Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-04-06 Transcription#2 Page 1 ITEM 2. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS. Lemme Elementary Bailey: Will the students from Lemme Elementary please come forward. Hi, thanks for being here. We're really um excited to hear what you have to say about why you got this special award, and I've asked Tyler Gunn, our Student Liaison from the University of Iowa to also assist me in this because you know he's closer to your age and I think that he could probably have more things to say to you about being a student and um working hard in the community. Gunn: Well thank you, Mayor Bailey. Again, my name is Tyler Gunn and I'm a student here at the University. I'm the, uh, Student Liaison to the City Council. It's really an honor forme to give out these awards because I understand, and as we all know here, it's very difficult to do good on your schoolwork and get it all finished, good grades, there's only so much time for extracurricular...extracurriculars, and from what I hear you guys go above and beyond that, and you're able to help your peers, and that's very important, and the Council and I, we appreciate that and we commend you for your efforts. So, uh, you've all...have a short speech here and we're really excited to hear it, so I won't keep you any longer. Brown: Hi, my name is Mandy Brown. I'm a 6th grader at Helen Lemme Elementary. I would like to thank my teachers for guiding me along the way. They've always been helpful to me. I feel honored to receive this award. It is a big award to receive. To me a citizenship means to help people and not focus on yourself. I can show citizenship by keeping kids safe on patrol, and helping younger kids. Thank you City Council for having me here and listening to my speech. It is great to be a Lemme Leopard! (applause) Fischer: Hi, my name is Libby Fischer. I'm a 6th grader at Helen Lemme. I'd like t thank my parents for...for helping me and make...and helping me become the person I am today. And the Lemme staff for helping us be the best school in the great state of Iowa. I am honored to receive this award, mostly because only three other students and I won this so the choices were pretty limited. To me citizenship means doing what you need to when no one's looking and focusing on others' needs before yourselves. Um, ways I show citizenship is being a patrol captain, helping with younger children, and acting on the 6 pillars of character. Last but not least, thank you City Council. Remember, it's great to be a Lemme Leopard! (applause) Johnson: Hi, my name is Lydia Johnson and I think I've gotten this award is because I understand what it means to be a Lemme Leopard and follow the 6th pillars of character. I express what they mean in my own words. What I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #2 Page 2 think the six pillars of character stand for is to learn to work together and understand each other's differences. Being a Lemme Leopard has taught me how to (mumbled) and therefore I am proud to say it's great to be a Lemme Leopard. (applause) Sanderson: Hi...I am, my name is Timothy Sanderson and I am in 6th grade at Helen Lemme Elementary School I show citizenship by participating in safety patrol and reading to younger students at school. I help save the earth by recycling and planting (mumbled) at my house. When I am...when I was in Cub Scouts we picked out (mumbled). I think citizenship is being a responsible, respectful, honest person who helps keep the city clean and safe for everyone. At Lemme we...follow the six pillars of character. Trustworthiness (mumbled) fairness, caring, citizenship. Thank you for having me here. It's great to be a Lemme Leopard and a citizen of Iowa City. (applause) Bailey: Lots of Leopard pride tonight! Thank you for brining that to us, uh, we have some awards for you and I'll have Tyler read them, uh, they all have your own name on them, but he'll read...he'll read one. Gunn: Well thank you for those speeches. They were some of the best I've heard. Really outstanding! So, your award reads: for his or her outstanding qualities of leadership within Lemme Elementary as well as the community, and for his or her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we represent you as an outstanding student citizen. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City City Council. Congratulations! (applause) Bailey: Do we have any grads from Lemme up here? I don't think we do. So...that was kind of nice! Hayek: I was a safety patrol captain, does that count? Bailey: Okay, that's good to know, but not at Lemme, right? No Leopard pride. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #3 Page 3 ITEM 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION. UNESCO Bailey: As you all know, Iowa City was designated a UNESCO City of Literature, and we are very honored to have sort of someone from our sister city, Edinburgh, here tonight and of course from one City of Literature to another, we would like to recognize Ali Bowden, and thank you for being in Iowa City, and we certainly have...we have a few tokens to, um, help you remember your trip. Although we consider Iowa City quite a memorable place and you shouldn't have any problem remembering our wonderful community, but we're so delighted that you're here to, uh, guide us in this journey of being a City of Literature. So, Ali and Chris, if you would Iike to come forward, I would just like to present you with this. First of all, Ali, we would like to present you with a key to Iowa City, Iowa USA, a City of Literature, so...I'm not exactly sure which doors it unlocks, but I'm sure they're all very literary, so thank you. And, probably even more importantly, we have a couple of books for you. (mumbled) by our own Marilyn Robinson, um, of course signed by Marilyn, and then the Oxford Project, which is just an amazing project and amazing book, and we just want...these are just some, as you well know, of the examples of why we are a City of Literature. So, we would like to give these to you. You might want to have these shipped (laughter) so you don't have to carry them in your luggage, but as a token of our recognition of our connection as Cities of Literature, and to thank you for all the work that you will do, and have done, in helping support us in this designation. So, thank you. (applause) Yes, at the mic. Bowden: Thank you very much. That's incredibly kind. Um, hello Iowa City, UNESCO City of Literature. I love being able to say that! Um, congratulations on your designation. Um, we in Edinburgh are extremely pleased that you have joined the Creative City Network, as our sister City of Literature, alongside Melbourne in Australia, and we look forward to many, many years of fruitful and creative collaboration and exchange, and also to the growth of the Network, as many more sisters of, uh, sister Cities of Literature come onboard. Um, I would also like to thank you for an incredibly warm, uh, and friendly welcome to your city. You are exceptional hosts! Um, I thank you very much for that. Thank you. Bailey: Thank you, Ali, and thanks for being here. Chris, did you have a few words, as well? Merrill: Thank you, Mayor Bailey, um, I just wanted to say a couple of words about Ali, just uh, byway of saying that she is the Director of the first City of Literature and it is, uh, she has been a defining member of the Creative Cities Network throughout, uh, throughout the world. She's the one who has in so many ways given us a sense of what this Creative Cities Network This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #3 Page 4 might be. We are so lucky to have her here this week to be meeting with the members of the community, going to the University, to the Library, to meet with as many people as possible to imagine what kinds of new collaborations and projects we might be able to put together, and I would draw your attention to an event tomorrow night, open to the public, we'll gather in Englert Theater at 5:00, uh, Ross Wilburn is going to speak, uh, President Mason will speak from the University, former Poet Laureate Marvin Bell will read some poems, including the poem that we commissioned him to write for our dossier, and uh, Ali's going to show a short film and uh, PowerPoint about what Edinburgh is doing as a City of Literature, as a way of sparking some ideas for us, as we move forward in the creation, uh, of our own City of Literature office. The final thing I would say is this, if not for Ali's guidance and her support and her active work behind the scenes, I think that Iowa City would still be waiting for that honor designation to come along, so I'm very, very grateful to her and glad she's here this week. Bailey: Thank you, Chris. Thank you, Ali, so much. (applause) And I encourage everyone to attend that event at the Englert tomorrow night and we don't lack for ideas in this community, but it'll be really exciting to hear how we move forward with the City of Literature. So...thank you so much for being here, and enjoy the rest of your week in Iowa City. We will try to do a better job with the weather! Thank you! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 5 ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. a) REZONING APPROXIMATELY 100-ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF 420TH STREET SE, WEST OF TAFT AVENUE FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT (ID-I) TO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (I-1) (REZ09- 00002) 1. PUBLIC HEARING Bailey: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Davidson: Good evening, Madame Mayor, Members of the City Council, I'm Jeff Davidson, Planning Director. Uh, the uh, the first item on your agenda is one I think you are fairly familiar with, uh, we are taking action now based on proceeding with the development of these, uh, industrial park and by the way, we're fishing around for a name, so hopefully it will have a formal name and can start doing some branding and some identity things with it, but for now, the expansion of the southeast area industrial park, uh, essentially taking off the interim development, um, zoning, uh, and going to a general industrial for approximately 100 acres of the total of 174 acres, uh, we are suggesting for the time being, uh, leaving this parcel, uh, with the ID zoning, uh, it'll...it'll be...the strategy right now, you're aware we received the RISE grant. We will be reconstructing 420th Street, uh, and...and putting in the associated infrastructure with that, and basically trying to build off of both sides of 420th Street initially, and this is the 100 acres that we are, uh, suggesting the ID, uh, designation be taken off of, based on us proceeding and getting the property ready for development. Uh, and...following this rezoning then, will be the platting of the property. We are still working on that. Our staff committee with our consultant, we hope to have a plat to you probably by May or June. Uh, the platting of course is what divides the property up into building lots that can then be, uh, put up for sale. Um, so let's see, just a couple of other things - um, we will be able then, part of our infrastructure installation will be putting in some citings, uh, initially on the south side of the railroad tracks, which will allow us to extend the spur down into this area, uh, we have every likelihood of crossing, uh, 420th Street and actually making sure that this area is also served with rail service, if there is a demand for it, thafll be part of our planning. Um, as L ..as I say, the bottom line here is that with these improvements we feel the property is ready to have the ID zoning...that ID zoning is basically for property that for one reason or another, and this case infrastructure not being available, um, it's not ready for development. We feel with these infrastructure improvements it will be. Our recommendation then is for rezoning of the 100 acres south of the railroad tracks, um, from uh, ID-I to I-1 zoning. Any questions? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 6 Bailey: Questions? Okay. Um, at this time let's, uh, just disclose ex parte communication. Any? All right. Discussion? Anybody else wishing to speak at the public hearing? (bangs gavel) Public hearing is closed. 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Hayek: Move first consideration. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Moved by Hayek, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Okay, roll call. This consideration carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 7 ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. b. CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY .98 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF ROHRET ROAD FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (ID-RS) TO LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 40.13 ACRES FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR-1) TO LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) AND 60.28 ACRES FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (OPD-5). (REZ08-00011) 1. PUBLIC HEARING Bailey: This is a public hearing continued from 3/10 and 3/24 (bangs gavel). Public hearing is open, and let's open this, let's disclose ex parte communication before we go into the... Champion: I did, talk to Wally P about what Planning and Zoning's decision was on talking to us, so...they don't want to. They approve of what we thought (mumbled) Bailey: Okay. Others? O'Donnell: I talked with Bob Miklo today, specifically about the buffer area. That's it. Bailey: Okay. Any other... Hayek: I talked to Legal staff about the southern area and exactly what had happened between the last time we talked about it and where things stand tonight. Bailey: Okay. Anybody else? I talked with Planning staff about the buffer area, as well. So, um, the wetlands buffer area. Okay. Davidson: This is the third meeting that we've, uh, had discussion on this item. Uh, there's not a whole lot new from the last meeting. The significant item since the last meeting is we do have a signed CZA, uh, that does reflect the new outlot D, which you had described to you, um, at the last meeting. You will recall that our motivation for moving outlet, ah, excuse me - outlot D -was that the developer had not been successful, uh, in getting, um, the Slothower Road situation, uh, and the resulting double-fronting lots, um, we...we had suggested that they work with the County to get that vacated. They weren't able to do so, so we are proceeding, uh, with a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 8 possibility in the future that...that, uh, that will be vacated, and...and subsequently taken care o£ Also, the...the plat could be redesigned to include Slothower Road staying. That'll be determined in the future, but the time being, we've created outlot D. Uh, the other significant thing that this allows is that you...you discussed at your last meeting, uh, somewhat extensively the notion of, um, multi-family development and offering some additional housing types from what was proposed by the developer, um, and also the possibility of some open space, additional open space, either in conjunction with that clustered housing, or as a...as something set aside. I think you'll recall the developer indicated that, uh, they might be amenable to, um, adding some open space, public open space down here, but only if it was subtracted off of outlot B, which is right now designated for, uh, park land, um, and exceeds actually what is required, uh, so...so that was the developer's thoughts on that. What we are proposing, the...the developer has requested RS-5 zoning for outlot D. Uh, and then of course OPDH-5 for... for parts 3 through 6, which is no change from your previous discussions. LTh, staffs recommendation for outlot D is to retain the current RR-1 and IDRS zoning, and basically force a rezoning in the future of outlot D. What that does is just give you a, well, significantly more flexibility over the RS-5 zoning, depending on how you might condition the RS-5 zoning. Um, because the RR-1 and IDRS zoning would not allow the property to be developed, um, without going through the rezoning process, what it does is it gives a future City Council, well, this City Council if it happens in the next eight months, or a future City Council, the ability to consider either the...the multi-family type units or the additional open space. That would occur during the rezoning process. If you were to rezone it RS-5 without any conditions, basically mandating those things, at that point then you have much less flexibility with the property and the developer would be able to come in with an RS-5, which is asingle-family subdivision that meets our subdivision requirements and we would have very little ability to manipulate it any further, uh, there are rights once it is rezoned that...that the RS-5 would allow them to go ahead with asingle-family development. So, that is our recommendation. Do you have any comments or questions before you continue your hearing? Bailey: Questions? Wilburn: Um, I like the possibility of being able to, uh, continue to try and work with, encourage, negotiate that because I think, uh, if I'm thinking of the right location in terms of open space or some multi-type unit, uh, the location that I'm thinking has some higher-end housing like this is out on the east side. I'm forgetting the name of it, uh, Windsor Ridge is, and that's kind of the prototype. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 9 Davidson: Windsor Ridge is an excellent model in terms of mixing housing types into a new development that ranges from I believe there are 12-plexes out there, certainly townhouses, all the way up to very high end single family duplexes, a real substantial assortment, uh, of housing types. Wilburn: Right, and it's something existing, it has existed, and it's worked in this community. So... Bailey: Other comments, questions? Okay, this is a public hearing. This is the third time that we're preceding on this public hearing. I would ask that those wishing to speak at the public hearing, I think Council really does understand the fundamental concerns that you all entered with -the trees, um, the...the wetland buffer, and these sorts of things, so I would ask that we hear new concerns, or...or different approaches tonight. I think that we are in agreement that we've...we've heard the concerns and I think we've moved forward with those concerns under consideration. So, those wishing to speak at the public hearing, please approach the podium, and limit your comments to five minutes or less. And please state your name. Jewell: My name is Larry Jewell, and I've spoken here before. Um, I'll go ahead and I'll breeze through this. What I did is I got this in late so you may not have had a chance to look at it, but basically it's a presentation that provides some additional financial information and impact, based on the proposed rezoning. So what I would is that you take a look at this when you have an opportunity to go back through it in your packet. I won't spend a lot of time on it tonight. I will just get to the, uh, key points that, uh, you asked us to get to. Basically there's an agenda that gives you an overview of what's included in the packet. Um, I've identified the objectives of the rezoning and development, uh, specifically based on the points we heard hear in the discussion periods, uh, we believe that these are some of the key components that the City would like to see when it comes to rezoning and development. Um, well planned neighborhoods is one of the key things that we're looking at. Um, also tried to identify the objectives of rezoning the development for the developer, again, I think at the top of the list is awell-planned development, along with maximizing return on investment, uh, they've expressed a desire to move forward quickly, and minimize the zoning and platting contingencies. So, those are ones that we've talked about in the past. Um, the neighbors, again, as you pointed out you've heard all of these concerns, so I'm not going to spend much time on those, but again, just recap those issues, uh, as part of this PowerPoint, uh, presentation here. Um, one of the key things I think, you know, that we've talked about is the desire to stick to the, uh, Southwest District Plan and there's a key statement in there that I think talks about the, uh, multi-family housing, uh, the fact that it would fit, if it's well-designed and then also it specifically states the transition between the larger lots and the new development. So that's straight from the, uh, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 10 Southwest District Plan. Um, truly what we believe is that the goal should be for collaboration, to strike a balance between the interested parties -the City, the developer, and the neighbors. And with that in mind, basically I wanted to quickly just recap some of the information related to the, uh, subdivision, uh, the request is to go from the larger lots to the smaller lots. The plat that we've seen previously had 1701ots and (mumbled) off of that, um, it just kind of recaps that information so no need to go back through that. Um, this is the, um, current map that you've seen multiple times, so again, what I would like to do is just kind of focus on this information down here that, um, seems to be the one of largest concern. Um, so basically if I focus on the southern subdivision, um, what we're talking about is about roughly 25 acres of buildable space, which is based on that plat that I just showed you, a total of 97 lots was proposed for that. Um, essentially under the current zoning that would be 25 one-acre lots, um, the proposed 97 lots equates to 57 out of the total 1701ots for the entire new development, and then just to, uh, give you asense -the average lot size for the subarea is, uh, a quarter acre, or four lots per...per acre. Um, if we take a look at the breakdown of those lots, you can kind of see how they break down, um, 41 % are at the minimum range, and only 6% at the larger lot size. So that gives you a sense for the density that's being proposed for this area. The other thing that I took a look at - I'm not sure if you'll be able to see that or not, but um, in your packet you should be able to see it, but I did a quick financial analysis based on the estimated gross revenue. I don't have the expenses, but under the, uh, RR-1 revenue, you can see that the developer taking current market information roughly about $3 million. City tax base would be about $200 for the first year. Again, this is using information that's current, uh, based on the Country Club Estates, Galway Hills, and the Cardinal Crossings information. With the proposed RS-5 zone, rezoning, basically what you're looking at is a difference here...I've got it highlighted here on the next page. You're looking at a net difference of about $4 million in increased gross revenue and an increase of about $379,000 a year for the tax base. So there's a sizable increase in revenue that both the City will see from a tax base purpose, and the developer will see, um, by rezoning this to an R...RS-S. With that in mind, uh, basically I think, you know, the neighbors have indicated we're not opposed to rezoning it. Where we have a problem is with the, uh, platting of this, and some of the issues that we've raised before, so this is just a concept plan that I put together based on the information I had available from that other plot... or that other plat map. What we've done is, um, we tried to give it a different configuration. Obviously we're not, uh, engineers or developers, but we...we took into consideration the open space, or the green space. Uh, we talked about, uh, putting in the multi-family homes, um, including four-plexes, duplexes, patio homes. You can also take this and you can disperse it amongst these areas here as well. Some of the things that we did, uh, add that weren't included before, we talked about adding trails. We talked about retaining This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 11 the 100-foot buffer there to take into consideration the sensitive areas. We included the larger lot sizes for the transition as called out for in the, uh, Comprehensive Plan, um, along this, uh, Rohret Road here, as well, and again, we've talked about retaining the trees and um, consideration for moving the center line a little bit north, uh, as that is designed. So, basically this is just one example where you can do the multi-family housing, um, you end up instead of the 97 lots, basically what you do is you end up with in this concept plan 76 total homes, versus 25 that would be there if you left it at a RR-1 zoning. So, again, we think the neighbors are definitely for the redevelopment, um, we would like to have input to how it's designed. We would like to have our points heard and a balance struck between the concerns that we've raised with the City Council, as well as, um, the interest of the City and the developer, so...thank you for your time. I...I'll try to answer any questions if you have it. I know that was a quick run through and you haven't probably had a chance to digest it, but uh, if you have any questions I'll try to answer them. Bailey: Thank you. Jewell: Well, I guess one last thing I did do is I basically, uh, gave my recommendations, uh, sorry about that, so again, I want to take a collective approach and strike some balance, uh, redesign of the plat, um, if the developer needs to move forward quickly, um, currently I would suggest only approving those phases north of the wetlands, without Lakeshore Drive, because that seems to be...still be a point of contention, and then the development of the southern subsection, uh, would suggest at a time when Rohret Road and Slothower issues are resolved. So...thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to comment at the public hearing? Hegeman: Mayor Bailey, my name is Robert Hegeman, I live at 44 Tucson Place. I've addressed this Committee before, or I'm sorry, the Council before. Um, four points, uh, first, um...three points on the wetland, the wetland ordinance. Um, because the buffers are important. The major drive coming through here comes down and curves up here, and goes straight up this wetland here. First point about the wetland ordinance, it makes no provision for low quality wetlands. That is not defined in the Iowa City ordinance. I've heard that term used, and it's somewhat prejudicial. The purpose of the wetland is to hold water and prevent rapid runoff. Uh, it doesn't have to be high quality to do that. So it deserves the same protections as the ordinance requires. Second, looking at this reduction in the buffer between this wetland here, section...14.5.i.6.e.3.b.2 states that it be reduced to 25 feet, only if it does not in a given year of average precipitation contain standing water at any time during the calendar year. I think we've seen photos from Mr. Jewell and others that there's standing waters back in that wetland back here. In other words, the buffer must be This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 12 50 feet, according to the Iowa City ordinance, and I request that that be reviewed. Second point, or the third point about the Iowa City ordinance. Um, has to do with its purpose. Its purpose is to minimize impact on the wetlands. It does expressly permit bridges and other things through a wetland, under subsection D, but subsection D of the wetland ordinance does not exempt the...the road from other things. That is compensatory mitigation if it does cross a wetland. So as this drives comes down here, and proceeds up this wetland here, it is destroying it, requiring that that wetland be compensatorily mitigated, and I think there is a plan to do that, by doing it down here. However, compensatory mitigation maybe permitted only if it is clearly demonstrated that avoiding and minimizing the impact on the wetland would be unreasonable, that is if it's unreasonable to move this road here. It should be allowed. But if it's reasonable to move it over here where it doesn't impact the wetland, then I think there's a serious question as to whether or not the positioning of this road here having a major impact on this wetland area here is in compliance with the Iowa City ordinance. Finally, one last point, before I mentioned the topography of which you cannot see from the...excuse me...there's a significant down slope and a significant up slope, or if you're going the other direction, a significant down and a significant up of about 20 or 30 feet. In other words this road running a gradual curve through here is going to have traffic that is going to speed up fairly fast down to 35 here, and slow down to 25 here. Similarly going the opposite direction, although the speed limit would be 25. There's not going to be policemen there every day. I would request something similar to Shannon Drive, where there is a speed hump crosswalk at the bottom to slow traffic down. That's going to be an area of, uh...uh, prairie grass and that sort of thing, well, there'll be a lot of kids there, and I think slowing that traffic down is important. Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to address issues that we haven't discussed previously in the previous public hearing...portions? Tokuhisa: Good evening, I'm Dave Tokuhisa. I've spoken to the Council before. Uh, in regard to Larry's, uh, concept plan, I think it's a good idea. It is good to see diversity in housing. As it is platted right now, on a junior high school teacher's salary I would not be able to think about buying a house there. That was my former profession before coming to Iowa City. Uh, again, consideration for the wetlands, not so much for the residents...current residents of the subdivision, but everybody downstream, within the subdivision and beyond. Because this is where, uh, big flooding starts. It starts up high and everything just rolls down hill, whether it be the Cedar River or the Iowa river, or the Red River. Uh, for the folks northwest of us. But, one good thing, I see we've made some progress in bringing forth ideas, which is good, uh, hopefully we'll see, uh, some more things realized, and one last concern is Rohret Road, uh, there is lot 38 in the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 13 subdivision, uh, will that lot have to be adjusted if the roadway is moved 17 feet north in the future, or would it not be better to do it now? Just something to consider. Uh, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. Bailey: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to comment? (bangs gavel) Public hearing is closed. 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Champion: So moved. Correia: Second. Bailey: Moved by Champion, seconded by Correia. Discussion? All those in favor say aye. Motion carries. Wilburn: Uh, Jeff, a question. I was, oh, I'm sorry. Bailey: Will you move first consideration? Wilburn: Move, um, first consideration. Bailey: Okay, do I have a second? Wright: Second. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Wright. Discussion? Wilburn: Uh, Jeff, just refresh my memory about....I mean the terms about the quality of a wetland. That's Corps of Engineer stuff, um... Davidson: Yeah, I...I apologize...all seven of you know I can't stand up here and speak as a wetland's expert. We do have a wetland expert on staff, Julie Tallman, who has reviewed this. I don't want to speak for her but...but it has been reviewed, and um, the...the issue of the quality of the wetlands and the compensatory mitigation has...has been reviewed by...by Julie, and she's asked us...she has not asked us to express any concerns to you regarding that. Wilburn: Okay. Thank you. Bailey: Other discussion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 14 Hayek: Can you, uh, speak to those two lots that, uh, abut either side of the entry road there on the east side, as it relates to Rohret Road. Davidson: Yeah, once platted, we would have to purchase property from those lots and you have the ability to do that, uh, either through an arm's length transaction or through condemnation, um, the City Engineer has indicated that, uh, he is comfortable with our ability to, uh, construct Rohret Road. Remember it's constructed to Lakeshore Drive is all, in conjunction with this. The portion will be reconstructed to that point right there, okay? It will be reconstructed. Um, it's this part further down here that you heard Ron at the last meeting indicate he was comfortable with the ability for us to protect the mature plantings on the lots to the south. He was a little less secure about the very western part here, um, but...but felt that with the flexibility that outlot D gives us, then in the subsequent rezoning and platting of that, we'd work that out at that time, and...and you know, I think Ron was pretty straight forward in saying until we design the road, we don't know for sure. Hayek: I mean, if there's a good chance that the road would be moved north, um, and we don't know that, but if that's the case, I mean, does it make sense to not address those two lots at the present time, versus (both talking) Davidson: ...the road will be constructed, reconstructed -excuse me -Matt to...to the western most part of this lot, um, that...that is a requirement of the developer in order to...to plat that area of Lakeshore Drive. Hayek: Reconstructed along its current configuration. Davidson: Um, for all intents and purposes, yes. The notion of moving it to the north was for...was from that point there further west, when Ron was...was, uh, projecting that to you the other day. (both talking) Hayek: Okay, so...so that section of Rohret Road, directly south of these two proposed lots... Davidson: Yeah, from where it terminates right now, to that point, will be reconstructed in conjunction with the parts 3 through 6. Hayek: And are not the subject of concern about the location of Rohret Road and trees. Davidson: Uh, Ron indicated he did not have a concern over that portion, no. Ron's chief concern and... and he really was wanting to give you the straight information - he could not guarantee that at this western most point, until the road is designed, he will not know for sure the impact on the mature This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 15 trees. He felt pretty good about it, but he didn't want to mislead you into thinking that until the road was designed we'd know for sure. Bailey: But with the flexibility of outlot D, I mean, as we design and as things are platted down there, we can...that can be addressed. Davidson: Yes, outlot D gives you the ability to move that alignment to the north in an attempt to protect the mature trees to the south. O'Donnell: Jeff, could you, could you point out lots 6, 7 and 8 up there. Davidson: I assume you are talking about...these, Mike? O'Donnell: Right. Uh, the 25-foot buffer, if...if that were increased 30 additional feet to like 35 feet, or 55 feet, would that alleviate some concerns about the steep slope and the water issue? Davidson: I think that's probably best answered by the developer's representative who is here. You have closed your hearing, but I assume at your request he could answer a question. O'Donnell: I would like to hear that. Davidson: Duane? Musser: Thank you. Duane Musser, MMS Consultants. I...I don't, I can't answer if it would relieve their concerns. Our...our concern would be that those lots are only 130 foot deep right now on your preliminary plat. I'm sure you can't read that, but, um, if we take 25 or 30 or 35 foot off the rear of lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, we basically end up with lots that are not buildable. O'Donnell: What's the depth of lot 130? Musser: Lot 130? O'Donnell: No, what was the depth of the lots 6, 7, and 8? Musser: They're 130 foot deep. O'Donnell: 130. Musser: Yes. Bailey: Any other questions? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 16 Champion: Well, maybe you explained the last time you were here, but could you explain how those, that slope is going to be protected or dealt with? Musser: Well, the portion of the critical slope that's in the buffer, obviously we cannot touch. The portion that is not, um, we will actually reduce that slope by some of the grading in the backyard to build that home. So we'll actually...there'll be less critical slope there after the grading's done, but obviously through the...through the staff CSR protection, and of course the wetland...the Corps of Engineers, um, the buffer, the wetlands will all be fenced off prior to construction, so all that area'll be protected from any development activity, and then we'll start our grading activity outside of that fenced in area. Um, you know, we do have to build Lakeshore Drive first. Staff is requiring that Lakeshore be built before any other phases, just to get secondary access up to Country Club Estates so I'm just...this first stretch here from Rohret up to the...up to the stream corridor is...is, has to be built first. Bailey: Any other questions? Okay. Musser: Thank you. Bailey: Further discussion? Correia: We11, I'm not going to support (mumbled) um, I don't...I don't think it's the right plan, um, I mean, we have two policy documents directing, um, housing policy. One is our housing market analysis that tells us what our market needs, um, we need more multi-family zones. It needs, uh, more diversity in housing costs, um, we want to see that housing mixed in all of our neighborhoods, um, we talked about that, um, in our...the District Plan, calls out a desire for more multi-family housing, and based on the information we had from Bob at our last meeting, there's 11 or something, uh, multi-family units in this whole Southwest District area, um, so given that for those reasons I'm not going to support this rezoning. Bailey: Okay. Further discussion? Wright: This is a plan that has an awful lot of flaws in it. Um, I think we've started to address some of those, but the, uh, think we can have outlot D remain in the RR-1 zone and IDRS zone, so that would give some flexibility to a Council in the future to talk about, uh, some more dense housing in that particular area. And I'm...I'm more comfortable since the City Engineer was here at our last meeting about the mature trees along Rohret Road. It appears that most of those will be, uh, able to survive the upgrades. I'm still a little concerned about the wetland buffer, uh, along the east side there that we were just discussing, but that...may not be sufficient to handle some of the water problems in the future, um, and I know those are This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #6 Page 17 substantially larger lots than some of the rest of the area, but they're not particularly deep. But it...it, uh...there are enough flaws in this plan that I don't think I can support it. Champion: Well, I am going to support it. I think we've tried to address some of the issues that we thought were really important, um, I would like...I will support the first consideration. I guess I'd like Julie here next time, if that's possible. Is that possible? To discuss this wetland issue. If anybody else agrees with me. Wright: I think that would be terrific. Bailey: I think that would be very helpful. Wilburn: I think I would like to hear, uh, Julie come here, but I, um, knowing Julie, if she would have had some concerns, she would have....she would have made sure that, um, if she didn't think that some of those things could be addressed, then she would have gotten word to us. Um...you know Larry had spoken about that balance between developer and public, and um, and the Council, and I guess part of that involves negotiation. We hope that sometimes that can happen. Um, that meeting that we encouraged but not mandated those, uh, good neighbor meetings that some of the negotiations can happen there, um, so when you're doing some negotiation I guess, um, part of what that involves is, um, well, it involves negotiation, and I guess I view outlot D as that negotiating point to try and get at some of those housing density issues, to get at some of the open space, pieces that, uh, and it gives it the flexibility with the road, so, um, I will go ahead and support first reading here but again, looking at, uh, the work that has been done, agreed upon in terms of, um, the outlot and going with staffs recommendation about the...about the, where to keep the zoning at to give us the most flexibility, to give future Council the most flexibility to try and address, um, those particular issues. But I would...I would, so if Julie could come so we can just hear, um, some I guess final word on her position related to that, that would be great. Bailey: Okay. (mumbled) O'Donnell: Well, I'm going to support this, um, L ..I'm interested in having Julie here at the next meeting, um, we have a developer who came into town and um, worked well with our Planning and Zoning Commission. Um, many, many questions were asked and answered, um, our staff supports this and I...I think it'll be a good project for the City. So I will support this. Hayek: I, uh, I'm going to support this. I, uh, I would not have supported it had it rezoned the so-called outlot D at the bottom, um, my preference would be to, uh, reach agreements on density of housing and Rohret Road and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #6 Page 18 these...these issues that are being kicked down the road, um, at the present time, uh, because I think, even though maintaining the, uh, outlot D zoning as it presently is intact preserves the City's options down the road, um, the reality is that once you've gone forward with a substantial portion of the...of this project, um, you know, I think our leverage diminished somewhat over time, um, but I'm...I'm satisfied with the overall design of what, of everything, other than outlot D, um, I'm satisfied already with...with the wetland considerations. You know, we have City staff who have looked at this, and we also have a...an outside consultant who looked at it, as well, and I'm familiar with her work and think highly of it, um, so that part is not what bothers me. It's the...it's the failure to deal with the housing per Amy's comments, um, and potentially some additional green space. So it will remain for future Councils to, uh, hang tough on those issues, so to speak, uh, and remember them, uh, when outlot D it, uh, comes before us for a rezoning, when the Slothower Road issue and everything else are dealt with. Bailey: Yeah, it would be my preference as well to deal with the outlot D, uh, challenges. I'm glad we're preserving that option, um, I wish we could take care of that option. I think that...I think that the issues of the road are well understood. So I will also be supporting this rezoning. Further comments? Roll call. Item carries 5-2, Correia and Wright voting in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #8 Page 19 ITEM 8. APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BURLINGTON STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE RENOVATION PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. PUBLIC HEARING Bailey: This is a public hearing. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is closed. 2. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Champion: Move the resolution. O'Donnell: Move consideration. Bailey: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by one of you...Champion. Discussion? Just for the public's information, the funding will be, um, 50% from the Iowa Department of Transportation, 25% from University of Iowa, and 25% City of Iowa City, which is from our Road Use tax proceeds. Any further discussion? Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #11 Page 20 ITEM 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9 ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC", CHAPTER 7 ENTITLED "VEHICLE SIZE, WEIGHT AND LOAD," TO RESTRICT LARGE TRUCK TRAFFIC ON NORTH SUMMIT STREET AND DEWEY STREET. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Wright: Move first consideration. Bailey: Moved by Wright. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Champion: It's a good idea, to limit big trucks on those little streets. Wright: Yep, those are narrow, narrow streets! Bailey: Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #14 Page 21 ITEM 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE IOWA CITY PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN FINAL REPORT AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolu... (several talking) resolution. Bailey: Pardon? Wilburn: Oh, that's right. We wanted to defer. I'm sorry. Bailey: Yes. Did somebody make a motion to defer? Correia: I move to defer indefinitely while we schedule a time to meet with the Parks and Rec Commission, uh, we're all supportive of the Master Plan, the Parks and Rec Master Plan, and want to have that conversation with Parks and Rec on how it will be implemented. Bailey: Okay, moved by Correia, seconded by O'Donnell. Any further discussion? All those in, or a motion. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed same sign. Motion carries. And then, Michael, you will take care of scheduling with Parks and Rec Commission. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #15 Page 22 ITEM 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, LANDOWNER UNIVERSITY VIEW PARTNERS, AND TENANT ETRE RESTAURANT GROUP L.L.C., D/B/A TAKANAMI, FOR A SIDEWALK CAFE. Champion: Move the resolution. Hayek: Second. Bailey: Moved by Champion, seconded by Hayek. Discussion? Champion: Um, I just wanted to ask, they've had a sidewalk cafe before. Bailey: Change of owner. Karr: Change of owner. Champion: Oh, okay! Okay. Bailey: Okay. Any further discussion? Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #17 Page 23 ITEM 17. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DIRECTING SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $10,300,000 SEWER REVENUE REFUNDING CAPITAL LOAN NOTES, SERIES 2009A. Wilburn: Move adoption of the resolution. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Kevin, did you wish to make any comments about this? And, maybe even a subsequent items? O'Malley: Yes, Madame Mayor, Esteemed Council, uh, you authorized this resolution, this sale and the subsequent sale, last September, and we were waiting for the right time to sell these bonds, and so in February we put it on for public hearing to do this, and since then we thought the market had kind of gone south on us, and this morning I thought maybe we won't be awarding these bonds because it was getting close to a 3%, um, savings and don't want to do these if they're less than 3%, and then at...at our meeting today, we only had two bidders, and that scared me, because usually we have six or eight because of our good name, but we had some great bids. As Marian can attest, we had 1.1 million in savings on the sewer fund, which amounts to 9.5% savings, as a percentage. Um, the other issue, the water issue which you will be speaking in a little bit is 1.4 million in savings, which is about 10% savings on the mortgages. One other thing I'd like to request, I have a refunding issue coming up, uh, in May, another GO refunding, and I forgot to put it on the agenda for tonight. I'm asking at your priority session if you would hold a formal session, uh, setting a public hearing for April 28th to authorize, uh, 2009C, D, and E. Any questions? Karr: Apri120th meeting. O'Malley: Apri120th, I'm sorry. For a May 5th sale date. Karr: Correct. Bailey: We can do that, right? Karr: Yes we can. Bailey: All right. Any questions for Kevin, regarding this? Okay. Thank you. Champion: Well, the low interest is (mumbled) it's bad for all of us who are near retirement. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #17 Bailey: (laughter) O'Malley: That's correct. Bailey: Okay, further discussion? Okay, roll call. Item carries 7-0. Page 24 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009. #20 Page 25 ITEM 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE REDEMPTION OF OUTSTANDING WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2000, OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, DATED DECEMBER 1, 2000, AND DIRECTING NOTICE BE GIVEN. Wright: Move the resolution. Bailey: Moved by Wright. Champion: Second. Bailey: Seconded by Champion. Discussion? Champion: You know, sometime when you have time I would like to just know when all these bonds are going to be paid off, like is it 100 years or 50 years? O'Malley: No, actually when we issued these bonds in 2000, both this water and sewer ones, they were 20....20 year bonds, and so we're keeping these refunding schedules are keeping the same schedule, so actually we haven't changed any of the maturity of them. We're saving about $100,000 a year on this water issue, and when we do something like that, it tends to help us not have to raise water rates, which is what I enjoy out of this aspect. Champion: Thanks for answering my question. It seems I'm always voting on water revenue bonds. (laughter) Bailey: Okay. All right. Ready to vote? Roll call. Okay, item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #21 Page 26 ITEM 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE ARTIST FOR THE WATER WORKS PRAIRIE PARK SCULPTURE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE SAME. (DEFERRED FROM 3/24) Champion: Move the resolution. Bailey: Moved by Champion. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Wright: One thing I'd like to, uh, just bring up about this, and we had a (mumbled) that a contract was signed, of course, when this, uh, Council originally approved this in early March, and uh, the, this resolution and this amendment essentially give the City a couple of options in this area that we can, uh, gracefully exit from the sculpture contract after, um, the terms of the contract with them, um, carried out over the course of two years. It gives us some flexibility should we wish to work with the artist on something else in a couple of years, so it's, uh, I think this is a reasonable, uh, exit strategy for the sculpture that we had out at the Prairie Park. Bailey: Okay. Further discussion? Hayek: Cuts our losses. Bailey: Okay, roll call. Item carries. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Wilburn: So moved. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? All those in favor say aye. Those opposed same sign. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #26 Page 27 ITEM 26. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Bailey: Let's start down here with Mr. Wright. Wright: I don't have anything this evening. Thank you. Champion: I don't have anything. O'Donnell: Nothing, thank you. Bailey: Mr. Wilburn? Wilburn: Nope. Bailey: Mr. Hayek? Hayek: Uh, couple things -first uh, appreciated the public safety insert that the Fire Department placed in the Press-Citizen recently. I thought that had some good information. Second, I attended the Mission Creek Musical Festival over the weekend, uh, four nights of, uh, bands at venues all across Iowa City. I saw a number of acts over two of the four nights, including a, uh, incredible rap star from New York, uh, a punk band from Los Angeles, bands from elsewhere in the country, and Sweden's version of Bob Dillon! And, uh, it was really incredible. The quality was top shelf, and downtown was alive with not only music, but music aficionados, and I thought it was a great event! Bailey: Great! I'm glad you went. Amy? Correia: Nothing. Bailey: Um, I know that given the Supreme Court decision last Friday that we will probably be looking at some changes in some of our policies with the City. I'm really quite excited that equality is thumbs up to Iowa, and um, I look forward to those discussions. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of Apri16, 2009. #27 Page 28 ITEM 27. CITY STAFF. Bailey: City Manager? Lombardo: Um, with relation to Fire Station #2, I know Chief and his crew are planning an open house, uh, perhaps sometime in May -have more information to follow on that. We'll get it publicized and let you know when that will be. Um, we are planning a impromptu, uh, family trip this weekend, realizing last minute that it's Easter, and so I'll be off Friday, uh, for the day, and uh, beyond that, go Spartans! Bailey: Assistant City Manager? Helling: Nothing. Bailey: City Attorney? City Clerk? How about a motion to adjourn? Wilburn: Move to adjourn. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn. Hayek: Second. Bailey: Seconded by Hayek. All those in favor say aye. Thank you very much. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of April 6, 2009.