willing to provide some direction for staff for the rest of this funding year? Elliott: Yes. Champion: Yeah, yeah. Bailey: All right. So we'll talk about it. Champion: But I don't need a ton ofinforrnation to do that. Bailey: All right. Vanderhoef: And what's your deadline on applications? Long: For the current? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 7 Vanderhoef: Ah hah. Long: The purchase offers that are out there, or you mean the fiscal year - Vanderhoef: No. For the '08. Long: Oh, we're going - the presentations are on Thursday evening. Vanderhoef: Ok. So you have all- it's closed at this point. Long: Yes. Vanderhoef: So you know what you have to deal with for this year. Ok. Long: Yes. Vanderhoef: So we're ok for this year and then when the survey is done we can take a better look at all of it. Bailey: Ok? Got what you needed? Elliott: Steve, one more thing. You're gonna walk away with more requests for anticipation then you anticipated. But at some point I'd like to know if you have any longitudinal data on the amount of time that the initial buyers who purchase these homes - the Habitat and Fellowship homes - ifthere's any indication of how long they stay in those homes before they're turned over. That would be interesting to me. And you know, it may not be available, but even your sense of it. Long: I can tell you right now. I believe Habitat has only had one turnover in their existence. Elliott: That's - that's what I'm looking for. Long: And they've developed dozens of homes so I'm not sure - Audience: 44. Long: 44, so. Elliott: That, that goes directly at our thoughts about stability. Bailey: Right, but we shouldn't expect greater stability from these homes than we expect from any other homes in Iowa City, which is Elliott: No. Correia: And related, like the average turnover is 3 years, people who own - Bailey: Ok. Does that? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 8 Long: Ok. So you do not, so these projects can proceed? Champion: Mmm hmm. Bailey: Mmm hmm. Champion: I don't think we need to have a Dilkes: Ok. I'm a little unclear though. If another owner occupied one comes in it can proceed as well? Champion: Yes. Dilkes: Or are you still having that meeting in two weeks? Bailey: We're still having that meeting in two weeks. Long: Ok. So just so I'm clear, before I leave. The Housing Fellowship has, we have one purchase offer now. Habitat? Audience: One offer for 6 lots. Long: It's one offer for 6 lots. Ok. Bailey: Ok. Sounds great, do it. Long: Thank you. Champion: Do we need to have him come at the next work session if we're willing to concede this now? I mean this is gonna be a big discussion. It's not gonna be just, we're gonna have a big discussion. Franklin: Let us try to come up with a statement for you for your fiscal '08 funds. Champion: Ok. Bailey: '08. Franklin: Because these we're talking about now are not fiscal '08 funds. Correia: Ok. Champion: Ok. Bailey: Gotcha. Vanderhoef: They're not '08? Correia: They're '07. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 9 Bailey: No, they're '07. Franklin: They're '07. The'08. Vanderhoef: They haven't spent out their money. Franklin: Right. Wilburn: Hello. Elliott: Look who arrived. Bailey: Did you catch your breath? Wilburn: I caught my breath, and I treated myself to a hot chocolate. I haven't had one in awhile so that was good. Elliott: Vh oh. Vanderhoef: That makes your brain, ah - Wilburn: Go to sleep? Vanderhoef: No, no. They just did some research and they're saying cocoa is the thing to do, but the bitter chocolate and it opens up your, your vascular system in your brain so you are doing better. O'Donnell: I'm going to write that down. Bailey: More chocolate (can't hear) Wilburn: I knew there was a reason I liked it. Vanderhoef: Ah, absolutely and anything to use chocolate, that goes for me. Wilburn: Karin, you ready? Or are you having technical difficulties? Franklin: No, I'm good. Plannine and Zonine Wilburn: Ok. Planning and Zoning. Franklin: Ok. The first item is a. Wilburn: Good place to start. I can talk slow if you need me to stall. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20, 2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 10 a) CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY .2 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF DIANA STREET AND SOUTH OF KIRKWOOD AVENUE, FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-S) TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO-1). (REZ06- 00027) Franklin: Ok. All right. We're here. This is a public hearing on the rezoning for.2 acres of property that is west of Diana Street and south of Kirkwood A venue. This is for the Lensing Funeral and Cremation Services and as you can see from the outline on the map, basically it squares off the commercial office zoning. 1I's something that was talked about when we went through the vacation of the alley, the north-south alley. Since then the Lensings have acquired some property here, including that area that's crosshatched. And they would like to have that zoned CO-l to enable them to expand the funeral home parking lot into that area. This rezoning carries with it the condition that there would be no traffic that would come between the funeral home using that east-west alley to Diana Street that was put in there when we did the vacation of the north-south alley. Elliott: In this, on this is says commercial traffic, and you just said any traffic. Franklin: No, no. Any funeral home, so commercial traffic. The only traffic that would be- Elliott: You mean, ifI go to the funeral home I can't use that. Franklin: Correct. You can't use the east-west alley. Elliott: I'm designated commercial if I'm in there parking lot? Franklin: That's right. You are. Elliott: How about that. Champion: How can you enforce that? Franklin: Well, the vacation required that there be a curb placed on the alley right here, so this alley is used for access to these properties and to this property. But it is not for access to the commercial property to the funeral home. And that was a condition of the vacation ofthis north-south alley here. And this rezoning reiterates that condition that you golla stop right there. And that was to deal with the concerns that people had on Diana Street of commercial traffic going onto Diana Street. O'Donnell: Good. Franklin: Ok? Vanderhoef: So, did they buy any of the backs of those lots, those real big lots that face Diana? Franklin: Yes. They purchased- Vanderhoef: The single hatch one. Correct? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page II Franklin: This one is- Bailey: Two. Franklin: Oh. Bailey: Two lots. Vanderhoef: They purchased 1018, the whole thing. Franklin: These, these two. Vanderhoef: One on either side of the alley. Franklin: No. On, they're both, they're both south of the alley. This is a very sensitive touch pad on this computer. Bailey: Maybe you need that red light. Karr: Would you like the pointer? Franklin: Oh, could I? Elliott: My understanding is the neighbors have agreed with this. Isn't that correct? Franklin: Yes. It appears that everything is copacetic with everyone for the moment. Elliott: Yes. Franklin: But you might hear something else later this evening. Ok. Any questions on that? Wilburn: No. Bailey: And that lack of alley access runs as a covenant with the property, right? Franklin: Yes. It would take an assertive action of the City Council to change that. Bailey: An assertive. Franklin: Mmm hmm. Correia: And then so, if Lensing, were to, not, you know sell all of their property there, what would happen with that? Would go along with? Franklin: I'm sorry? Correia: If they were to sell their business there. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 12 Franklin: Correia: Franklin: Correia: Franklin: Correia: Franklin: Yeah. Would that? That restriction would still hold. Still hold. Ok. Yes, because it's, it's the break between the CL-I zone and the RS-5 to the east. Ok. b) CONDITIONAllY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 1.03-ACRES OF PROPERTY lOCATED AT 1902 & 1906 BROADWAY STREET FROM COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO-1) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC2)(REZ06-00028) Ok. Item b is a public hearing and first consideration if you choose on the rezoning of a property at 1902, 1906 Broadway Street from CO-I to CC-2 community commercial. This is from an office zoning to a commercial zoning. And this is the rezoning that has gotten some press with the fate of the Coronet Apartments. I will tell you that as we reviewed this as a staff and as it went, well, I think as it went through the Planning and Zoning Commission, but certainly as we reviewed it as a staff, the assumption was that it was a given that the Coronet Apartments would be demolished. That that was not the question. The question before us was the zoning question. The support for this rezoning comes from a basic premise that redevelopment of this corner is appropriate. And so the question obviously is what does that redevelopment need to be, or should be, or will be in the marketplace. And so there's a judgement call that obviously all of you are going to have to make as to whether this makes sense in the marketplace, if you buy the notion that redevelopment at this corner is appropriate. There were conditions that were placed on the staff recommendation as this went to the Planning and Zoning Commission. And that's not it. This, this is the proposal, or a concept of the proposal that the staff supported in going to Planning and Zoning, which calls for a 50-foot buffer on the south side of the property. This is the HACAP property, and the driveway to the HACAP property would continue. That's what this cross-hatched is here, is access to the parking for the HACAP units. The requirement would be that there is a 50-foot landscape buffer here between that area that would be zoned CC-2 and the residential area to the south. This area would remain CO-I, which it what it's zoned right now. There's other residential here, and the CO-I was to be the buffer between the residential and the commercial. There's a 1989 conditional zoning which would close off the access point to Hollywood Boulevard here if this area was ever used for any commercial purposes. The current use is as parking for the Coronet Apartments. So as a residential use you can have access to Hollywood Boulevard, with conversion to any kind of commercial use that access to Hollywood Boulevard would be closed off. Therefore one needs access through any development here into this back lot. So that condition, in terms of closure of this point at Hollywood Boulevard is reiterated in the conditional zoning agreement. Likewise with this buffer there is a requirement, there This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 13 was a requirement for a 5-foot masonry wall and then landscaping in this area here. Another condition that was proposed and the staff recommendation was that there would only be one freestanding sign on this lot, on this property. Typically, if you had two uses you would be able to have two freestanding signs. The idea there was that you limit those and thereby limit some of the impact on the property, on the residential properties. As it went through the Planning and Zoning Commission, and I'm not sure what order these things are in anymore. Elliott: Karin, where is the law office on that? Franklin: Ah, the law office is right in here. Elliott: Right in there? Ok, thanks. Franklin: Yeah, yeah. O'Donnell: Karin, while you've got that one up there- Franklin: Mmm hmm? O'Donnell: I noticed the Commission wanted a 35-foot buffer. Franklin: Right. O'Donnell: Staff wanted 50. Franklin: Right. O'Donnell: Do you not think it would be easier to pro, to ah - I can't speak tonight - to provide access to the lower lot ifthat drive there would be IS feet wider? Vanderhoef: Access to the lower lot. O'Donnell: The lot down there that's going to remain CO-I. Franklin: Oh, here? O'Donnell: Yes. Franklin: If this were 15 feet wider? O'Donnell: Ifit were wider, yes. Franklin: The driveway? O'Donnell: Yeah. Franklin: No - well, that's a 20, This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20, 2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 14 O'Donnell: Franklin: O'Donnell: Franklin: Champion: Franklin: How wide is the drive now? That's a 22-foot drive. I mean if you add 15 feet that's 37 feet, that's wider than a collector street. Ok. So you don't really need that much, not for a drive. The issue was, in terms of the developer's position on this and this is the proposal with a 35-foot buffer. The issue was the orientation of the projected use, the drive-in restaurant. And let me just say that as you look at this for rezoning, and you're looking at CC-2, when you look at conditions you look at the worst-case situation. And worse-case situation we believe with a CC-2 is a drive-in restaurant, because of the amount of traffic and lights and all that kind of stuff. So that's one ofthe reasons for the quantity of conditions on this. This was the proposal that the developers brought in, and the orientation of this development was one of the points, as well as I think keeping some of this area more open for development. This is a 35-foot buffer from here to here. It requires 6 feet of Hollywood Boulevard to be vacated. That has been vacated across the street in the CC-2 area, where that mixed-use building of commercial and residential is, on the west side of Broadway. So the point is that there's, there's not anything particularly untoward about that 6-foot vacation that would be out of keeping with the area. One of the concerns that the staff had with this project was, with this development, the way it was laid out, was the access to these properties in here. If this is to be the access to the commercial office to the east it means as you come out here you are coming out into traffic coming in for the drive-through and for these parking spaces. Not good. But the, this particular layout is not the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The recommendation is more general in terms of what they have recommended to you. And I'll just go over those quickly. The conditions for rezoning this would include not less than a 35-foot buffer along the southern property line, a 5-foot masonry wall, which is the same as the staff recommendation, dense planting of deciduous and coniferous understory and overstory trees in this area, which is essentially our S-3 standard in the zoning code, closure of the access point at Hollywood Boulevard, a landscape set-back here of20 feet. The landscaping is not unusual. It's the 20-foot setback rather than a 10-foot setback. And that's just to give a visual sightline down, that this is more of a residential area down here, instead of having the commercial right up to the sidewalk. The limit of one free-standing sign, S-3 screening or screening along the east boundary and southern property lines of the CO-l parcel, or alternatively, along the east boundary of the CC-2 parcel. The reason for looking at that, either screening at this point or here has to do with how quickly this particular lot develops. And if this piece right here is going to develop as this intensive use of a drive-in, that there be some screening between the residential uses here and that in the short term. At some point there's likely to be a building here which would create that buffer and screening, but in the short term there would be just open space and the existing parking lot. Then there's a condition regarding the design of this particular building. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 15 Vanderhoef: Is there any other access to that quote open space then, other than through the developing property? Franklin: Ok. In answer to that question, and this is related to that question, this is a site plan that Bob Miklo's been working on with the people that may do this development, to try to get that access separated out so that if flows better. This is a 35-foot buffer and has the 6 feet - I mean, this follows the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission, not the original staff recommendation, but the Planning and Zoning Commission. It does, however, separate out the flow of traffic through here in terms of accessing this easterly lot to take care of this confusion that would result with this design. So this site plan, as far as I can tell right now, except for maybe this drive right in here, would meet the conditions of the conditional zoning agreement, in terms of what was recommended by Planning and Zoning. Your first question always with zoning is: is it appropriate to make the change? And then if you make the change, what are the conditions that you need to impose to make it fit, if any? Wilburn: Karin, can you walk us through a few examples in town where in, on a residential block, where there's a chunk of commercial on the edge and the corresponding buffer? I was trying to think, like up on I" Avenue. Franklin: I" and Rochester. Wilburn: By the Hy-Vee, yeah. What type of buffer, distance-wise, between that home up there and that - because that's now a drive-up pharmacy, isn't it? Franklin: Ah, that was the old Hy-Vee? Wilburn: Right. Franklin: Yeah. In there it's kind of, there was an existing situation that predates much of our current zoning principles and so the screening that would be required today is not required there because it existed. Correia: You're talking about the I" Avenue Hy-Vee? Champion: Mmm hmm. The old - Elliott: I " Avenue, not the - Bailey: I " Avenue - (all talk - can't hear) Vanderhoef: Up by my house. Correia: Hy-Vee Drugstore. Bailey: Smaller. This represents only a reasonable accUrate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 16 Vanderhoef: There is a board fence there. Correia: There's a drive - drive up (can't hear) Vanderhoef: Uh huh. O'Donnell: How about the Walgreen's on Muscatine and I"? Franklin: That's commercial zoning to the northeast south and in fact there may be a commercial zoning just to the west of that. Bailey: Everything that (can't hear) Franklin: I, yeah there's a- Vanderhoef: A whole block of commercial in there, but when we put that in, those lights, we were working real hard to get the down - Franklin: The downcast lights, which is - Vanderhoef: So that it would not pass the center of the street, so I think it's residential to the west. Franklin: Well we, ok, that could be. You know, I'm trying to picture what's right, I go by there all the time. Champion: Wasn't it the General Pest Control people? Not General Pest- Franklin: Yeah, that pest business, and that's why I thought it might be commercial. But that may be a nonconforming use. I'd have to look at the zoning map. Champion: Mmm hmmm. Wilburn: I'm just trying to think of somewhat similar situations where such a high intense use, I presume the - Franklin: Usually we don't. Usually we try to put neighborhood commercial which, you know, has different kinds of standards, right next to residential, or the CO-I. Those are, those are the zones that are typically the buffer. Wilburn: Right. Right, because I guess what I, I mean I was trying to think how much buffering can block out some of the things you mentioned. Traffic noise, and in this case it would be - Correia: Lights. Wilburn: Even potentially like noise from ordering the food, things like that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 17 Champion: Now we have a light ordinance now in which you, I mean, that's one of the things that's built into our ordinance in terms of the number of footcandles that can spill over and we get a, I forget what you call that, it's a plan for all of the lighting when those site plans come in. And so that would be looked at, whether it was CO-lor CC-2 or whatever, to keep that light intensity down. Elliott: Ross, I think I see where you're going and Karin, I suspect you'll be surprised, because I'm surprised that I'm gonna say this. But I think I would be more restrictive than P & Z would be on this. Ijust, Ijust can't see a drive-in across the street from an apartment building, and I wonder if we'd even be talking about this is that were a high-end apartment building. Correia: And it's not even across the street. it's right at the parking lot. Elliott: It just, somehow it just, it doesn't seem right to me. Franklin: Ok. That's your choice. You'll get input I'm sure tonight, at the public hearing. Wilburn: Ok. That, that, I just needed to think of some similar, or somewhat similar situations. Franklin: Yeah. Vanderhoef: One other question - Franklin: I mean there is commercial office zoning that would be retained here on the east end, but, I mean, you're right that it's, at this point with the HACAP housing, it's right there. Wilburn: Right there. Vanderhoef: That angled piece, I guess it's north of the HACAP building. Franklin: Angled piece. Vanderhoef: Well- Correia: That's now a parking lot? Bailey: The parking lot part? The CO-I part? Vanderhoef: Ok. The, to the right. Franklin: Yeah. Right there. Vanderhoef: Yeah. Franklin: Ok. That's where our, we've got a storm sewer easement and the trail goes through here. Vanderhoef: Ok. So the City owns that. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. City Council Work Session Page 18 February 20,2007 Franklin: O'Donnell: (laughter) Wilburn: Franklin: Champion: Bailey: Franklin: Bailey: Elliott: Dilkes: Wilburn: Dilkes: Wilburn: Dilkes: Elliott: Franklin: Bailey: Elliott: Franklin: Wilburn: Yeah. Well. It may be an easement, as opposed to ownership. But you can't build anything there. Planning and Zoning and staff have both approved this? Both of them approved with a certain type ofa restriction, with staff more restrictive than Planning and Zoning, is that correct? Staff was more restrictive than Planning and Zoning. And if I vote for this I would want it to be the most restrictive. I would have a hard time voting for this. It was a struggle. Doesn't make any sense. I just remember staying in Chicago - Just remember, it's always good to wait 'til you get through- Hear from the public, yeah - The public hearing, yeah. Before you - Commit one way or - - reach your conclusions. In the area north of Michigan Avenue in a motel and there was a McDonald's across the street. And at 3 o'clock in the morning, that was going strong. Now granted, that's Chicago and this is Iowa City, but somehow that picture still comes to my mind. So it'll be interesting to hear more about this and hear from more people tomorrow. Yeah. I think one of the questions we wrestled with - Later. Later tonight. Sorry. One of the questions we wrestled with was the redevelopment of this, this particular little area and in the marketplace, what was likely to be the sort of investment someone would make here. And that's, it's a real hard one to know exactly what that would be. Sure. Sure. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 19 Vanderhoef: Housing isn't probably gonna go there. Wilburn: Give us something to chew on between now and 7 o'clock. Franklin: Yeah, between now and 7 o'clock, right. c) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF MCLEAN STREET BETWEEN HUTCHINSON AVENUE AND LEXINGTON AVENUE. (VAC06-00006) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin: Item c is pass and adopt on the vacation of McLean Street. Bailey: Oh- Elliott: Good morning. d) AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF THE PORTION OF MCLEAN STREET LOCATED BETWEEN LEXINGTON AVENUE AND HUTCHINSON AVENUE IN MANVILLE HEIGHTS ADDITION, TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. Franklin: And then d is the public hearing and resolution on the conveyance of that vacated portion of McLean Street to the abutting property owners, the Laws, Staleys, Stamlers and O'Brien. Correia: I just, I had something, I don't know, I'mjust going to bring it up here because it's related to this. Franklin: Ah hah? Correia: When, you know, we're going to be receiving the compensation of$37,000.00, and if there's a housing link there, because it's related to neighborhood. And it's also non- planned for income and as we're planning for doing some affordable housing initiatives down the road after we get this study, I wonder if there would be support to put this into some type of, you know, affordable housing fund that, that when we get to the point where we have some ideas that would be money that we could invest? Elliott: I personally, I understand your situation. I personally would rather not micromanage that. I'd rather leave that to go into the fund. Bailey: What does happen to that money? Vanderhoef: It's just general fund. Atkins: We have a general revenue account called miscellaneous. Correia: Is that micromanaging or is that setting policy? Vanderhoef: Miscellaneous (can't hear) This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 20 Bailey: Atkins: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Atkins: Correia: Bailey: Atkins: Franklin: Atkins: Franklin: Elliott: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Elliott: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Franklin: Wilburn: That's not really a good line item. No it is not. Is that micromanaging or is that kind of creating a policy? Opportunity. An opportunity, and as we're looking at- Earmarking is not uncommon, so. Thank you. We like earmarking, remember? I know you do. And we'll probably go to that miscellaneous fund to fund the, at least a portion ofthe housing market analysis. Hadn't thought about that. Mmmm. Now that's, that's why I'd like to leave that to the people who work with the budget. We work with the budget Bob. Isn't that what we do? Yeah. We approve it. Get a lot of that. Ok. So I hear there's not support to earmark. I would be willing to, but I don't think there's really- Are we moving on now? I think we're moving on. e) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE NO. 06-4245, WHICH AMENDS CERTAIN SPECIFIC PROVISIONS WITHIN TITLE 14, ZONING CODE, CHAPTER 2, BASE ZONES; CHAPTER 3, OVERLAY ZONES; This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 21 CHAPTER 4,USE REGULATIONS; CHAPTER 5, SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; CHAPTER 7, ADMINISTRATION; CHAPTER 8, REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES; CHAPTER 9, DEFINITIONS. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin: Item e is the housekeeping provisions in the zoning code and we would ask if you would please expedite consideration of that. Elliott: These were the technical - Franklin: Yeah. Champion: Right. Elliott: Haven't we approved this about 5 or 6 times already? Franklin: At least. Champion: (can't hear) Franklin: So this should be the last one. Elliott: Ok. f) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXTRATERRITORIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT OF L YN-DEN HEIGHTS PART III, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. (SUB04-00011). Franklin: We'll see if we can find something else for you. Item fis then a resolution approving the preliminary plat of Lyn-Den Heights Part III in Johnson County. This is kind of an unusual little situation, in that this plat we have seen before and gone over before, and I'm not sure how far it got the last time. But at this point it has gotten as far as it can go with the City, in that we have reviewed it and but for its compliance with the County Road Performance Standards and approval of the wastewater treatment system by the IDNR, we would recommend approval of this plat. The thing that is hanging it up is that the County's Road Performance Standards would not enable this to occur. The applicant has asked that we go through the process of City review so that it can get to the County and the denial based on the Standards can happen at the County, or a resolution, whichever. So we, and, the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission would recommend approval of this. At this point in time. Vanderhoef: Provided they do the - Franklin: Depending, it's approval subject to DNR approval of the wastewater treatment facility and compliance with or exemption from the County Road Performance Standards. Vanderhoef: Oh. So it's either/or. Franklin: Yes. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 22 Vanderhoef: Rather than compliance with. Franklin: The thinking was is that that is an issue for the County to determine, and I guess, frankly, ifthere's going to be litigation, that we not be involved in it. Elliott: Mmm hmm. Bailey: Thank you. Vanderhoef: Is there a way we could say that we would prefer standard? Franklin: Urn, sure. You could send a little letter. V anderhoef: Well, the way the letter reads now is - Franklin: I mean I think, I understand what you're saying, yeah. Vanderhoef: You've got your choice, folks. Franklin: Mmm hmm. If you want to send it forward with a approval subject to compliance with the roadie - roadie? - the County Road Performance Standards, you can do that. However it depends on how important do you think that is and whether you want to get pulled into this whole thing. Dilkes: Well, and if the Road Standards have some kind of waiver provision or wiggle room, it's gonna be the same result anyway. I mean, I don't know, I'm not familiar with the specifics of the Road Standards. Franklin: Yeah, I don't know if they have an exemption provision or not. Dilkes: So, I mean, you can comply with Road Standards ifthere- Franklin: - is an exemption provision. Dilkes: Yeah. Champion: Well I don't have any problems just having it go forward as what you stated. Elliott: This way we avoid possible or potential litigation. Champion: (can't hear) about the road. Franklin: Well, it becomes a matter between the particular developer in this case and the County, then. But. O'Donnell: This is the number of cars on a (can't hear) road and what's appropriate. Franklin: Yeah. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 23 O'Donnell: Ok. Vanderhoef: How many trips does that generate to get to the exit when it's built out? Franklin: I don't know, but it exceeds, it exceeds the standard at which you would need to upgrade Rapid Creek Road. Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm. Franklin: That is, this will generate more traffic than would be allowed under the County's Road Performance Standards, without that being an upgraded road. O'Donnell: Ok. Franklin: Ok. I'm done. Wilburn: Actually you're not. I need one more thing to chew on about item b. Franklin: Yeah? Wilburn: So that I can have in the back of my mind as we go through the public hearing and first consideration. Is the, obviously if the Council goes forward with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, it's possible that we could end up at a third reading without a signed CZA anyway, right? Franklin: We have a signed - Wilburn: We have a signed - ok, never mind. Franklin: Yeah, yeah. Now, one thing I did neglect to mention is that for a drive-through restaurant to go here, it does have to go through the Board of Adjustment and get a special exception. Bailey: Board of Adjustment. Wilburn: Ok. Franklin: Your zoning it to CC-2 enables that to happen, and all of the site work that I showed you was really in preparation of that. Wilburn: But my real question was, ah, after the public hearing, should a majority of Council wish to go with the, either the more restrictive or denial, is the Commission's recommendation general enough that we wouldn't need to go back to meet with them? Or is - you mentioned there's at a minimum of 35 feet buffer? Franklin: In the spirit of the resolution that has you go back to Planning and Zoning, that you would want to, want to offer the opportuoity to have a discussion with Planning and Zoning, because they had quite a bit of discussion about this particular item and were- This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 24 Wilburn: Franklin: Wilburn: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Franklin: Bailey: Correia: Franklin: Sure. Yeah. That's fine. I just wanted to have that in the back of my head when- There's not - yeah, I think you'd want to go back and talk to them. Ok. That's all I needed to know. And speaking - And- Oh, go ahead. At that Planning and Zoning meeting, where they voted on this, was there a public hearing component to that? Yeah, all of their items are public discussion, always. Always. Oh, right. Ok. I guess I had hoped that that, those minutes would have been in this - Yeah, and my apologies, I apologize for that. We had a, we had a mess-up in terms of getting the minutes into your packet. They are online, but they are not in your packet. You know, one option that you have, if those are critical to your decision making, is to defer your first consideration until your next meeting. (all talk - can't hear) Franklin: This is on for public hearing and first consideration, but there's nothing that obligates you to give your first - (cut off - end of tape) Bailey: Right. Council Appointment Wilburn: Thank you. We have one Council Appointtnent I believe, for the Senior Center Commission, Charles Felling. Champion: Well he certainly would be excellent. Vanderhoef: Mmm hmm. Bailey: Although I'm really sad to lose him on Public Art, I think he's done such great work. Champion: I know. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 25 Bailey: Wilburn: Vanderhoef: But obviously he's interested in moving to Senior Center Commission, so. So we'll go with that? Yes. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Wilburn: Trueblood: (laughter) Trueblood: Bailey: Trueblood: Wilburn: Trueblood: Terry Trueblood, Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Got your name taken down again, Terry . Good evening. I don't have any pictures for you, and I'm not here to talk about a pedestrian bridge. Those are, that's the good news. Master Plan. This is something that I think we first started talking about sometime before the turn of the century, maybe the lOthe century, and it's been a high priority of the Parks and Recreation Commission staff, or Parks and Recreation Commission and staff for a number of years now. And I did send a memo to you in your packet that basically kind of gave you a history of where we've been with this, kind of brings you up to date with where we are right now. And about that time Steve and I thought, well, it's been quite a long time since we've talked to Council about this, so we thought it might be a good idea to come back and come before you again. Actually, that was Steve's idea - I wasn't for sure it was a good idea. Steve did. So, at any rate, I'm here tonight to answer any questions I can about the memo. Like it does, like it says in there, we have solicited for qualifications from firms, we have received those, so if we go ahead from here the next step would be to select those that we want to get proposals from and then start an interview process. Basically, what we see the Parks and Recreation Master Plan doing for us is we gain citizen input and then we address community priorities. We establish or refine our vision for the future, we develop a long-term action plan, you know, that responds to public interest, and hopefully we build a strong constituency for implementation in that process. We look at it as, although it's an over-simplification, basically three phases, phase one being where are we now? Phase two being where do we want to go or where do we want to be? And phase three being how do we get there? That's where we're at with it. Can I answer any questions? It is a budgeted item, by the way, as the memo indicated. When you do citizen input, I was talking to a group of 6th graders at Lucas a couple of years ago and they have some thoughts, of course they have some thoughts about Mercer Park. Do you, do you involve kids in our community when you're getting citizen input? Certainly no reason we can't. We've done it in the past with the skate park. I'm sorry? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 26 Wilburn: Bailey: Wilburn: Trueblood: (laughter) Bailey: Trueblood: Bailey: Correia: Trueblood: Correia: Trueblood: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Champion: Correia: We've done it in the past with the skate park. Oh yeah. You remember the skate park. That may be one reason why we shouldn't do it again. I think, if it's at all feasible, we should consider ways, and maybe the Youth Advisory Commission could help, but I think we should consider ways to get kids voices in your input, somehow. Sure. Some of, some of the firms that have been in contact with us have even mentioned, they, most of them looked upon this as giving us a proposal instead ofa statement of qualifications. One of them was 86 pages long. But they, they would mention in their, one or two of them, anyway, mentioned in there getting kids involved, so I think, I think there's a very distinct possibility that could happen. Good. I think it ~ould be good to utilize the Youth Advisory Commission with this particular project, so we might, we can talk about- Sure. I don't know, if there's a planning committee, that's a subcommittee ofthe Parks and Rec Commission, or how? Right now, right now our committee is to select the finalists and then interview them and then select the one we want to hire, bring a contract back to the Council for endorsement and signature. But then every one of the consultants mentions, for example, starting to talk to stakeholders, so we, along with the consultant, along with the Parks and Recreation Commission, will have to start identifying stakeholders. Ok. Which, obviously, City Council would be the ultimate stakeholder, but people like the Youth Advisory Commission, neighborhood associations, other special interest groups. Yeah, they, 'cause I think the Youth Advisory Commission could playa role- Convening kids. Convening kids, yeah. Yeah. And I think that would be real exciting. Be a nice goal for them. Yeah. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 27 Elliott: Trueblood: Elliott: Trueblood: Elliott: Trueblood: (laughter) Trueblood: Bailey: Elliott: Correia: Wilburn: Trueblood: Wilburn: Wilburn: Terry, it's probably because you did a good job of summarizing, but I think this is eighty thousand bucks, if I'm not mistaken. That's correct. It seems to me that nobody knows more about our parks and recreation, what we have and what we need, and what the interests are than we do; give me a 60 second short course why we need to spend this money to tell us what I think we know. I thought I did that, but I'll try again. Fine. No, I understand. There have been cases, actually in the state ofIowa, where, I checked around with various communities where they've done master plans. And several of them, I'm gonna say 3 or 4, say we really don't have one that's all that good. We took a shot at it in-house - best we could do is come up with some guidelines, that kind of thing, and to do it right you really need a professional or professionals. There will be more than one firm with each one of these to do the survey component correctly, to gather the information correctly, to do the benchmarking, the comparison with national and state standards, that kind of thing. Some of this is stuff we could do. We frankly don't have the time or, I believe, the expertise, to do it right. Plus, an outside consultant will have less of a tendency to guide groups in the direction they want them to go, because they won't have any vested interests. If we were to do it, it might come back to you saying that we need to build a pedestrian bridge and have (can't hear) But an outside consultant might not say that. Just pay $80,000.00. It's cheaper than 1.3. That was, that was a pretty good 60 second summary. That was. I will say, I do remember, as a Parks and Recreation commissioner, the Parks and Rec. director himself asking my two children what color scheme the playground equipment in the Pedestrian Mall should be and they picked it and he accepted that, so I know he's open to the idea of youth input. Was there a compliment in there somewhere? Yes, I guess I'll say, say thank you Terry. Thank you. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. __._.___._._____._.~__.__.,.~_..~_~_____._~__,_..__.__ ___.______~__.___.___~___,...,__.___.__ . _._._._.m._.'._,_.___.____~_ __._..,,___..___.,_______.__ ,_ February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 28 Bailey: And you know, Economic Development Committee is doing this downtown market mix study. I don't know if there's any overlap, but we shouldn't, we shouldn't overlook that we're also bringing in a consultant to look at our downtown area, and there might be some overlap, I don't know. I can't immediately think of it, but we do have a playground structure down there, so, something to think about, just keep in the back of your head. Trueblood: One other thing I should mention to, it made something click up here, which doesn't happen very often, but it clicks up there now and then. Ah, although other nearby interests indicated that they weren't interested at this time participating in the master plan, we will take those under consideration, with, you know, as we do this. Like what is the, what does the University offer? What does Coralville offer? What does the County offer - those kinds of things. Bailey: Great. Elliott: Think that's important. Wilburn: That's good - yeah. And thank you for at least- Bailey: Approaching them. Wilburn: Approaching other entities to see if they were interested. Vanderhoef: I, I'm disappointed they weren't, because I think we use each other's facilities frequently, and it behooves us to know whether we're duplicating or not. Wilburn: Ah, O'Donnell: Where was this bridge you kept talking about, this footbridge? Trueblood: Oh, I can't even remember now where it was. Elliott: That was an old cars movie. Champion: I think it was number one on their list, which we've never given them. Wilburn: Sir, did you want a nod of consensus or a go forth and etc., etc.? Atkins: We'd like consensus, but it will come back in the form of a contract. Wilburn: Ok. Atkins: We'd like, we'll take it that far, until what we need is your blessing on the contract. Wilburn: Ok. Trueblood: Yeah. Whatever he said. Wilburn: Ok. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 29 Vanderhoef: He'll tell you if you forget. Trueblood: Yeah -I'm sure. Wilburn: Thanks Terry. Al!enda Items Wilburn: Agenda items. Consent Calendar 4(f)7 Correspondence re: 523 Church Street Bailey: Champion: Bailey: Champion: Bailey: Helling: This is out of correspondence, it's 4(f)7, about 523 E. Church. How, are we addressing that in any way? Which one is that? It's the one about the greenhouse, the two front yard? It seems logical that they could have a greenhouse. It seems logical to me, too. That, that person has been in contact with our staff, and I did a short response just reiterating that, you know, that they had talked to the right people in dealing with staff on it, but I'm not sure where that, yeah, where that might go or whether there's any exceptions or anything. They're dealing with H.I.S. staff, and that's where they ought to be. Consent Calendar 4(f)6 Correspondence re: Snow covered bicycle racks Bailey: Ok. And then 4(1)6, the bike rack letter. The snow. Atkins: Yes. Bailey: I mean, we got one of these last year. Is there something we could do, especially this winter? It's been pretty mild, people have been riding bikes quite a lot. Is there something we could do better about keeping bike racks clear? Say yes. Atkins: Yeah. Bailey: Will we do it? Vanderhoef: If we pay for it. Trueblood: Most, most of the bike racks in the downtown area are not the City's responsibility for removing snow from around them. It's the adjacent business or property owner. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 30 Bailey: Do they know that, the property owners? Trueblood: I'm not entirely sure they do. Bailey: Maybe that - Trueblood: One of the suggestions I made to the gentleman was that they might, he might talk with a business, especially if he has a particular one in mind. But in the meantime we're, we are going to have a discussion about maybe notifying the businesses to let them know that they should do that. Now, having said that, I will say that there are undoubtedly some cases where they just don't have anywhere else to go with the snow. They can't scoop it out into the street, and they can't leave it in the middle of the sidewalk, so they may not be able to do anything except pile it around the bike rack. Bailey: Well, do we need more bike racks on our property, that we can keep clear, especially in the winter, that would enable some of the se to be piled up with snow? I mean, people ride bikes in the winter. I know I have a lot of respect for that, but I'm not one of them, but. Trueblood: Don't know the answer to that just off the - Champion: A lot of the parking meters downtown have little bike racks on them and they're rarely used. So, maybe they're not aware that those are actually bike racks on the meters. I mean, like put the bike up. Vanderhoef: That hook. Bailey: Right. Do we still have a lot of those downtown? I thought? Ok. I see them mostly in the north. Trueblood: I wouldn't say we have a lot of them, but there are a number of them downtown. Vanderhoef: Maybe that should be pointed out to the gentleman also, just in case? Bailey: Well, I don't think we should make, I mean, Ijust want to see it as easy to ride a bike and find, you know, downtown. Champion: Me too. Bailey: I mean, we clear our parking, so I think we should make sure that bikes have adequate place - if they're brave enough to ride them in the winter, I think we should have- Atkins: Typically what we do- Elliott: I'm not sure brave is the right word sometimes. Bailey: Smart? Vanderhoef: So where do we put the snow if you're cleaning your sidewalk? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 31 Trueblood: With the ones that we clean? There are some, there are some cases where we actually have to haul it away. Bailey: Right. Vanderhoef: You do. But the businesses who are responsible for clearing their sidewalk in front of their business, when you get a couple of three inches of snow, where do you put it, other than in a pile someplace on the sidewalk? Trueblood: Well, that's what I'm saying, is there may be some cases where they have no option except to pile it around a bike rack. V anderhoef: Yeah. Trueblood: Now, having said that, I think when there's a small amount of snow, I think they can pile it on either end of a bike rack, it'd be ok. But when we start getting a lot of snow, there's, you know, you can only pile up so much in one or two locations. Elliott: To whom do those racks belong? Trueblood: They belong to the City. Elliott: The ones that are responsible for the merchants. Trueblood: The City owns the bicycle racks, the City installed the racks, the City maintains the racks, except for the snow. Elliott: The merchants have a legal responsibility to keep the? Trueblood: Not legal, not legal, no. Elliott: Ok, because if I were there I might well say not my bike rack. Trueblood: Best we can do is encourage them to do it. Legally, there's nothing in the code that indicates that they have to keep the bike rack clear. Elliott: I like encouragement. Bailey: I like the laws. Vanderhoef: It's either that or push - Bailey: Ok. Thanks. I, it, we just got the same letter last year, and Ijust think we need to do more to, you know. Trueblood: Well- Vanderhoef: This is the same person. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 32 Champion: (can't hear) bike rack, it comes from the street. Bailey: What? Champion: Because those bike racks - Bailey: It might, it might, actually. From the plows. Trueblood: Yeah. In some cases it does come from the street and from the sidewalks, so it's getting it from both sides. Bailey: Well I think maybe we should put more bike racks in our parking facilities so they're covered and people have access to that. If we do have bike racks and (sound drop-out) Trueblood: We have a large bike rack in the Dubuque Street - not the Dubuque Street, the Old Capital ramp. Bailey: Right. O'Donnell: Is it full, Terry? Trueblood: No. I think Joe Fowler would tell you that it's rarely used. Champion: That's not what bikers want to do. Correia: People, no, if they're going downtown- Vanderhoef: They want to park in front. Correia: Just like everybody in cars. Bailey: Well, that's why you ride a bike, so it's more convenient. Correia: Of course. Bailey: Ok. Thanks. I just think we need to do more. Wilburn: Other agenda items? ITEM 8. AMENDING TITLE 16, ENTITLED "PUBLIC WORKS," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "CITY UTILITIES," ARTICLE A, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS," BY AMENDING SECTION 5 TO ALLOW FOR DEPOSITS TO BE BILLED INSTEAD OF PAID IN ADVANCE WITH PROPER PAYMENT HISTORY. Bailey: I have a question on item 8. This is an ordinance, it's in section one, amendments. I don't understand what this means: with the exception of a residential owner account. What is a residential owner account. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 33 Atkins: Bailey: Champion: Bailey: Champion: Dilkes: Champion: Atkins: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Atkins: Dilkes: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Atkins: Dilkes: Champion: O'Donnell: Vanderhoef: You, I don't want to say it's a residential owner account. Is that me? Or is that somebody who owns an apartment? Is that, is that us, or is it somebody who owns apartments? We're homeowners, that's what that means. So what's it, is that residential owner account.? Yes. I think it's an owner-occupied. Right, owner-occupied. It's like you and me. Hold on, I'll get the actual definition. So owner-occupied can't, we can't establish an account online? I don't think there's a deposit requirement, I think is the issue. Yes there is a deposit requirement. Oh, there is a deposit requirement? Mmm hmm. For new customers on utilities? Yes there is? Then why is that the exception? Ijust don't understand that. I can look at the ordinance that's being amended and Tell me when we vote on it? So we're gonna have to wait for Kevin to get here. I thought I understood this. If I can find the ordinance. For utilities, I don't need a deposit. You can transfer it, it'll be billed. You can transfer it and if you have good credit with the City, you can close down one, open the other and - This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 34 Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Atkins: Bailey: Atkins: Champion: Bailey: Atkins: Dilkes: Bailey: I don't see that here. What we were trying to do is that there's the mad rush to get sign-up. What we'd like to do is that folks who have an established credit with us, the freshman who's now the sophomore, can do this by way of the web. And iffor some reason they don't pay, we still have the ability to collect. It's quite frankly, trying to cut down I totally get that part. I just don't get this part. I mean, I get - You got that part. Yeah. I understand the - See, I don't think that's a change. 1 mean, I, you can't, 1 gotta go back and 1 didn't do this ordinance - I'm sorry. But I, you have to look at it in the context of the whole ordinance, which is much longer than this. Ok, which I didn't do, and I apologize. No, that's ok, I'm just saying that that's what I'll have to do in order to answer the question, I think. Ok. Ijust wondered if we were exempting a certain group of people from being able to do this. No. I don't think that's what's- We're not doing that. So if! move into a house, I can go online and line up, before my closing date, I can line up my water service. That's what I understand. No, the student who has had an account with us the whole year can also do that. Right. But I just didn't understand what this meant. Kevin will be here at 7:00. I think, if! had to guess without looking at it, I think what it's doing is it's just tracking the old language as to the setting up when deposits are required, and allowing that to be done online. I don't there's been any change as to who, who must make a deposit, etc. Ok. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 35 Dilkes: Bailey: Dilkes: Bailey: Wilburn: Karr: Atkins: Elliott: Bailey: O'Mally: Bailey: O'Mally: Bailey: O'Mally: Bailey: Elliott: Atkins: Elliott: And I don't think there's any exemption for who can do it online on their account. Ok. I just wanted to know what classification a residential owner account was. l'lllook at it. Thanks. Other agenda items? Ross - I'm desperate to know this now. Get Kevin. Wow. What's the question? What's a residential owner account? Oh, that's just someone who owns their own property. So, the person establishing an account, with the exception of a person who owns their own property, shall be required to make a combined account deposit for City services. So if you own your own property you don't have to pay a deposit? That's correct. If you're a tenant, you have to pay a deposit. Thank you. See how easy that was? Thank you Kevin. Ask the man who knows. (all talk - can't hear) Champion: (laughter) Bailey: Wilburn: Why does it take all that to say that? Seems to me that we could say it more clearly, but fine. Need one of those, if you're taking a test, somebody to just magically appear in front of you and give you the answer. Other agenda items? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20,2007 City Council Work Session Page 36 Karr: Ross, do you wish to talk about March 6th, since the agenda several setting a public hearings? Wilburn: I was gonna do it during Council Time, but I can do it now since, yeah. Karr: Well, yeah, it has impact on the agenda. Wilburn: Well, and I apologize for bringing up another calendar issue, but I, I've been asked to be the keynote speaker at an event on March 6th, and the event starts at 6:30. I was going to ask the Council if you would be open to and are interested in one, either doing a combined session on Monday and since tonight's agenda involves setting several public hearings that would move those public hearings to Monday, if Council were willing to meet on Monday. Champion: Whatever, I'd be happy to. Elliott: Fine with me. Champion: Fine. Vanderhoef: That, that's ok. Wilburn: Ok. Vanderhoef: As long as, as long as our work session subjects aren't getting backed up. Wilburn: Another option could be to like start earlier, like 5 :00 on the 6th O'Donnell: 5:30? Bailey: But starting later isn't an option? Wilburn: I don't think this event will be over until, like 8:30 or 9:00. Bailey: Ok. Champion: Either option is fine with me. Bailey: I'd rather go with Monday. O'Donnell: Why don't we go with Monday and start at 5:30? Elliott: 5:30. Bailey: We'll have the conference board right in the middle - is that ample time? Vanderhoef: Wait - we may have to start at 5:00. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 37 Wilburn: 5:00? Champion: And then we'll have a Council meeting at 7:00, .Iike we do tonight? So we'll have the conference board so we'll need to start earlier, at 5:00 or 5:15, whenever. Vanderhoef: Probably at 5:00, just so. Wilburn: 5:00. Karr: 5:00 on March 5th. Vanderhoef: Ok. Break in there. Karr: 5:00 on March 5th. And then the conference board would be at whatever time it is, and then 7:00 is the formal. Can do. Wilburn: Right. Thank you for reminding me. Vanderhoef: 5:30 for conference board. Karr: Well, conference board has the public hearing on the budget, so it's whatever time they set, so we don't have any flexibility on moving that. Bailey: It's set at 6:30. Champion: Oh, that'll be fine. Wilburn: Ok. Thank you - I appreciate your flexibility. Atkins: So just so we understand - Monday we will have a 5 :00 work session, 6:30 conference board, 7:00 regular Council meeting. All of those hearings that are noticed as the 6th will now become the 5th. Ok. Champion: I think the other thing is, when you right that agenda, in case we're not done with our work session, can we write it so that we continue? Karr: To be continued? Yeah. Atkins: Ok. Vanderhoef: After the formal meeting. Champion: After the conference or after the formal. Karr: I doubt that you'll have much time after the conference board, unless the conference board goes real quick, because you'll have a 7:00 formal, unless you delay the start of the formal. So do you want to continue the work session? Bailey: No. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20, 2007. February 20, 2007 City Council Work Session Page 38 Champion; Well, I don't know if we'll have to or not, so leave the opportunity. Correia: We have the opportunity. Karr: Got it. Ok. Champion: So we don't get into trouble with the attorney. Wilburn: Anyone want Council time? O'Donnell: We can do that later. Wilburn: Do it later? Vanderhoef: Yeah. I guess what I'll say is I brought back a couple, no, actually a few things from Des Moines this week, and I'll just leave them out here and you can take a look, at your leisure. Some of them are kind of fun. Wilburn; Ok. Start up again at 7;00. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 20,2007.