Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-17 TranscriptionNovember 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 1 November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session 6:30 P.M. Council Present: Bailey, Champion, Correia, Hayek, O'Donnell, Wright Council Absent: Wilburn Staff: Lombardo, Helling, Yapp, Briggs, Purdy, Davidson, Miklo, Fosse, Rackis, Howard, Hargadine, Jordan, Severson, Long, Boothroy, Dulek, Smith (Crystal) Others Present: UISG Representative, Swedlund Planning and Zoning Items: a) AMENDING TITLE 14, ZONING CODE, TO ESTABLISH A MINIMUM PARHING REQUIREMENT FOR HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS (CB-10) ZONE AND TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "HOUSEHOLD" TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNRELATED PERSONS ALLOWED TO RESIDE IN ONE DWELLING UNIT FROM FIVE (5) UNRELATED PERSONS TO THREE (3) UNRELATED PERSONS IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2), CENTRAL BUSINESS SERVICE (CB-2), CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB-5) AND CENTRAL BUSINESS (CB-10) ZONES. Bailey/ Okay, let's get started. Planning and Zoning. Davidson/ Good evening, Madame Mayor, Members of Council. Uh, we have one Planning and Zoning item this evening for discussion. And it is to make some amendments to the Central Business District zones, which are CB-2, CB-5, and CB-10, and uh, the Community Commercial, and I would just like real briefly to, uh, go through a couple of things, and then Bob and Karen will take you through some of the specifics of the changes that are being proposed. And I see we have up on the board a diagram showing those zones that I just highlighted. Um, the last couple of years we have seen a type of building evolve in this community that the zoning ordinance really never anticipated, that is to say in 79 and 80 when the, um, the areas that we're considering these amendments for were...were put into the City Code, we did not anticipate in the downtown area large-scale, high-rise residential style buildings, and we are now seeing those, and in the last couple of years, we have had some rezonings, uh, come to us, uh, well, obviously we had the Plaza Towers project, which we negotiated the specific development arrangement because that was an urban renewal parcel and there was some specific things being asked of the City. We negotiated an arrangement with the developer. We've also had, I believe Karen and uh, Christina highlight in their memorandum to you, three other rezonings, uh, in the area south of Burlington Street where there were requests made for rezoning from CB-5 to CB-10 to allow, uh, a larger building, larger scale building not allowed in the CB-5 zone, and again, we negotiated specific conditional zoning agreements to address concerns This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 2 about both parking and the type of unit being designed for these large-scale buildings, and at the time those were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, they indicated to us, `Hey, you know, you need...at some point we need to go back and take a look at the Central Business District zone,' um, and make permanent changes to it, if in fact we're going to keep seeing these type of buildings. That is to say, a building that is predominantly residential and not the kind of building we're used to seeing, which is a predominantly commercial building in the Central Business District. And so that's what basically we're doing this evening. Um, we have already made some changes to the, uh, that address these same points, having to do with the commercial spaces that are...are put into these large-scale residential buildings, and that is to say they are not afterthoughts in the building, that in fact the street floor, the ground floor commercial spaces are legitimate commercial spaces, and I think in the buildings that were recently constructed on south Gilbert Street we have seen an improvement, uh, compared to the buildings that were built, for example, at the corner of Dubuque and Burlington, or College and uh, Gilbert, uh, where the commercial spaces have not been successful, and in my own opinion, that's been because they have not been well designed in terms of being commercial spaces, and so I think we've made some improvements there. The, um, the two things that, as I said, we're going to address this evening, uh, are...are the, uh, what has become I think a proliferation of dormitory style, uh, large concentrations of young students in one place and the, um, some of the externalities that have resulted from that, as well as parking requirements for these buildings, uh, the current parking requirement in CB-10 zone is that, uh, a developer is...is not only required, but not allowed to provide parking, that the City will provide parking and that's been so that in terms of the provision of commercial parking downtown, the City has a system that it has control of and...and can, uh, make sure is a successful system. Um, as I mentioned, the large concentrations of...of students in what have been characterized as unsupervised dormitories, uh, the four and five-bedroom units have been a concern. Uh, the, uh, we believe the Comprehensive Plan calls for trying to, uh, have a range of, uh, people live in the downtown, not just students, uh, and have a place, or have our regulations encourage that, uh, we feel like, uh, restricting the...one way to get at some of these concerns is by restricting the number of, uh, unrelated people allowed to live in a single unit, restricting that from five to three, um, and that is what is proposed. And, you know, we can elaborate that on as much as you want. There have been concerns in particular since the large concentration of student housings been built on south Gilbert Street about the atmosphere in that area, the management of those buildings, the, uh, large number of police calls, and we did confirm with the Police that there are a very high number of police calls, one building had 36 calls for disturbance related activity, uh, in a ten-month period and Captain Johnson indicated that is a high number of calls. Uh, he felt...they certainly felt that the character of those buildings was a contributing factor. Are we sitting here saying that this proposed restriction is going to eliminate that - of course not. I think there are a lot of other issues, but we are trying to get at some of these things, through this suggestion. Um, the other thing then is the, uh, the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 3 parking requirement, and...and the fact that, uh, we feel, um, the existing parking policy is certainly encouraging housing that is constructed solely for students in that there is not as much sensitivity about having parking on site in a building that is intended solely for students. There is some sensitivity, but we don't feel as much as there is for...for example, the Plaza Towers building was just designed specifically for non-students, and the developer would be the first person to tell you that they had to have on-site parking, and then I think most of the...I have certainly never heard a developer, uh, contend that notion that you need to have, uh, parking on-site to offer to non-student type housing, whether that be apartments or owner-occupied, uh, condominiums. So, the two proposals then, uh, are to amend the definition of household for Central Business District zones, and the Community Commercial Zone, to reduce the number of unrelated persons allowed to reside within each dwelling unit from five to three, and this would eliminate the four and five-bedroom apartments, uh, for which in some buildings there have been a proliferation of, and then the second thing is to establish a minimum parking requirement in the Central Business District 10 zone for residential uses similar to what is required for the CB-5 zone, and for the time being, it is just a parking requirement that we're talking about, not the impact fee, which is also part of the area south of, uh, Burlington Street. There is the possibility that...that as part of an overall parking strategy we could consider an impact fee for downtown, but we are not proposing that at this time, just that there be a parking requirement. With that I'm going to turn it over to Bob and Karen to just go into a little bit more detail, and also, um, outline for you some of the concerns that have been expressed by property owners who would be impacted by these proposed changes. Howard/ Just a little bit more about the maximum residential occupancy. Um, as Jeff said, from five to three in the CB-10, CB-5, CB-2, and Community Commercial, CC-2 zones. These are our commercial zones. The idea here is that they're intended for commercial development, but the residential supports the commercial, but the idea is that...that you have a, uh, a good healthy commercial, um, base on the buildings. Uh, with these proposals, we of course have grandfathered in existing four and five-bedroom apartments. So anything that's been already built, um, with four and five-bedroom apartments in these zones would be grandfathered in. They have their rental permits. Those would continue. Um, we also, uh, intended to have a provision in here that would, um, basically apply the current maximum occupancy, uh, of five unrelated persons to any development for which there's a valid building permit or license issued, um, right now. Something that's in the pipeline -the Telluride Building right now. We checked with the Housing Inspection Services Department when we drafted this to see if there were any projects that were in the pipeline that had received a building permit, um, have started construction. The Telluride Building, um, on the old St. Pat's site was the only building that had...was under construction basically. They've, uh, got a foundation permit and have started, um, their foundation. So we wanted to not affect that current project. It's already gone through all the review processes, um, and so we've intended to put language in This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 4 here to allow that to continue, um, there was some glitch with the language, uh, Eleanor might be able to address that, but we intend to correct that. Dilkes/ Yeah...we, staff looked at the language today and there was a date of August 25th, I think, in the earlier draft. I'm more comfortable with this provision as written, because it dovetails into our moratorium ordinance, um, which says that, um, upon setting of a public hearing, on any, uh, zoning change or text amendment, um, no further development activity may occur, unless there has been substantial, uh, progress on that development activity. So in the examples that Karen talks about, for instance the Telluride Building, clearly has made that substantial progress and we could not, as a matter of law, um, I think, interfere with that building. Howard/ Moving on to the parking requirement, um, as Jeff stated, um, we have...Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending the same parking requirement as we have currently in the CB-5 zone. That is, one parking space for every efficiency, one-bedroom or two-bedroom apartment. And then two spaces for every three-bedroom apartment. Um, we do have allowance for historic buildings downtown. If you want to put...remodel and put apartments above, and it's an historic building, you can go for a special exception, um, to get an exemption from that parking requirement, um, there's also an allowance to find parking off-site. So if there's constraints on the property, you can't actually put the parking on the site, um, you can get, um, permission from the City to get permits in a City facility, um, since there's so many City facilities downtown, most of the properties are within 600 feet of a parking ramp. Um, could get credit, um, if there's spaces available in those ramps. Um, so there are some flexibility here with the parking requirements to allow development to occur downtown, but to also acknowledge that, uh, large residential properties do affect how much parking and affect the parking congestion downtown. Correia/ I have a quick question. As you were talking about the spaces per bedroom apartment. I recall talking with a student who lived in a building that had parking, you know, on the ground floor and then it was built up, but the tenant in that building weren't assigned parking spots based on they lived there. They had to purchase those spaces, and I don't know the percentage of tenants in the building that actually purchased those parking spaces, so I mean, I appreciate...I mean, I think we need to have spaces associated with apartments, but how do we know that the tenants that live in that building have...that live in that building actually have access to those spaces. Howard/ I guess we don't, but I think that the market is that if you have permanent residents living downtown, somebody that wants to purchase a condominium, live down there permanently, they're desire to purchase a condo maybe contingent on them having (coughing, unable to hear) so the market will tend to, the developer will tend to want to provide parking space for those particular tenants. Like we said, there's a tendency for students because they're only there on temporary This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 5 basis, they maybe more tolerant of putting up with not having a parking space for a limited amount of time. Correia/ (mumbled) any more tolerant, but feel like they don't really have any ability to... Howard/ They don't have the market clout. Correia/ Right, right! Exactly. Davidson/ I've...downtown, uh, apartment building where...a substantially sized building in the near southside actually has indicated to me, I mean, he has the parking, uh, on the ground floor of his building, uh, to help him lease the apartments, but it is an optional expense and the ones when he has spaces that are, um, that basically if he has spaces left over after all his leases are filled, uh, he attempts to set up other arrangements for those to, uh, fully utilize the parking. Correia/ But they're set up so that...that tenants are required to lease those spaces. Davidson/ No, they are not required to. They're given the option to. Correia/ No, no, no, but in order for them to have a space, they have to lease, they have to pay extra for it. Davidson/ Yes. Correia/ Well, I mean, I lived in an apartment when I was in college on Van Buren Street. There was a parking lot. You got to park there. I mean.. . Davidson/ That's not the way in a lot of the buildings downtown. Bailey/ Not even on the northside, I mean, the parking...people will hunt, rather than pay for a space in a lot. It's really... Correia/ Well, if anyone, you're a student or you're, I mean, it costs...you know, it's not inexpensive to rent an apartment, and then to tack on the extra cost of a parking space if they're required to have parking for tenants in buildings so that we have less congestion... Champion/ ...required to have parking. Not required to have parking for tenants. Correia/ But that's the purpose, I mean, if we associate the parking requirement with the tenancy, so many people live there. They have to have spaces so that there's parking for the people that live there, and then...is there a way to say those spaces.. . This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 6 Davidson/ If there is a way to do that, I don't know, I guess we'd have to investigate that. It is not the way it is currently, Amy. The parking is optional for the person, I mean, at least in this once instance I'm thinking of, and I think it's fairly common, um, that there maybe other arrangements, but.. . Champion/ Parking is almost always charged for in rental units in most cities (mumbled). Correia/ Well, I guess... Champion/ ...not right downtown. It might be an asset for you to provide free parking (mumbled) students to live further away from downtown, but I know my kids all lived in apartments in San Francisco, and you rent another garage, so it's not just $400 or $500 a month. Correia/ ...we're trying to... Howard/ I guess...the parking, um, I mean, you can't run a commercial parking facility downtown. The City's the only one authorized to do that. Now, does...do people sell their parking? Yes, they sell it to people other than their building. Yes, that does occur. I don't know how you enforce that, um, is that allowed necessarily? By ordinance -probably not. But...(several talking)...I guess the more parking that you have, I guess the idea here is that if you...if there is parking congestion, the more residential buildings you get downtown, um, we have anticipated the amount of parking that is needed for the residential, versus the commercial. So we have anticipated that. This ordinance will tend to require more parking to be built, um, whether that gets to the people you're intending it to, at least more of it will get to those (mumbled). Champion/ Is that going to be a hassle for people who are not going to be able to provide parking? I can think of several places downtown where it'd be impossible (noise on mic)...parking. How's that going to be handled? Miklo/ There maybe some situations where it would prevent the redevelopment of a property. If it's a historic building, there is the possibility of applying for a special exception to have the parking waived. Uh, another possibility would be if there's a nearby City facility that has parking available, that the spaces could be leased in those...those spaces. But I think in some situations, um, there maybe properties downtown that wouldn't be able to redevelop and I guess the question is, in some of those cases, you may not want them to redevelop because of their historic nature or because of the current character, uh, of those blocks. Bailey/ But there is a...I mean, alternative to minimum parking requirements maybe approved by special exception. So, i£ ..if the property owner.. . Miklo/ They could seek it on a separate property, or a City property. I did want to point out that we did have a meeting last week with some of the downtown property This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 7 owners, and...and I believe you'll hear from them...those tomorrow...tomorrow night. Uh, there were two requests that they put out. One was that perhaps the implementation of this ordinance be delayed, until they can develop some properties that they've acquired in the downtown. The other request was that we look at number of spaces, or the ratio of spaces required for one-bedroom apartments. Um, right now the proposal is if you build aone-bedroom apartment you provide one parking space. If you build atwo-bedroom apartment, you provide one parking space, and if you buy, or build athree-bedroom apartment, you provide two parking spaces. So the, uh, the two- and three-bedrooms get a break, compared to the one-bedroom. Um, the thought was perhaps we should consider a ratio of a half a space per the one-bedroom and, or maybe .75 spaces per one-bedroom, which would lower the burden on...on the one-bedroom spaces. And of those two proposals, they put forward, we think that there maybe some merit to that second one, to adjusting the, uh, required parking spaces for one- bedrooms down slightly. LTh, we did run that by the Planning and Zoning Commission tonight, just an informal straw poll, and they said that they, uh, they would not have a grave concern...they wouldn't necessarily want this to have to go back to them, if you did make that sort of amendment. Hayek/ On the subject of historic buildings, um, what would...and let me use an example, uh, the space above Panchero's is, uh, I think empty, open. I think once upon a time it was an apartment. I think now it's storage. There are a lot of buildings downtown, some are, you know, 50 or 100 years old, uh, clearly don't have parking, um, if somebody were to spruce a building like that up and...and market it as a residential spot, would...would this be trigger? Would these requirements come into play? Miklo/ They would be, but the property owner would have the option to go to the Board of Adjustment to apply for a special exception for a building that's designated historic. So they could designate it as a....as a local or national historic building, and the, uh, Board of Adjustment would have the ability to waive that parking requirement. And those buildings, we suspect that in most cases you wouldn't get that many units, because of the small footprint of the building. LTh, so we don't feel that those would have a, uh, if all...if several of those converted to apartments on the upper floors, we don't feel that would have a negative effect, in terms of the supply, whereas if you took a, uh, a larger site, tore it down and built four and five-bedroom apartments, or even three-bedroom apartments, the number of units you would get would, uh, effect the ability of the City to provide those spaces. Bailey/ So historic buildings in this case have to be designated historic, locally or nationally. Okay. Howard/ ...two options. They could do the historic route, or they could get permits in a City facility (mumbled). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 8 Miklo/ Both of those would rely on, there would be action required by the Board of Adjustment, or the City, um, agreeing to allowing the spaces in the ramps to be used. Hayek/ So you, I mean, you wouldn't have a right to redevelop a property like that. You...it'd be, (both talking) you'd run the risk of not getting the special exception granted. Okay. Wright/ Related to that, Bob, what is the...what's our excess capacity in some of the parking ramps downtown, to be able to handle some of this overflow, should we have some more development? Davidson/ You know, that's a good question, Michael. The...the capacity of the ramps, because of the different parking functions that we try and include in the ramps, there's not a simple answer. For example, in terms of monthly permits, I believe there's no capacity at all in the system right now. Is there actual capacity, places to physically park cars in those ramps? Yes, there are. But for example we hold back...we want to have short-term parking available, so we hold back a certain number of spaces so that when somebody comes downtown they have, they don't have to wait for somebody to leave before they can go in and park there. So, there's that kind of fluidness and...and flexibility. When we've had to work out special parking arrangements, for example with the Gazette, uh, locating downtown. There, we had to...they had requirements for a certain number of parking spaces, uh, probably the highest demand ramp that we have is the one attached to Old Capitol Mall, uh, but yeah. We were able to, by looking at the whole system, move permits somewhere else, and free up those spaces to allow the Gazette to do what they were proposing to do, and...and basically clinch the deal for the...the developer. So we...we have that kind of flexibility, Michael, when you look at managing the entire parking system. O'Donnell/ Jeff, didn't we have a study a short time back where we were advised we needed so many more residential units? Davidson/ Yeah, that was based on new buildings, that had either come on-line recently, paid in to the parking impact fee fund, or were projected to come on-line in the next, I think, three to five years. O'Donnell/ Do you remember that figure? Davidson/ I remember...the parking was about a thousand spaces, and that's... O'Donnell/ ...the residential, um, how many more residential units they said we're going to need downtown? Or they recommended? Davidson/ Residential...oh, you mean the downtown market study, in terms of... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 9 O'Donnell/ Yeah, and I thought they were talking we needed an additiona12,000 units downtown, residential units. In the downtown area. Davidson/ I can't... O'Donnell/ Does anybody remember that? Davidson/ I can't recall that just exactly, certainly a focus of that study, Mike, was...is to, um, encourage an array of housing types downtown, and not just student housing and...and I think this does work to that goal. O'Donnell/ You know, I agree with reducing the dormitory living style downtown, but I think the parking...people that have already purchased buildings downtown with the intention of development are...are not going to be able to do that under the system, unless they do go to the Board of Adjustment. Um, as well as, I think there's some really good, um, properties downtown that have been developed that would not have been able to develop under this new system. Bailey/ But I think those two things are really linked, I mean, I think that they've pointed out the linkage that we can reduce the number of bedrooms, um, you know, unrelated occupants, but unless there's some level of parking provided, you're still not going to attract the diversity that you're trying to attract in types of households downtown, because there is that expectation that it, you know, a certain sort of lifestyle or whatever, that you would want a parking space relatively close, even if by living downtown you do tend to do most of, I mean, you do tend to sort of use and walk and those sorts of things, so there's a linkage. I don't know how we address it. I mean, the think the idea of reducing the requirement for one-bedroom apartments might be one way to try to get at this, and then the fact that we have facilities downtown and that's an option, at least I like that, as well. I mean, most of these facilities are within the distance that would allow their use, right, for the parking requirement. Howard/ One example is the Vogel House. Obviously that's on a very small site. They were able to get permits, I mean, they need parking for their tenants there. They...they had a market demand for parking. They were able to get permits in the City facility next door. So that's just... Davidson/ And that was in Tower Place, which we either have a real restricted number or not any monthly permits in there, otherwise, but again, we...we felt that to help that project along, and encourage it, that that was an appropriate use of the City's parking system. Bailey/ (person speaking from audience) No, tomorrow night, Mark. Thank you. Hayek/ But use...use that as an example, if...that was developed before we, before this concept was come up with. If you've got a structure that, uh, is the example I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 10 brought up, uh, or just because of the footprint of the building, really can't accommodate off-street parking, um, the only way around that is to, number one, get a special exception, which is by no means guaranteed, and number two, secure long-term parking at a City facility within, I think, 600 feet, and if we don't have the ability to tell an investor that they will be able to secure that kind of long-term parking, that's...seems to me we're running the risk of a chilling effect. Is there any way we can deal with this...the City ramp issue so that if we are unable to provide that kind of parking, uh, to meet the alternative option, that they have under this proposal, that they could...that would weigh into the exception and somehow help them get around this. Do you understand what I'm saying? Davidson/ Kinda. Hayek/ I mean, it's a...for, if you can't provide off-street parking, one of your options is to, uh, try to fill a portion of your need through a City ramp, right? But to do that you've got to get a special exception, and you have to find sufficient numbers of...of long-term lease spaces to do it, within 600 feet, and if we don't have that capacity, how they going to do that? Davidson/ Yeah, I think the notion, Matt, is that for alarge-scale building, we want them to provide parking on-site. Hayek/ Right. Davidson/ Because we don't have the capacity to absorb a hundred spaces, in our facilities, or we don't want to make use of our facilities in that respect. So for a large-scale building, we want to encourage it to be provided on-site, and there are large-scale buildings downtown built in the last 10 years that have parking provided on-site. Um, so we believe it's a realistic thing to do. It is, it adds an expense component to the project that the developer does not currently have, yes. Uh, the 600 feet is designed, we're pretty sure that with possibly one exception that pretty much anything in the CB-10 zone is within 600 feet, that's two blocks, within two blocks of a parking facility, um, so again, the notion there is to allow that to occur for asmaller-scale project where it would be deemed appropriate through the Board of Adjustment to have that happen. We're not trying to set this up so that there is no way for people to develop property downtown; we want property developed downtown. Hayek/ I agree, and you know, I share your concerns about lack of commercial space and the lack of residential space for non-students, but I'm worried about those smaller buildings. Uh, many of which I think are... are ripe for redevelopment and... and I think a lot of those buildings, because, you know, they look...they're loft style, the old Montgomery Ward building on the Ped Mall, a lot of those structures I think would actually be very attractive to non-students, um, but they have to be rebuilt and you have to go through this process. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 11 Davidson/ And that's a perfect example of a building that we know is not going to be able to provide parking on-site, and so hopefully what we're suggesting here, there would then be options for that to happen as a redevelopment project, with parking provided by the City. Hayek/ Right. Bailey/ Because it's a smaller scale, I mean, that we could absorb...we anticipate that we could absorb those smaller...(several talking)...absolutely. Davidson/ I encourage you to think about the, kind of the large philosophical question of, do you believe a predominantly residential scale redevelopment project should be required to provide parking? `Cause that's what we are suggesting as appropriate, and if you all don't believe that is appropriate, then what we're suggesting is not going to make sense. Champion/ I think it'd be nice, um, I just don't want to discourage the redevelopment of some of those older buildings. And when you look at some of them, there's no way you could provide parking. So if we don't have parking in the ramp, then they can't redevelop it? I mean, this is my concern, that... Correia/ Well I have a question. When you're talking about asmall-scale redevelopment, so ten units? Five units? O'Donnell/ Maybe there should be a number. Correia/ No, but I mean like a, so for instance, so... Champion/ How many units are in the Whiteway Building? Does anyone have an idea? Does anybody have any idea how many units are in the Whiteway Building? Davidson/ Hold up your hands. You can't participate. Bailey/ Karen's looking it up, but I'm sure that you could use your fingers. Davidson/ And I guess while Karen's doing that, we are aware that there are other properties downtown, for example what I still call the Dain-Bosworth Building, and I'm not sure exactly who's in there now, but that's another parcel. It is an underutilized parcel, in terms of... Correia/ Can you do addresses? I don't know what the Dain-Bosworth. Davidson/ That's at the corner of... Bailey/ Corner of Washington... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 12 Davidson/ ...of the alley on the Ped Mall, and the Ped Mall, um, where is it in near? (several talking) Correial Is that the Wells Fargo? Bailey/ The... Davidson/ Is it Wells Fargo now? Okay. Correia/ Okay, thank you. Davidson/ That's an example of a property that we would like to see redeveloped. It's not really what we would call for in a downtown building. It is a small enough parcel with poor access that it will not have parking provided on-site when that redevelops, and that would be a perfect candidate for a building to have its parking provided through the City system. If a large-scale residential building was built there. O'Donnell/ But still, Jeff, they have to go after an exception on that. Davidson/ They would have to go through the process to access the City's (both talking) system. Yes. Miklo/ Which gives the City and the developer some assurances that the parking's being provided. If they don't, if there is no requirement, then the City has no control, we don't know what's...where that parking is going, or if it's being handled. It's impacting the rest of the system, uh.. . Bailey/ Um, we're acting like the Board of Adjustment is a disconnected process, I mean, it is a judiciary process, but it's connected to our process and our objectives, and so it will come in with a staff recommendation. Wright/ The Board of Adjustment also has guidelines that, which...within which a project has to fall, and so, you know, they're going to know all the way down the line, if I do this, this, this and this, it shouldn't be an issue to get a special exception. It's not, it shouldn't be rocket science to be able to get (both talking). Bailey/ ...if it's... Wright/ ...and it's not discretionary. The Board of Adjustment is generally pretty cut and dried. Not always, but generally. Bailey/ But it is connected to our...our objectives as a community. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 13 O'Donnell/ It is connected, but I'm still saying that if you want to develop something, that you previously purchased, there's no guarantee that you can do that with this system, and that's...that was... Bailey/ ...guarantee in the credit markets right now. O'Donnell/ Well, but, yeah, you know, properties a little bit different. Correia/ I do think, I mean, I think we hear about parking all the time, as you know, whether it's a real or perceived issue in the downtown. I think having residential development in our downtown that doesn't make any accommodations for parking contributes people trying...people have cars anyway, don't have spots, they're shifting their cars around, trying to keep their cars here or whatever, and it's the other objective that we have, which is in our downtown market analysis is to create a more diverse residential, you know, residential.. . Wright/ Environment. Correia/ ...environment downtown, you know, when I was a student I didn't have a car, or maybe I didn't need a car, but as a 40-year-old I'm going to want a car, even if I live downtown, I'm not going to spend...so I wouldn't live somewhere where I didn't have the easy ability to lease a space. Um, I think.. . Champion/ That's going to be market driven. Because you're not going to rent a space downtown without available parking (mumbled). Correia/ Right, so in order to...if we want to encourage development, residential development, but you want it to be more than targeting a specific population of students, then we need to make, I think we need to make accommodations for residential parking. Wright/ Yeah, I agree with you, if we're, especially if we're trying to attract permanent residents downtown, accommodation for the permanent resident to permanently park needs to be made. Champion/ But nobody's going to build a building for permanent residents without putting some kind of parking in. Bailey/ Yeah, now they won't, if we pass this. Wright/ Right now we prohibit it. You have to get a...(several talking) Champion/ I mean, they're not going to build a $400,000 condominium without a parking place for whoever's going to buy that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 14 Correia/ I guess we're not creating an incentive or any kind of...or even a (mumbled) to...to create that development, if we allow no parking either. It's easy to do. We don't have this other hassle or whatever it is, then they won't...it's not happening. It's similar to...the market's not providing it then...and we want it, and it seems like it's wanted then what do we do to create the incentive, whether it's involuntary or mandatory incentive. I mean, I think that's, you know, (mumbled) given the option of having this mandatory incentive. If the market's not doing it, then .. . Howard/ I think that was the premise of the discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission, is right now the system incentivizes student apartments because there is not as much of a market demand for the parking for student apartments, so the student apartment developers are given an advantage basically, over developers that would otherwise have to...or need to provide the parking for the tenants that they want to attract. So, we've kind of tipped the market toward...toward incentivizing the student apartments. Hayek/ Isn't part of that tied to the fact that under the status quo we actually prohibit off- street parking within CB-10, unless it's by special exception. Um, I mean, that's, from my perspective, that's a big leap to go from prohibiting it to requiring it. Um, and...and maybe there's a way to structure it to...to dampen the impact, but have...(several talking) Howard/ It's not allowed, except by special exception, and the reason it's by special exception is because we want to, the City wants to control the conditions under which parking. We don't want surface parking lots. We don't want...we want to control how that parking is...is provided on-site. Miklo/ Where the driveways are located (mumbled) Howard/ You know, if it's on a pedestrian street, we don't want a driveway on it....so, if there's, if in other words we just allow parking, that means they can put it in anywhere they want it, without any consideration. So by putting it, allow it by special exception, that way the City has some control through the Board of Adjustment to...to determine how that parking is provided. Hayek/ To the extent the market, let's say look at the last five or ten years, to the extent the market has decided that, uh, residential development should have off-street parking, what has...the experience been in terms of getting a special exception to provide it? I know it's happened in some places. Howard/ Board of Adjustment's granted it every time. But through that process, they considered where the access was, whether it was from the alley. Davidson/ And what it was going to be used for. You know, short-term commercial parking, although there's even been exceptions made for that, uh, with the Bread This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 15 Garden property, there was an exception made for the grocery store property that allowed private, short-term commercial parking. But other than that, you know, that's been the thing we've mainly wanted. That's...that's kind of the City's bread and butter downtown, and so...but...but, for long-term residential parking, for example, we've generally allowed that. In fact, I think we've allowed it in every case. Bailey/ Further questions? I mean, we have ample opportunity to discuss this tomorrow night, and you will be here tomorrow night? (several talking) Miklo/ Um, one other thing that I wanted to mention. It does seem like you're concerns are around the parking, uh, one possibility is you could go ahead and, uh, make this two .questions. One regarding number of bedrooms, if you were, if there's a consensus or majority of Council that wants to regulate the number of bedrooms. You could do that, and then revisit the parking at a later point. Unless there's a majority that wants to... Bailey/ I see them as linked. I don't know, I mean, obviously our focus has been parking, but I think that just goes to how important we understand parking is. But... Howard/ There's one more questions that's likely to come up, and that's this question of, um, assessed value, and in our meeting with the developers downtown, they expressed the concern that if the City does this, the assessed value of properties downtown would go down. So we did make a call to the City Assessor and talked about how properties are assessed downtown, and he said properties are assessed downtown based on the current use of the property, um, the land does hold some value, but most of the value, if you look at the assessments, are in the building itself and what it's used for. They don't...they don't try to speculate on what could happen potentially in the future, um, and so there was some question about what the market value would do, but the assessed value shouldn't be affected necessarily by these changes. And that's really the question, is what creates more value downtown. That's the question for you, whether you, you know, want it shifted toward, uh, balance of apartments downtown and how that will affect the value of properties and the value of commercial property downtown over the long-term, um, that question of market value is different than the assessed value question. Bailey/ Any questions, comments, or things you want prepared for tomorrow night that come to mind? Bob did mention this, um, giving a break for one space per efficiency, one-bedroom, or space...is that something we want explored further? Wright/ ...to .75. Bailey/ ...75. O'Donnell/ I don't think that makes a big difference. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 16 Bailey/ I do. Wright/ I think it could, especially in a larger building. It can make quite a substantial difference. O'Donnell/ I don't think so. Davidson/ I mean, I think it could be seen as a way to encourage efficiency in one- bedroom units, if there's a lower parking requirement. Bailey/ We can talk about it tomorrow night. Correia/ ....there maybe folks,-non-traditional tenants that...in cone-bedroom or an efficiency that aren't going to have (mumbled). Older tenants, tenants with disabilities might not have a car. Wright/ Yeah, but also potentially free up spaces for atwo-bedroom...two-bedroom units in the same building. Miklo/ You had asked how many, uh, units were in the Whiteway Building, and according to our data it's 39 one-bedroom units. Champion/ So there's no way you could put 39 parking spaces under that building. Miklo/ No. In that case, they would, uh, could seek spaces in the, uh, the public, um, ramp across the street. Bailey/ So, it sounds like we...you said that we would have the ability to absorb something in that range, 39, 50, sort of parking requirements. Davidson/ (mumbled) parking structures if (mumbled) Bailey/ All right. Any other questions? I'm sure we'll discuss this further tomorrow night. Thank you. Champion/ Public hearing is tomorrow night, right? Bailey/ Yeah, the first public hearing and first consideration is tomorrow night. Okay, next item is Council Appointments. Council Appointments: Bailey/ Um, Aid to Agencies review, um, Human Services Aid to Agencies. We typically have appointed two Members to review funding applications from Health and Human Service agencies, and make funding recommendations to the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 17 Council. This was...last year, um, Connie and Mike Wright served with, um, Student Government representative. Do we have interest in...you all have interest in doing this again, or... Wright/ I'd be glad to do it again. Champion/ Well, I don't...I think I'd have a conflict of interest since I'm the Chairman for the Shelter House campaign. Bailey/ All right. So do we have another person who would be interested in doing this? You also have a (mumbled). Anybody going to be voting on this this year? (laughter) Matt or Mike, do you have interest in serving on this? Hayek/ Interest, but not the ability. I can't. Bailey/ Mr. O'Donnell? O'Donnell/ I wil1...I have to check the schedule (mumbled) Champion/ Ross would not have a conflict this year. Bailey/ Right, and I can check with him as well, if Mike will check his schedule. I'll try to reach Ross. Okay. Thank you. (several talking) In the spirit of our continuing relationships together. (laughter) Agenda items. Agenda Items: ITEM 7. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC", CHAPTER 4, ENTITLED "PARKING REGULATIONS", SECTION 9, ENTITLED "PARKING DURING SNOW EMERGENCIES", TO REQUIRE, UPON DECLARATION OF A SNOW EMERGENCY BY THE CITY MANAGER, ALTERNATE SIDE PARKING UPON CITY STREETS NOT CURRENTLY POSTED FOR SAME DURING THE DECLARED EMERGENCY. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Bailey/ Um, I just do want to point out that on Item 7, our very exciting snow emergency ordinance, there is a recommendation for expedited action, if somebody... Champion/ (mumbled) Bailey/ Oh, please. I hope not! (laughter) So, there's that. Um, do others have agenda items they wish to.. . Correia/ I have, um, Item 9, speed humps on...or... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 18 ITEM 9. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REMOVAL OF SPEED HUMPS ON FOURTH AVENUE AND A STREET BETWEEN COURT STREET AND THIRD AVENUE. Bailey/ Uh-huh. Correia/ Fourth Avenue, um, can you remind me of our, uh, thank you, John. Yapp/ No podium this time. Bailey/ Cozier approach. Yapp/ Much cozier. Bailey/ Next it'll be an easy chair. Correia/ So...so we send surveys to 16 households, if I can... Yapp/ Yes, I believe so. Correia/ And then 12 households return surveys, and 8 said to take it out. I know that we then go by the majority of the returned surveys. Yapp/ That's correct. Correia/ I guess I'm concerned about this street, because the issue that brought it to us, City High, has not gone away. Um, and certainly I can see that speeds have gone down because we have speed humps in that...over time with the speed humps being gone, I can see that the speeds would increase. Yapp/ I agree. Correia/ Um, and how much does it cost to put them in and then take them out? I mean, the first cost was when we put them in and about how much was, I mean, it's a small street... Yapp/ There's four speed humps, and they're about $1,500 each, so about $6,000. Correia/ I mean, it's not as much... Yapp/ Not nearly as much to take them out. They'll be milled out, um... Correia/ And the cost is just the materials, or that includes the labor? Yapp/ That includes the labor. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 19 Correia/ That includes the labor, okay. Wright/ And then we don't allow them to be, um, reconsidered for...three years? Correia/ That's a recommendation. Bailey/ That's a recommendation. Yapp/ Staff is recommending that they not be, not be reconsidered for at least three years, and that's really to avoid a yo-yo effect, where we're putting them in and taking them out every year. Correia/ And this is right at that corner where there's a student that was hit. It wasn't a person driving up that street, but I mean it's kind of in that area where there's a lot of traffic congestion, and we have 50% of the total households in support. Only 12 returned the survey, but 8 of the 16 said they want to take them out, which.. . Yapp/ That's correct. Correia/ 50% so it's (several talking) Bailey/ The way we're approaching in this though is all in compliance with how we have our traffic-calming program, so... Correia/ So does our policy have the surveys...specifypercentcge of returned surveys? Yapp/ It does not. Correia/ Okay. The percentage of.. . Yapp/ That's something that Council's talked about in the past, wanting a minimum. some kind of minimum response rate, but to date, you have not required that. Champion/ I hate to take those out and since, to me it's not an overwhelming majority to take `em out. But, I know that's part of the policy, but that's... Correia/ But the policy doesn't specify how we come up with the percentage that we (mumbled). Yapp/ The policy specifies that, uh, at least 60% of the respondents...must agree one way or the other for us to forward the, uh, the item to you... for consideration. Correial I just have a...I have a concern just because the issue hasn't gone away (mumbled) causing the speed to be high. It's an area that's problematic in terms of safety on that corner. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 20 Bailey/ I agree with you. I'm concerned, I mean, I was like `What are you thinking' but they live there, and it's in our policy, and the recommendation, um, for looking at at least three years, I tend to agree to avoid that yo-yo affect. Do we want to look at our traffic calming policy for...to address any of these issues? That would be my question, more broadly. O'Donnell/ We've been going to do that on several occasions. Champion/ Well, I, yeah, I still like the traffic calming policy, but don't we have the authority to do traffic calming on our own? Yapp/ Yes. Bailey/ So we could leave these...we could put these in in a year, if we notice problems. Dilkes/ I'd have to look at the po1...I mean, I think the idea of the policy right now is that it's driven by the people who live on the street. And so I think it would be...I think you legally could. It would probably be inconsistent to do that, with that policy. Correia/ Can we...can you bring that policy to us tomorrow? Yapp/ The...sure. Correia/ Because, I mean, I don't have it in front of me, in terms of the percentage that's in there is what triggers you bringing it to us doesn't trigger what decision we make on it. Yapp/ That's correct. Correia/ Okay. (several talking) Bailey/ That would be unusual, but we could certainly not accept what the neighborhood wants. Yapp/ Or you could request more information before making a decision. That would be appropriate. Champion/ ...make sure they really want those out of there. I just.. . Correia/ Because, I mean, I understand the premise of it having coming from the...the residents of the street, tenants, residents of the street, but this is also an area that is heavily trafficked with young people walking to school, as well, and so I mean I think there is a greater... Bailey/ So, John, you'll be here tomorrow night? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 21 Yapp/ Uh, either me or somebody on our staff. (several talking) I'm thinking of my schedule in my head. Dilkes/ I think you need to be prepared if you're going to open it up on the removal end to open it up to people outside the neighborhood on the putting in end. Bailey/ Which changes, which is a dramatic change to our policy. Dilkes/ I mean, I just think you need to think about that. Champion/ Right, that's a good point, Eleanor. Dilkes/ And that is a (several talking) Correia/ I haven't had anybody come to me. I'm just thinking about it, um... Dilkes/ I'm just suggesting that there's a flip side to that (mumbled) Hayek/We do need to be mindful that part of the appeal of this program is that local democracy is in action, and...and you sell it on the premise that you can vote to put it in and you can vote to take it out, and I do have concerns about the message that sends. Notwithstanding that, the real traffic concerns that we have there. Bailey/ Okay. Correia/ Can I just say something that Connie said in the campaign was just because somebody has an opinion doesn't mean (laughter). Bailey/ Well, we can decide the right answer tomorrow night. That's what those fun meetings are for. (laughter and several talking) Okay. Other agenda items? Wright/ I do have a question on Item 6, the taxicab inspection. LTh, I think it's a good idea. Is that going to be done by City staff, or is that going to be done by an independent garage and written, signed off upon? ITEM 6. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5, "BUSINESS AND LICENSE REGULATIONS," CHAPTER 2, "TAXICABS," IN SECTIONS 5-2-4, "VEHICLE INSPECTION REQUIRED," SUBSECTION A AND 1(A) OF THE CITY CODE TO CLARIFY CURRENT REQUIREMENTS, TO INCREASE SAFETY, AND TO REQUIRE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS. (FIRST CONSIDERATION Karr/ Okay. Actually...actuallythays just clearing up, cleaning up language, Michael. Right now it is done by City staff at the Equipment division. What this does is simply do two things - we had decided a year ago to go from semi-annual inspections to an annual, and there's one section of the Code that left semi-annual This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 22 in. So this is cleaning up that language, and simply making it consistent to present language, annual. Secondly, the Code, uh, required all vehicles for hire to have certain equipment, but in...later on in the section, we allow pedicabs and horse-drawn vehicles, and that equipment list wouldn't be appropriate to pedicabs and horse-drawn vehicles, so we're simply adding an exception. It was more of a clean up language than anything else. Wright/ Okay, thank you. Bailey/ Other agenda items? Well...go ahead. Correia/ Our correspondence from the Englert...how are we... ITEM 3. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. e) Correspondence. 9. Brenda Pearson: Englert Request for Funding_[12 letters of support included] Bailey/ Yeah, that's on my list. Um, do you have... Lombardo/Having reviewed it, I think, um, that it's consistent with, uh, the funding that we provide for Economic Development. We do set aside $200,000 a year, um, for that purpose, and I think on a perhaps three-year commitment and then work with them to provide or build in some metrics based on the outcomes we expect to see that it'd be an appropriate use of the funds, but I...I hesitate to say it should be open-ended. We should have some expectations for what's going to happen with that funding and what might be the result of supporting the Englert and we could work with them to come up with, uh, some metrics that would support that, or reflect on what it is that you wanted to see. Bailey/ So have the Englert board make a presentation to Economic Development, develop some accountability measures, and then bring those to Council for recommendations, as we would in any other kind of funding arrangement? (several responding) Champion/ I didn't know where we were going to get the money. Bailey/ Are we (several talking) because Michael didn't say anything (laughter) Lombardo/ It's a limited amount of money, and we have a lot of uses, but, you know, until we further develop our Economic Development program, I think for three- . year commitment, and it gives us a chance to work with Englert and see how that relationship is working out and then if we do decide to do anything else with Economic Development, then we have, uh, some ability to look at that in three years. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 23 Bailey/ So, um, okay. So we'll move in that direction, if everybody's in agreement. I think that would be.. . Wright/ I think it's terrific! I was thinking this in terms of the way we gave money to some of the other arts organizations in town, and just being, yeah, $50,000. Bailey/ Well, I tend to agree with Michael, I mean, I view the Englert as one of the sort of, well, it's... Wright/ It's a cornerstone. Bailey/ Yeah, it's a really important part of our downtown and the economic development and vitality of our downtown, so treating it as an Economic Development investment sends a good, I think from my perspective, sends a great message, and then also gives us some accountability measures, a little bit more than we have in community event funding. So... Lombardo/ I think too, you know, our assistance in terms of getting it refurbished, and I mean, we've been supportive in other ways through the years and... and so I think it is different than just a typical annual funding request from an organization. Bailey/ So we'll (several talking). Okay. Other agenda items? I have Item 11. I wanted to discuss this, um, Pepperwood (several talking) because, well, first I just have to say, I thought that we were going to send this to Economic Development Committee for renegotiating the TIF agreement and clarifying the design review process, but we had a discussion and that wasn't what was really understood, and so I have concerns about sending design review to Economic Development Committee, given that that's not what we.. . ITEM 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND DEVELOPER SOUTHGATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PEPPERWOOD MALL. Davidson/ No, it wouldn't be design review, Madame Mayor, it would be staff would bring, uh, a proposed, uh, project at Pepperwood to you for consideration on an ad hoc basis, and the Economic Development Committee would be the arbiter basically. Bailey/ Okay. What question did you have, Connie? Champion/ Well, I was going to ask whether we'd really gotten that review process going and how we're going to handle it. I guess it won't be a problem if they bring another, want another permit. (mumbled) ironed out before then. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 24 Davidson/ Yeah, remember, this is a five years remaining on this TIF agreement and we did indicate to the developer that this proposal applies to this TIF agreement and this TIF agreement only, um, staff tried to consider, you know, the range of possible things that you're going to have brought to you. Uh, it seemed like the scale of those were such, you know, for example something like the Slumberland agreement where, uh, franchise business had some requirements that they needed to have met in order to complete the deal, uh, staff felt was not consistent with the staff, or with the TIF agreement. You, of course, heard the developer's opinion, as well. Um, and it was decided by Council to, on an ad hoc basis, make a decision that staff at least continues to feel was inconsistent with the TIF agreement. What this would do is basically amend it such that you could continue to do that. Champion/ Well, of course, we can continue to do that anyway, but my problem with that is that then you get, it's already a confrontational issue, and why does it have to be confrontational? I mean, the developer doesn't like the way the staff handled it, uh, there were innuendos made about how the staff handled everything, because it becomes a confrontational situation, rather than how can we...do you know what I'm saying? Correia/ Well, and that's...I guess when I saw this, I mean, I thought it made sense, I mean, the thing...the thing that...when we were considering the Slumberland, is...is for me, I wasn't on the Council when we entered into the TIF agreement, but for me was we want this to be a revitalized area. We have a major franchise here, you know, they have these requirements. It didn't seem...it seemed that that is going to continue, create draw to the area, that met our require...the reason that we entered into the TIF agreement was to do that. They were creating more space for the showroom. We don't have any retail, big retail, furniture in that area. I mean, we talked about the lack of retail in various parts of Iowa City, so it seems to me that...that that met those goals, those economic development goals, which seems like it makes sense to me to have that then (mumbled) Economic Development Committee. Bailey/ Right, but technically from what I saw is, I mean, technically it didn't meet the TIF agreement, so what I assumed that we would do is change the TIF agreement so we would have more flexibility to meet broader economic development goals, because there's not really a lot in this TIF agreement, um, and...and so instead of a case-by-case sort of thing, um, being able to do this on a staff level, which I think is a little bit more expeditious, than taking it through a committee every time there's a change over there, and that's another concern I have is we often hear that it takes so long to get business done around here, and sending it through committee, even though I think it's a very flexible committee for meeting, um, does...it would be a delay, versus being able to go and have staff...some clarity for staff and having staff sign off on something. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 25 Davidson/ We did outline the timing parameters... Bailey/ I saw that. Davidson/ ...that you're going through, with the developer. The developer indicated that in particular, because it was the Economic Development Committee and as you say, it's pretty streamlined group, that that was acceptable from their end. Bailey/ Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thanks. Um, any other agenda items? Want to jump right in to flood or do we need a break? Okay, let's jump in! Flood mitigation. Flood Mitigation (IP2 of 11/13 Info Packet): Lombardo/ So in your packets you have, um, a series of memos addressing, kind of updating on flood related issues and flood mitigation strategies. Uh, I'll only comment, um, that our strategy thus far has been to take very measured steps, uh, to developing these plans, based on what we saw as level of funding, and um, I think few would argue that that process for discovery is...is being protracted, uh, we don't know how much more funding will be coming this way, and we won't know until probably early December, uh, what additional resources will be heading this way for flood mitigation, and our ability to access that, perhaps several months later, and so I think there's a, both an internal and external kind of, uh, pressure or awareness that...that, uh, we need to move forward in some way, uh, and I think some of the questions and dialog tonight is going to be centered around getting your, uh, expressions of interest for moving forward in that regard. Steve Long I know has an update, um, on some information and meetings that has taken place since the packet was put together, and so we'll start off with, uh, that update and then we'll lead into Jeff and Rick, and uh, their memo and some of the questions that they have, before you. Long/ Hello. First of all I just want to introduce you to David Purdy. David was hired as one of the flood recovery specialists, we don't have an official title yet (laughter). Flood recovery. Um, he'll be helping primarily with the buyout process, and the other person...turn that on...uh, Nasseem Moradi will be helping, has been helping primarily with, uh, the Jumpstart programs. So if you have any questions about buyout, please everyone, call Dave from now on. (laughter) No! Just to give you a little update where we're at. We...as you know we received about $680,000 in Jumpstart funds initially, and that was for interim mortgage, downpayment assistance, and rehabilitation of...of, or to get homes back in place. We received 126 applications, ranked them, and set up a, used our similar C...our CDBG, our Community Development Block Grant funded rehab program that we've been operating for about 30 years, used those weighted priorities to help rank the applications, and then once we did that we brought in the first round of 13 households that reached the top of that application pool, and been working with those households to verify, uh, the information on the application. We've This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 26 offered assistance to 10 households for about $429,000, and today we called three more households in, and we're meeting with them this week to kind of start the process, so we should be able to commit about another $180,000. The...the...the stickler of the program has been the State's CDBG funds. We've received about, well, we were allocated about $1.2 million. We haven't received the funds yet. We...these funds are for people, or households making below 100% of the median income, and are the same three categories, um, so what we've been doing is using the same Jumpstart list and when you combine the CDBG - we have about 130 applicants for both funds right now. And there are some distinct differences between the two programs, and I just highlighted, we have a little chart here with the two programs and there's a lot of yellow on each page, and yellow is the...yellow highlighted areas were the differences between the State program and the federal program. So as much as...the Governor's office has been saying it's a seamless process, um, it hasn't been very seamless. And we've had, to say that we've been frustrated with the Department of Economic Development I think would be an understatement, um, but we're working on that. We brought in, uh, well, representatives from the Department of Economic Development, including the Deputy Director and two other people came and met with us, uh, last Friday, and we had the help of...of Mayor and Senator Dworsky, and Representative Jacoby, along with Senator Bolkum to work with us to try to, um, clear up some of the issues that we're having with the State, and I should also add that someone from the City of Waterloo came down and joined us for that meeting, and we've talked to the cities of Cedar Rapids and Cedar Falls, and everyone shares the same frustrations, so I can go into some of that frustrations. I won't get too detailed, but um, one example is they have a maximum of $60,000 per household, which matches the first program, but if...when, if you put one penny into a home to rebuild, you have to bring the entire home up to code. Now we don't, we agree that's...that's, you know, that's something we all strive for. Let's say you just had sewer backup, and your basement was damaged and you need a furnace replacement. Well, that meant that we had to go in and fix the front stoop. We have to fix the roof. We have to fix every window that's damaged. So a...a $10,000 project could turn into a $50,000 project, um, a better example maybe if you had $100,000 in damage, which is not unusual with a flood, uh, the average damage by street was anywhere from $78,000 to $148,000 per house, and we had this $60,000 max funding. We had to, because we cannot do what we did with the State, or the Jumpstart funds, where we went in and just did the basic systems, the electrical, plumbing, furnace, windows, doors. Now we have to, before we can sign a contract with the homeowner, we take the $60,000 that's available, it's $100,000 in damage -that homeowner has to come up with $40,000 up front, and a lot of homeowners lost most of their equity in their homes, so it's not like you can go out and get a second mortgage. So these are... Correia/ The State requires it...to be 100% secured before their funding is released, to get started? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 27 Long/ Yes. Uh-huh. We can't...the theory...and the State...their, the State is dealing with the entire state of Iowa. And when I say the State, I mean the Department of Economic Development. So most communities did not receive the amount of damage that Iowa City received in dollars, uh, per unit. Elkader, Oakville, um, some of those communities where homes are worth a lot less. The value of the damage was much less. So and I...they're also not used to dealing with communities with building inspections. It's called an "entitlement community," um, of which there's ten in the state. They're used to dealing with much smaller communities without the staff and the resources that entitlement communities have. So, we've been ready to go for weeks because we've been doing this kind of stuff for 30 years, and we're not able to spend the money yet because the rest of the state's catching up, or the DED hasn't formally laid all their rules yet. Um, but we're working on that, and I believe Regenia's going to be sending a letter to the Governor... Bailey/ Reflecting these thoughts, I'm going to send a letter, um, to the Governor on behalf of the City of Iowa City, asking for exception to some of the decisions of the DED, I mean, that's what we asked for on Friday. I hope that Tim Waddell carried that message to the Governor, but just to be clear, we're going to send this, as well as to our local representatives. So...that should go out this week. Correia/ Could we get a waiver (mumbled) Bailey/ Well, part of the challenge is, I mean, there's this terminology about, and you'll have to tell me what the...emergencyrehabflitation versus, I mean, that's what we're trying to do here, and the State is requiring us to do, or thinking that we should be doing something else. Lombardo/ For example, HUD allows for, under emergency provisions, that um, we...we don't have to do full, um, lead paint abatement. Um, they require under the State's guidance they're suggesting that we have to do full lead paint abatement. The houses are largely gutted inside, so this would mean on the exterior and up to the eaves, and...we would have to, and have a licensed contractor come in. There are very few licensed contractors available. We're adding not only a $10,000 to $15,000 cost per house, but who knows, three to six to nine months of wait time, um, we don't...we think the provisions are there under...under HUD to allow us to waive that requirement, because I think we can argue that this is an emergency, um, but... Hayek/ Is it a matter of interpretation that's, uh, at some identifiable person's discretion? Is it a legislative change? Long/ No, we've talked to the representatives at HUD, at the regional office in Omaha, and they concur with our findings, but it's up to the State to set the parameters of their own program. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 28 Bailey/ The concern, or...what I heard on Friday and perhaps you heard the same thing or something different is as he indicated, they aren't accustomed to dealing with communities that are, that have the capacity to address these issues, and so they're trying to make standards that address the entire state, towns like Oakville and Elkader where the damage wasn't so high and that they have to strongly oversee building code issues. Hayek/ But...but who is they? I mean, is this something that... Bailey/ Department of Economic Development. Hayek/ ...the department itself could...could switch gears and sync with our interpretation? I mean, that would be... Correia/ ...waiver, right? Long/ It...could. Lombardo/ The concern is that if they allow the waiver for Iowa City, then they would have to allow the waiver for the whole of the state of Iowa, um, and so in one instance we're getting penalized for not being able to operate under the provisions that HUD provide us, but I mean, there are legitimate concerns that they have, but there are ways that...(several talking) Correia/ I'm sorry. I wonder if this is an opportunity to utilize this Metro Coalition and ask for a waiver for entitlement cities, so if entitlement cities have been doing this (several talking) for all of this time and they have the capacity and it's a smaller community, seems like this is one of the reasons why we got the Metro Coalition together was to have similar communities of size, all in the Metro Coalition are entitlement communities, I believe, um, I'm pretty sure that they are, and so if we can get that group, as well, to go in and say, and meet...request a waiver for entitlement, it's clear, you know. Bailey/ Right. Correia/ It doesn't...require them to say, `Oh communities that have this, that or the other.' It's HUD (mumbled) Bailey/ I think that's a great idea, and um, I'll make sure that all the, um, representatives on the Metro Coalition and our lobbyists get a copy of this letter, and ask for their support, as well. I talked to the Mayor of Cedar Falls and has Steve indicated, somebody was here from Waterloo, and it's a concern of Cedar Rapids, as well. I know you've been in communication with them. So, it's a good idea. Long/ On a positive note, um, as you know we've worked with the Community Foundation of Johnson County, and they were able to gather $50,000 to assist This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 29 with interim mortgage assistance, to help people pay, actually it's housing assistance, rent payments or mortgage payments, and we are going to start contacting the first 16 households tomorrow. So...that money will be, uh, a lot less regulations and rules, than the State and the Feds, so that money'll be out by the end of next...this week, hopefully. So... Correia/ Is there any possibility that there might be additional funds from the Community Foundation? Long/ They did...they did say that they would do some fundraising to...that seems to be the number one immediate need right now. Correia/ The mortgage or rent assistance? Long/ Questions? Correia/ Well, I guess...are you going to...leave now? (laughter) `Cause I had a question if you, if that was the end (laughter). Bailey/ Yes, when he says questions, that's what it means! (laughter) Correia/ I was wondering, I've been, um, attending the, um, long-term recovery task force or whatever it's called, and the specific subcommittee of, um, case management committee (mumbled) and so um, as um, the months have gone by and needs have changed, um, you know, the Crisis Center works with families, households, that are impacted and trying to meet some needs, and with the scope of the funds that we have being so limited, especially right now, has there, is there the ability for our flood specialists to start being more, or to be more involved, um, I think that the churches are available to start trying to do some of that, we have a household that's not eligible, how can we garner those maybe national church resources to come in and do some...to identify. I think that, um... Long/ Now that we have people. Uh, actually tomorrow morning at 10:30, Naseem will be at the long-term recovery meeting. They... at Crisis Center. Bailey/ Other questions for Steve or David? I do want to say that your staff has been great. I was in a meeting with neighbors and Naseem was there and she was very well informed, which I cannot say the same for myself, so that was very helpful and you've all been doing a really great job, in a very difficult situation. So, thank you. Davidson/ The, uh, final thing that Rick and I would like to do, uh, this evening in terms of the, uh, the flood issue is, uh, basically try and, um, get a little bit further along in terms of some City Council decision making about our overall strategy for trying to repair and make whole the neighborhoods that were damaged, uh, in June. Um, again to reiterate, our strategy so far has been to focus on the HMGP This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 30 program, the FEMA buyout program, and uh, David Purdy, as you heard, is...is now focused on that effort, um, in addition to the buyouts through the HMGP program, we think there's probably a couple of, uh, properties that at least hypothetically we may want to use non-HMGP funds because they're not eligible properties. We may want to use CDBG or some other source to buy out a couple of other, uh, properties to, um, and Rick...Rick is, as we speak, trying to bring up the HMGP map. Hopefully he'll get that up. But there are a couple of...of not eligible properties for HMGP that we think we may want to use CDBG or some other source of funds to buy out as part of an overall strategy. Um, and then, and this is one of the things we want to focus on tonight is implement, determine what measures we are able to implement to reduce the flood hazard to the remainder of the neighborhood, and...and we certainly want to...I think it's gotten a little lost and we want to emphasize that if we were able to buy out all HMGP eligible properties, and there you see them -all the orange properties, uh, this would be a tremendous accomplishment in terms of reducing the flood hazard risk, uh, in...in the areas, in the Parkview Terrace neighborhood, as well as the, uh, Taft Speedway, uh, area. Um, and we can't emphasize that enough, that basically we would be removing dwelling units from these properties, permanently, which basically means we're never going to have to put funds into repairing damaged properties on those lots. We're never going to have to rescue people from those properties, and...and it is really the only way with 100% surety to reduce the flood hazard risk. So, if that's all we're able to do, that's a great accomplishment in terms of, uh, the floodway and primarily the 100-year flood plain and... and these neighborhoods. Um, but we are aware that there are going to be some complications to doing that, as you've heard us say many times -HMGP program is a voluntary program. Adding to that, one of the things that we have been waiting to determine and now believe has been determined is that we were hopeful that we could make application for all of these orange properties and then be able to negotiate with people over some duration of time in terms of whether or not they would, uh, accept buyout funds, um, we now have found out that by the time the application is made in January, we have to have signed statements from each property owner saying they will entertain a buyout. Otherwise the property will not be considered...for the programs. So, certainly based on your...one of the things we...we have a very, you've seen the three items that we're going to ask for specific decision making on tonight. One of those items is, are we prepared to inform property owners who are eligible to buyout funds, but refuse them, that we may not be able to provide, as part of a longer term strategy, protection to their...to their residence, and Rick is going to walk through kind of the alternatives in terms of the long-term strategies, once I'm finished here, and indicate to you some of the difficulties of having to jury-mander, uh, these sort of long-term protection strategies around properties that would refuse buyout funds. Uh, we certainly want you to clearly indicate tonight the message you want sent to people who we're going to be working with, in terms of the HMGP buyout funds, of what you want us telling them in terms of, you know, basically making sure they have a clear picture of the amount of vulnerability that their property is going to have, if they refuse HMGP buyout funds. Um... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 31 Dilkes/ Can I just clarify one thing, Jeff. We did, um, get word from the State that while we must have the signed voluntary statement at the time we apply, if there is a change in what the property owner wants to do, we can make an amendment to that application. Davidson/ ...can, and that would be over what duration of time approximately? Or do you know? Okay. Dilkes/ So there is still some ability to do that negotiations. Bailey/ So they could chose to participate, at a later date, if we make the amendment. Dilkes/ If we make the amendment, and again, we don't know what that time period...that is not a wise thing to do. Bailey/ Oh, right. Dilkes/ There is no harm at all in including yourself on the application because it's always voluntary, and you can always...we can be at a closing with the check, and a closing statement, and the property owner can say, `I don't want it. I've changed my mind.' So to not put themselves on the buyout list to me makes absolutely no sense, but...and we were arguing to the State that it was our application - we should be able to include we wanted, even though it was ultimately voluntary. But we had...they said no to that, but they did say that there was a possibility for amendment. Correia/ And that amendment, you were saying would be to add somebody (mumbled) Dilkes/ Yes. No guarantees about what time that.... Davidson/ But certainly the message we want to send to people is, hey, give yourself the greatest flexibility possible and allow us to...to make application with what Eleanor just said, so hopefully we'll be able to convince people of that. Um, the three questions then that we want to, uh, get answers to are: are, well, the one I just gave you about...about whether or not we will afford protection to, uh, HMGP eligible properties who refuse funds, and incidentally, David...David Purdy indicated to me that it's approximately $13 million is the value of the properties that we would be, uh, purchasing. FEMA has indicated we have, you know, as we've said, a pretty good chance of receiving funds for those properties, so again, that would be a heck of an improvement $13 million worth of basically really good solid flood mitigation, if we're able to achieve that. The other thing, uh, we had an attachment, which Rick is going to walk you through with basically three levels of, um, possible long-term strategies, ranging from the more simpler, straightforward, less expensive to the...the flood wall, levee, very high expense, and you know, there's been a lot of publicity certainly over what Cedar Rapids is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 32 proposing to do, as of last week; what the City of Coralville is proposing to do. I think those two communities combined is $153 million, uh, worth of, uh, of improvements. Our estimate for the similar, uh, type of bricks and mortar type strategies is somewhere between $20 and $27 million. You know, that's a lot of money! That's a lot of money that would have to come from Washington, uh, to this corridor, and we've been trying to be as realistic as possible about the feasibility. It'd be great if it happened, but I think we need to be realistic about whether or not it's going to happen, allow ourselves that option, but also be prepared to do some things with the money we have available, if that's what we, uh, get down to. Um, the other thing that we want to, um, that has come up late in our evaluation process, but that we believe has some merit in terms of considering is the notion of a temporary flood wall that would be constructed with the...the, I believe the brand name you hear is a "hesco barrier" -these are the large barriers which are unfolded and then filled with, uh, rock or gravel or something. Rick knows more about them and can answer your questions, but the notion of doing that, again, as a strategy maybe in between the permanent flood walls or levees, and the smaller scale strategies we would like your, uh, input on that, as well. So, uh, Rick'll now walk you through...oh, I guess just one other thing to highlight quickly, is you know, you can see from the...the HMGP buyout map that we...we have some areas that I won't say easily but maybe logically could be carved out and...and open space areas created that would be open to the public, and basically be assets for the remaining neighborhood, but again, all contingent on exactly how much we can accomplish with the buyout program. So, with that, we'll come back to the three specific questions after Rick has walked you through the, uh, the options. O'Donnell/ Jeff, one quick question. On the river side of Normandy, what would be the disadvantage...of signing for the buyout? Davidson/ Disadvantage? O'Donnell/ What would be the disadvantage? Davidson/ Well, I think it comes down to whether or not a property owner, you know, we've talked to property owners, Mike, who are committed to staying there, and... and, you know, tell us that they understand the hazard of living in a vulnerable location. They love the river. They're willing to put up with that. They have a strategy for putting up with it, you know, themselves. O'Donnell/ But does it disqualify them from any funding? Davidson/ Yes. Rehab funds. O'Donnell/ Rehab funds. So they're disqualified (mumbled) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 33 Davidson/ Right, and...and Doug Boothroy has indicated that there are a number of people, in fact I believe he said the number was 16, uh, people on the river side of Normandy, um, and around the corner that have taken out building permits for something, and we don't know that...certainly we wouldn't want to imply that that was because they all intended to rebuild their homes and stay there. I mean, some of them maybe for winterizing and just kind of, you know, tying things up. But clearly that indicates some, it could indicate some interest in...in a resident remaining there permanently. O'Donnell/ Okay. Thank you. Fosse/ Any other questions for Jeff? Before we move on? Okay. What I wanted to do is just review with you a broad range of options, uh, that may exist for the neighborhood, and the intent tonight is not to...to get direction on any specific option, because there's a lot of detail that needs to be worked out for...for any of the options. There's a lot of public input needs to be...that needs to occur before we proceed with any particular option. Uh, but what we want to do is just get out on the table for the starting point of discussion what the range of options are, and then also as Jeff pointed out, that if we want to preserve the option for the large- scale flood control, um, works, then we need to make some decisions tonight on the steps necessary to preserve that option. So, I'll work from the memo that...that you have in the packet, and um, the range of options really goes from doing the buyouts and very little more, to the large scale flood control projects, and the buyouts, as Jeff said, are in the neighborhood of $13 million, so that's really the starting place there. And let's go in and look at this, uh, by neighborhood, and we'll go through the Parkview Terrace neighborhood first. Um, if we do the buyout of all the eligible homes, I believe there'll just be one home remaining that's still below the 100-year flood mark. Um, so we may want to do, look at purchasing that home, as well, or assisting them in...in making sure that they're protected to the 100-year level, and that would provide, um, that minimum level of protection. Certainly the downside to that option is...is we all know that for this neighborhood, this intersection tends to flood well below the 100-year mark, so that that vulnerability of their access remains an issue. So a mid-point option for this neighborhood would be to do the buyouts, and then also do a project that elevates the road in this area so that you maintain access roughly up to a 100-year event, and then along with that would be putting in some, uh, storm sewers with valves on `em, and then the means so that we can more easily install pumps to help keep the...the area dry, up to a certain point. Uh, right now that's done on an ad hoc basis, and...and really the tough part is keeping the water from coming back through the storm sewer system and flooding the streets out there. Bailey/ So it wouldn't need to be elevated, just the back-flow valves would suffice. Fosse/ Well, the...the roadway would need to be elevated in here. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 34 Bailey/ Okay. Fosse/ That's a very important thing, and then there's...there's three storm sewer outlets for the neighborhood. One roughly in this spot, one right down in here, and then one that drains this area out. Certainly these two along Normandy Drive would need back-flow valves on `em, and then a means to be able to install a pump. Hayek/ How much do you have to elevate that intersection? Fosse/ To get above the 100-year level, I think we're in the 2-foot range, 2 to 3-foot range, and the thing you need to be careful of when you do a project like that is anytime you get the road higher than a home, that creates another set of problems. And so as I said, there's a lot of detail that needs to be worked out for...for any of these options. But we're just here to, at a starting point for discussions, and then the, uh, the other end of the spectrum is a large-scale flood control project, and...and, uh, that brings with it, uh, certain challenges, and I want to go over those, uh, perhaps the most significant challenge is...is presented by the, uh, restrictions on the, on the land that we purchase with the Hazard Mitigation Funds. Uh, those being that that land, um, cannot be used for permanent flood control, and it cannot be protected by permanent flood control, um, so those familiar with the neighborhood know that right along here is...is the high ground, um, when you're looking at protecting that neighborhood and...and if we purchase these homes, uh, with the flood mitigation money, that's...that's not where we could put any flood control works. At best they'd need to go back in the public right-of--way here, and then we have the next challenge of you cannot, uh, protect homes...or protect areas that were purchased with the flood mitigation money. So, the first question that we might consider is that if we want to preserve some means of...of putting flood control works in the public right-of--way, uh, we may want to purchase these homes with another funding source that does not have the restrictions for being protected. Uh, the other thing is if...if we want to be able to put in some means of...of putting flood control works in here, certainly these lots on the ends are ones that we'd want to consider purchasing with an alternate funding source, cause there just isn't room remaining on the, on the remaining lots to get that in between the homes. Does that make sense? Does that seem clear? Um, the other thing is, is as Jeff pointed out, if...if we don't get, uh, complete participation, and we know we won't get complete participation in...in the buyouts. We could end up with a checkerboard pattern where we have homes here and here and you know, just here and there that remain, and to design a flood control project that will protect those homes, while at the same time not protect the lots that we said we can't protect, because we're buying with the flood or hazard mitigation monies. It's just about impossible, so what we need to be able to do, to preserve our option of that is...is to let people know when they make a decision on the hazard mitigation buyout funds that if they chose not to participate, there is a possibility they could end up on the wet side of future flood mitigation. And...and that's important for property owners to know, and it's important for us to know, as well, when we're doing that planning. So that's a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 35 decision that we'll be looking for tonight. Um, one of the other things with...with flood control works is they're expensive. They rely on outside funding, and we don't know the availability of that yet. And...and also, as Oakville learned this year, that there's flood control projects are not a guarantee that you'll remain dry during a flood. And...and that's certainly a vulnerability, uh, is that, uh, we put something in. There's...there's, um, complete reliance on that and then some day that will overtop. Now for instance, we...we did a joint project after the flood of 93 with the University of Iowa to help protect the Arts Campus, and that performed very well up to the point at which it was designed for, and then it overtopped. So, that's...that's an understanding that you need to have. Any questions on that, before we move across the river? Bailey/ The City may want to consider a different funding source with those interiors - do we have a sense of the property, the current value or ballpark of what that might be? Fosse/ I've not put that together yet. No. Davidson/ There's quite a bit of variation in this neighborhood, so we would want to look more specifically at that before we gave you a ballpark number. Correia/ And earlier you said that there was just one house that would need to be elevated? That's...in the 717, 713, I mean it looks (mumbled) Fosse/ I think it's...612 Normandy is the one that remains, and I don't know which one that is. (several talking) Oh, here we go. 6...612, here we go, right there, is the one. I'm sorry. Amy, what, your question. Correia/ So you're saying that 713 and 717 are not in the 100-year flood plain? Fosse/ They're above that. Correia/ They're above the 100-year flood plain, but they're right next door. Fosse/ Yeah. (several talking) I don't know. No, and i£ ..if we look at some sort of flood control works in the right-of--way, um, and everybody else along here has had the opportunity to opt out, uh, we might want to give them the opportunity as well. That's one of those details that we need to look into, if that...to be purchased. So that they don't end up on the wet side. Correia/ Opt in, I guess I'm thinking. Fosse/ Yeah. Correia/ Okay. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 36 Davidson/ And we're hopeful that there maybe special allocation of...of CDBG to, um, to do those kinds of projects with. We just need to have that all come together. Correia/ Because, I mean (mumbled) that would make these kind of assessments, but if all of those properties along the river were reverted back to natural space, natural land, that offers flood protection. Davidson/ Right. I mean, right now there's homes on everyone of those lots that are displacing area where water would go. Correia/ Would be able to go, right, so I mean, and I'm sure there is some professional that can give us an assessment of how, just how much flood.. . Fosee/ Yeah, I don't think you'll see a significant change in...in the water surface profile. The elevation of the flood behind these homes. The big different that you're making is you're reducing the damage potential. The homes are not there to be damaged. Correia/ Okay. Lombardo/ And the ability to focus on protecting the other areas and not having to protect these. Fosse/ Uh, okay, going across the river and looking at the Taft Speedway and Foster Road area. Uh, basically you have that same range of options available to you. Uh, do the purchases that are eligible, and... and call it good there. Uh, the vulnerability that remains, again, is one that has to do with access, and that is on Foster Road. LTh, we have, there's a small portion of Foster Road that is below the 100-year flood plain, and certainly there's a large portion that's below the 500-year flood plain, and...and as we saw last summer, that displaces a large number of folks, who are not directly affected by the flood, but their access is cut off because right now that is the only means of access for the neighborhood. There may at some future date be a secondary means up the hill, but as of yet that's...that's not in the works. So the...the mid-range option might be to do the buyouts, and do a project to elevate Foster Road, along here, to preserve that access. And then the, uh, the third option, the other far end of the spectrum is to do a flood control project that...that would protect the Parkview Church and Idyllwild area, uh, by...by putting some combination of an elevated roadway or flood walls, uh, along here, and that would, by default, protect Foster Road as well. Again, lot of details need to be looked into for any of these options. Um, and then the other thing that we need to consider are looking at strategies other than the permanent flood control works. As Jeff talked about, the hesco barriers are one option, and there's all sorts of proprietary things out there, as well as good old sand bags, but they're awful labor intensive and slow and...and um, now, what we heard today, but we don't have this in writing yet, is that it maybe possible to put temporary flood control on property that's purchased with hazard This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 37 mitigation money, uh, I'll believe that when I see it in writing. But without that opportunity, that makes especially this neighborhood, uh, difficult because if you start by working in the right-of--way, that's significantly lower than the ground is up here. So you've got a lot of catch up to do just to get to the point where you would be starting if you could place temporary flood control along the ground up here. And then again, if...if you have remaining homes sprinkled in there, that complicates that equation, and you need to have a plan in place for...for how you would deal with that. Hayek/ Do you know what the approximate width, minimum width would be of either a temporary or a permanent structure? Fosse/ Well, it depends on whether you go with, for permanent structures, there's a couple options. You can do, uh, a...an earthen levee, which would have considerable width, uh, there's concrete walls, which can be kind of no fun to look at. Uh, and then there are these, there are demountable walls that, uh, you can bring, you can either put in a...a system of vertical columns where the pieces slide in at the time of the flood, or the vertical columns can be put in place at the time of the flood, um, there's a variety of options there, and those have a smaller footprint. Uh, but the key is, uh, having them designed to prevent overturning, because when you've got that narrow base, you've got to make sure that (both talking) Davidson/ ...when I heard Coralville's presentation last week, they've got some of those in their strategy and there's quite a bit of engineering to...of what's underneath the ground to do exactly what Rick was saying -keep those things from tipping over when the...when the water gets up next to `em. Fosse/ And... Davidson/ They are something that can be implemented...once we hear an event is coming down the river, you know, in particular with the Reservoir, we're fortunate in that respect. There'd be plenty of time then to mobilize people and get those set up. Fosse/ And you don't need to use all one technique or another. It may have, you know, you may put in an earthen berm to this point, concrete wall along here, you know, demountable walls along another area. Any combination of things can be considered, and...and that's one of the things that we would...we would ask an engineering firm that specializes in this type of thing to look into, if we go that route. Davidson/ And...and again, if...if you indicate this evening that those are things that we should pursue, I think we need to get, uh, the first things we need to do then is...is put these alternatives forth in neighborhood meeting settings, on both sides of the river, and see how people feel. I mean, there's going to be, you know, this is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 38 going to be people's neighborhoods. We all know how...how important our own neighborhoods are to us. We need to make sure we get input in terms of this is realistic, this is not realistic. I wouldn't want to live here if you did this. I mean, those are the kinds of things we need to...we need to hear. Correia/ And I guess that's what I'm thinking about as we're having this conversation is I think probably one of the things, besides some of the topographical, it's a flat neighborhood, so it...it is easy for, um, people to live that have, um, physical challenges in the neighborhood, but I think the other appealing aspect of it has been in this neighborhood is the river - is that, and you know, it is...it was here first and, you know, how...how do we, you know, to risk being hooky, like honor the river and the strength of the river and what it's capable of, at the same time then of minimizing risk, and um, having folks that chose to stay there understand what their risk is and for us to be clear about what...how we can protect that neighborhood, in a way that doesn't...you know, put up concrete walls. You can't see the river, I mean, I don't know that that is... Davidson/ A lot of times with a levee, even though it's a green wall instead of a concrete wall, you can't see the river either. Lombardo/ Well, and options that are not listed in here, we spent a lot of time discussing different approaches, trying to determine how far we could go in terms of examining strategies, but we haven't included in here, uh, elevating homes and flood-proofing, I mean, we've held back on a lot of that because we were trying to understand what level of funding maybe coming our way, and even in proposing these things to you tonight, we're kind of hedging that we don't know how much funding is going to be available to attack any of these strategies, at a11, and so that poses I think a broader dilemma. We've not rolled out the grand plan, if you will, uh, as some communities have, because we have been taking measured approach, based on what we thought was fundable, and maybe that's a broader question for you all to consider, is do you, I mean, is there an expectation that we would have a grand plan and be protecting other areas of the city. It's not something that we've been prepared to do. Davidson/ Well, shall we get to the, uh, shall we get to the questions specifically? Bailey/ Um, I would like to take a break. A 10-minute break. (mumbled) I apologize, but (several talking) So I'll say this again, if people are here for the commercial vehicle congestion downtown, I apologize, um, for this late announcement, but we will postpone that to the next, uh, work session, and um, thank you so much for your interest in that. (laughter and several talking) Except Chris, right. (several talking) Okay. Davidson/ Ready to go? Bailey/ Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 39 Davidson/ Uh, three specific questions then - uh, the first one is: are we prepared, and basically we'd just like an indication from the six of you, uh, are we prepared to inform property owners who are eligible for HMGP buyout funds, that if they chose to refuse buyout funds, their property maybe located on the wet side of a flood protection structure in order to protect the larger neighborhood. Champion/ Yes. O'Donnell/ I'm not. Correia/ I don't know. I'm not exactly sure what that means. O'Donnell/ On the river side of the barrier. (several talking) Davidson/ Temporary barrier, permanent barrier, levee, demountable wall.. . Correia/ Well, practically speaking, I don't know if this body can say today that in ten years we wouldn't, the City wouldn't protect homes on the wet side of... Davidson/ Right. No, we're telling them right now, this City Council. Champion/ Well you can't, because the land around them is going to be in the buyout program, and you can't do any flood mitigation on the buyout land. Correia/ Well I understand that. O'Donnell/ But could you tell...the question is if you have the river here, you have a house here, and you have the barrier here, you're putting the house between the barrier and the river. Davidson/ That's correct. (several talking)...to be bought out. O'Donnell/ I still couldn't do that. Bailey/ Well, I say it now, but it... Davidson/ I have two yeses and a no so far. (several talking) Champion/ Well, I'm looking at the long-term good of the city, and I'm not so sure what I'm willing to do for flood mitigation. I'm not so sure I'm willing to put a barrier between the houses and the river, although I might be totally willing to put a temporary barrier in there. (mumbled) seen by the neighborhood. Davidson/ You know, it's not out of the question, Connie; it could be a sandbagging army. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 40 Champion/ Exactly! Davidson/ You would still be on the wet side of that. Champion/ But I think...well, I guess I'd have to say for the good of the neighborhood and the long-term benefit to the city, I could probably agree to do that...tonight at least. Correia/ So, if some, okay...we've only talked about properties being bought out on the hazard mitigation grant program. If we, if the City decided we wanted to do flood mitigation, we wanted to buy the houses that were not either on the, weren't eligible or weren't voluntarily on the buyout program, but we felt it was in the best interest of the rest of the neighborhood to have that, to purchase that land or acquire that land, could we do that? Dilkes/ Could we...use that money to buy those properties? Correia/ Use other money. Dilkes/ Yes. Correia/ To buy... Dilkes/ I think that's the plan. Davidson/ That's the plan. Correia/ Even if they didn't want to be bought? Dilkes/ Well...(several talking) Davidson/ Well, I mean, that would be an option, yeah...at that point with some other source of funds that don't have the voluntary requirement tied to it, Council could make a decision to involuntarily purchase something in the name of public safety. Correia/ Right, right. So that's... Davidson/ But as you say, we have not discussed that. Correia/ Right. Dilkes/ I think you have to look at this as a planning measure. As a planning...for purposes of planning (several talking) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 41 Davidson/ Right. The most important thing in terms of your answer is for us to then go out to the people who have HMGP eligible property and tell them this is what the City Council has said as a matter of policy. Bailey/ And if...if we, can I just ask this question - if we, um, decide that if they're located on the wet side of a flood protection structure, they maybe located there, we are not preventing them from using flood protection measures. They could sandbag. They could buy, what do you call them? Hesco barriers. They could do whatever they chose to do on their property to protect their property. Correct? Or...or would we assume that that wouldn't happen, because it would have effects on our ability to protect the neighborhood? Dilkes/ I don't...I don't think...for one thing Amy's right. You cannot bind a future City Council. If a future City Council decides to mobilize sandbagging efforts to protect houses that chose not to get a buyout, there's nothing that we can do about that. But for planning purposes, in order to move forward, both in terms of informing the neighborhood what the current Council's plan is, and in terms of developing future miti...or mitigation strategies for the remainder of the neighborhood, we need to have that question answered, either in the negative or the positive. Bailey/ Right. I just wanted to know what message completely that we were sending. You have the option, but we might chose not to, okay. (mumbled) Hayek/ Um, we11...I've got sort of a side legal question, which probably doesn't matter. If we did do something like this, do we have reverse condemnation issues to deal with? Dilkes/ Inverse condemnation? Hayek/ Yeah. Dilkes/ ...issues to deal with...somebody could make that claim, but I'm comfortable with making that decision. Hayek/ Well, my sense is that, uh, this is an incredibly difficult decision, and it's...I don't...this, I think it's important to understand that this is for planning purposes, um, but I think if you, uh, have an opportunity to save 9/1 Oths of a population, and the only way to do so is to put at risk 1/IOt"' this is a situation in which you have to say that...yes, yes to number one. That's where I would come down on this. And it's not easy. O'Donnell/ And I can understand everybody saying that, but I...I just could not in good conscience ever vote to put somebody on the wrong side of the barrier with a rising river. I just could not do that. But I understand everything that's been said here. But I just personally could not do that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 42 Bailey/ I think it's the good of the many, versus the good of the one, and that's the kind of decisions the City has to make all the time, and... O'Donnell/ I'm not arguing with your reasoning. I'm just saying I personally can't do that. Hayek/ But I think...I think what flows, pardon the pun, what follows from that...that kind of position is that you might be in a position where you could not erect some temporary or permanent protection for the rest of the neighborhood. You just wouldn't be able to do that. (mumbled) told that...for sure by planners and by consultants, but that appears to me to be the situation we would face. Correia/ Well, and that's what I wondered if what we say is that, is that we want to protect neighborhood and in order to do that we need to have this minimum number of, this minimum number of lots, land, vacated or bought out or whatever, whether that's voluntarily bought out or whether it's done through some other means, that that's our intention, so that there isn't a situation where there's one and there's this many, and there's a problem with trying to protect. So if then.. . Dilkes/ I think making a decision that...right now without knowing any of the circumstances that we're going to condemn land that somebody does not want to sell us is a much bigger decision than this one. Davidson/ Right. Our motivations right now are for all these orange colored properties to reduce the flood hazard risk to zero, and we have a remarkable opportunity to do that, and to then protect the rest of the neighborhood. Both very worthy goals. O'Donnell/ Jeff, did you say on the...on the river side of Normandy, how many houses did you say had taken out building permits? Did you say 16? Davidson/ Sixteen. O'Donnell/ But what are there, about 20 houses there? Davidson/ A little more than that, I think. Twenty-five or thirty. Yeah, that...I thought that was a high number too, Mike, and then, you know, Doug clarified that that was not, should not be construed to mean all those people intend to rehabilitate their house and stay there. That he knew full well some of them were just people wanting to button things up, repair enough to button things up for winter time. Dilkes/ And remember, if you...if you can demonstrate you used money and put it back into your house then that's not deducted as a duplication of benefits. So people are not out anything if they take a chunk of insurance money, you know, do half the improvements that they thought they were going to do and then stop because they want to do a buyout, and I've heard from people who are in that position. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 43 Davidson/ Madame Mayor, do you believe consensus has been reached...on this issue? Bailey/ Yes. I was going to ask you if we can move on. Champion/ I think it'll be important to have that consensus when you're talking to the property owners, so they kind of know where we're going. Fosse/ What this is saying it's not guaranteeing that they're going to be on the wet side. It's just that...it's possible that you maybe, and you need to understand that when you make your decision. Davidson/ For buyout, right. Uh, the second item then is...pertains to the large-scale, uh, levee/flood wall projects, which were summarized in the information that Rick, uh, presented, um, estimated...our information, our analysis that we've done so far estimates that expense for both sides of the river at $20 to $27 million. The estimated local share of such a project could be in the $5 to $6 million range, introducing a whole additional set of policy questions for the City Council in terms of spending that much on local match. The question to you is that to basically go beyond where we are right now, and Rick can clarify for you exactly where that is, to go beyond that and do additional design work to...to further, uh, give further clarity to that cost estimate and basically more specifically decide what we would do, uh, we estimate at a $500,000 to engage a consultant to do that, and is that an expense you want us to go to now, or would you rather have us wait until Washington indicates to us that, uh, that funding is likely and then go to that expense. It might mean some delay at that point, although with the rapidity that Washington works, I'm actually thinking we would not be delaying anything unduly. Correial You're talking about the strategy three? (several talking) Bailey/ Question two. Fosse/ Question number two. (several talking) Champion/ I'm not willing to spend $500,000 without knowing (mumbled). Fosse/ And...and... O'Donnell/ I'm not either. Fosse/ ...we're not asking here, or not saying here is that we would bring to you a contract for $500,000 tomorrow, if you said go, but what it is is that represents about 2% of the cost of...of the full estimate for the whole works. A total design would normally run you in about the 5%, so this...this would take it to a point at which we could probably go and... and solicit federal money, that sort of thing, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 44 but...but certainly a first step is to...is an intermediate one, and that is to engage the neighborhood and find out what their expectations and interests are, and if it's not for a complete flood control works, then we shouldn't start down that path. (several responding) Davidson/ Okay. (several talking) Correia/ ...neighborhood input on the... Davidson/ All right. Well, let us do that and then bring that back to you after we've done that and you can have a feel for how the neighborhood actually feels about it. Fosse/ Now there...there will be some intermediate expense amount to do that, and that's what, you know, we'll be back to you with that. Champion/ But it won't be $500,000. Bailey/ Are we in...(several talking) Fosse/ I don't know off the top of my head. Bailey/ So for number two (several talking) Fosse/ It's probably less than $100,000...for the next step. Bailey/ So for number two we'll get feedback from the neighborhood, and get more information. Champion/ What will cost $100,000? Bailey/ Consultant costs. Fosse/ Consulting fees, yeah, to...to, and we don't have an estimate on it yet. I'm just shooting from the hip here, when asking about order of magnitude type things, but our next step would be to get out, have some meetings with the neighborhood, talk about the options, uh, begin to flush out some of the...the ones in which there's interest to a greater degree and get more information on that and decide where we need to go from there. Dilkes/ But I'm unclear about whether that's...those neighborhood meetings are something you can hold before you spend consultant fees, or not until you spend consultant fees. Fosse/ Not until we spend consultant fees. We'll need to engage a consultant to assist us with that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 45 Dilkes/But you don't know what that amount is. Fosse/ No. Champion/ The other thing that bothers me about this...is the local share might be as much as $6 million. Davidson/ Might be. Fora $27 million project. Yes. Champion/ And how, well, how much is the area that we're trying to protect? What's the value? Do you know? Davidson/ Assessed value -wasn't that like $40 million? (several talking) Sixty between both sides of the river. Assessed value. Champion/ Oh, both sides of the river. Davidson/ Right. Champion/ So this is for both sides of the river? Davidson/ Yes. Lombardo/ Again, and these are...are preliminary, rule-of--thumb estimates. Champion/ I know. I know. Davidson/ If you go to the attachment that Rick walked us through, Connie, it separates it out, either side of the river. Champion/ Okay, okay. I'm just getting confused on that. But I see now...okay. (several talking) Correia/ Well, just so I can clarify. So we need to have, just basic design work done so that people have something to respond to? Is that what the cost would be before we would initiate input on something like alarge-scale levee, flood wall project? Fosse/ Uh-huh. What we would do is...is develop a contract to bring the consultants in and engage the neighborhood, get some feedback from `em, and as I said, refine concepts that there's...there's adegree of...of interest and support from the neighborhoods and...and then determine whether or not we need to, you know, how big is the elephant, at that point. Lombardo/ And...hopefully in, in utilizing that process, it'll give us time to know what additional fundings may become available, um, I would hate to build expectations or head down a path that...that we're creating expectations that we're going to do This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 46 thus, and find out that the funding comes up locally short, and never...in ten decades will we be able to afford it, and so that's the balance that we've been trying to maintain is going down a path that perhaps commits us to a certain direction that we won't be able to (noise on mic, unable to hear) Bailey/ And that's a little bit of my concern, because I don't think that kind of money is available to us, congressionally designated funding in that amount. Davidson/ Yeah, even the article, uh, summarizing Cedar Rapids' strategies, uh, stated, and I think it was good, that...that it could be over 7 to 10 years that they acquire the funds needed, and they need to have a plan to do things incrementally so that if they only get through year 6 and that's all they ever do, they've got something that functions to a certain level with that amount of funding. Um, but...but you know, I think some people, pardon? (several talking) I think some people were under the misimpression that that $100 million Cedar Rapids thing was going to happen next year, and it is a much, much longer range strategy than that. Champion/ Hopefully we won't need it for another hundred years! Or two hundred years! Bailey/ You know, just given the way things have gone, I, um, I've come to the conclusion that whatever we do is going to have to be something we can afford generally locally, because money isn't coming from other places very easily or very quickly. Wright/ If that money does come, Rick, do you have any, or Jeff, do you have any idea when? Slightest clue? No. Okay. Hayek/ I think, um, I think we need to provide the opportunity for the neighborhoods to provide...to give us some more direct input. It's worked well on several occasions in the past, and I think we're at a point where it would be appropriate to set something up for that. Um, on this and other issues. Um, do we need...but to answer, to get input from the neighborhoods on...on that, on number two, do we need consultants for that or...or can we do that within internal resources, or...or even just an opportunity for public input? Fosse/ I think it's in our interest to bring consultants in on that, who have been through it in other communities, and they can bring a lot to the discussion, and...and the other thing is just the, uh, looking at our in-house resources are tapped out right now in dealing with the flood recovery, as well as catch up on everything else that's going on. Lombardo/ (several talking) And we just don't have the expertise, I mean, flood...in terms of flood mitigation and strategies and deployment, and a lot of the questions, we...we just don't have answers to potentially and we would want some level of assistance there to be able to do a thorough job on this. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 47 Davidson/ Yeah, we know enough from doing this kind of thing, Matt, that it even adds greater frustration if we show up with concepts that are so general and nebulous that people just have more questions than getting things resolved. We want to be able to come with enough information to actually make sure people understand what's being proposed. Shall we move on to question three, Madame Mayor? Champion/ Yeah, can I ask one more question? Bailey/ Absolutely. Champion/ If we did come up with some flood mitigation between the river and the house that aren't eligible for buyout, what was my question? (laughter) Davidson/ I mean, that is something we hope to do. Champion/ If we do that at Idyllwild, then Foster Road would not have to be elevated. Is that correct? Isn't that what you said? Davidson/ Hypothetically, yes. Fosee/ That's right. Champion/ What about Dubuque Street? Or is that.. . Fosse/ That would still need to be elevated, independent of that. Champion/ But that isn't as crucial, because there are other ways to get around there. Fosse/ Well, it...crucial from, you need to look at it from a...a community-wide perspective when you define, you know, how crucial it is to the community, the link to the downtown, the link to emergency services north of Iowa City and all of those things. That gets into a whole other decision process. Davidson/ I mean, you bring up a good point, Connie, and that is one that we considered in the Parkview Terrace neighborhood, that if we set, if we were able to construct some large-scale flood mitigation measure, uh, permanent structure on say Normandy Drive, then the houses on the inside of Normandy Drive aren't in a flood hazard anymore...in a flood hazard area anymore, right? Well, as you heard Rick say, designing flood mitigation measures, I mean, he gave the example of the one in the Arts Campus that we thought we'd done that, and look what happened. The only way to really reduce that risk to zero is to remove the property from the flood plain. The final question then is in terms of the temporary barriers, and if you are interested in that being a strategy that we, uh, develop further, because we basically, I mean, do you want to elaborate, Rick, on exactly what we know and what we need to find out. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 48 Fosse/ That's one that's...that's emerging, as I pointed out we're getting some information today from...from the State on whether or not the properties that we use buyout money on can be used for the placement of temporary barriers. Um, if that's true, that might be a viable option that we consider, and that's certainly one that I'd like to be able to discuss with the neighborhood, if it's all right with you all. Bailey/ Yeah, I think that there's agreement. Davidson/ Any other questions while we're here? Champion/ One more. If we put up a temporary flood wall, whatever you want to call it, what happens to the water that's supposed to come over? Fosse/ Oh, that's no longer out in the...in the neighborhood? One of the things that we're working with the University of Iowa on is to develop a commuter...a computer model of the... of the Iowa River corridor through the campus, through Iowa City and through Coralville, so that we can...we can do all sorts of options. What if we do this. What if we do that, and see what that does to the water surface profile, and the...the University is working with us on that so that's going to be a good thing. Champion/ Does it do us any good to save one neighborhood if we're going to flood the one next...a mile down the river? Davidson/ Eventually the water does go somewhere. (laughter) Fosse/ Typically it's (several talking) Davidson/ Well, and I've heard from people north of Coralville, you know, wondering that exact question. And told them basically what Rick just said. Fosse/ Yeah. Um, Stanley has done some preliminary numbers that if we put a flood wall along the north side of Normandy Drive, it'd be about afour-inch rise in water surface elevation. Up river, yeah. And that's just a, based on the model that we have now, which is relatively crude compared to the one that the University's working to build for us. So we're going to have better information at a later date. Hayek/ Is that a flood wall on both sides, or just one side? Fosse/ Just one side. Yeah. Champion/ See, that's, to me, something I have to think about too, because I think a lot of this flooding we're seeing now is because of all the flood walls and levees that are north of us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 49 Correia/ And development that.. . Champion/ And development. Wright/ Course, one thing to bear in mind too is that, uh, you can do the same thing with some really effective sandbags. Champion/ ...doing the same thing though. Wright/ It would... essentially the same thing would be happening. If your sandbags are keeping the water out of the neighborhood, and everybody's going to try to sandbag. Champion/ And I don't have any objections to sandbagging. So I should not have any objections to a temporary wall. (laughter) Okay. I got it! Bailey/ So will you tell us what happens next, what the next, what we should expect next. Fosse/ See...we've got the direction we need for working with the buyouts, um, we'll visit with some consultants about how to frame the next step on getting out in the neighborhood, and then get back with you with a schedule and a scope on that. Bailey/All right. Any other questions for them? Thank you so much. I know that you're both working very hard on this, so thanks. All right. Shall we talk about recycling? Jen. Curbside Recycling for Multi-Family ResidentiaUCo-Minding Recyclables: Jordan/ (several talking) All right. I will try and keep this as brief as possible, without speeding up how quickly I talk. So, if I get to talking too fast.. . Bailey/ ...as much time as you need. Jordan/ ...let me know. Thank you. Bailey/ And not one bit more. (laughter) Jordan/ Okay, so the question I bring you this evening, um, is based on the fact that our current recycling processing contract with City Carton Recycling expires at the end of June, um, in 2009, so in the very, very near future we're going to be having to put out an RFP for a new contract. The question that I pose is shall it remain a sorted system like we currently have, or should we change to a single stream system? I'll give a little bit of an overview of each and then staff recommendations. Okay, so from a public point of view, the current system, um, covers residents in single-family homes up to four-plexes. Residents pay $3.60 a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 50 month on the utility bill, um, they sort into one of six categories, and according to a student survey, um, second semester of 2007 by a political studies class, Professor Redlock's class, just over half of the residents polled, which was about 400 people, um, covering all of Johnson County disliked to recy...or to sort, but still recycle because they see it as a very good thing to do. (several talking, laughter) I've actually had people tell me they don't recycle specifically because they don't like to sort it, but I think they're in the minority, the very small minority. Okay, so the current system from a city point of view then serves 14,400 accounts, which hits about 55% of households in Iowa City. Um, the other, uh, 45% obviously is five-plexes or larger, um, we have six compartmentalized trucks that cost about $140,000 each new. So we have five routes daily and then we have one backup truck. The curb idle time is substantial, even if the materials are well sorted by the citizens, because the workers potentially have to empty up to six bags. There's also the potential for worker's comp claims because of the lifting. Okay, so from the financial point of view for the current system, with a $3.60 a month on the utility bills on those number of accounts, that's about $622,000 a year revenue. We also budget, um, I've seen a couple different numbers -between $7,500 and $10,000 per year for the value of the recycled materials. That is based on our contract with City Carton Recycling, which is based on the market. Um, quite frankly this is a very bad time to be thinking about doing an RFP, with the market the way it is in recycling and everything, um, but that's looking at either our current system or going to a new system. So that really kind of balances itself out. Um, currently the average, what we make per ton, um, spread out over about the whole 2,000 tons that we recycle curbside annually, is about $4.00 per ton revenue, which is obviously just fed back into the system to buy the trucks, pay for the labor, that type of thing. Um, but again, the markets are volatile, and the next actually is...the next slide is just kind of a good example of this. I got this number from City Carton, who I've been working closely together with...with whom I've been working closely to get us some of these numbers. This doesn't take into account the last about six weeks, which has seen cardboard go from about $65.00 per ton down to about $30.00 per ton on the market. So, um, it's not looking good, and City Carton's actually called recently to tell me specifically that. So (laughter) um, so these are the numbers for about the last three years, and we are below any of what we see here right now. Okay, so the summary of the current system, it does work well. Um, about 55% of residents, about 55% of residents have access to it. About 65% of residents who have access do recycle. Um, just contrasting that, however, to...well, I'll do that with the next part. Um, this is just a summary, so I'll just flip through these. Half the residents do not...do not like to sort. We have the six trucks that have no other uses, which is an issue for, um, Streets and Refuse. Um, there's a long idle time to empty the containers at the curb, which of course corresponds to fuel costs, um, we do see revenue, um, almost every year, if not every year, but it's not much, um, the main key with this, and this is the second part of this presentation, and it's kind of in the background, but the way we have the current system...the system currently, it makes it very difficult to expand the program to more multi-family housing. There's a multitude of reasons. The This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 51 number one that we hear from people who, um, are interested in doing this is space in the apartments, and the parking conversation was very, um, timely tonight to think about that because this would likely mean, um, by expanding to multi-family...to more multi-family, it's going to take up parking spots basically. They need somewhere to put the stuff in a dumpster. So, with the current system, that would take up to six dumpsters, up to, you know, six parking spots. So, yeah, that's not something...that's the reason we've been talking about multi-family for the last 15 years and we're not doing anything about it, quite frankly, so...it's one of the major reasons. Okay. So, moving to the single stream system, basically what happens is instead of having six or five different...or five different things within one container, everything goes into one bin mixed. We would still continue to exclude glass from curbside for a multitude of reasons. So I don't see any reason to change that. Wright/ What are some of the reasons for excluding glass? Jordan/ It's heavy, it's bulky, um, safety issues, and the main one is there's absolutely no market for it. So, when we looked at the compartments on the trucks that we have currently, um, glass was really a pretty easy decision to take that out, when it has no market value, um, we currently get paid for cardboard, newspaper, and magazines. So the last addition that we made was magazines, to what we pick up curbside, and they have a pretty strong market value and they're pretty easy to pick up. They're heavy also, which is good for the market. The fact that (mumbled) for those, because we get paid by the ton. Um, so once the materials are picked up in a single stream system, they would get transported to a facility that would then sort them, um, sort of at a materials recovery facility, a MERF. We do have a couple of options for that in the state, um, City Carton has one in Cedar, uh, Cedar Rapids. There's one in Des Moines, and then there's also some smaller ones around that actually use, um, just hand sorting labor versus the two that I mentioned, which are mechanical labor. Um, other communities have seen between a 25 and 50% increase in their recycling rates. So this could have a significant impact on our curbside recycling. For instance, Cedar Rapids...our recycling rate, as I mentioned, is about 65% of those who have access. Cedar Rapids, um, in two different neighborhoods that ECCOG looked at in a study in 2003 -one was 86% and one was 94%, um, Marion's at 88%. So we have significant room for improvement, um... Champion/ Well, that's not...but that's kind of just a statistic coming out of how many houses are using curbside recycling. It doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of the other people aren't recycling. For instance, I never curbside recycle. But I recycle everything. Most of my neighbors (mumbled). Jordan/ That's actually an interesting point. Part of the study that ECCOG did in 2003 found out that the vast majority of people who use our city's drop-off sites have access to curbside recycling. So...yeah. That's interesting to point out too. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 52 Champion/ I have too much recycling for the curb. (laughter and several commenting) And I don't want to sort it. Jordan/ Fair enough. (laughter) Um, a single stream system from a public point of view would continue to cover single-family up to four-plexes, at least initially; however, this would make the expansion to multi-family much easier around the community. Okay, from a city point of view again, we'd continue to serve the same number of accounts, with our current trucks and containers, and that is really the key for the first couple years of the new contract. Eventually we would move to five automated packer trucks. So we're immediately taking out the purchase price of one truck, because we don't have to have that redundancy, um, with the truck that's not used for anything else. We already have that redundancy built in because we have other packer trucks that we use for refuse and for um, yard waste, so we already have that. So we're saving the cost of a truck there. Um, we would have fewer trips to empty the larger packer trucks. They can hold eight to ten tons, versus our compartmentalized trucks that we use now hold something like two to three tons. So there's a significant fuel and time savings there, as well. Um, curb idle time would be substantially less because~they would literally, initially at least, be dumping the one 18-gallon container. Eventually we would want to phase in the carts, which could just use the tipper, like we're working on with the refuse, which also results in fewer worker's comp potential claims at least. Okay, so finances in a single stream system. And this is all based on the fact that we would be looking at a 25 to 50% increase in recycling. So we...one of the most significant things is we would be seeing a savings for the Refuse division in tipping fees, what they take to the Landfill, and we're looking at somewhere between $17,000 and $35,000 per year in savings there, which would be then, and I talked with Rodney Walls about this. That money, those savings would be fed back into the recycling program, to...to save the increase there. Um, it would prolong the life of the Landfill between about 2,000 and 4,000 cubic yards per year, valued at that amount shown, um, we would eventually move to using all packer trucks, which again would save the purchase of the sixth truck, um, I think the packer trucks right now are running about $180,000, so um, we'd be paying more for those, but we'd be saving the cost of the sixth truck at $140,000. So...um, again, significant fuel savings from less idle time, and this would also open up staff time for other duties, and as we continue to add recycling programs and expand what we have in place, um, this is...can only be a good thing. Okay, so the cost for the single stream system -these numbers are based on conversations with the City Carton Recycling and what a potential contract may look at as potential response, um, as someone who might be responding to the RFP, um and also in conversations with Cedar Rapids who's had a single stream system in place now for quite a while, and the processing fee would be roughly $35.00 per ton, and the transportation to a MERF, which is a component that we're obviously not paying now because we're taking it directly to City Carton to sort, or to sorted, um, would be roughly $15.00 per ton. On the other side of that, the contract plays out a little bit differently in that it's acost- sharing contract with single stream rather than the one that we have now that's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 53 basically, um, the market value minus the processing fee. So this is a little bit more, um, progressive if you will. So we, the average there...we'd be looking at about $22.00 per ton of revenue. Um, the tipping fee offset which I mentioned earlier, um, the $17,000 to $34,000 that Refuse would be saving comes out to about $8.00 per ton. So the cost of the program would be higher, and we'd be paying about $20.00 per ton of material collected, um, versus going way back, about the $4.00 per ton that we're actually getting in revenue now. So, there's a significant difference there. Um, very, very conservatively based on the numbers from City Carton, and a poor market year, we would be looking at an additional 30...up to 50 cents per account per month. Okay, so in summary, um, it will obviously cost more to transport and process the materials, um, however, it will preserve Landfill space. It's going to save the Refuse department in disposal fees, um, it's going to reduce idle time at the curb and fuel usage, and as we move forward with it (mumbled) and we're starting that now, um, it's...it could be significant in savings there for... for greenhouse gas emissions. It's going to reduce the need for one full truck, and it's going to delay any new hires for recycling staff, and it will allow an easier expansion to more multi-family recycling, and I should point out - I know we've talked about this before -this is the number one question that Iget -why can't I recycle in my apartment. So this is something that I would really like to work on, and I think this would really help us move in that direction. So the staff recommendations are to move forward with an RFP for single stream recycling, um, to continue using the compartmentalized trucks and the blue bins as we phase out those trucks over the next six years. Three were just purchased in 2000...2007, I believe, so we'd be looking at the next set off three in 2010, and then the last set of three would be phased out in 2013 then. Um, we would phase in the use again of the...the carts. There are grants available for those and by phasing in use, we could do...we could do several grants that would allow us to get, um, more than we do if we did just a lump sum. And again looking at raising recycling rates between 30 and 50 cents per household, um, to both run the program and then in the years that the market is stronger, we would be able to use that...that, uh, surplus to build up the inventory of new carts. So, the next steps then, if Council chooses to move in this direction, is to put out the RFP for a single stream system to begin July 1 S`, um, staff would immediately begin preparing public education now for distribution in a couple months, before the contract went into place, and we would immediately begin examining the best ways to expand the program to multi-family housing, and again, that's really, from my point of view, that's really the key, um, to making this happen. Bailey/ And would we see the fee increase in this upcoming budget, and the upcoming budget cycle likely, if we.. . Fosse/ Yes, if we're going to implement next summer. Really have three options in front of us today. One is to continue business as we're doing now, uh the other is to do just an RFP for the single stream and the third would be to, uh, bid alternates and... and compare. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 54 Bailey/ Okay. Questions? Hayek/ I...I don't understand the third option, bid alternates. Fosse/ To bid single stream or what we're doing right now. Hayek/ Oh, okay. Fosse/ And then we'll look at what the actual costs are and make a decision when we know exactly what it'll do to rates. Bailey/ But we think we know that single stream will cost us more, I mean, but... Fosse/ Pretty certain of that. Bailey/ ...it would just be a matter of getting the exact numbers. Okay. Correia/ Two things. One is...how long are these contracts usually for? Jordan/ Our current contract is a three-year base with two one-year rollovers, which is relatively standard. Cedar Rapids, I believe, has aten-year contract, and I've heard them say that they regret that. So, I don't think we want to go that long, at least initially until we knew that we had things worked out. Correia/ ...just on our third year right now, or we...at the end so we've had this contract for five years. Jordan/ We started talking about this last year in November and started pulling some numbers together and was planning on working on it much more significantly this summer, and well, we all know what happened this summer, so... Champion/ Where are we at on our dumping stuff, I mean, the truck that dumps everything? Fosse/ Oh, the... Champion/ I can't remember what it's called. Fosse/ ...oh, yeah, (mumbled) truck? We're adding our second one to the fleet this year, and we see us continuing to head that direction, because that's asingle-person vehicle. Champion/ Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 55 Fosse/ There's no rolling or anything. The trick is, you know, not everybody in the city has carts yet, and some of the carts are just inaccessible to the arm for that truck, but eventually we'd like to work that direction for some of our routes, for the recycling as well. It just makes sense. Champion/ Right, that's what I was...I think ultimately we'd have both of those things going (mumbled) system. Fosse/ Uh-huh. We've been very pleased with our first truck. We expected more downtime with all the mechanical intricacies, uh, but it's performed very well for us. Champion/ And couldn't that same truck also do the recycling, or does it take a different truck? Fosse/ If you...if you have the right container. You bet. But it won't pick up the little blue thing (laughter). Correia/ So if we would move to the single stream in July, and you say we'd still use the blue bin and the compartmentalized trucks. We would just dump everything in and they would just dump everything...we're just using those trucks because we have those trucks? They wouldn't be sorting them at the curb; they would just throw it all in, take it to wherever...(several talking)...using the trucks because that's what we have, as we're transitioning to the new trucks. Is that... Jordan/ Right. We won't begin to see the full efficiencies of the system until all the new trucks are in place, and all of the new containers are in place. Correia/ Again, I can't...was that three years? Jordan/ That's looking at six, six years down the road we'd have the full, all the new ones completely rotated in. Lombardo/ Can it...have you worked the numbers on, uh, the expanding...expanding the program to more multi-family housing what that would do to our waste stream and what does Landfill... Jordan/ I haven't, um... Lombardo/ Potentially significant. Jordan/ Potentially, yes. We're looking at...even if we could catch another 10 to 15% from our 55% now, and they're recycling at the same rate that the rest of the community is, it could mean another, um...1,000 tons a year, which is, you know, half of what we're doing now. So I think it could be significant. With this...part of the reason that this is so much easier for people and it allows the recycling rates This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 56 to increase so much is it is so much easier. So not only are people who already have, um, who already are recycling, they're going to recycle more, but also the people who do have access to recycling who aren't, may start. So there's...there's acouple different levels of efficiency and easiness for...for the, uh, residents. Bailey/ We11, I know this group has expressed interest in multi-family so this...this sets it up pretty well, so how would we like to...to proceed with this, um, bid single stream? Bid alternates? Um, continue the way we're going? Champion/ I would bid both of them. Correia/ I would bid single stream. Champion/ Well, I would do...I would also (both talking) Bailey/ I would like to know the dif...the cost differential, myself. I would like to be able to make that case, but (several talking) Correia/ ...cost differential from what our current contract is? Champion/ No, because it might...(both talking) Bailey/ It doesn't cost more to get a...two bids. Fosse/ It would give us that differential but...but it would take away the option of...of continuing as we're doing, if we're...if we find out that differential is something that...that we're unwilling to pay. Does that make sense? Because without a new proposal, we can't...we can't continue on. Correia/ Say that again. Fosse/ Okay. Without bidding alternates, if we just bid single stream, and...and we compare that to the way we used to do it, and say, `Oh, that's too much. We don't want to go that route.' Then we...we won't have the benefit of having a new proposal in hand. Correia/ It could be more than what we're paying now. Fosse/ Right. Lombardo/ We'd have to go out and bid (several talking) Fosse/ Right now when we all sort in our garages, we're adding value to the product, because we're taking care of that step. We're going to take that away. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 57 Correia/ I think we know it's going to cost more. Bailey/ I...I agree. I don't have...I'm not shy about that, but I...I would like to be able to show that and explain. I...I would just, you know, if you're bidding I would just bid alternates, because for whatever reason we may decide to continue as we do. I hope not. Lombardo/ Is there any concern that bidding alternates is going to affect the contract price? Hayek/ Good question. Jordan/ I haven't gone through an RFP process before, so I don't have any good info on that. Fosse/ That's a good question. That's something we'll...put some thought into. Lombardo/ I don't know why it would, but it'd be something to consider. Bailey/ So, how would we like to proceed? I mean, it seems like we're interested in at least getting the single stream bid. The question is how we approach that. Champion/ Well, I would like to see us eventually, that's why I'd like to look at this as longer term, um.. . Bailey/ And, keep in mind if we go this direction we're going to be raising fees. And are we comfortable, I mean, we're setting a course in action. Champion/ How much? Bailey/ Thirty to fifty cents per month per household (several responding). Jordan/ Which still would take it at most $4.10 per month to recycle, compared to our current $10.60 for refuse. Bailey/ It's still a fee increase, and I know that that gets particularly touchy at budget time and I just want to flag that. Hayek/ If staff, uh, thinks we should bid the alternates, and my sense is that you do, um, I would support that. Bailey/ If there's no...if there's no reason as Michael pointed out that that would affect anything, that's...I would like to proceed in that way. Fosse/ We'll check in to that. If there is, we'll get back to you and let you know. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 58 Hayek/ How...who are the usual suspects out in the bidding community on...on these kinds of things? Jordan/ City Carton Recycling, uh, Mid America Recycling, um, there are at least two if not three smaller...two smaller and one mom n' pop in the, what could be conceivably close enough to transport. Um, one thing that the Streets and Refuse department is very concerned about is they don't want to have to haul it anywhere. So, that's something that we would have to put in the RFP that there would have to be some sort of, um, location for them to, for our staff to drop here and then the other, the company would have to transport it. Champion/ What about Waste Management? Do they have something in Cedar Rapids? Jordan/ No, they don't. Um, but that doesn't say that yeah, we certainly can transport further, um, if...but we're going to pay the companies for that. Lombardo/ Company could decide to provide roll-off containers at a strategic location that we could fill to. There are ways at getting at that. Jordan/ And that's basically what City Carton would do too. They would have a semi that would run two to three times a week to their Cedar Rapids' facility, which has a sort line. So... Champion/ They don't have a sort line here? No. Jordan/ It's...it's...they do, but it's already...it's to finish the sorting that we already start at the curb, basically. (several talking) We all make mistakes! (laughter) Bailey/ I heard the single stream, I heard a couple bid alternates. What's...give us a direction and... O'Donnell/ I'm for doing them both. Bailey/ Okay. Dilkes/ Just to clarify. You want to see, before there would be an award of that contract. You would want to see that. Those results. Bailey/ Uh-huh. Fosse/ We'd bring forth the staff recommendation. Dilkes/ It normally doesn't go to Council, that's why I'm (mumbled) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 59 Bailey/ Okay. So this time it would, it sounds...we'd be interested in seeing it, okay. (several talking and laughter) Yeah, we would like to be able to take that, a full (laughter). You have what you need? Fosse/ Yes. Bailey/ Okay, thank you. Jordan/ ...very much. Bailey/ Okay. All right, we are postponing commercial vehicle congestion downtown. Thank you, Matt, for being willing to postpone that discussion. Hayek/ Thinking about that, uh, beautiful deserted island right now and it's...(several talking) Bailey/ On his computer. (laughter and several talking) He's hallucinating! Hayek/ ...congestion on that beach! (laughter) Bailey/ Violence Against Women Task Force recommendations, Dale. Violence Against Women Task Force Recommendations (Ref IP #3): Helling/ You have, um, again, the um, recommendations that came from the Task Force, and these include in italics the staff comments. Trying to just give you an idea of...of what are the things that...that uh, we're already involved with, uh, what are some of the things that we can...we can do, and a response to those recommendations. Uh, many of them are, uh, just coordinating and...and networking with...with other agencies in the community. A couple of things that I think, uh, major things that you'd want to look at would depend on far we could go in response to some of the recommendations. One is the funding of the police officer or officers for reinstatement of the Crime Prevention Unit. Uh, because we see a lot of these things that would fall into that, uh, function, and the other thing is whether or not, and this is something that's kind of in the works, but whether or not you want to expand the...the, uh, neighborhood lighting to a full- fledged lighting program, um, again, there are a number of things that are recommended in terms of neighborhood lighting that are pedestrian lighting (mumbled) would take a lot of research and uh, contact with the neighbors and would be reasonably expensive to...to uh, implement if...if in fact we're going to do that in all the areas that are covered, or at least this study or these recommendations would probably want to cover. So with that, I'll just...Sam is here and uh Linda Severson is here and John Yapp is here. Um... Bailey/ Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 60 Helling/ Questions? Correia/ Um, well, since I chair...co-chaired this, I mean, I (mumbled) all the recommendations (laughter) so I don't know if we wanted to go through and pick out, um, if there are things we wanted to say...we agree with this or we want to move forward on this or you don't want to move forward on that. One of the things that I wondered as I was reading through this - if it makes sense, if it makes sense to me to identify, um, the City staff point person on these recommendations. That would, that we would ask for, you know, at regular intervals, you know, what's the progress on this, you know, crime prevention bureau, or what's, um, the progress on, um, staff comment on page 3 of this can be encouraged at the staff level. So like who would be encouraging this, who would be then offering the accountability this was done, um, I mean, I guess I wanted (mumbled) Dale as that point person... Helling/ Yeah, I... Correia/ ...that liaison with some of the University initiatives, as well, um... Bailey/ And I just want to underscore that because I talked to Monique DiCarlo, who's the interim sexual assault coordinator and director of RAC and um, she will be probably sending us a formal request for that liaison person, um, a staff member who can work with the University and coordinate and be a communication conduit as well as some of the implementation coordination, um, between the two, and she contends that nothing really will work well without this sort of liaison and this communication. I know that we communicate a lot with the University, and I don't discount that, but in this specific area, so I think that that's a really good idea, um, and something that we should consider as a matter of policy is to have that, um, that connection, because that would help us coordinate with, um, UI Police. I know that Sam works very closely with them, but I think it would just really help that relationship. Wright/ So many of the recommendations do take into account the University. Bailey/ Yes. Champion/ Sam, explain to us what this, um, crime prevention person would do that would help this situation. (several talking) I mean, one body... as an education thing or...tell me a little bit about that. Hargadine/ Sort of all of the above. This position has existed before, and when, uh, we had the staffing cuts back in 2000, that was one of the positions that went away. So, there is some precedence there, there's already some job descriptions, um, one of the things would be a Neighborhood Watch Coordinator. Uh, would also like to, uh, run volunteers out of that office, sort of as a force multiplier, so that that...that one particular officer isn't doing all of the neighborhood watch. It kind This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 61 of builds on itself with the volunteers. Um, that's the primary, uh, but there's a lot of secondary, well, a lot of education. Uh, education to seniors, I mean, there's a lot of different, um, community policing, crime prevention things that we're not...have not been able to do since then, so uh, you could do, you know, uh, education of the elderly, so um, you know, it's multi-faceted, but uh, it all hinges on putting that one person back in there. Champion/ And, Sam, how are volunteers used? Hargadine/ Um, the...the old neighborhood watch signs, lot of times those were put up by volunteers. Um, volunteers in neighborhood watch, uh, there's usually a block captain that organizes their block, and get to go through and continually train `em, about every other year, because the neighborhoods change on a constant basis, so you keep up those databases, um, it's a constant process. Once you've got neighborhood watch established, you can't just sit back and rest on your laurels. It's gotta always be updated. Champion/ And this person would do that. Hargadine/ This person would coordinate it, with the volunteers. Lombardo/ ...um, data nationally on how effective neighborhood watch programs are? Hargadine/ I know that when you don't do them, your burglary rates usually go up. Bailey/ Um, I have a, this is a really minor question, but you know, going back to this very simple thing of the web site - how, I mean, it seems like links and staying safe in Iowa City, given that it's a very, um, we have lots of people moving in and out, um, would be a great thing to add to our web site. How common in that in other college towns? Have you seen examples or have other people seen examples? It seems like it would be a natural from the...from the police department web page. Hargadine/ I think there's a lot of that, you know, when you're looking for something, some kind of information that's specific, um, you know, it could be, `Okay, I got a PAULA. What happens now?' So they go to the Internet to research those things, so I think it's very (mumbled) Bailey/ I think that would be something that we, I mean, we've got this new web site. People have commented on how useful it is. It seems like a natural. If I were moving in to Iowa City or had a child moving in to Iowa City that that might be something I would look at, and how you stay safe or doing some safety links and I don't know, that seems like a simple step and I mean, it's not going to address everything, but it seems like something that we emphasize that it's important to us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 62 Wright/ It's also one of the easiest things we could do. Bailey/ Yeah, that's what I was also...well, hanging fruit is always... Correia/ But I'm also wondering if that's something we can utilize our UISG liaisons to do, to help with... Bailey/ (mumbled) Correia/ Or even just the content, when you look at...when students are looking for information on the web site, what kind of information is it, what... Bailey/ Well, and also we should be using our agencies, as well, because we, I mean, we want that to be (several commenting) I mean, I would like to move forward on that for a couple...one of the reasons, it seems like an easy cost-effective thing that we could do, I mean, are other people interested in that? Champion/ Oh, yes, that's simple (several responding) Sam, let me ask you another question. Um, this is kind of sensitive. I don't want people to take it wrong, but you're so short of police officers, would this be what you'd want, for that one police officer you might be allowed to hire? Hargadine/ Well, um, this last budget year, you authorized the Department to go to 75, which was an increase, uh, of two, and one of those positions reallocated for this position, because we do have the need for it. Um, we've since, uh, we're in a hiring process right now. We will...we'll always be playing catch-up, between retirements and whatever. So, um, we plan to have between two and three going to the Academy in January. I think it's important not to go ahead...we have two in the Academy right now, uh, I think when those are out, I think it's important to go ahead and proceed with this position, otherwise we'll never be up to... Champion/ Right, because people are always leaving and it takes a while to get somebody. Hargadine/ Right. Bailey/ And that person would coordinate with the UI Police and other sorts, I mean... Hargadine/ Yes. They already have existing programs, so it'd be good to compliment. Bailey/ Okay. Correia/ And there certainly are applications for community policing, within regular police work, and if there was a community policing expert on the force, that would provide that training to the other officers and then you could see there'd be applications for... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 63 Hargadine/ There's the whole science behind (mumbled) community policing by environmental design, so those kind of things -how to structure your business so that you're not likely to be robbed, you know, it's time to make a deposit. There's a lot of...and lighting. Champion/ And, um, in the assaults on women, are they pretty much concentrated. I know they go on all over town, but is there a concentration area that we could concentrate on? Hargadine/ Well, what started this original task force were the groper cases, and they appear to have subsided. Knock on...Formica, um, that doesn't mean there aren't still problems that go on, and um, there...I don't think there really is a... a pinpointed area. They were in apartment houses, everywhere. They're, you know, they're a date rape, something...there's just, there's no way to pinpoint. I can pinpoint the biggest cause, uh, it's a couple blocks from here, but um, where these assaults occur, there's no way to really focus. Helling/ I think the study, and certainly in talking about these things though we, again, without specific lines, we're looking at the high pedestrian areas and the areas where people are walking late at night. Now all the assaults didn't occur late at night, but uh, a lot of them have. Bailey/ When we're doing...oh, I'm sorry, Mike, go ahead. O'Donnell/ I was just going to say, you can't pinpoint an area, but you can, you know, you can light an area; like the idea of the Nite Ride. There's stuff you can do to combat that. Hargadine/ Nite Ride's been very successful for the University. Um, it's had some problems, but I think over all, they're in the multiple hundreds of people that they've been able to take home. Um, of course funding is an issue. Bailey/ Now...and what are we doing in so far as, I mean, part of that's a high pedestrian areas, so you know, focusing on students and, or new residents, I guess, just broadly. I'm assuming that we're doing some education on an annual basis for new University students. How do we do that? On safety on campus - I'm assuming that's part of University does that, of course they've got to balance not making it seem unsafe, but being reasonable. How do we work with them? Hargadine/ We've been invited to, um, they've got a, um, a conference is not the right word. Correia/ Women's Safety Forum, they're starting to do every year. Hargadine/ Right. Um... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 64 Bailey/ When is that? Is that a...is that (several talking) okay. Hargadine/ It's in Old Capitol Mall. There's also some (mumbled) they put together on, um, first time you're renting, and um, we're participating with that. We'll have a table there with the UIPD, so...things not to do to, uh, make your neighbors angry and those kinds of things. Bailey/ So we're doing more outreach and...and staying safe in Iowa City, as well as the...okay. Participating in a community in a positive way in Iowa City. Wright/ Well, one of the things we heard an awful lot about was lighting. And lot of conversations about lighting in some of the neighborhoods, and indeed, at least parts of our neighborhood are incredibly dark at night. Champion/ My neighborhood too everywhere. Wright/ Um, but it also looks like that's going to be one of our biggest hurdles. Bailey/ Well, and there's some research that indicates that it doesn't have as big a impact as everybody assumes, and so I think if we start down that road we have to be very careful. So... Wright/ I haven't seen that research so I can't...I can't respond to that. Bailey/ Right, yeah. Helling/ John is here; could probably shed a little bit of light on that. Um, but I think one of the things that he would stress, and I think we've heard all along, when we talked about lighting is there's really a...there's really a discrepancy amongst the neighbors in terms of their preferences. Some people would like more lighting and that's not attractive. It's thought of as light pollution to some of the other people in the neighborhood. Bailey/ Well, and it's also, I mean, approached in a particular way. Constant lighting can also light an area so, you know, perpetrator can see a victim rather than protect a victim. I mean, go ahead. (several talking and laughter) What do you have about lighting, Dale? Talk to us about lighting, and how much the neighbors love it! (laughter) Helling/ ...northside neighborhood request and... Yapp/ Oh, sure, we did...we did have a cost estimate done, uh, for putting in permanent pedestrian, fairly attractive pedestrian scale lighting, similar to what you see on...on, uh, North Market Square area and it was about $100,000 for four block faces. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 65 Bailey/ Is that Goosetown, the Goosetown request that came through PIN grant? Yapp/ Yes, that's correct. Um, that includes conduit, the poles, the fixtures, the labor, uh, it was very expensive for a relatively small area, four block faces, and that does not include the ongoing cost. Uh, we currently pay Mid American Energy between $11 and $13 per light per month for electricity and maintenance. It comes to about $30,000 a month that the City pays, uh, for lighting. So that's just something to be aware of, there's always an initial cost, as well as an ongoing cost. LJh, as far as the safety issues, I do not know of the specific studies, but uh, certainly adding lights to a pedestrian walkway, um, does increase the safety, uh, if it's...it's, this is going off some past research, if it's combined with trimming back vegetation, trimming back hiding places, uh, and so forth, but adding lights does not address anything in the apartments, in the...in the, uh, cars at parties, etc. So it's one piece of a larger...larger issue. O'Donnell/ That's where the educational process comes in and becomes very important. Yapp/ Uh, with a potential lighting program, there's the high-end, uh, option which is permanent pedestrian lights. Uh, similar to what we have in the commercial areas downtown, um, we've also discussed other options, just as far as brainstorming, such as using that $100,000 to give everybody amotion-detector light for their front yard, giving everybody a light post for their front yard. Uh, it would have a lot of the same effect. Bailey/ Well, and the question too is, I mean, do we want our neighborhoods to look like our commercial areas and do neighbors... Yapp/ Many...many of the lighting issues...I deal with street light requests. Most people are not in favor of additional streetlights in their neighborhood. They, and the typical comment is when I look out the window at night, I want to see the stars. I don't want to see a streetlight. So it's important that pedestrian scale lights be small scale, low to the ground, uh, and not overly bright. (several talking) We've talked about that, and that's an option. One of the issues, especially in the near downtown neighborhoods is the tree canopy. Uh, would prevent most solar lights from getting enough light to be charged, but it's an option in areas without that mature tree canopy. Bailey/ Did you talk in the Goosetown neighborhood, I mean, I know that they came in with that PIN grant and now it's...it's very, very expensive. Did you have a further discussion about that concept of light poles in yards in that sort of.. . Yapp/ I was not involved in that. Bailey/ Okay, because that seems to also, I mean, that also seems to be an interesting, compelling neighborhood... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 66 Wright/ I don't think that was ever discussed. Bailey/ Okay. Seems like...(several talking) Wright/ ...just wanting to get...this had nothing to do with safety. Bailey/ I know. It was historic. Wright/ ...30 streetlights. Champion/ When we replace a streetlight, it should be replaced with something good looking, that's for sure. (laughter) Correia/ Well, I mean certainly I think lighting is probably the higher end, more expensive, well, permanent...permanent lighting. I think some of these other ideas, like motion detectors or motion detector lights, the assessment of...of landscaping. I mean, I think that that is a big issue, in terms of safety. Um, so I mean, I think that along the continuum, and it's only really one factor. I mean (mumbled). The issue is identifying what is the...what is the City's role. What can the City do to be part of creating more opportunities for safety. What types of community collaborations should the City be involved in. Um, what...which departments could be doing certain things, um, and then what constructual things. Bailey/ Well, and I feel like, I mean, I do feel like getting...liaison, moving in that direction, and there's some marketing messaging mentioned that it seems like that could be undertaken by the University that actually has a department, but with that communication we could all have a similar message. I'm sure that, I mean, this has the Iowa City School District listed, so getting people around the table and having some messaging, um, around anti-violence, particularly using, I mean, this talks about using (mumbled) to get that message out. I think that that would be possible with that liaison and that would move forward much more quickly than it would if we sit around and kind of talk about it. There is one other question that was brought up in a discussion that I had about this, um, cab drivers, um, possible initiatives -these are things that staff believes can be initiated. City of Iowa City Police Department to provide customer safety training, and/or informational brochures to cab drivers, and I know we do a criminal background check of cab drivers. Do we any kind of...we don't currently ask them to go through any kind of training right now. Karr/ No, we do not. Bailey/ And, so...I mean, that could be something that, I mean, this is customer safety training. This is customer...this is training for cab drivers to be safe and to recognize...that could be something that... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 67 Correia/ And to also be able to offer a.. . Bailey/ A safe haven. Correia/ Yeah. Right. To know what to do. Bailey/ Right. Right. If they see sexual harassment, if somebody follows somebody into a cab, they can address... Correia/ Right. Bailey/ I mean, that seems like something, I mean, I know the University is looking at some training products that perhaps...how hard would that be to require that...that check off? Karr/ (both talking) Bailey/ Yeah. Karr/ We have 16 companies, 87 vehicles, and I'm going to venture a guess, well over 200 drivers at any point in time. Bailey/ We would have awell-trained populace! (laughter) Karr/ So I mean, if it...if it, and they're all staggered, their, uh, the drivers...the permits for the drivers are not all at the same time, so it could be part of the renewal process, part of obtaining the permit. It would simply be a matter of scheduling it frequently enough to enable new drivers to get it. That would be the only issue. Correia/ I wonder if there's some way to do like a, some type of video production.. . Karr/ I was wondering if we could do a video that would allow...we could set it up and they could view it, sign off on it, and.. . Correia/ Maybe a little test to make sure they actually watched it. Lombardo/ It would be easier if...we had expectations for more professionalized taxi services. I don't know if that's a road you want to go down or not. Bailey/ Um, you weren't here a couple years ago with this discussion, were you? (laughter) Shall we go down that road? (laughter) Karr/ We've talked about that! Bailey/ We have talked about that. We absolutely have. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 68 Lombardo/ Like requiring them to have storefronts and be actually legitimate business and not operate out of your car. Bailey/ We have talked about that. Lombardo/ Be happy to start going to work on that, if you'd like us to. Champion/ Well, I think we did make some stipulations. Didn't we? Karr/ But we didn't come close to... Bailey/ Not close to what... Karr/ Michael is talking about, right now it's very, very easy to start a cab company with two cars. Bailey/ But, we aren't' going to get into this discussion any farther (laughter) because it's not (several talking). Helling/ No, we're not looking for, you know, decisions and details. I mean, I think we just want to know if we're.. . Bailey/ Well, I was trying to pick off some of the stuff that seemed really easy and that we can move ahead on and get some traction. I mean, and... and that also because we are in charge of (mumbled). It seemed like something that we could look into, and approach, and if the University is looking at, uh, videos and web products, seems like we could partner once again, and give it a shot. It does seem like having people informed about...the more people who are informed about what to do when they see this situation. We have an educated community, and, I mean, I've intervened. I think other people around this table have intervened in difficult situations, and if people are trained, that's part of what...of how a community takes care of itself. Dilkes/ It also requires certain postings and (mumbled) some kind of, you know, motto or something that you could (mumbled) Karr/ And we could require that, even being part of the rate card that must be posted. It could be incorporated into it. Very easily. Bailey/ I think (mumbled). So, where do we want to go, I mean, I would like to move forward on this liaison. Do we need to wait for a formal request from the University or (mumbled) Helling/ No, I don't...I mean, I think that's something we can, we just have to work with them. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 69 Bailey/ Are other people interested in that, as well? Just that liaison staff person who kind of...coordinates (several talking) yeah. Correia/ I think we're talking about...so liaison to the University, as well as a liaison to the Council, on progress on.. . Bailey/ ...staff person who turns both ways. Correia/ Okay, good. Bailey/ ...what I was... Helling/ ...several different facets here that involve different expertise, and...one coordinator, but I think we're going to have a number of staff involved, I mean, any time it's...it involves different agencies, human service agencies, I think, you know, Linda has those contacts and on the other hand, with...with public safety at the University, obviously it's going to be (mumbled) through the police, so um, yeah, I think we can get together and put something together that'll work, um, I'm not comfortable in saying, you know, maybe people right tonight say this person will be the liaison, I mean. Bailey/ Well, I mean, I think what would be the most helpful is if it was, I mean, this is just my thought, I mean, and what I heard from Monique is it would be most helpful if it was one person, who would have the ability to, you know, talk to or get the other, the right people around the table, versus multiple staff people, I guess, but that's for staff to figure out. Helling/ No, I think that's right. Overall, we're going to have to coordinate through one, you know, one contact. We don't want to send people chasing around different individuals. Bailey/ Then we can look at the web links and we can look at the...what opportunities that we might have with cabs and if we ever have that (mumbled) professional discussion again, we can look at that, I suppose. Correia/ So could we have an expectation that every quarter that we would receive a report on, a staff report, on what...on these different items, where we...where we are. Bailey/ Well, the one question I would have is I appreciate that this was a task force on violence against women, and I'm getting a lot of calls generally about violence in our community, and are we going to...at what point are we going to keep it focused in this way, I mean, I know that the University is looking at that, but they're also concerned about broad violence issues. I mean...how do we want to...is that a bigger question than we want to...yes? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 70 Hayek/ It's an issue, but...but it's a broader issue than tonight affords us. Bailey/ We could stay `til midnight. (laughter) Yeah. Hargadine/ Well, when you educate, you educate everybody. Bailey/ Right. Hargadine/ When you increase the transportation, you know, so people can get home, you make it safer for everybody, so I think even though the task force was, uh, has specific designs, I think does have broad over-reaching when you make it safer. Bailey/ Right, but you would also acknowledge that there are going to be specific approaches to address different types of assault, I mean, male on male violence is different than... (both talking). Right. Okay. So do we have what we.. . Wright/ Just...to throw it out there. I think John knows this already, but um, one of these recommendations talking about a representative with the parking and transportation (mumbled) for the University, uh, which is fine, but I also, for the time being anyway, I'm Chair of the Parking and Transportation Committee at the University, so...so you got one! Bailey/ Oh, check it off the list! Okay. Wright/ So that's at least good for this year! Bailey/ Good. Hayek/ I mean, I think if we've got a central person on staff who can coordinate these things and keep the ball moving down the field, and...and we can figure out a way to tackle a reasonable, realistic number of these, you know, on the short-term and plan for the bigger issues over the long-term, and then report back periodically, and we'll make progress. Bailey/ And also make sure that the City is, yeah, participating in the ways that, I mean, yeah (mumbled) with, communicating with new residents (mumbled) Hayek/ Yeah. I mean, these are...these are good recommendations. Helling/ I think so, yeah. Information Packet Discussion (November 6 & 13)• Bailey/ Thanks... for staying. Good. Okay. Information packet discussion, information packets from November 6, November 13 -any, um, I just want to point out, um, legislative open house tomorrow, which will be a challenge given our schedule, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 71 but it's there. Okay? Any other items? (laughter) Hearing none, I'm moving along. I was going to give you plenty of time (several talking) slow on the uptake! Okay. Council time. Council Time: Wright/ If you'd waited much longer somebody would have come (several talking and laughter) Bailey/ I thought that was nicely timed actually. Waited the exact amount of time to be respectful and... Champion/ The turkey thing is this Thursday, right? Bailey/ Yes! (several talking and laughter) Karr/ I don't think there's any symbolism in the turkey thing, but (laughter) yeah, the Thanksgiving employee luncheon is this... Champion/ Okay, I won't be there, but I didn't R.S.V.P. Bailey/ (several talking) do we have to post as open meeting? Do we have four? (several talking) Okay, thank you. Karr/ Anybody else want... Bailey/I R.S.V.P.'d. Karr/ Okay. Hayek/ I'm up in the air. Champion/ It starts at what time, Marian? (mumbled) Karr/ I think it starts serving at 11:30. Hayek/ (several talking) Used to be a carver out at Yellowstone Park. Bailey/ I'm sure if you just stop by for awhile too (both talking) Hayek/ No, I know. Karr/ Eleven to 1:00 is the... Hayek/ I like those things! (several talking and laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 72 Bailey/ If you don't R.S.V.P., you don't get food! (laughter) Okay, other Council time? Hayek/ I had, uh, a meeting last week, or lunch last week, with Provost Lowe, and I had another meeting with Tom Rocklin, uh, who's the Interim Dean of Students and I know Rocklin going back a number of years and anyway, the upshot is the University is cooking up some alcohol-related ideas and they're...they're gelling on their end, I think. Specific proposals and a desire to work with the City and... so, I think they've got some momentum. Correia/ ...in the Englert letter the alley... Bailey/ Oh, yeah! Cabaret! Correia/ ...alley cabaret, that sounds really, really nice. Wright/ That just reminded me. Where are we with the, uh, when will we be seeing a proximity ordinance for bars? Dilkes/ We're shooting for...to bring all the alcohol stuff to you on, the meeting on January Stn Bailey/ So appropriate, right around New Years. (laughter and several responding) Dilkes/ `Cause it'll have the zoning component and it'll also have the licensing component, a new...price specials restrictions so you can chose. Bailey/ Other Council time? O'Donnell/ One...one thing on the information packet. We got a letter regarding the SEATS, uh, ParaTransit, our program, and uh, I've been on the SEATS ParaTransit Advisory Committee for a number of years. I've been the Chairman of it for several years, and I've just never seen a letter quite like this. You know, it's...we've done many, many surveys and um, it's always, they've always been very, very positive and this is the first real negative letter I've seen about it. Champion/ There is nothing you can do where you're not going to get negative letters. O'Donnell/ Exactly. Correia/ So you think it's an (several talking) Champion/ ...no matter what you do, there's always going to be people who don't like what you do, and they're going to do exactly what that letter does. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 73 O'Donnell/ And I get so many calls from the ParaTransit riders, uh, they like the service, they like everything about it, and uh, this is really about the worst thing I've ever, ever read about the program. Yeah. But I just wanted to point that out. Champion/ But they probably (mumbled) write a letter like that about (mumbled). I mean, it's just the way it is. O'Donnell/ (mumbled) Schedule of Pending Discussion Items: Bailey/ Okay. Um, schedule of pending discussion items. Any other questions about when things are coming up? I think we're kind of...been through out pending list. (several commenting) Upcoming Community Events/Council Invitations: Bailey/ I think the rest of you got this Realtor's Home for (mumbled). Are we going to be able to have somebody...November 20th at 2:00 P.M. at Sandhill Estates. The partners and sponsors of Realtor Home for our Future, affordable green home with the universal design. So there's a...agrnund-breaking ceremony. Correia/ ...include the Housing Authority and the housing ambassadors. (several talking) Bailey/ FYI, I don't think I'll be there, but...okay. Discussion of Meeting Schedules (Ref. IP4): Karr/ Um, that is the second draft of the, uh, January, February and March schedule. It includes revisions around dates that you had mentioned to me, um, includes, um, the dates that we had avoided the last time, and we really do need to nail it if...nail down the schedule, if nothing more for the regular "formal" meeting schedule, because we'll be setting public hearings in December for January, budget aside. They all worked for you? Bailey/ So, if there are any challenges.. . Champion/ They will not all work for me, but I don't know which ones won't, so it won't make any difference. Karr/ It'll only make a difference if it happens to hit a time that one or two more of you can't come. Bailey/ So will everybody take a look at this between now and tomorrow night, and let Marian... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008. November 17, 2008 City Council Work Session Page 74 Karr/ And there's only one formal meeting right now in January. That's the 6`h Champion/ I'll be here for that. But I won't know definitely until after December lst, because I'm going out to Salt Lake City for the new grandbaby. Correia/ Everybody else has to be here, so... Champion/ So Connie can go to Salt Lake City! (laughter) `Cause I'm going even if we're not going to be here. Bailey/ We need five, right? Karr/ You need four. You only, yeah, you only need four. It's if it's a...if it's something that you don't agree to, then... Bailey/ And are we concerned that there's only one formal meeting in January with any kind of items? Karr/ Well, that's why the sooner I get this information out to staff, we know if there's a problem, but I didn't see any reason, any way to make that happen, given the absences of many of you in January. Bailey/ So, please look at this before tomorrow and... Karr/ Without giving up a budget session Champion/ The other thing is too, there doesn't seem to be a lot of Planning and Zoning items going on right now, which take a lot of time, and so.. . Karr/ That may pick up, like later in that...not necessarily January. Bailey/ But, the exact reason to get it out to staff, they'll know what's in the pipeline. Yeah. Okay. All right. We are through our work session agenda. Shall we go home? Show up here tomorrow at 6:00. Thank you all very much. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular work session meeting of November 17, 2008.