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.