Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-18 TranscriptionNovember 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 1 November 18, 2002 Council Work Session 6:35 PM Council: Champion, Kanner, Lehman, O'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilbum Staff'.' Atkins, Dilkes, Franklin, Helling, Karr TAPE: 02-88, BOTH SIDES TAPE 02-88, SIDE ONE PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS a. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 10 ON AN ORDINANCE REZONING 10.15 ACRES FROM MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY (RM-20) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY AND PLANNED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (RM-20/OSMOPD}I) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NORTHWEST OF HIGHWAY 1 AND RUPPERT ROAD. Franklin/Items a through d are setting public hearings for December 10th, the first for the rezoning from RM-20 to RM-20 OSA OPDH for the multi-family housing project on Highway 1, this we call the Callaway Lodge project. This is in Plarming and Zoning this week. We are setting public hearing early because you only have one meeting in December. You also have received and I don't know if you have it a letter from the attorney for the project that's asking for your consideration of--- Karr/Karin, I did not distribute it because it was not relevant to the setting of a public hearing. Franklin/OK. Karr/I was going to distribute it December 10th. Franklin/OK. Well, I'll just let you know then. They're going to be asking for expedited consideration and to have first consideration on the same night as your public hearing. Lehman/OK. b. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 10 ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY (RS-5/OSA) FOR 5.6 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1520 N. DUBUQUE ROAD. (REZ02-00019) Franklin/Item b for setting the public hearing is also a rezoning from RS-5 to RS-5/OSA, and this is for a project on North Dubuque Road near the HyVee, north of the HyVee. Kanner/In item number a, Karin, what's the number of critical slopes that will be disturbed in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 2 that project? Franklin/It's 65 percent is what the percentage is, as I recall. I don't have all that material in front of me, Steven, because we'll have the public hearing next time. Karmer/Now when we say "disturbance," do we just--do we know what the disturbance is, do we have any measurement from just a spoonful of dirt to half of the slope? Franklin/No. Karmer/OK. Franklin/I mean we have--the way we come up with the percentage is to look at an area that has critical slopes and then look at that area that's going to be disturbed, but I can't tell you in cubic yards what that is or how many spoonfuls. Karmer/OK. So, just any kind of impact, large or small, gets counted as a "disturbance." Franklin/Yeah. Kanner/Thank you. c. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 10 ON AN ORDINANCE VACATING LAFAYETTE STREET, LOCATED WEST OF CAPITOL STREET. (VAC02-00006) Franklin/OK. Item c is setting a public hearing for December 10th on the vacation of Lafayette Street, and this is for a--it's been requested by City Carton. d. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 10 ON AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE EAST-TO-WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 27 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN PLAT, LOCATED BETWEEN MARKET AND BLOOMINGTON STREET WEST OF DODGE STREET. (VAC02-00007) Franklin/Item d is setting a public hearing December 10th for vacating the east-west alley in block 27; that's between Market and Bloomington streets, and that has been requested by Mercy Hospital. e. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE K, THE SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE, REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY REZONINGS AND SENSITIVE AREAS SITE PLANS. Franklin/Item e is the public hearing that you will have tomorrow night on the amendments to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. If you recall, the City Council asked us, referred us back to the Planning and Zoning Commission to do an amendment to the Sensitive Areas This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 3 Ordinance to allow more administrative review as opposed to going through the rezoning process. And we went through the ordinance and what you have before you still requires rezonings in some cases, but a large portion of the Sensitive Areas work will go through the administrative review as opposed to the rezoning. And that's--the distinction is based upon whether there is discretion under the ordinance or not, in that in those areas where there is some discretion, such as the reduction of a buffer, the ability to take out more woodlands than what would be under the Code, under the strict provisions of the Code. Obviously, any modifications in the zoning which is what you had before also will come under the zoning issues as opposed to site plan. And I can go through all the specifics of this, if you wish me to, so that you know exactly what the differences are. I'll leave that to the Council. Wilburn/You mean any discretion by Council, for Council? Franklin/If there is a matter of discretion within the ordinance and it was concerning a feature that currently required rezoning, we kept that in the rezoning process. However, if it's a technical issue, in which it means the Engineering staff, Housing or Building, and Planning are looking at it for compliance with very specific provisions of the Code, those would be done administratively. We also, because there's language in there such as "minimizing disturbance of things such as critical slopes," in the rezoning provisions, if there's a disturbance of more than 35 percent of the critical slopes, that would go through the rezoning process. Less than 35 percent would be done as an administrative review. Pfab/How would this have affect the Harlocke-Weeber? Where would that have fit in? Franklin/I believe that that would have been a site plan review and the pertinent thing for that project relates to the ability to put utilities in a protected area, or in a wetland, I should say. So, no that wouldn't have been affected. That would have been site plan review. It would have been done administratively, because that was--- Pfab/Not the way it was done. Franklin/No. Pfab/OK. Franklin/Largely it was a technical issue and so those things are in the administrative review. Pfab/I'tl just make one comment here. After I saw what happened after the construction was partway through there. That was a disaster. So I'm not going to be able to--I don't have any interest in making any changes. Franklin/OK. Lehman/Well, the only thing, Irvin, whether or not we make this change, that wouldn't have changed what happened at Harlocke. What you're talking about would require a change This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 4 in the substance of the ordinance. Not the administrative--- Pfab/But we had no chance. It never would have come up to the public, so there, it would have just been swept under the street. Lehman/It still didn't come up to the public. Pfab/It seemed to. Franklin/Yeah, I--you're right. Lehman/Right, it didn't. Franklin/Well, there were technical issues that had to be complied with to go through the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, why we went through all the litigation and everything. And those did not change. You'd have to change those technical requirements in order to have affected a different result. Pfab/But I mean, it would have never, we'd have never, the question I'm asking is would you have ever come up for a vote? Franklin/It would not have come up for a vote. Vanderhoef/Karin, I've got a couple of questions because they've been brought to us at different times, and one is the prairie and how do we get something new onto the map when it gets identified. And I haven't found any other--- Franklin/OK. And we didn't address that. I want to say we did not address everything in the Sensitive Ordinance that we may have had issues with over time. We addressed it with a very specific thing that was noted by the Council and that was to look at administrative review versus the zoning process. There are some portions of the Code, as we're going through our Development Code review that we're looking at. That issue of the prairie would be one--- Vanderhoef/Or wetland or whatever. Franklin/Yeah, well, it's the prairie that's important because that is the only feature in which it has to be shown on the Sensitive Areas map, which is no longer on the wall. So that's the only one where this problem comes up of having to go on somebody's land to make a determination that there is a prairie. And we don't even know that whether that is a real problem or not because we have not been presented with information that was achieved some other way. What I mean by that is if the neighborhood in the prairie instance had come to you with a proposal that this prairie be placed on the map, at that point we would have to make a judgment, the staff, in making a recommendation to you and you as to whether the information they presented to you was sufficient for you to put that on the map. We have not been confronted with that. We have only been confronted with the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 5 Planning and Zoning Commission asking the staff to investigate the designation of a prairie. For us to investigate the designation of a prairie, I believe we need expertise that we do not have to go on the land and say this is a prairie or it is not. However, if somebody from the public brought that into you that had gleaned some information some other way, you would still have to make the calls as to whether that was sufficient information for you to place it on the map or not. So what I'm saying is I'm not sure if it's a procedural problem in the Code unless you want to make it much easier for someone to designate a prairie on the map or you want to take the map out and give prairies a greater weight in terms of their importance for sensitive features and so they're treated like, say, a wetland that somebody would have to, when they bring in a development plan, show whether there's a prairie there or not. And that's a whole different philosophical approach than what's in there now. Vanderhoef/I understand, but as we move further south with annexations and so forth, I don't know whether we'll run into some of that as a question and so I would like to hear some alternatives of how we might address this before we have another occasion. Franklin/Or an occasion. Lehman/How does that relate to this? Franklin/Well, only in that it's in the same ordinance, but it is another issue in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance aside from the issue of process which is all that we were directed to do ahead of the Development Code was the issue of process. Lehman/Right. Franklin/That you wanted to, or a majority of the Council, wanted to address sensitive areas in a more administrative way where it was a matter of technicalities. Lehman/Right. OK. Vanderhoef/The other thing that I would like us to look at in all this is the woodland and the wetland where it's contiguous but maybe has more than one owner or when it gets broken down into a different plat. Franklin/I know what you mean. Vanderhoef/I don't know how to handle it but the questions have come up to us before, and it just seems like we don't have anything that spells it out that, yes, it is or no, it isn't. We're in limbo. Franklin/Mm-hmm. Pfab/I've got a question for you, Karin. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 6 Franklin/Mm-hmm. Pfab/I understand that there are people over in, at the Sand Prairie Area that strongly feel or maybe have even more knowledge than that, that that is a sand prairie. But is, what can be done if it they decide, is there any way possible to preserve that as such? Franklin/I think we're straying. I'm sorry, but, yeah. What my thinking has been up here as we've been talking is the issues you're raising about the sand prairie are not the issues--- Lehman/There's nothing to do with this. Franklin/....that are part of this amendment and to which the public has been given notice that we're going to be discussing it, and there are a whole lot of people interested in that sand prairie issue wouldn't necessarily know we were going to be talking about it tonight. Pfab/Does this have any effect one way or the other on an issue such as that? Franklin/Prairies are treated just the same. They've always been a site plan review. They will continue to be a site plan review unless you decide you're going to treat them differently. Pfab/So--- Franklin/ They were never a feature that required rezoning. The features that required rezoning were wetlands, critical slopes, protected slopes, and woodlands. Prairies always require a site plan; they do under this amendment, so this amendment that we are discussing tonight is irrelevant to the prairies. Pfab/OK. You mentioned something about if there was a reduction in amount of required standing timber, I believe, or something to that effect. Franklin/Buffer. There's buffers required for wetlm~ds. Oh, the woodlands? Pfab/Right. Franklin/OK. That's different from a prairie. Pfab/No, but, no, no. What I'm saying is that part of, that's part of this? Franklin/Yes. In the woodlands because, in the rezoning process prior, woodlands on sites with stream corridors had to go through the rezoning process. Now, if you have a woodland that is two acres or more and someone wishes to take down more trees than are permitted trader the Code, because there's a table--- Pfab/Right. Franklin/...that tells you how much you can cut, if they want to take down more, that is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 7 something that would have to come before the City Council. Pfab/Would that change according to this? Franklin/Yes. Pfab/So then they wouldn't have to. Franklin/No, they would have to. Pfab/They would still have to? Franklin/Yes. Yes, they would still have to. Pfab/But is it up to 35 percent or is it any amount? Franklin/For that particular provision it is any amount. So, if they exceed what they're allowed to remove under the ordinance, if they want to exceed what's allowed under the ordinance, then it must go through a rezoning process for woodlands. Lehman/Karin, is it fair to say, I don't want to make this oversimplified, but--is it fair to say that this amendment will enable staff to issue building permits and whatever? As long as the technical requirements of the ordinance are met? Franklin/Yes. Lehman/In any case where they cannot meet the technical requirements, it still must come to P and Z and to the Council in order to receive approval if it's different from the requirements that are written down? Franklin/Right. Lehman/So. Yeah--- Franklin/If--OK--- Lehman/ Simply said, if they can meet all of the requirements. Franklin/But if there is any discretion, then it comes to Planning and Zoning and the City Council. Lehman/Right. Pfab/Can you give me an example of one or the other? What would be different? What would have been different? Tiffs represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 8 Franklin/There's a certain buffer that is required around a wetland, I don't know--say it's a 150 feet--there are provisions in the Code that allow the reduction of that buffer under certain circumstances. Any reduction in buffer would come to the Council and the Plarming and Zoning Commission. OK? Pfab/I guess--- Franklin/If they provided the full buffer, the full 150 feet, then they don't have to come to the Planning and Zoning Conunission or the City Council because they have met the technical requirement. But if they want any deviation from that, if there's any judgment to be made, it comes to Planning and Zoning and the City Council. Pfab/In the last two or three years, which one would not have had to come if this was in effect? Franklin/Which one? Dilkes/Well, we've already said that the Harlocke-Weeber would not Franklin/ The Harlocke-Weeber would not have had to come before the Council, if that's what you're after. Lehman/How about Hickory Heights? Franklin/Hickory Heights, I think, the critical slopes disturbance would have brought, yeah, because that was more than 35 percent. Lehman/How about the fraternity house over on--that one was a variation in height. Franklin/That had a variation in height; that would have come to you anyway. Vanderhoef/And likewise these down on First Avenue. Franklin/Variation in height would have come to you. Pfab/So, the only one that comes to make is Harlocke-Weeber? Franklin/Mm-hmm. The operative word there is "comes to mind" because I haven't gone back and analyzed all 90 cases that we had. Pfab/Right. But to me, and that, after you step back and watch what happened there, you realize that it still was a disaster for the neighbors there. So, if that could have slipped through, if they were opening up a gate to let that one go through, then I, no--- Franklin/ No, no. Lehman/That one went through even though--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 9 Franklin/It would have gone through anyway, Irvin, whether it had been a site plan review or rezoning because the technical requirements are the same. The only way you would not have had Harlocke-Weeber is if the technical requirements changed. That things were more restrictive than what is in the ordinance now or what is in the amendment in terms of the technical requirements. Dilkes/I think the Harlocke-Weeber situation is exactly the type of situation that led our consultant to recommend that we make these changes because that's a situation where you have technical requirements but because they come in front of Council for a rezoning opens up kind of a Pandora's box of issues that are important to the neighborhood but not necessarily part of the decision to be made by Council. So you're absolutely right, Irvin, if you think that the Harlocke-Weeber situation is one that we're attempting to avoid by making some of these changes. Franklin/Mm-hmm. Chan~pion/It's because they had--- Franklin/Which was the majority's direction. But if you want to--- Champion/ They had no impression (can't hear) Franklin/If you didn't like the way Harlocke-Weeber came out, the way it physically, the result, then, to deal with that, you would change either the technical requirements of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance or you would severely downzone that land. So that's the solution; it has nothing to do with what we're talking about tonight in terms of the changes. Dilkes/To argue against this because you don't like the result in Harlocke-Weeber is to argue that because something comes in front of the Council, the Council can do anything it wishes, and that is not the case. Pfab/Well, if my memory serves me right, if they would have just backed offa little bit of what they were pushing for, that would never have come in front of Planning and Zoning. Lehman/It had to because it was Sensitive Areas Ordinance and we require it to go there. Pfab/No, it was, I think when they put the dam in and they cut something is what really tripped that. O'Dormell/The only reason--- Franklin/No, it was when the storm sewer was in the detention basin and the detention basin was on a slope; that's why it came. But the effect of it all, whether it had been a site plan review, or as it did, went through Planning and Zoning, the City Council and the court This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 10 system, the result would have been exactly the same. Pfab/And this would have made no change? Franklin/No. Kanner/Karin, a couple things. Would it have been possible to have the appeal go to the City Council instead of the Board of Adjustment? Franklin/I don't think so, because this is in the Zoning Ordinance and by state law, appeals of zoning decisions go to the Board of Adjustment. Dilkes/Yeah, I think that's right. Franklin/The only thing that differs from that and I think it's because it's not, well, it's the Historic Preservation--- Dilkes/Yeah, but that's by State statute. (can't hear) specified by State statute for historic preservation and the State Code does provide that appeal of decisions by administrative staff go to the Board of Adjustment. Franklin/Right. Mm-hmm. Karmeff And it would go to the Board before it would go to the court. I think I saw the Board in there, the Board of Adjustment or the court. It would go to the Board first and then to--- Franklin/ Yeah. Typically, that's what happens. I don't know why there'd be an "or," what would be that circumstance. Dilkes/Yeah. I'm not sure where the "or" is in here. I'd have to--- Kanner/I thought I saw it them. Franklin/Typically, what happens is is it goes to the Board of Adjustment and then there is a Writ of Ceritioraro by an aggrieved party. Karmer/And why did you pick the numbers 10 percent for the utility installment and 35 percent for critical slopes? Where did that number come from? Can you tell me your thinking? Franklin/Yeah, it came from our history with it. I think that Bob explains the 35 percent or I thought he did in the memorandum. It was looking at some of the cases--oh, I know, it's in the minutes--some of the cases that we had and so based on that history of when those critical slopes, when the critical slopes hit that threshold that it was kind of like an averaging out. I can't tell you the exact numbers and the number of cases. I'd have to go back and ask Bob that. But he went back and he looked at all the cases that we had already done and when critical slopes were an issue and when they weren't. And I'm This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 11 assuming he did the same thing with the wetlands. That's when there's an installation of utilities. I could probably get you more on that, talking to him. Kanner/I'm not following what you mean by--- Franklin/ Well, going back and looking at the cases that we had since we had the Sensitive Areas Ordinance in place since 1996 and looking at those that had critical slopes and when it was, there was an issue of how much was being disturbed that warranted discussion either of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council. While Hickory Heights, Hickory Hill, Hickory--that one up there. Lehman/Hickory Heights. Franklin/Hickory Heights. The First Avenue one where we did an awful lot of work with the applicant on the slopes that were being disturbed and looking at those that were particularly--I don't want to say "controversial," because that's much too weighted--but those that got a lot of consideration because of the percentage of the slopes that was being affected, gaud so 50 percent was too high and 20 percent was too low, so you have to land on a number and that was one that made sense in the context of those other cases. Kanner/But, I'll bring this up more, I guess, when we vote on it, but it seems that's the whole crux of the argument of why it should come to Council because you're saying warranted discussion and who gets to--- Franklin/ Right, that's--- Kanner/...be part of that discussion and when the higher you make it with the numbers--- Franklin/Right. Kanner/...the less chance there is for the public--- Franklin/No, it's--- Kanner/...to have access to that discussion. It makes it a bit harder. Franklin/But, it's 35 percent or more comes to the Planning and Zoning and Council--- Kanner/Right. Franklin/...for rezoning process. Kanner/Right. But the discussion you're talking about, warranted discussion, I'm not quite sure who it is, and I'm saying if you lower that number, that would mean--- Franklin/That's a judgment call. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 12 Karmer/Right. It's sort of a judgment call. Franklin/I mean, there's nothing magic about that number except that it is in the context of past cases that we have had. Kanner/And, Ernie, these other things I think are relevant to the discussion tonight, some things that maybe Dee and Irvin brought up, in the sense that I think this ordinance will be more palatable to people in the community as evidenced by perhaps the letter from the environmental advocates and discussion in the Planning and Zoning, if some of these other things were added, perhaps. And I would propose at a minimum, we, if we're going to pass this, we pass a good neighbor, a mandatory good neighbor policy, because that will get the word out along with signs, mandatory signs, for things that don't go for rezoning. And, at least then, people would have greater knowledge of what's going on and then could contact staff on these issues. Lehman/I don't disagree with that except if they meet the technical requirements of the ordinance, it is, staff doesn't have any choice, they have to approve it. Whether the neighbors like it, we like it, the staff likes it, it doesn't make any difference, if it meets the technical requirements, it must be approved. Vanderhoef/And that's why we had the lawsuit--- Lehman/Right. Vanderhoef/...because it met the technical requirements and it wasn't a popular thing but we had no choice. Lehman/No. And inviting people to comment on something over which they have, legally, no influence whatsoever, as long as it meets the technical requirements, I'm not sure is good policy. Kanner/Well, we've heard that kind of iffy, of slopes in trying to say what is the percentage of slopes; we have a letter again from environmental advocates that talks about how do you define what the wetlands are exactly, and so I think, in general, it's just healthy to have that policy and it's healthy to have that discussion. Vanderhoef/Wetlands, that is straight-out Corps of Engineers. They set it and we have to go by what they, we have no choices. Pfab/We had choices, though we made decisions. Vanderhoef/No. Lehman/No. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 13 Vanderhoef/But they, the jurisdictional wetlands are defined by the Corps of Engineers. And we used the same standard then that they have. So if we disturb them, then we have to replace them, if they qualify with the definition of a jurisdictional wetland by the Corps of Engineers. Pfab/So, as I am trying to process this thing, it looks to me like this 35 number is kind of a flip of the coin. Franklin/Well, I wouldn't put it quite as arbitrarily as that. Pfab/Not quite that, but it's getting kind of close to that though. And then I think in that case, we, if anything, we ought to err on the small side rather than the large size. And, it, because that's what takes away the right to make things come out the way it's best for everyone concerned, for the neighbors, the City, and whatnot. So, I guess maybe the devil's in the details here, as we found out in Harlocke-Weeber. So maybe we better start looking a lot more at the details and while we're doing all this other stuff around, I think that 35 percent number is pretty dam high. Lehman/Well, we'll have--the public hearing's tomorrow night. We can hear what the public has to say, and I suspect it's going to be the following meeting when we have first consideration. Kanner/Just want to clarify something--the Wetlands Ordinances aren't, the wetlands definitions are not written in stone. The Corps of Engineers sort of is a fluid thing, and--- Franklin/You can be more restrictive if you wish. You already had that discussion. Kanner/The people call the Corps of Engineers and try to lobby them and try to talk with them and say maybe there's a different definition. It's not a written-in-stone thing. Vanderhoef/It is according to our ordinance. Franklin/No, I don't think it's quite as negotiable as you're--- Kanner/No, no, but I'm saying that they try to be objective in their thing, but I think in the political process, we've had people that call them as well as call us and try to say that maybe you're off a little bit in your definition of what a wetlands is. And--- Dilkes/The definition doesn't change, as I understand it, somebody with expertise in determining whether you've got a wetland or not, takes the definition, applies it to the land to determine whether the wetland exists. Franklin/There probably could be debate about whether all the characteristics are there or how extensive it is and exactly what it's boundaries are. But I don't think--- Kanner/That's what I'm saying. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 14 Franklin/OK. Kanner/That those things are, they're human interaction--- Franklin/Subject to debate. Kanner/...and debate. Pfab/And it's a human interaction debate that got the 35 percent. Lehman/Well, we'll hear it tomorrow night from the public--° Franklin/That is your choice. Lehman/...and we'll talk about it in two weeks. Franklin/Absolutely. Lehman/OK. f. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONING," ARTICLE U, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT," SECTION 7 ENTITLED "VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES" TO INCREASE THE MUNICIPAL INFRACTION CIVIL FINES FOR VIOLATING TItE ZONING CODE. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Item f is second consideration on--wait, didn't we--what did we just do tonight? (Laughter by several) Lehman/We just did first tonight. Franklin/Oh, OK. Yeah. Lehman/Tomorrow night it's second and they would also like us to expedite that if we see fit. Franklin/Yeah. Pfab/That's item 1??. Franklin/That's the fees for zoning violation. Lehman/There by the f group recommendation. g. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE THE NORTHERN TWO FEET OF This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 15 BENTON STREET BEGINNING 60 FEET EAST OF GILBERT STREET AND ENDING AT MAIDEN LANE. (VAC02-0005) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Item g is pass and adopt on the vacation of the two feet of Benton Street for Kathleen Steve. h. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF WHISPERING MEADOWS PART 3, IOWA CITY, IOWA (SUB02-00019) Franklin/Item h is a resolution approving the final plat of Whispering Meadows Part 3. This is a resubdivision of part 2 to enable the developer to proceed with a part of the project without paying escrow on the remainder of it, and so, you have to pay escrow on whatever you have final platted, and this is a way to avoid that. Champion/Will you tell me that again, Karin? I'm sorry but--- Franklin/OK. Part 2 is a large portion of southerly part of Whispering Meadows. Champion/Right. Franklin/The developer would like to proceed with one of the cul-de-sacs in Whispering Meadows to the south along Whispering Meadows Drive. There is another portion of the plat immediately west of it which he does not want to build at this time. However, if he leaves it all together, he has to pay escrow for the public improvements for that portion of the west. To avoid that, he is splitting that off as a separate final plat. Champion/All right. I understand. Lehman/OK. Vanderhoef/And it was a really big project so 30 and 30 and 40, whatever it is. That's a reasonable sized subdivision anyway. Franklin/Right. i. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXTRATERRITORIAL PRELIMINARY PLAT OF KENNEDY SUBDIVISION, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. (SUB02-00020) Franklin/Item i is considering a resolution approving the extraterritorial preliminary plat of Kennedy Subdivision. This is located outside of Iowa City's limits of fringe area C on Dane Road, just south of the most recent subdivision that you did in the county there. This had been approved previously; it was a preliminary plat that expired; they're just doing the same thing over again. It's nothing big. O'Donnell/OK. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 16 Lehman/Thank you. Franklin/You're welcome. AGENDA ITEMS Lehman/OK. Agenda items. 4. f. CORRESPONDENCE (3) DARYL WOODSON (THE SANCTUARY): LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS Karmer/We got a letter from Woody from the Sanctuary in regards to liquor license renewals and asks for the City Council to request the ABD to get those a little sooner to us so that he can do his part with a little less time pressure. Is it possible to get it, that they can send it to us earlier, the ABD. Karr/Well, I think that there's a number of issues there. Certainly, the Council can make, direct staff to make the request. Again, the State ABD does it statewide by month. So you would be asking them to either move up just Iowa City's portion or consider moving up all their process a little bit. And certainly that request can be made. The other thing is that the delay that Darrell refers to is in the DCI report. That DCI report can be requested way ahead of getting renewal papers from ABD. That request can be made at any time 30 days before filing it. So that form could be picked up; it could be sent to DCI and that report back so when he got his renewal papers, he could put them together and then get the signatures. And he is now aware of that procedure as well. Lehman/He knows that now? Kart/Yes. Lehman/OK. Vanderhoef/Is that something that is common knowledge to all the bars? Karr/Yes, there's many of them doing it now. Vanderhoef/So it's becoming--- Karr/Again, we will be coming to you possibly with some other suggestions on that procedure in the near future. I think many of them wait for the whole package--- Champion/Too late. Karr/...and by waiting for the package, DCI becomes a stumbling block, not ABD. It would still be, even if it came early, ifABD gave it to them earlier, it still could be a delay This represents only a reasonably accurate n'anscription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 17 depending on the Council schedule, holidays in particular, summer schedule. It still wouldn't make any difference potentially to applicants if you waited to get those papers. I think the procedure just is much more time-consuming, and this is the first year. We just finished the first year of it, and I think once people are used to it, they may be requesting that earlier. Certainly, we can make the request of ABD, but again, I just don't know how, because it is statewide and they do do it by month. Pfab/Marian--- Vanderhoef/Is that the only notice they get, so they wait for the quote "reminder" when the whole packet comes? Kan'/The packet--just to clarify--the reminder is their license is due at the same time every year, so they no longer get a reminder. They get the renewal papers. So, once they wait to get the renewal papers, and then they process the DCI report. There is no reminder prior to getting the ABD papers, which is what Darrell is suggesting. If they came earlier, there wouldn't be a need for a reminder. Pfab/Marian, is this the same DCI report that taxi people--- Karr/It's the same DCI report that taxi people--- Pfab/And apparently, there is a very short way to mm that thing around if you (can't hear). Karr/It is the same procedure for taxi as it is liquor. It's just a matter of whether you want to pay the extra fee to have it faxed or whether you send it by mail and wait for the return mail. Lehman/OK. Other agenda items? 4. d. SETTING HEARINGS. (1) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR DECEMBER 10 TO AMEND THE SECTION 8 ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN FOR IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY SECTION 8 PROGRAM. Kanner/We're going to be setting a public hearing for Section 8 Administration plan. Can you give a brief overview of what one of those things are? Atkins/To my knowledge, it's a reaffirmation of the plan we have in place, that we've used for years. Steve, I'll confirm that for you tomorrow, if that's OK. Kanner/OK. I thought I read somewhere there would be a few--- Atkins/Minor changes, yeah. Usually the side that has some rule change or some regulation change that we have to adopt to it that (can't hear) within our plan. But I'll confirm that for you tomorrow. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002_ November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 18 Kanner/OK. You'll get us some pertinent information. Atkins/Yes. Yes. Lehman/This is required by HUD, right? Atkins/Yes, it is. Yeah. Kanner/But there's a few new things. Atkins/A couple of new wrinkles and I'll get those identified for you. Lehman/Any other Agenda items? APPOINTMENTS Lehman/OK. Council appointments. We've got several. 13. a. ANIMAL CARE AND ADOPTION CENTER ADVISORY BOARD Lehman/Animal care, we have two applications and one vacancy. Do we have a recommendation, nomination, or condemnation? Vanderhoef/Looks like we've got two good applicants but we have one person who has served just one three-year term and I think we should reappoint them. Champion/We should reappoint them. O'Donnell/It's a good idea. Lehman/Are we in agreement to reappoint Tammara? Pfab/Fine with me. O'Donnell/Mm-hmm. Wilburn/Yeah. 13. b. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Lehman/Board of Adjustment. Champion/Two applicants. Kam~er/Appeals we had two. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 19 O'Donnell/We didn't have any for Board of Adjustment. 13. c. BOARD OF APPEALS Lehman/OK. Board of Appeals. O'Donnell/Roffman and Haman reapplied and they're great on there, and they both--- Lehman/Are they, we need two appointments and they have two applicants. Vanderhoef/And they fill the (can't hear) positions. Wilburn/Yeah. Vanderhoef/And they've been there before. Lehman/Is that--- Pfab/Fine with me. Lehman/Everybody OK with that? Champion/Mm-hmm. 13. d. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Lehman/OK. Human Rights Commission. We've got several, one of whom has removed their name. Wilburn/Henningson, something like that? Vanderhoef/Yeah. Wilburn/I'll (can't hear) lot of good experiences and that counts here. I'll draw out the names. Billie Townsend, a person with community work and works with some youth agencies that I know. Sure for his work with Stanley Foundation, I think it was some international experience. And Alice Mathis, she's the director of Student Affairs, just to get the discussion going, I'll throw out those three. Champion/Well, I certainly would support Billie along with you. I think he would be excellent, and I would totally support him. Lehman/All right. Are we in consensus for Billie? Vanderhoef/Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 20 Lehman/OK. Billie is--- Pfab/We have three others? Lehman/All we need Champion/I do think that Nick Klenske has just served one term, and it's kind of been our practice, I think, it's like third (can't hear). He filled a vacancy right? Vanderhoef/So, it's been less than a year, so I think he should be reappointed. Champion/I kind of feel that he should be reappointed too. What do other people feel, Em/e? Lehman/I have no strong feeling. O'Dormell/No problem with it. Vanderhoef/Does anyone know Kathryn Gerken? She's been on the Iowa City Community School District Affirmative Action--then what do they call it? Champion/They don't have an Affirmative Action. Kanner/Equity Committee. Lehman/Equity Committee. Vanderhoef/Equity Committee, that's it, thank you. I don't know her and I don't know Alice, either one. Both of them look very good and even Gary Klein with his training, which is one of the things that that Commission keeps looking at in doing more training, and has some experience at what. And I do not know these people so I can't make a recommendation specifically one over the other. Champion/I also liked Forrest Friedow, but I'm not hung up on that. I mean, I think there are a lot of good applicants there. Vanderhoef/There are. Pfab/Yeah. Vanderhoef/This one is the tough one. I think we'd be OK with--- Champion/ Who was the other person that you were talking about, Ross, when you had--- Lehman/David Shorr. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 21 Wilburn/David Short. He's in with the Stanley Foundation. He's had international experience. Pfab/Yes, I would certainly recommend him. O'Donnell/Have we decided already on Townsend and Klenske? Lehman/Townsend we have. Are there four people who would like to go with Nick Klenske, or do you want some more discussion? Pfab/So that would be the third one, right. Lehman/Well, we have one. Billie Townsend. Pfab/I'd like to go for the person on the Stanley Foundation, that gentleman, and then if we go there, I'm open to discussion on the other one. Lehman/All right. Shall we do David Shorr? Are there four people or five who would concur with Shorr? Vanderhoef/Yes. Lehman/All right, David Shorr is the second. Wilburn/I brought up Nick again. Lehman/And the other name we have--well, Nick and also Alice Mathis, those two names have been put out. What's your pleasure? Kam~er/I think I might lean toward Alice, but with Nick having been in there only for a few months, I think we probably owe it to him to give him another term. Vanderhoef/I do, too. Lehman/All right. Kanner/Continue that. O'Donnell/Nick Klenske. Lehman/We have enough. We do, Nick will be the third. Vanderhoef/Ask some of these people to apply for some of our promotions. Wilburn/Yeah. OK. Lehman/You know, it's a shame. It really is a shame that--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November ! 8, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 22 Vanderhoef/Yeah, they've got good qualifications and they want to be involved in the community, so--- Champion/ God, they were all really good applications. Wilbum/I'm sorry--who did we end up with? Lehman/Billie Townsend, David Shorr and Nick Klenske. 13. (e) PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Lehman/All right, the Parks and Recreation Commission. O'Donnell/Did we only have one reapply, was that Craig? Vanderhoef/Craig, mm-hmm. O'Donnell/OK, I like, you know, Craig is very good on there. So I'd like to nominate Craig along with Sarah Walz also. Champion/Yeah, I could support both of those. Wilburn/That's great. Karmer/I can vote for both of those? Lehman/Is everybody in consensus on Craig? All right. Vanderhoef/Craig is great. I think he should have a second term. O'Donnell/We just did that. Vanderhoef/And, Judith Klink, I was on the Commission with Judith back in the early nineties before she left town. She's a very knowledgeable person and has good ideas for the parks and the trails, so I was thinking in terms of her and then to balance out someone who has more leaning toward recreation programming and youth sports and involved in that way, Dave Fleener was the other person that I was looking at. Champion/I do a~:ee with Mike that Sarah--I really can support her without any trouble. I think her involvement with Hickory Hill Park is a positive thing. She's also familiar with volunteering, getting volunteers to do things, and as we get more and more park land, we may want somebody with that capability. Wilburn/What I was impressed to see--helped raised some funds for a couple of events they had out there--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 23 Champion/Exactly. Lehman/How many would concur with Sarah Walz? Sarah is number two. O'Donnell/I don't have any problem with Judith Klink. Wilburn/I certainly (can't hear) Lehman/Judith is in that Harlocke-Weeber neighborhood where we're hoping hopefully--- Atkins/Maybe next year. Lehman/...to get that park started across from Roosevelt. Vanderhoef/And it wouldn't be a bad idea to have another female on that Commission. Putting two on. Wilburn/Yeah. Lehman/How many, is Sarah, or Judy Klink--acceptable? Champion/I think we're only having, I don't--- O'Dormell/There were three. Lehman/There's three. Champion/There's three. Oh, I thought there was only two. Oh, yeah, then I wouldn't have argued with you at all. O'Dormell/Rex Pruess and Toni Cilek didn't reapply. Vanderhoef/We're not laughing. Champion/For some reason I had it in my head there were only two. 13. f. PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE Lehman/Public Art Advisory Committee. We had two vacancies and we have two applications, is that correct? Vanderhoef/The one gentleman has such a short history with the City. I'm feeling a little uncomfortable. I do not know this gentleman at all. So--- TAPE 02-88 SIDE 2 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 24 Vanderhoef/ Pfab/Sometimes a new face and a new idea is not all bad either. I just got off the phone with somebody about a half hour ago that brought some very interesting points and they just moved into the area. I had quite the lively discussion and I just couldn't believe what ideas that we had overlooked, looked at all the time and just, I'd have no problem with that. Lehman/I'd suggest we either appoint both of these folks or readvertise and--- Champion/I would appoint both of them. O'Dormell/Let's do. Lehman/Do we have agreement to appoint both of them? OK. 13. g. SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION Vanderhoef/Go ahead. Senior Center--both are reapplications for one term. I think we should reappoint them. O'Dormell/I agree. Lehman/So, Lori Benz and Charity Rowley. Vanderhoef/Yup. Lehman/Do we have concurrence on that? Wilburn/Mm-hmm. Vanderhoef/Yep, fine with me. Lehman/All right, guys, that was easier than I thought. COUNCIL TIME Lehman/Hey, Council time. Champion/Well, I just want to ask. Somebody called me today about Scott Boulevard and that they've seen deer over there and they just wondered why they don't have deer crossing signs over there. Lehman/Deer can't read. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November l 8, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 25 (Laughter) Lehman/Don't smile. Vanderhoef/Do we (can't hear) Atkins/You can put them out. Oh, yeah, I'm sure. Well, it's the time of the year. Vanderhoef/We're getting reports now one of the recent ones was that the deer reflectors really are not all that useful. They're not doing their job either so I'm wondering how much a deer sign can--- Pfab/What's the speed limit? Atkins/35. Lehman/35. O'DonneI1/25 and 35.25 on First--- Lehman/35 on Scott. O'Donnell/...and 35 on Scott. Atkins/I mean, we can put them up; I'm not so sure they accomplish a whole heck of a lot. Pfab/Well, maybe it's the drivers, too. Because it's, most of the time the deer and the car can make it at that speed, they can maneuver around about that speed, but 45 and 50--- Champion/Well, it's pretty open. You should be able to see the deer coming. Pfab/But at night they might, you just see their eyes. Champion/Oh, that's true. Lehman/OK. Wilbum/Sometimes the deer can pass pretty soon. Atkins/Under advisement. Kanner/I have a few things. Lehman/Go ahead, Steven. Kanner/I'm doing my annual tour of the City facilities and one of the places I was at last week This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 26 was at the fire station and ! was talking to Andy and he gave me the tour. And things are looking good up there. I asked him about regional effort, regionalization. And he says, from his point of view--and that's of course we approved the strategy that's (can't hear) and plarming. The fire department's talked about that and we talked about it, and he said if Council wants to move in that direction, he can make it happen. He could work on it. But he says if we want to do it, we have to be a little more forthright. And I wonder if we want to be a little more forthright and talk about this at the joint meeting. I think--and I think Andy said, concurred to a certain extent, that it's a matter of time before Coralville goes professional. But I think now perhaps in the next year is the time to start talking with them seriously about some of their agreements. We do have some aid agreements but I'm wondering if Council wants to be a little more assertive and see if we want to start having stafftalk about this, see if it's a possibility? Lehman/Is that the sort of thing that we should put on a work session? Atkins/I think you can, Emie. I think it's a great idea, but I really believe and I think Steven's hit the point. You need to tell the Coralville City Council how important it is to you, and we've got a couple opportunities. Champion/Well, can we write a letter? Atkins/Done that. Twice. I think, yeah, this joint session--- Wilburn/Talk to them and send them a (can't hear) joint session, I suppose? Atkins/Sure. I think Andy's right. We need to, excuse the term, light a little fire here and there--- Lehman/Oh. Dilkes/Just a friendly reminder that this is the, the purpose of this is to decide whether you want to talk about it later. So, just--- Lehman/Right. Do we want to put it on work session? I think we do. Pfab/I would suggest we do. 0'Dmmell/I think we should send a letter to Coralville and get a response before we do anything here--- Lehman/Talk about sending a letter, let's have a work session to discuss this sort of thing, and then we'll have (can't hear) Vanderhoef/(Can't hear) in the letter. Kanner/And maybe Andy can be here. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 27 Atkins/Sure, I'll arrange that. Champion/The other thing that really, when you bring that up, Steven, that really bothers me is that we have a dispatching police station, the County has one, Coralville has one, the University has one, I mean, what a waste of money. We've got about 100,000 people. Atkins/We've offered in the past to be centralized. Pfab/This diversification, the things we get hit with a big one, somebody will survive. Champion/It really does, I mean, it's such a--we're all paying dearly for something we could all do so easily together. Vanderhoef/Am I correct, Steve, that the last time that was discussed was when--- Dilkes/I'm sorry. But you know, if you want to talk about it, put it on a work session. Lehman/If you want it for a work session. Champion/Let's add that to the fire station. Atkins/Public safety issues at a ~vork session would be fine. Lehman/OK. Atkins/OK. You got it. Lehman/Other items? Kanner/There's a conference I went to last year I found helpful on transportation sponsored by a few different organizations, I was wondering if anyone--it was in our packet. Pfab/The one in Perry? Kanner/What? Pfab/Perry, Iowa, that's coming. Kanner/Yeah. I went to that last year. Pfab/I have a conflict. Karmer/Is anyone thinking of going? Vanderhoef/Say the dates on that one. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 28 Kanner/I think December 2nd through the 4th. Vanderhoef/(Can't hear) Karmer/I'd be interested in going again, if that's all right with the Council. Pfab/Fine with me. Vanderhoef/That's fine. Kanner/OK. Lehman/OK. IP9 MEMORANDUM FROM STEVEN NASBY~ COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR REGARDING REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF CDBG LOAN AGREEMENT--NEIGHBORItOOD CENTERS OF JOHNSON COUNTY Karmer/And then the final thing is, we had a memo from Steve Nasby on the Broadway, on the Neighborhood Center issue and the loan. I think he was essentially saying that it's a staff decision and so it would be up to us if we want to discuss it otherwise. Was I reading that correctly? Pfab/Say that again. I missed where you started from. Kanner/The Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County want to discuss different terms for CDBG grant. Part of it was a loan. Pfab/OK. Kanner/We got a memo in our packet from Steve Nasby, essentially saying that staff has traditionally done these kind of negotiations, so I'm assuming that he's saying that he's, the staff is going to handle it, unless we want to discuss it. Champion/You're talking about changing the (can't hear) Atkins/I thought we had a recommendation from HCDC. Vanderhoef/Well, there was a recommendation and that--- Atkins/That it had to be changed to $50,000. Vanderhoef/...that was why I questioned this because of--- Atkins/Who should do it--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 29 Vanderhoef/...staff took it back to HCDC for a recommendation, but the recommendation never came to us. So it's like either staff does it or we do a recommendation that comes on through the Council, and not have it both ways. Champion/I think what they're saying here is that it would represent a whole change of how we operate the process. Vanderhoef/It's all the way--- Kanneff Oh, you're saying Steve Nasby. Yeah, I think it should come to the Council, a recommendation, I think that's what you're implying that you want, think Council should look at it, too--- Vanderhoef/No, what I'm implying is that if staff needs a recommendation, the recommendation needs to come through HCDC and to Council. If staff doesn't want a recommendation, then they just go ahead and continue the policy as it has always been. But they do these contracts for the grants and loans. This one stopped in the middle of process; that's what I was concerned about. Lehman/Well, did this one--well, I guess I'm not quite following all of this. Pfab/I got lost on such a turn I think it was. Kanner/The question is should Council be involved in some level on this recommendation and/or final decision? That's the question if we want to discuss that further. That's what Steve Nasby was bringing to us. And I guess if we do nothing, it just goes with what was recommended essentially by HCDC, I think staff would take that recommendation and go with that. Atkins/That's correct, Steven. Pfab/Is he suggesting something else? Kanner/No, he's, 1 ~hink he's suggesting going with the HCDC recommendation, which we may well also agree with. But in some way I think it should come to Council for this change of term. It does affect the cash flow in theory. Vanderhoef/It didn't come to Council to start with on the loan. When we award money through HUD or CDBG monies, staff has always done the contract, and it would be a change of policy. So it was unusual, in my mind, for staff to ask for a recommendation from HCDC on the change of one of those contracts that staff had done it, to begin with. So, if they're going to ask for recommendations from HCDC, then it needs to come on through to Council. If staff is just going to continue to do these, fine, let staff continue to do them. But not to make a recommendation--HCDC makes recommendations to Council, not to staff. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 30 Champion/Right. Vanderhoef/So that's my concern because it appears that the policy change with this one particular request for change. Champion/Well, it's a pretty significant change, and it says in here that significant changes are required by City staff be reviewed by HCDC and approved by the City Council. Dilkes/It sounds like maybe you need to, if you want to discuss this further, put it on a work session. Atkins/I'm OK with that. Lehman/All right. Do it. Atkins/OK. Pfab/Got it. Lehman/All right. Anything else for Council time? 4. CORRESPONDENCE f. (4) DANIELLE WAGNER: REQUEST FOR PANEL PARTICIPATION Wilburn/There's a request in our packet from a Danielle Wagner, a sophomore journalism major, president or program director for their Society of Professional Journalists, asking for one of us to be on a panel that they're having about legal and ethical issues in communications. I was curious if anyone ever responded; if not, I was going to check it out further. If it's the format I'm thinking of, I might be interested in doing that. Pfab/What's the date on that? Wilburn/It's December 3rd, Tuesday, December 3rd. I was just asking if anyone had responded. If not, ! was going--- Vanderhoef/I responded no because I'm going to go to League of Cities. Lehman/You know, I've done it. Ross, you'd love it. It's fun. It's a lot of ftm. I've done it two or three times. Wilburn/I don't--something similar I saw on PBS was the Constitution of(can't hear) where they present, you know, a certain scenario and you kind of respond with your particular area, but--- Champion/You do a good job. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 31 Kanner/You know, I was going to call her also. Wilbum/Well, I'll get the information and I guess rather than just bring it back to Council, I'll give the information to you, too, and if both of us are interested and let them know that both of us are interested and then they can choose which one they want to, yeah. Lehman/OK. Karmer/OK. Vanderhoef/And just a heads-up, I told Ernie about it. After we set our schedules the other day, I have another meeting in Washington, D.C., that happens to be just prior to National League of Cities, so a heads-up that maybe that March or late February meeting might get changed for we set the budget. Lehman/And you'll let us know as soon as you find out. Vanderhoef/Well, I'm going to go to both of them so it's just a matter of your schedule and whether we set, whether we vote on budget the same night as the public hearing, or whether we set a special meeting just to vote on the budget, a couple of days or something after we do the public hearing. O'Donnell/I was going to bring up something then, too, because I may be going to Solon. Wilburn/Solon? Champion/Solon? (Laughter) Lehman/How long a meeting? Vanderhoef/Do you need a map? Champion/Do you need an airline ticket? Pfab/I have a couple of things here. Lehman/Yes. Pfab/Request for stop signs up on Rochester and Scott. Also, somebody mentioned the problems for pedestrians walking north along the east side of St. Mary's as you head toward Devotay, is that the name, on Lirm Street. The cars coming out of that there's almost no warning for a pedestrian and there's no stop signs there. This represents only a reasonably accurate tzanscription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 32 O'Donnell/What are you talking about--that low parking out there? Vanderhoef/On the ? Pfab/Yeah. Vanderhoef/Coming out of the alley? Pfab/Yeah. Vanderhoef/And Devotay? Pfab/Apparently the Devotay is, you're right there at the alley, there's no stop--- Vanderhoef/At the sidewalk. Pfab/Yeah. And for children, somebody moved into the area, said that concerned them. Vanderhoef/Well, see, we have that all over downtown. Pfab/But them is, and there is no stop sign there. I don't know if there should be or shouldn't be, that's a--and also over by the, on the north side of Hamburg Inn Nmnber 2, the same situation. Champion/They're all over downtown. Vanderhoef/I think this is something that--- Pfab/So I meanjust--- Vanderhoef/...send it to Jeff. But my thinking is Jeff always comes back and says stop signs are made to be rolled through and it might give false security to people. Because it would seem that we would need a stop sign at every alley exit if we started putting them up in a few. Atkins/Dale reminded me of the state law requires you to stop. Lehman/I was going to say, I believe it's a state law you have to stop coming out from an alley anyway. Vanderhoef/It is a state law but it's stilI, people just don't. Lehman/Just put up a sign that says state law. (Laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002.. November 18, 2002 Council Work Session Page 33 O'Dormell/Stop, Ernie. Lehman/Ordinance 962 days. Champion/(Can't hear) right-of-way Scott Boulevard and First Avenue, and they'll do traffic counts on those and see if they (can't hear) Lehman/Yep. Champion/A lot of people are driving on it now just to look at it. O'Donnell/It's been a long time--- Pfab/Several people said it's a case of where people are in kind of a hurry, either they want to get home or they're getting late for work so they come, sometimes they don't remember the exact speed limit as they're coming through there. (Several talk, laugh) Pfab/So, it makes it difficulty for some of these people, apparently there's some big utility poles so you might be streaking down toward you, you almost have to get out to the point where you get hit. Anyway, that was their comment. Lehman/Well, Steve, that is something we're going to have to keep an eye on. Atkins/Yes. Well, but we're, yes. Lehman/The lighting along Scott--there's so many folks that are going to be using that sidewalk, pedestrians or whatever, that they may have to look at streetlights. O'Donnell/That's a great help. Vanderhoef/I've had calls on streetlights. Lehman/OK. Anything else? All right. Atkins/Good night, all. Vanderhoef/Good night. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of November 18, 2002..