HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-15 TranscriptionPage 1
2. Proclamations
2.a. Juneteenth National Freedom Day
Teague: (reads proclamation) And here to receive this proclamation is Commissioner Roger Lusala
from the Human Rights Commission. Welcome, Roger.
Lusala: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you Council for this proclamation. Juneteenth is the oldest
nationally celebrated holiday of the ending of slavery in the United States. It is for me such a
pleasure to be accepting this proclamation for the first citywide celebration of Juneteenth, on
behalf of the Human Rights Commission. In the word of President Obama, Juneteenth has
never been a celebration of victory or an acceptance of the way things are. It is a celebration of
progress. It's an affirmation that despite the most painful parts of our history, change is
possible, and there's still so much work to be done. These word rings true today, especially with
all the new laws passed and signed by our Governor, attacking diversity and racial justice
(mumbled) So let us not sit back, let us keep walking and continue to move our city forward
with racial justice issue and victories. Let us be bold, be brave, change the world, and leave a
legacy for others to follow. I hope the Council will take part in all the festivity celebrating
Juneteenth this week, and especially this Thursday with the block party and the screening of
Miss Juneteenth. I will also invite the Council to be part of the HRC's summer series and to
take part in the Iowa City (mumbled) Thank you all for what you do.
Teague: Thank you, and thanks to the Human Rights Commission and all that you all are doing, and I
did want to make note that Juneteenth is a City holiday and so we're very excited that this is our
inaugural, um, year for Juneteenth being a holiday here at the City of Iowa City.
2.b. Waste and Recycling Workers Week
Teague: (reads proclamation) And here to receive this proclamation is Patricia Fossum, Assistant
Superintendent Refuse. Welcome.
Fossum: Thank you. We greatly appreciate this proclamation and recognizing the hard work of the
Refuse staff and all waste staff (mumbled) City of Iowa City and to Johnson County, and on
behalf of the Refuse division, I greatly appreciate this proclamation.
Teague: Thank you so much for all that you do! (both talking) really appreciate it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 2
3. Special Presentations
3.a. COVID Update —Johnson County Public Health
Teague: And we're going to have ... 3.a. is going to be an update, a COVID update, from Johnson County
Public Health, and I'm going to welcome Sam Jarvis, who is the Community Health Division
Manager. Welcome.
Jarvis: Good evening to the City of Iowa City and as always thank you for having us. We always
appreciate the opportunity to provide updates, uh, on both the fronts, uh, of our COVID-19
response as a community. Uh, in terms of what we're seeing with cases, as many have seen on
the State's website, we are experiencing single digits, um, you know, which is wonderful to see.
Cases have not been this low since the beginning, and that was during a time where testing was
not as prevalent, as many remember, uh, and testing was, um, somewhat restricted to certain
parameters, and so the profile of those cases are... are much younger, as we've begun to report
the past several months, an average age of roughly about 28, 29 years old. Uh, it's not
necessarily those who are 12 years of age and younger, who cannot be vaccinated yet at all. Uh,
it's still some adults, and then we do see some 30 and 40 range, um, even older adults who have
not been vaccinated, some who have been, and we know that there are breakthrough cases on
rare, rare occasions. But as we've seen lower digit cases, we've kind of switched our strategy
with our contact tracing team, and so we've been working with them this past couple weeks to
train them and provide them the tools and information so that they can address vaccine
questions while they're on the phone with those who they are performing investigations and
contact tracing with, um, to kind of better utilize their time and kind of begin to explore more
preventative measures on that front, so we're excited to be able to do that, um, starting this week
with our team. Uh, in terms of vaccination, uh, Johnson County continues to be the most
vaccinated county in the state. So we're very excited about that, we're happy that our
community gets it, uh, and so again, a huge thanks to everyone who's been vaccinated so far,
uh, and those who are planning on getting vaccinated. What that means is roughly we're at 55%
of our total population, and that's based off of the 2019 census estimate for those who want to
look at that math and everything. So roughly we're (garbled) use a baseline of 151,000 folks,
and so, um, to put that in perspective, every percentage point that we want to gain is roughly
about 1,500 people a week or...or so, uh, when we're looking at kind of movement, and so when
we're averaging about... somewhere between 30 to 100 doses, new doses a day, um, you know,
we ... we know that getting a percentage will ... will take a bit of time, roughly a week to two
weeks, and so we've seen some increases. One most notably with the announcement that Pfizer
is for those who are 12 and older, and so we hope to continue to vaccinate those younger folks,
but as always great appreciation to our community for recognizing the importance of
vaccination, and we hope that others are continuing to ... to share that with their friends and
family, because we know that that kind of trusted link to others helps to really, um, solidify that
decision. It's not always, um, influencers or other celebrities and things. It's really those trusted
folks. So, as always, happy to answer any questions that the Council might have.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 3
Weiner: Thank you, Sam. Do you have ... do you have a number as to what percentage of the eligible
population is ... is vaccinated or has had at least one shot, which is sort of the metric they're using
in ... in the country as a whole to get to the 70%?
Jarvis: Well, you know, when we're looking at that, I know that we've looked at it, um, it gets a little
difficult with the 12 and older cut off. There's some data sets I know staff have been utilizing.
So we are ... we believe last time reported was around 67, 66%. Uh, I think we had reported out
at one point 64 to 65, but then with the addition of that age group, you know, obviously
that... increased that population (mumbled) or baseline. So we're making headway, uh, not as
quickly as many would like, but continuing to make progress.
Teague: Thank you so much, Sam, for all that you're doing, really appreciate it.
Jarvis: Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity.
Teague: Great, all right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 4
9. Community Comment (items not on the agenda) [UNTIL 7 PM]
Teague: And this is a time where people from the community can address any topic that is not on our
formal agenda. Individuals will be provided with three minutes to speak, and we'll have a timer
for you, um, that will be showing. So if there's anyone that would like to speak at this time,
please raise your hand, and this would be for any item that is not on the formal agenda.
Welcome, Dan... followed by Taylor. Welcome, Dan.
Kauble: Good evening, um, I would like to speak in support of the Excluded Workers Fund, something
which will benefit the entire community and not just excluded workers. Um, speaking of the
EWF, um, it's interesting that the City ha ... that releases by the City, such as the survey regarding
how to use American Rescue Plan Funds, um, it was only released in English, and given that
many excluded workers may not be fluent in English, it seems like a very disingenuous way to
receive feedback from the community when it's excluding a large number of people in it. Um,
in regards... in regards to the MRAP, this Council and City government needs to walk its talk.
The Council published a letter last year condemning the usage of such military equipment in
Johnson County law enforcement. Despite that, City Manager Geoffrey Fruin has shown that
he will not listen to the will of the Mayor or the Council regarding this issue. Um, you all need
to forbid ICPD from using the MRAP tank and contributing any funds to its maintenance or
upkeep. Um, its usage is a form of terrorism, as it terrorizes those who see it, especially
children, and negatively impacts... impacts the predominantly BIPOC neighborhoods where it's
used. Even the most pro -police people should oppose it, since it decreases the trust and
legitimacy of the departments who use it, and therefore the city government. I would like to say
that for a city government which came out so strongly against the MRAP last summer, it's very
peculiar that you all allow Geoffrey to use it at will and have done nothing more publicly to
stop its usage. Um, I would... during the People's Truth and Reckoning Committee on June 6 th
,
we heard from Chris Kelly and his lawyer about the injustices Kelly had faced at the hands of
Iowa ... Iowa City Police. Um, that includes over eight months in custody for a crime that was
later thrown out. He wasn't in jail for breaking the law. He was there because he was walking
while black. Despite that, um, despite that judge also stating that ICPD committed major
misconduct (mumbled) case, the City government has shown no intention of making things
right with Kelly. In fact, they seem rather opposed to any kind of restorative justice for him.
Um, I would like to finish by promoting an event being held by the Iowa Freedom Riders this
weekend. On Saturday, June 19`h, at the Hilltop Shelter in Coralville's ST Morrison Park, there
will be a Juneteenth celebration from 6 to 10. We will have food, face painting, games, and a
book raffle. Events like the one held by the City (mumbled) are run by some good people, but
they're also giving unnecessary credit to officials who have done little to nothing to help
BIPOCs (mumbled) or in some cases have actively sought to harm them. Furthermore, the
inclusion of organizations like the Downtown District, whose Executive Director Nancy Bird
has backstabbed BIPOC business owners, like Naa Tackie. It sure puts a big damper on the
City's celebration.
Teague: Thank you, Dan, and welcome, Taylor, followed by Annie.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 5
Kohn: Hi there. First I want to support the Excluded Workers Fund. I took your survey today, but I
wanted to make sure I vocalized it too. I also want to draw attention to the civil rights lawsuit
against the City, because an Iowa City police officer, Travis Neeld, needlessly stopped and
arrested Iowa City resident, Chris Kelly, in December, 2019. He was held in Muscatine County
Jail for eight months before a federal judge threw out the charges against him, calling it a case
of `walking while black.' So, as you know, Kelly is rightfully suing you, and there's actually a
website that Kelly's lawyer has set up about the case and it's walkingwhileblack.org, and I just
wanted to read from its front page directly, since you continue to insist that we need ICPD. It
says: This lawsuit recognizes that the illegal stop and excessive force on December 26, 2019,
was not some isolated incident; not the result of any single individual's singular exercise of
poor judgment or a mistake, nor merely the work of a few bad apples. It did not come out of
nowhere; rather, it was a particularly flagrant instance of a broader and long-standing custom
and practice that is familiar to many, many black people in Iowa City. The custom and practice
is the product of a legacy of official acts and omissions, supervisory practice, official and
unofficial trainings, on-the-job training and mentoring and expectations, stereotypes and
understandings, expressed and reinforced through conversations, shared sympathies and
frustrations, rehearsed justifications, reactions, stories, anecdotes, jokes. It is continuously
created, maintained and enforced by ICPD officers and local officials at all levels, including the
highest levels, on a daily basis, on duty and off. Critically and intolerably it is both explicitly or
implicitly driven by considerations of race and invidious racial stereotypes. It is in a word,
racist. That's on the website walkingwhileblack.org. Travis Neeld is ICPD, this is what ICPD
is. Why is it like pulling teeth to budge you closer to the smallest of checks on police power.
For example, taking away the keys to the MRAP, and impossible to get you to take any action
outside of letting Geoffrey Fruin, who is not elected, feed you a harmful plan to expand the
police department by incorporating the cops into the city's nonprofits, meaning people who rely
on those resources have to give them up if they are understandably distrustful of these police.
We refuse to be so cynical as to believe that this poisoned institution is the best we can hope for.
We can actually take care of each other. We can actually prevent harm. Better things are
possible. Defund the police. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Annie, followed by Stephany.
Gudenkauf: Hello, can you hear me?
Teague: Yes.
Gudenkauf. All right, my name's Annie and I live in Iowa City, and I have a few things I'd like to
amplify tonight. First, I also want to advertise the Iowa Freedom Riders Juneteenth celebration
this Saturday, June 19`h, from 6:30 to 10:00 PM at the Hilltop Shelter in Coralville's ST
Morrison Park, from 6 to 10. Join community organizers that are putting their money where
their mouths are in celebrating and fighting for black liberation. There'll be free food, music,
kids' activities, and community bonding. Hope to see you there, Iowa City. On another point,
I'm disappointed that none of the Council has publicly commented on the violation of Chris
Kelly's civil rights at the hands of ICPD officer Travis Neeld and Assistant Johnson County
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 6
Attorney Jude Pannell. If this Council probably states that Black Lives Matter, why are you
silent when the most egregious forms of racism are perpetuated by your coworkers? I dream of
a day when Iowa City Council's actions match their empty words. It's offensive. Next I'd like
to talk about the MRAP tank. I'm failing to understand why both the Mayor and the Council
publicly condemned the existence of the tank, but it can still be used as the police department
pleases. Why does the City Manager's opinion get to matter more than our elected officials?
I'm demanding that Council refuse to fund the tank moving forward and place sanctions on our
police department for continuing to use it to terrorize BIPOC people in our town. Next I
wanted ... I want to discuss the need to spend federal ARP funds on an Excluded Workers Fund.
The Biden administration specifically mandated the funding the City gets, that goes toward
those that are historically harmed by our society, including women, black and indigenous
people of color, and small businesses. The Excluded Workers Fund would support all of these
groups. Using our tax money in a way that helps the most vulnerable is the best way it can be
spent, and you are the ones with that kind of power, use it wisely. Finally, I want to talk about
the insidiously planned and violent clearing up unhoused people's encampments on May 24th.
The City still hasn't said anything. It should formalize a public... you all should formalize a
public apology to these people who were not explicitly warned of the destruction of their
homes, despite City statement saying otherwise. The City should also be making successful
efforts to identify those whose ... whose items were disposed up and replace that. Why does the
City hate poor people so much? The money to fund Public Works and the police to destroy
those people's already difficult lives could much better be going towards government housing
that enforces... that doesn't enforce unreachable non -trauma informed practice standards on
those needing shelter the most. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Stephany.
Hoffelt: Can you hear me?
Teague: Yes, welcome.
Hoffelt: Thank you. Okay, I kind of wanted to echo what Annie was saying about the homeless
encampments. I'm really frustrated, and, urn ... I think that maybe possibly even see this as an
indication of the fact that the Fruin plan is going to be basically useless for these folks. I mean,
you have your person, um, the Fruin plan suggested hiring in place at Shelter House, and yet
that person has not done any street outreach to the folks who had their home or had, you know,
their... what is ostensibly their home razed to the ground and their belongings stolen, and so is
this what the Fruin plan looks like? Is it just lip service to the fact, to the idea that that person is
there to do street outreach, but then doesn't actually go out into the community that they're
working with to ... at, you know, perform any real outreach, because we've certainly talked to
people, and we know that there are people in various states... stages of addressing this issue with
the City. So we want to first ask that the City listen to whatever they receive in communication
from those people with open ears and with the respect that they deserve, despite the fact that
they do not have access to homes in this community. I'd also like to take a moment to talk
about the Excluded Workers Fund. I also, as you know, I'm ... sorry. I am with the Iowa City
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 7
Mutual Aid Collective and we are one of the groups that is supporting that plan, and I want to
talk about the fact that the City put out a survey asking people how that ... they feel, and the
county for that matter, how the money should be used, and it was done online and in English.
So the people that it would help the most and the people whose opinions don't really quite ever
get a voice, aren't able to find it, they aren't able to read it, and it just generally that practice in
the City perturbs me to begin with. I saw an incident last night ... two nights ago when I was at
Wetherby, that almost involved the cops being called that night because a person who was a
white person was screaming at one of the women that she was breaking the rules, and I walked
up to the gentleman and I suggested to him that he should consider that the rules are only posted
in English at that park, and this woman doesn't speak English. So how is she supposed to know
what those rules are? That's the kind of racism that's inherent in City government, that is
causing problems for everybody in this community and it needs to go away.
Teague: Thank you, Stephany. Would anyone else like to address Council at this time? If so, please
raise your hand and I'll call upon you. Seeing no one, I am going to close this time of public
comment.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 8
10. Planning and Zoning Matters
10.a. Rezoning — Hickory Trail Estates — Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately
48.75 acres of land located south of N. Scott Boulevard and west of N. 11t Avenue from
Interim Development Single -Family (ID -RS) to Low Density Single -Family with a Planned
Development Overlay (OPD/RS-5) zone. (REZ20-0016) (First Consideration) [Deferred
from 6/1/20211
Teague: And could I get a motion to give first consideration?
Mims: So moved, Mims.
Bergus: Second, Bergus (garbled)
Teague: Moved by Mims, seconded by Bergus, and I'm going to ask if anyone from the public would
like to address this topic, to please raise your hand at this time. I don't see anyone on the phone
lines, but if there is anyone, you can press *9 to address this topic. Stephany, I still see your
hand up from the previous item. I'm not sure if you want to address this item, but I'm going to
call on Martha, um, followed by Stephany, if her hand is still raised. Welcome, Martha.
Norbeck: Welcome, thank you for the opportunity. Um, so I sent a letter to Council on Sunday
outlining some larger long-term issues related to, uh, planning ideas, but I wanted to speak
specifically to the Hickory Hill, um, project or the hill ... Hickory Hill adjacent project. So I ... I
go to Hickory Hill one to three times a week, and my running route takes me adjacent to
Hickory Hi ... Heights Lane, and for reasons I don't understand, it is a clear view of just an open
field to those houses at the crest of the hill, and those are huge houses. And I curse them every
time I go by, and I don't understand why there is not a woodland buffer between the trail and
those houses. It is offensive to me that the ... these people get to impose their ostentatious
lifestyles on my nature experience. I ... I don't understand that, which leads to this whole
woodland buffer issue with the proposed development. Yeah, they went to the single -loaded
hou, uh.... street, but it's just a handful of street or trees, and a few ...a little bit of prairie. There's
not any attempt to actually create a buffer, a visual buffer. So basically for people in the park,
that experience is going to be really heavily impacted. I'm all for the senior housing.
Somebody suggested in the last meeting, gee, why don't you just split the two apart? They're
kind of trying to shove two different animals together. I think that's a great idea! The senior
housing, that is tasteful. It's thoughtful. It's well landscaped, like that is very well thought out
and seems appropriate for the location, with appropriate density. I will also point out
every.. returning back to my letter is, um, you know, these lots are half -acre lots that's 5,000
square feet of buildable area. It's pretty massive. You're going to get huge houses. You are
going to get huge houses ... on these lots. Now you compare that to my little house, it's 570
square feet on .2 acres in the Longfellow neighborhood. It's a great living experience. We just
need to think differently about how we do planning. In Germany, for the trades, they look
ahead to like what kind of needs do we have in our community, in terms of do we need
carpenters, do we need electricians, do we need chefs, and they actually allocate to the trade
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 9
schools, you should be using this amount, you know, you should be opening up this many slots.
It's not based on desire, it's based on market need. Why can't we do the same thing with
planning? Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Stephany, followed by Adam.
Hoffelt: I already spoke, y'all, so I think maybe I was being called on again.
Teague: Yes, your hand is still raised. All right, thank you. Welcome, Adam, followed by William.
Tarr: Thank you, Mayor Teague. I want to speak not just as a member of the public here, but also in
full disclosure, as a representative of Nelson Development tonight, the part of the development
team that is proposing the senior assisted living facility. I just want to stress for everybody
listening, I mean the public as well as the ... the City Council, that this plan has gone through two
revisions incorporating City staff and public input, and done that in good faith, and that the
result of that has been that the plan before the City Council tonight was voted 6-1 in favor at
P&Z, after going through all of this good faith input and revision. And P&Z, in making that
recommendation at a 6-1 vote, did so because the staff reports from the experts and the
specialists that are entrusted by our City government to evaluate the proposals, each advised
P&Z that the proposal complied with the relevant criteria. We are not a nation of mob rule or
by regulation by fiat. We have the criteria we have, and to the extent anybody finds fault with
those criteria, the legislative process is there for overhauling or for creating new criteria in the
future, but for the sake of predictability and rule of law, so that people can know how to operate
accordingly, this developer has followed those criteria. They're codified in Title 14 of the City
code. That's Chapter 3, Article A, and Chapter S. It says specifically that in the staff report to
P&Z and on this proposal that the plan complied with the comprehensive plan in the Northeast
District plan. It's been commented that the rendering for the Bluffwood neighborhood is a
veritable overlay of the current drawing for this proposal, with the only significant difference
being that where we had two cul-de-sacs in the Bluff -wood drawing, this proposal has a through
street, and that is in order to comply with our more current comprehensive plan, which allows
greater public access to the expanded Hickory Hill Park that will be created by this
development. So ... looking at exactly what has been proposed here, the experts who work for
the City have found that it is compliant. It complies with all applicable approval criteria found
in Chapter 3, Article A, and it's important that while I know that the public has a lot of
passionate feelings about development in general and about Hickory Hill in particular, again as
I've said before, my family lives near Hickory Hill Park. We value the park and use it all the
time, and we don't want to see anything happen to deteriorate the quality of the park. But
looking at this plan, everybody who has been tasked with being experts have recognized that
this plan does comply with all the relevant criterias. It protects stream side. It has a woodland
barrier to the park. It expands the park by 14 acres. The majority of woodland cover is
protected. This is a plan that does everything the developer has been asked to do, and it is a
great opportunity to make sure that development next to this valuable park is something that
brings in a diverse community of people. And I think it's before the City today to just ... to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 10
City Council tonight, to just listen to the community input, but to recognize that your job here is
circumscribed by code, and to follow that accordingly. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. I want to acknowledge that the developer, um, he was a part of the development
team. I also see Clark, who was also a part of the development team. Um, certainly Council
may have some questions for you during our time of discussion, and so, um, we'll come back if
Councilors have any questions for clarification or any questions at all with the developers. I'm
going to call on William, followed by, um, Nan ... Nandakumar.
Synan: Thank you, I just have a couple of comments. First, I wanted to point out that even though the
Bluffwood neighborhood was intended to be predominantly low density single-family, it
actually isn't. It's actually about 45% multi -family. Uh, second, the community members are
not opposed to having an assisted living facility in the community. However, the parcel of land
in question was projected to be low density single-family residential, and so the members of the
community had suggested to P&Z and the developers at the P&Z meetings to perhaps place the
senior care facility on the parcel of land adjacent to and directly due north of the nine -acre
parcel that is in the proposal. You will notice that this land was left out of the proposed sale by
ACT. It is ... it's less than 100 yards away from the proposed site. And you'll also notice that this
land was projected to be used for multi -family medium density dwellings in the comprehensive
plan. But yet it has been left out of the sale. Um, an alternate suggestion made by community
members was to consider building the senior facility on some of the 185 acres of land along
Scott Boulevard, which ACT also owns and borders the community. At the previous work
meeting tonight, P&Z members said the neighborhood association was offered to buy the land.
I want to know what neighborhood association they're referring to. I've lived here 27 years and
never heard of such an offer, and I've never seen a for sale sign on the property. And then lastly,
the property in question, again, was projected to be low density single-family residential. I
understand that the people who will be taken care of at the facility will look at it as their
residence. However, if you look at the largest assisted living facilities in Iowa City, many are
designated limited -liability corporations, which employee dozens of employees. So they are in
fact commercial -type entities, and we believe it can be placed within the community, but not
directly on the property abutting the park, which was again to be low density residential. I think
if they look at all the options, ultimately this can be a win, win, win for everyone involved here.
Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Nandakumar, followed by Dan.
Narayanan: (both talking) My name is Kumar Narayanan, and I wanted to thank all the City
Councilors for considering this matter. So, um, we have objections on multiple fronts to this
process and this plan, but the first and most salient objection is this is a major deviation from
the comprehensive plan laid out for development of this land and all land around it, but there's
also a major conceptual critique we have of this. This is a major, uh, appropriation of a public
good. This land would not have near the value if it was not close to a Hickory Hill Park, and I
would challenge the developers to disclose how much money they're making the value of the
park and the relative value of the public good that is contributing to their profits, because that's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page I1
a major ...that's what's at stake here. If these huge homes were not next to the park, they would
not ne... be worth nearly as much. These houses are not affordable and they are not something
that, uh, you know, there's something that the homeowners are getting a lot of value of, but the
community of Iowa City is getting almost no value from. Um, there's also, you know, Adam
raised multiple, uh, things about this process being done in good faith. You know, I was at both
Planning and Zoning Commission meetings, and there were multiple irregularities that I had
questions about. For instance, the traffic study was done in January of a pandemic. You know,
I ... there's no way that that traffic study's valid for other parts of the year. Um, the renderings
(mumbled) were from different angles, there was no attempt to look at the view shed, the sound
shed, the water quality, um, and you know these questions where, uh, you can ask the
(mumbled) I doubt that they were answered to, uh, a degree of confidence from the community
members. There's also the significant issue of a buffer zone. You know, the buffer zone is
really important, because in order for the park to maintain its value and the value of the public
of Iowa City, there has to be a buffer zone, whereas this development does not interact with the
park, and many people identified win, win situations where there was a building that was
respectful at some distance from the park, that did not interact with the park, and would
maintain access to Scott Boulevard, but that avenue was not pursued, presuma, uh, presumably
due to the financial payoff from building these gargantuan homes. And then, you know, there's
also a significant racial justice component. You know, as I ... personally I would not feel
comfortable running in this large neighborhood, entering the park from that, you know, kind of
neighborhood. Um, you know, I ... I just ... I feel like there's multiple issues that were not
considered, and I hope the Councilors will take these views in, uh... in contrast to the very
polished and, uh... um, cursory presentation from the developers. I'm also going to say that I'm
going to lower my hand, but my wife will also speak. I'll raise my hand again. Thank you very
much.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Dan, followed by Joe.
Kauble: All right, um, I just want to back up everything said by Martha and everybody else who has
spoken up against this project. Um, the plan for Hickory Hill that y'all are going to be voting on
is a clear example of how the City of Iowa City doesn't care about ordinary people. Instead y'all
cater to the ultra wealthy, and whatever these developable... these developers bring to you. In
doing so, you ignore the wishes of ordinary folks. Instead of turning this into affordable
housing or something useful for the majority of the community, I mean...it...it seems like you
may vote to just piss all that away! I mean, please listen to everyone who's spoken up against
this project, because I mean as it is right now, this project does not favor the nor ...like ordinary
people in the community. Um, Adam Tarr, you know, he may be an upstanding guy, but his
comments are totally ignoring the wishes of the people. It's clear loads of folks are upset with
this plan, and sure, even if this was something Planning and Zoning was really into, that doesn't
change the fact that loads of people don't want it. Sorry, Adam, but this isn't something that
people like! (garbled) negative comments were overwhelming the positive ones. The beauty of
the legislative process is that the wishes of the people are... are reflected by elected officials, and
I hope those elected officials listen to their constituents. Also, don't take the word of some
developer, who is overstating just how much the community supports this project... project.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page t2
(clears throat) Also, again, sorry, Adam, but like your comments about the experts liking it, that
just reflects the elitist bogus which plagues this city! Don't let these elites, whether they be a
developer or Geoffrey Fruin outweigh the voices of constituents. Um, Hickory Hill's a
wonderful place, and it is clear that this project is going to harm the park and its surrounding
neighborhoods and the people who live there. Please maintain it, please maintain its buffer
zone, don't let these jerks bastardize its wild beauty. Um, also (laughs) I'm just going to say the
developer's timer ran out and it's really, uh, someone who's constantly been cut off by the City.
Like it's ... it's ridiculous that that guy was able to just talk and talk and talk without being cut
off. I mean after I'm done, after my timer goes down, y'all are gonna cut me off without a
second thought. Why didn't you do it to that guy? Again, that goes back to the elitism within
the City government. It's clear that this Council doesn't give a damn about the feelings of
anyone except those who aren't a part of your system. I just really hope that Council just listens
to the public, for once, regarding this issue, because, I mean, there's so many other issues (both
talking) which Council has not listened to people about.
Teague: Thank you, Dan. So Clark is the developer, and this Council will allow the developer to give
us information pertaining to this, um, pertaining to this project, and I'm going to ask Councilors
to save their comments or questions to the ... to the developer after ...when we ... when we actually
have our time of discussion. Welcome, Joe. You're on mute. You're on mute still.
Clark: Sorry, can you hear me?
Teague: Yes.
Clark: All right, good evening, and thank you, City Council, for letting me speak on behalf of the
development team. Our team consists of Mike Welch at Axiom, Jacob Wolfgang with Nelson
Development, and myself with (mumbled) Hickory Trail Estates. First off, I want to say that I
am an eastsider in Iowa City and have lived near Hickory Park since I was born. I love the park
and would do nothing against it, as I've enjoyed it for over 40 years of my life. I'm a local real
estate broker and developer that has produced similar projects in Windmill Heights in 2017 and
Tamarack Ridge in 2020. Both are successful developments on the east side of Iowa City. I'd
like to touch on seven key points tonight. Number one, rezoning. The comprehensive plan, the
Northeast District plan, and the Bluffwood Neighborhood plan are land... are land use scenarios
intended to be general guides that may occur in this neighborhood. The principles set forth in
these plans were used closely by our development team in creating the concept being brought
before you tonight. Many different concepts were created and reworked and reworked prior to
the submittal of the final concept. We believe this is the best plan for this particular parcel of
land. The 48.75 acres of land is currently zoned ID -RS. Um, we're looking for it to be rezoned
to OPD-RS5, and RS5 is the lowest density zoning available to us as the developer. Number
two, the land purchase. The land purchase took almost seven years to negotiate and complete
with ACT. The City's interest in the land purchase — in the past three months, the City of Iowa
City has stated that they do not have the funds set aside to purchase the 62 -acre parcel of land
for parkland. Nor do they have an interest in a public purchase of any smaller portion of the
property. Friends of Hickory Hill Park's interest. Friends of Hickory Hill Park have never
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 13
made an offer to purchase this land from ACT that I'm aware of, since they took
ownership... since ACT took ownership of the land in 2008 from John Larson. Additionally,
Friends of Hickory Hill Park have not approached me as a developer to purchase the land, thus
indicating they do not have interest in owning the 62 -acre parcel. Number three, cul-de-sacs.
City staff would not support a plan brought by the developer to use two cul-de-sacs back-to-
back on this land, thus going against the drawings in the comprehensive plan. Instead, they
opted for a through street that would allow two exits for emergency vehicles. The Northeast
District plan states using cul-de-sac streets should be done on a limited basis, such as where
topography or other sensitive features prevent practical street connections. This development
has a clear path down the center ridge that allows for a connecting street, and our team utilized
this space to create a through street, thus eliminating any options of using a cul-de-sac. Number
four, single -loaded streets. Single -loaded streets present many difficulties for a developer. The
full cost of infrastructure installed with only one half of the lots being developed. Friends of
Hickory Hill Park, along with Planning and Zoning Commission, have requested we supply a
single -loaded street. We have complied with their request and removed 17 single-family lots
from the west and south side of the street, and ultimately reduced the size of the lots on the east
side of the street. Although the team was reluctant to add this feature, this was agreed upon in
efforts to gain the support of P&Z and some of the members of Friends of Hickory Hill Park
and City staff. Number five, environmental features and sensitive areas. The beautiful trees in
the northwest corner are being preserved and 113 street trees are being added. The project has
also met the 50% threshold imposed on by the City for any new development in this area.
Sensitive and steep slopes, woodlands, and stream corridors were taken into consideration when
choosing where to place the roads and housing. These items limited the options our team had
when designing the current plan. The center ridge down the middle of the development was
used for the roadway, which lends itself perfectly for a single-family housing development on
the east side. The comprehensive plan encourages development that occurs with consideration
of ecological features, such as protecting critical wildlife habitats, natural terrain, future green
spaces. Our development team definitely took this into consideration when creating the current
concept for this land. The 14 acres of donated land to the City should also not be forgotten.
Number six, affordable housing. This has come up pretty recently. Rezoning of the land in the
Bluffwood Neighborhood does not require affordable housing. The comprehensive plan does
not include an affordable component. The City should not be able to change the rules
midstream. This concept should be considered based upon the existing guidelines in place for
the developers at the time of submittal. Single-family lots are only 70 feet wide. This ... this
goes in line with affordable housing. Most of the lots originally were 85 to 100 feet wide. This
can allow for a variety of different housing types and styles to fit into the single-family
neighborhood. The extra 14 acres of land is for sale and being looked at by local developers as
condos and apartments on the northeast corner of Scott and 1st Avenue. This will complete the
entire 62 -acre parcel of land and will give some diversity to the available housing in their area
upon completion. Lastly, supply and demand. As a local real estate broker, I see this
development as a positive way to increase housing stock at a time that it is needed most. The
housing market has reached a crossroads with supply and demand. The higher the supply, the
lower prices will be in the market. Each development that is turned away by Council is
lowering supply and only making housing less affordable across the city. In conclusion, a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 14
private piece of land that is negotiated to be purchased by a private developer should have
parameters by which he or she can (mumbled) This parameter in this situation is the Northeast
District plan and the comprehensive plan created by the City staff, City Council, staff, and
public input. These items were used by City staff, Planning and Zoning Commission, and my
development team to pave the way for the rezoning request being presented today. Our concept
and preliminary plat are in line with the requirements imposed upon us as developers, and I'm
asking you tonight to vote yes for rezoning on this great project. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Joe, is there anyone else from the development team that you're aware of that want
to address this, because I believe I want to bring them up now, so that, um, we really should
have had an item that said, you know, `developer comments,' before the public spoke. Do you
know if anyone else wants to address from the development team?
Clark: I don't think... unless ... I don't think Mike Welch wants to. He can speak up if he wants to right
now, but I ... I think I was going to speak on behalf of us and then Adam Tarr.
Teague: Thank you. All right, I'm going to continue with public comment at this time, and I'm going to
welcome Ann, um, and this will be followed by Kumar's wife, and I'll need you to pronounce
your full first and last name when you come forth. Welcome, Ann.
Synan: Thank you, Mayor Teague, and thank you, City Councilors, for this opportunity to talk. I was
very glad to hear tonight during the work meeting with Councilors and Planning and Zoning
that the comprehensive plan needs to be reviewed carefully, um, and also presented to the
public in a more transparent way. That has been something we've been extremely disappointed
in, um, in all our years here in Iowa City, um, and plans get changed very easily, and I do not
agree, um, that this is the best plan for this property. I would also like to respectfully remind
Councilors that parts of the ... parts of the comprehensive plan may be 15 to 20 years old, but it
was reaffirmed in 2013, and that did include the Bluffwood Neighborhood and this property. I
would like to simply say we can do better for this piece of property, and it is a beautiful piece of
property. It is neighboring on two neighborhoods here, as well as beautiful Hickory Hill Park.
And I think that we can ... we can put in something that will work much better, and as Councilor
Thomas said, something that will take into consideration more of the natural environment there.
We do not think that the housing option that is being presented for the, at least for that rezoning
part for the overlay, that is a huge nine -acre facility, um, that's going to look up to four stories
high with 90 parking spaces is ... is a good option for this piece of land. Um, I would also just
like to say, um, I have to say I was a little bit offended by a comment during the work meeting
from one of the commissioners, where there's a group of people who are rallying the troops.
Um, I really believe that the opposition to this plan comes not from this rallying cry where
people are trying to get others involved to oppose it, but it's truly heartfelt concern for the
character and integrity of Hickory Hill Park and the Bluffwood Neighborhood. So I am asking
you as City Councilors and the Mayor to please vote to deny this rezoning request. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Kumar ...wife, um, followed by Taylor... and I'll ask that you state your
full name please.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 15
Narayanan: Hello, yes, can you hear me?
Teague: Yes.
Bindari: Okay, um, I'm Asha Bindari. So, yeah, so I'd like to comment on some of the points made
previously, and to develop them further, beginning with the fact that the park is a public good.
It's a good that is funded by taxpayer dollars, so let's start with that, you know, kind of reflect on
that. The park is public good, it's funded by, you know, taxpayer dollars. The development
would not have the market value that it has, but for the existence of this park, and therefore as
taxpayers, we are subsidizing the profits of the development. Okay, so that's sort of...sortof
their first point that I think has... really needs to be emphasized in terms of the relationship
between the park and the development. It's not ... this is not a case where there's private land,
you know, and people want to do what they want to do with the private land and people
shouldn't interfere, because the land only has the quality that it does, because it is dependent on
this public park for... for its character. Okay, so the second point is that this plan does not abide
by the comprehensive plan and by the sort of spirit of the idea of the buffer zone. So the
development, uh, proposal right now would still degrade the experience of being in the park and
the value, the ecological value of the park. Because the City is basically... would be subsidizing
this development, and the developers are asking for a rezoning. They're asking for ...for a
change that would enable them to move on. We really need to say, no, this is not ... it's not a
development that's in the best interest of the city and it's not a development that protects the
interests of the, you know, the residents of this town. So it...it takes resources from the
residents and transfers them to people who have ... who have more. It's an unjust transfer of
resources really, um, and I mean I think one way ...one way to think about this is that really it's
sort of like someone saying, well, I know we agreed that I can't do it, but I can't do this thing,
but I really want to do it. And if you just kind of change the rules and I'll be able to do it, so
please change the rules for me. And this, of course, you know, as any marginalized person
knows, that kind of exemption is not made for marginalized people, nor ordinarily the idea that
it's even a reasonable request only emanates from a social position that assumes a certain
amount of privilege and entitlement. Um, so I mean, lastly, on the racial justice point, I think I
want to emphasize a point my husband made, which is that, you know, people with brown or
black skin who are going to be running, you know, running on the trail near that development
may well get arrest... you know, someone ... who knows. I mean, of course, everyone knows
about... about cases like this. They might get, um, the police might be called on (both talking)
adjacent to it. So, yeah, thank you for your time.
Teague: Yes. Welcome, Ann, followed by Taylor. I am sorry, Ann has already spoken. Welcome...
welcome, Taylor, followed by Tanner.
Kohn: Hi there, yes, I would also like to back up everyone who opposes this project. We shouldn't be
using this land for more low density single-family housing; that's not the housing we need here.
And the people do not want it. I'm sorry if that hurts the developer's feelings, but I don't know
it's not mob rule to listen to the public. I also really hated that `rallying the troops' comment. I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 16
think it's very reflective of actually a lot of rhetoric we've heard from, you know, Council and
from other, you know, City employees and people associated with the City, that if you are
hearing a whole lot of an opinion that you don't like, you like to say it's like one group or that
they've like roped in all their friends, and that's not the case. Maybe there's actual genuine
concern here, maybe the people affected just genuinely don't want this project, and maybe it's
not like conspiracy against you. I just... really I'm tired of that line of thinking. Uh, when
people come together here, it's because they all feel the same way. It's not because it's a
conspiracy. Thanks.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, Tanner, followed by John.
King: Hello, Council, um, I also just wanted to say, um, I found it very disturbing how both developers
were allowed to speak well past their time limit. You know, we've seen people get cut off on the
dot. Most recently is, you know, just I think two people before me. Um, whereas I think Joe,
he had to have gone over ...well over a minute over his time, and I understand if maybe you
meant to include an item on the agenda for developer comment, but that item wasn't there, and
maybe in the future we could have something like that, but we didn't have that and, um, it ... I
want to believe that this process works and that we're all getting a fair shot, but when I see rich
people getting more of a voice than your ordinary people, um, just makes that somewhat
difficult, and also, Joe Clark, the park is called Hickory Hill Park, not Hickory Park. You might
want to get that one down if you're going to pretend to care about the park. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome, John.
Doesy: Hi, this is John Doe. Um, at the Iowa City government and this Council (both talking)
Teague: I'm sorry, this isn't John Doe (both talking) stop right now and thank you. Would anyone that
hasn't addressed this topic, uh, that want to address this topic, please raise your hand now.
Seeing no one. All right, Council, it is our time for discussion. And I'll just open it up.
Thomas: Well, I ... I'll open the, um, discussion. First, I want to thank everyone from the public and
from the developer team, all the various stakeholders in this project. I ... I cannot think off the
top of my head anyway of a project where I identified more stakeholders in this project. It
really does have many, many different points of view in terms of the outcome, uh, and I had an
opportunity to speak with many of them, and I wanted to thank them for... for those
conversations. I found them to be very civil. I know sometimes the conversation and
comments that have been made at our public meetings have... some people have taken
exception to, but I did find my personal conversations to be very civil, um, and encouraging in
that regard. So I wanted to ... I did prepare some ... some comments here, because I wanted to
make sure I was as precise in my..in my..my language as possible. You know, we ... we've
talked about the three Planning and Zoning meetings, uh, and really what the focus, in my view,
of those discussions were was the ... the concept of the double -loaded versus the single -loaded
street concept. That was really... really what the conversation was focused on. The first two,
um, you know, it was very ..the first ... the first presentation did not have any single -loaded
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 17
representation. Uh, that's... the second came in in response to that concern from P&Z and had a
limited amount of single -loaded representation. The third concept did remove the housing on
the southern portion of the continuous road, and so it was that plan that the Planning and Zoning
Commission adopted. And I would agree that ... that a single -loaded street with a public right-of-
way to finding the park boundary can be a preferable frontage to Hickory Hill Park, depending
on the circumstances. But I ... I do disagree with Planning and Zoning's recommendation, uh, in
satisfying the Northeast District's planning principles, uh, pertaining to development east of
Hickory Hill Park. Just to give a little brief discussion or description of the the planning
principles, the neighborhood planning principles evolved from the Northeast District planning
workshops, which were held in spring of 1998. Uh, it was a citizen planning team that
emphasized the importance of preserving the natural beauty of the Northeast District, and the
planning principles are under a number of different categories, but the one I wanted to focus on
would be `preserving natural features,' which was the second principle, uh, and I wanted to
recite the second principle. It ... it stated that incorporating and maintaining a green open space
buffer between Hickory Hill Park and urban development to preserve the natural integrity of the
park. That... that's on page 8. The ... the need for that green open space buffer was referenced in
several sections of the Bluffwood Neighborhood narrative, which followed the principles. In
my judgment, the current proposal does not provide the public need of a sufficient buffer to
preserve the integrity of the park experience, which includes the multiplicity of long and short
views of the visually prominent ridge line to the east, from the park's open space, clearings, and
trails. The buildable land along the single -loaded portion of the street in the current proposal
must conform to the alignment of the ridge line. We've ... we heard that discussion earlier
tonight. Uh, that's really a given with this project. You know, in thinking about the single -
loaded concept, the ... the alignment of the development never changed, and in fact as Phoebe
mentioned, in the third iteration, the road actually moved closer to the park. But in any event,
the ... the actual developed area of road and buildable land really was limited in terms of where it
could go and if you look at, you know, a map of the area, the ridge line moves quite close to the
property line between this ... the, uh, private property and the, uh, the ACT property and Hickory
Hill Park. So I would add that the buildable land along the single -loaded portion of the street,
which must conform to the alignment of the ridge line is again, in my judgment, too close to the
park to provide an adequate buffer preserving the integrity of the park experience. So I then
went to, um, to ... what to look at what future considerations could be given to how that public
need directly created by the rezoning could be satisfied. The first point I would make is that we
need to provide greater clarity regarding the principles of development for the property.
Council could consider amending the Northeast District plan, or, based on what we have
learned from this zoning application, develop a new concept. Second, I would say that we need
to prepare a more thorough visual depiction of the proposal that emerges from those planning
principles, so that we all have a better understanding of its impacts on and the relationship with
the surrounding conditions. The technologies are available now to really carefully and
accurately depict what's being proposed, and in a project of this nature, which is ... which is quite
complex and, as I mentioned, have ... it has multiple stakeholders. We really need to make sure
that everyone understands what they're looking at and, you know, I can tell even with my design
background, uh, in looking at particularly the, um, the single-family component, uh, looking at
a two- dimensional drawing of a site plan really is not sufficient to understand the ... the impacts
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 18
of that ... of that development. Third, I would say broader... we need to consider broader
utilization of the purposes of the plan development overlay zoning to achieve the Northeast
District's planning principles, pertaining to preserving natural features. I also took a look at
some of the purposes of the planned development overlay that I think are pertinent to this
rezoning, and I'll just mention a few of them. One, providing flexibility in the site planning of
buildings, open spaces, and circulation. Two, encourage the preservation and best use of
existing landscape features through development that is sensitive to the natural features of the
surrounding area. Three, promote efficient land use with smaller utility and street networks,
while maintaining pedestrian -oriented street frontages, and under that purpose, I would ... I
would mention that given the information that we've ... we've received, I think the senior living
proposal has promise. I again would... would like to see better graphic depiction of that plan, so
we understand its relationship to, uh, ls` Avenue, basically to all the contextual issues in all
directions that pertain to it, but I am ... I do feel that the concept of having senior housing in that
location has some value. There's also I think potential for clustered residential development
near Scott Boulevard. Uh, that... that's in the plan, uh, and what we have now is ... is essentially a
single-family concept, running from beginning to end. And... and fourthly, encourage
opportunities for energy-efficient development. You know, so in sum I would ... I would just
simply say that if we're ... if we are more consistent with the planning principles of the Northeast
District plan, and consider opportunities promoted and encouraged by the plan development
overlay zoning, I do believe we will have a better project, and I think that better project is
possible.
Bergus: I'll jump in. I really appreciate your ...your comments, John, and I just want to echo what you
said about all the members of the public who came forward and gave such thoughtful
recommendations and questions and requests to the developer and to the Planning and Zoning
Commission through three meetings, and to our now second meeting, where we've heard from
people. Um, how are ... I ... I do think that this proposal meets the comprehensive plan, and I do
think we should approve the project and go along with the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation. This is a very difficult project because it balances some starkly competing
interests, and we know that, we can see that, we can hear that from what folks have said. Um,
but I don't know that it's possible to reconcile those and still provide what we're obligated to
provide, given the current existence of the plan and the code in which we're operating. We don't
really have the option to make new rules or new policy or amend the plan on the fly given
particular shortcomings with a particular proposal. When those concerns, as they've been raised
throughout the process, I really do believe have been addressed. We've seen the environmental
concerns, and I ... I share many of those, and I think how the developer has proposed increasing
the ... the woodlands that will be saved, the fact that one of the conditions of the conditional
zoning agreement is to have the woodland management plan that will be approved by the City
Forester. The fact that the buffer on the streamway has been increased. I do think there's been
changes to accommodate those concerns and certainly it may not be enough for many people,
but also what we're hearing is that this is ... this is a matter of degrees and ... and if we want to
come to a development... that can occur, because I've heard many, many people say not against
development, just want some changes to this ... this particular plan. But we're also hearing
people say that the senior housing isn't appropriate here, and that's too much density. And we're
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 19
also hearing people say that it's not dense enough! That if we want to address our need for
affordable housing and do the best that we can in terms of our climate action goals, we should
have more density. Personally, I ... I was disappointed when this plan was amended to take away
the ... the multi -family that was in the northwest portion o f the property, because I think having
that variety of housing types in a single development is really important, and it is an articulated
goal. So I think the challenge of balancing these competing interests is not something that I
approach lightly. But this plan has been amended, it has been vetted, it has been reviewed by
Planning and Zoning to get them to the point of recommending approval. And hearing some of
their reasoning during our work session this evening helped me to understand that this is
another... opportunity where the Council may reject to the good because it's not perfect, but I
don't think that we're able to make this perfect, and ... and I realize that it's ... it's messy and it's not
satisfactory to many people, but for those reasons I will be supporting this project.
Mims: (mumbled) go ahead and go next. Um, John and Laura, I agree with ... and thank you for your
comments for the public. Um, we've had a lot of public input on this, and I think that's really
important and appreciate people sharing their concerns. I think one of the comments you made,
Laura, is ... is really important here, and that is that there are a lot of very, very different
competing views and interests on this ... when it comes to this project, and I think a lot of those
views are very passionate and very strongly held, and for that reason I would agree that I don't
think there is the ability to come to a plan or solution that really would work for everybody. I
think one of the P&Z members mentioned that they really hadn't heard anything negative about
the senior living until the third meeting. And so, I mean, things change, um, but from my
perspective, looking at the... all the documentation from the public input to the staff analysis,
etc, and P&Z meetings. Certainly our staff and P&Z came to the conclusion that this meets the
comp plan and the Northeast District plan. Those need to be our guiding principles. Um,
obviously there's been some changes, you know, with not doing cul-de-sacs like we used to do.
Um, comments made at P&Z also on, you know, predictability, we have to have rules,
regulations, ordinances in place that they can rely on, that staff can help interpret for them, you
know, P&Z, etc, so that they know, you know, what they can do and what they can't, and
obviously there were some very significant adjustments from their first proposal to the last
proposal. Um, I ... Laura, you also mentioned some of the changes, the additional woodland
buffer, the additional acreage going to the park, etc. And I think those are all really positive
things. A couple of comments made by the public, I'll just mention that I'll have to say that I
don't agree with. Somebody made the comment of almost like a public taking, because this is
near th... near the park, and these lots and houses wouldn't be worth as much, um, if they were
somewhere else. I would suggest that people look at the house ... the price of the lots and the
prices of houses going up on Tamarack right now. And those are not adjacent to Hickory Hill,
and my guess is these will probably be in that same ballpark. They will probably be high-end
houses, but quite frankly that's not what we have the right to look at when we're talking about a
rezoning. We ... we can't ... we're talking about land use issues. It is not about the size of the
houses, the price of the houses when we make these decisions. I'm totally supportive of
comments of other Councilors. Um, I think, Mayor Teague, you made a comment earlier about
really wanting to get us moving on some of the zoning changes we've talked about, um, in terms
of, uh, John, you've brought up the missing middle, more these things by right and even the ... I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 20
was talking I think to ... to Janice today, even the idea of it, you know, maybe the requirement in
some areas that you combine different housing types, but that... those are not the rules that we
have in front of us right now, and so we have to act based on those rules. So, based on that and
the belief that staff and P&Z have thoroughly evaluated this and concluded, um, and with my
own review of the ... that it meets the plans, um, and I think there's been a lot of adjustments to
try and address the raised concerns of the public. The other ...I ... I will support it. The other
comment I would make was people in the public need to understand there was a comment made
about us, um, following the public desire. Our first and foremost responsibility is to follow the
law, and the rules and regulations that we have in place. So while we have had dozens, if not
hundreds of people speak against this project, we cannot vote against it because that is what the
people want. We have to vote, if we vote against it, we have to vote against it because we
believe that we legally are entitled to do that, based on the rules and regulations that are in
place. I don't believe that's the case, so I will be supporting this. I hope we will have rules and
regulations in place that will allow us to have a lot more creativity and a lot more diversity in
developments in the future.
Taylor: I will follow Susan on this since I ... I have been trying to look at this from the legal aspect also,
because originally I just thought I ... I just don't like this project. I just didn't like the project and
was going to vote against it, uh, but the more I looked at it and looked at the zoning as it is now,
the IDRS zone, the interim development single-family, uh, was described to use as a default
zoning district. It's a category that until City sewers and/or urban development can occur, uh,
you have it in ... in as that zoning. Well, those kinds of things have happened, so it is time that
this, uh, would be changed, and that's what we have to look at. What we're looking at now is an
ordinance to rezone this plot of land. And I just keep thinking, you know, when I appreciate
public comment, and most of you will know that, uh, the Mayor Pro Tem and myself for the last
four or five years have been talking till we're blue in the face about the need for affordable
housing. But looking at this and thinking about it and the legal aspect of it, the factors are just
not present that ... that warrant an affordable housing obligation for this plot of..uh, this tract of
land, but I would encourage developers to continue to look at parts of the city that, uh, where
we could put some affordable housing. But I would point out that we as a Council are
definitely committed to the ro... um, the need for affordable housing in our community, and ... but
in this contents, uh, we have legal inability to be able to do that and require the developer to do
that in this and I keep hearing, um, our legal counsel have continually told us about arbitrary,
unreasonable, and capricious decisions, and so I looked up capricious. I wasn't sure what that
meant, but, uh, it's just impulsive and lacking any firmness on the decision, and that's kind of
more what my feeling towards this... against this was ... was impulsive, because of the cost of the
homes, but that's... that can't be my major decision for that. I also looked at the fact that we're
not really infringing on the park. We're not taking anything away from Hickory Hill Park! In
fact, this developer is willing to add 14 acres to the park, so we're adding to the park. Uh,
granted the, you know, people going through the park are going to see these homes but there's
nothing wrong with that. I border on Willow Creek Park and there are expensive homes all
along there, along Teg Drive and along Kiwanis and Willow Creek Park, and no one complains
about that. Uh, it's kind of nice to see that. Um, property owners were given... given plenty of
opportunity to file protests and I appreciate all their comments, and we did get the protest
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 21
petitions, but there were not enough, of course, to require super -majority by us. I ... I would say
that, um, go back to what I said during the work session, that, uh, and reflecting on what Phoebe
Martin had said that to look at the future. We definitely, absolutely have to look at the form
based codes and comp plans and zoning. We seriously have to look at these. If they're 15, 20
years old, the community has changed, the needs of the community have changed, and we need
to get some affordable housing language in there and some (mumbled) zoning changed on that.
I also ... I would encourage the developers to be concerned about the sensitive areas and the
buffer zones, and I think that ... that will help with this. Um, otherwise I ... I'm ... am very
reluctantly, uh, going to vote in favor of this.
Weiner: I think I will reprise a little bit of what I said during the work session, which is, um, we ... we
have the codes that we have and not the codes that we wish we'd have. So I ... I really
appreciate, I honestly appreciate all the work that has gone into this. Everyone who's made an
effort. I know a number of people who have ... who have researched and written and ... and shown
up at the P&Z meetings and whom I've talked to as well. I really appreciate everything that
Councilor Thomas laid out. I would ... I want codes that require more climate sensitivity. I want
codes that ... that that give people the ri ... basically the right to build duplexes or triplexes. I want
different codes, and we've been talking about different codes for the time that I've been on
Council and before that. There's ... we need to change some of the single-family codes. We need
to be able to move forward. I know that staff is working on codification of...of the form based
code for the South District. Maybe we need more capacity to work more quickly with codes,
but I will ... I will end up ... I will vote for this even, again (mumbled) I don't love the project
because, um, these are the codes we have, and I would really urge Council to urgently take up
some some of these issues, so that we can move forward and get our codes changed to ... to better
align with our values and our community's values.
Teague: I'll go next and then it'll be our Mayor Pro Tem! All right, well, we had a meeting with P&Z
today during our work session, and during that meeting one of the things that I know P&Z job is
is to really look at the project, to make sure that the rules and the ordinance are in line. And as I
began to speak with people from the ... from the... from the, um, from the community, as well as
I've had some discussions with Councilors about this, some for, some, you know, some like
some aspects of the project, some don't like some aspects of the project, which I think we all
share that. Where I am now is ... this certainly... and... and we're going to make, you know,
the ... the excuse is our zoning, you know, the codes that we have in place right now. It ... it
doesn't meet our values, um, for... there's elements that I really love about this project, and then
there are some elements that ... it's missing, you know. Affordable housing is something that we
talk about all the time here at Council and it's missing. You know, the ... the buffer, I hear some
of that in the natural, um, we have animals and we need to consider all of them in, you know, in
this project and there's just missing elements to this project. But as I, you know, look at what is
my obligation and that is to make sure that what comes before us meets the requirements. Now
it will never meet at 100%. There are values that, you know, I can scream to the top of my lung
and say we really need to stop and not do this because affordable housing is missing. And
I ... and ... and, you know, I wish I could do that and I don't feel that I have that ability. I believe
that the missing middle is not a part of this project, as it stands before me right now. We need
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 22
that, we need that in our community. I know that I've said this before now and I'll say it again,
for the developers that are coming forth, if you know Council's value and not only Council
value, but the ... this community value, bring us projects that included, even if it's missing from
the code. It ... you know, it is frustrating, you know, the ... the predictability of something that
came up earlier. Um, and I do believe that our Council must get to the place where we create
things that are, um, predictable for the developer, for the staff, for all of the community
members. If you're living on the other side of the town or you're living right next door to a
project that's about to be rezoned, and for Council. It should not be this, you know, challenging
and it is, and one of the things that I'm gonna, you know, really ask that our Council become
committed to, um, I know that it's on our work session, and I'm going to work with Mayor Pro
Tem and City Manager to really get this on our work session, when it seems appropriate. We
have to have this conversation moving forward. I do want to say that there are some good
things about this project, um, that was created as a conversation between the community and,
you know, devel... development team. Everything is not there, I get that. I will vote in favor of
this project, um, I, you know, it's such a challenge because I've, you know, voted against
something that was annexed that didn't have elements and, you know, at least my thought there
was, um, it wasn't in the city and and it, you know, my understanding was it, you know, that
affordability should still be there. There are things, you know, again like I said, missing from
this, um, from the ... the ordinance, the plan, the rules, and, um, at this point I cannot hold this ... I
will not hold this developer or this project to that, and I will vote in favor.
Salih: I guess I'm the only one left here. I ... I'm really torn between like really move forward with it or
not. I try just to listen to everyone so I can get convinced. The fact that we are here just to
check the box, I don't agree with that. You know, we're ... we're not here just to check the box. I
guess as elected official, uh, you know, we need to listen to the public too and see what the
good for the public, definitely. I always not about checking a box. Anyone else can check the
box, but elected official should... yeah, look at that too, but look at the value of the community.
I understand everyone... every single one here talked about this. Understand what the Mayor
said about the (mumbled) I know that he believe on that, and he wish also too is ... if we can
change this. Um, I thinks I see everyone really humble and ready and really, you know,
passionate about changing the code, which is I hope you stay the same, uh, for the, you know,
and do this as soon as possible. Um, have we did everything by checking the box? That's not
true. So, you know, I just feel like some time Council talk about, you know, let us follow the
policy because that's the policy, and in another time, we are not following the policy. You
know, I don't know, but it's ... is really to me, I have many, if I can have examples, you know,
there is many, many examples happening and we just some time we need to just value the
residents. You know, I just really still torn, don't know what to do; um, part of me saying, yeah,
just, you know, even though... even if I said yes or no at this point is not gonna change anything.
There is a majority of support here and, um ... let's see how it gonna go!
Thomas: I just (garbled) one comment. Um, in terms of the ... the regulatory framework, uh, we have a
tool right now, the planned development overlay, which allows the freedom to develop a plan
which would embody the principles of the form based code, the missing middle, all of these
things which... which we're, you know, looking to implement in a ... in a more by -right manner,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 23
can be implemented on a project -based level right now. Uh, what are some examples of that?
The Peninsula is a planned development RS5 overlay. The development of Prairie Hill Co -
housing is a planned development overlay. It's either RS5 or RSB. So this can be done right
now. It requires insight, it requires a vision, but it's possible to do now. So this is, in my view,
it is not a regulatory issue. You know, I was certainly looking at questions related to
consistent... consistency with the Northeast District plan, and I think there are inconsistencies.
But I just want to be clear that there are tools now that would allow us to do many of the things
that were mentioned, if only we had the way to get there. We do have the way to get there, and
it's right ... it's available to us now.
Teague: I do have a question ... oh, go right ahead, Mayor Pro Tem.
Salih: I also want to have a question, I'm sorry, but you can go ahead, Mayor!
Teague: My question, I want to get clarification from either our attorney or staff on this because...
conditions I know do happen at rezoning. We can also ... when we actually see the site plan and
all that other stuff officially, we can have... either we pass it or we don't, and then at that point
there's also some conditions that could be taken. Can staff clarify for me if we can have
conditions related to this rezoning?
Fruin: Well I'm happy to jump in, and then Eric can ... can clarify. Certainly you do have the ability to
provide some conditions. There are limits on what you can do. For example, you cannot
provide any conditions regarding affordability, because that runs counter to State law. But if
you saw other land use aspects that you wanted to discuss conditions on, you ... you can, and
then we just have to as staff kind of listen to those conversations and ensure that it's legal
and... and... and doable, and then what we probably need you to do is defer the vote and discuss
those with the ... with the developer, so that we can make sure that they would be on board with
whatever it is you're suggesting. Sorry if I jumped in front of you there, Eric.
Goers: No, that's fine. Thanks, yeah, I would agree with everything Geoff just said, and the other part
of it is, you...when you're looking at conditions for a rezoning, the most important thing is that
you focus on what conditions have been created by the rezoning, that is what needs have been
created by the rezoning, and that's the kind of thing that you can put conditions on. That is, uh,
building new infrastructure, because there's better, you know, greater traffic, um, or you know,
when we look at the Riverfront Crossings plan and so forth, you know, there are affordable
housing com, uh... uh, portions of that, but that's because, you know, our city's belief was that
we were going to be eliminating affordable housing, you know, the older kind of housing stock
that was present. We presumed was affordable and those are going to be torn down, and so we
thought it would be appropriate, with the reduction of that affordable housing, to have to
replace some of it. I see that's not present here. This is greenfield development. There is no
affordable housing already there. I think it would be different there (mumbled) as has been said
by many others, you know, we need to, you know, the things that we can demand, do of course
speak to some discretion that we have with the OPD, but we do have to remain consistent with
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 24
the code that we have, and we think that staff, uh, has negotiated those terms and put conditions
in the conditional zoning agreement that address the things that we think we legally can address.
Salih: Mayor, you know, my question was like close to your question, uh, you know, now I think that
I'm very fond of affordable housing. If I can ask the developers to do affordable housing, I will.
Even though is not right now, as you said, this is like huge change. I'm not talking now about
affordable housing really. I know that there is no way we can (mumbled) as the project, the
current project, the way that it look, we can not do that. But I'm asking about as a condition,
just like you said, like the buffer and everything else, like the public that talk about the traffic
study, and all this kind of things, can we really spe... add those kind of thing, and ask the
developer to improve them?
Teague: I do have, uh, and sorry to jump right in there. I ... the City Forester, um, is going to approve,
um, some aspects of this, and I guess I don't know to what degree, you know, that... you know,
kind of satisfy. I know it's, you know, kind of projected as not fully, um, the hope for the ... for
the buffer and that has been something that has been really mentioned by the community, and I
would love to have that addressed, um, if we could.
Frain: Mayor, we could, um, Danielle's on the call and my guess has the the plan available. Um, we
went through that with you on the first reading, or I'm sorry, on the first meeting. Um, but it'd
be helpful, we can walk you through that buffer again so you can kind of see what's there now.
Do you need that or are you comfortable talking about the sufficiency of the buffer without
seeing the image?
Teague: At least for me right now, I think one of the things that sticks out in my mind from the
community is the buffer, and so personally I ... I think I would like to just walk through that just
to refresh my memory there.
Bergus: While Danielle's pulling that up, if it's helpful for Councilors, in our packet on page 470 is the,
um, conditions within the conditional zoning agreement ... so you can see what it actually says
about, um, the trail connections, the traffic calming, the woodland management plan, and the
landscaping plan.
Sitzman: So I pulled up the overall image of the development for you all. Um, there's one that also
shows us sensitive areas delineated, but, um, this one's a little bit cleaner. Basically outlot A is
the area between Hickory Hill Park and any development taking place. This does have the topo
lines on it as well.
Fruin: Danielle, can you ... can you kind of just trace outlet A with your, um (both talking)
Sitzman: Sure! Uh, so along north Scott Boulevard to the north, uh, along the western property line,
north to south, and then along a southern boundary and between the, uh, street, and then the
single -loaded side or the ... single -loaded side, and then the double -loaded side of the street with
the single- family lots along the north part of the street.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 25
Fruin: Okay, so for the Councilors, the green area's essentially the ... the, um, land that would be
dedicated to the City to incorporate into Hickory Hill Park. That's your roughly 14 acres there,
and you can see it depending on where you're at within the development that buffer grows or
shrinks and, Danielle, if you can read, uh, it's hard for us to read, but if you can read a few of
those measurements and show (both talking)
Sitzman: Yeah, I'm not sure that I can, Geoff, because I think this is a screen capture and the resolution
not great.
Fruin: Okay.
Sitzman: Uh, for reference though, the lots are approximately 80 feet in width, and, uh, I'm sorry, I
can't read the dimension on the depth either, but you can kind of see that compare them to the
lot sizes.
Fruin: So at the, uh, Danielle, if this estimate is off, please jump in, but at the, uh, kind of the skinniest
part down there, if you can read lot numbers. It looks like, you know, across from lots maybe
10, 11, and 12, you may be looking at a 30, 35 -foot buffer from the... from the roadway to
the ... to the park at... at it's probably it's narrowest point.
Sitzman: I would agree. I actually have a table I've just put my hands on and it says it's 35 feet, at the
narrowest... there.
Salih: If there is any way you can tell me what the different between the current one and the ... what the
public asking for, or you don't know?
Fruin: I ... I have not heard any specific distance measure or, uh, articulated by the public. Um,
obviously that 35 feet is ... is much shorter than you get up north, you know, as you move further
towards Scott Boulevard, um, you know, you get a couple hundred feet buffer up there in that
area, but to directly answer your question, Mayor Pro Tem, I have not heard a specific distance,
so I don't know if 40 feet, 50 feet, 60 feet... you know, I don't know what would be deemed
sufficient, and it's probably going to be different for every individual, um (both talking)
Thomas: I can comment. I ... I think the area of greatest concern is most likely where the double -loaded
becomes the single -loaded. Second, there are issues... it's not just the horizontal distance. It's,
you know, what is the topography doing? This is the kind of condition where, you know,
that ... that kind of graphic analysis that I mentioned earlier is necessary, uh, to ... to really look at
through a say section elevation, uh, what the condition is in terms of topography, in terms of
existing vegetation, uh, to even get an understanding of the, you know, the problem that needs
to be solved. But I think what ... if we're talking about a visual buffer, which given the
narrowness of this condition, uh, I think what we're talking about is a visual screen, uh, most
likely of evergreen vegetation, because the... the... it's during the winter months, fall and winter,
when deciduous trees lose their leaves that you would have the highest visibility. So in my
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 26
mi ... and I'm speaking just for myself, obviously, but that ... that would be my response is this
would need to be looked at carefully along... at various stations along this narrow section, uh, in
order to come up with at...at least some level of remedy to the buffer, the question of the buffer.
Salih: And I thinks (mumbled) Mayor, can I ask the developer, if he can ... like (both talking)
Teague: Yeah, um, Welch, welcome and, um, maybe you can chime in on this.
Welch: Yes, thank you, Mayor. Um, actually the ... the buffers, um, if we kind of want to go through it,
um, at lot 3, so in the south end (mumbled) right there, Danielle. Um, that buffer from the front
yard of lot 3 to the southern boundary to the park boundary, that's 150 feet. And then as we go
across on the comer from lot 6, going west, so from the front yard... yep, right there of lot 6 to
the park is 159 feet. And then on the back of lot 42, yep, right there, that's 116 feet, currently.
Um, what those buffers were originally is we were following the existing treeline. So on the
South, we were about 30 feet and then we got to the, like the west (mumbled) across from lot 6
and we were at 35 feet. So kind of in rough numbers, um, those buffers from... from where the
rear yards used to be to where the front yards are currently, they increased on a, you know,
magnitude of four to five times what they were.
Teague: Okay.
Salih: Thank you. (several talking)
Bergus: I was also ... I had a question about the existing trees. So I'm looking at page 186 in our packet.
It's labeled as Hickory Trails Development Concept plan, and I was tracking the ... kind of the
measurements, you know, from the property line into the front and backs of the lots that were
just mentioned. But there's also the kind of scalloped edge that says existing tree line, and then
there's also the top ... the topographical lines and the elevation, so you can see sort of where the
lower elevation is along a stream -way and it goes up to the ridge where the road is, um, but the
existing tree line looks like that there is trees north to south along kind of that whole ... well
from ... on this orientation of this would be, you know, top to bottom. Um, are those trees going
to stay or are those trees being removed?
Welch: Well we, um, I guess what we're doing is in order to meet the 50% woodland retention, we
made the lots, um, the buildable area on the lots is shallow as we could. Um, well I should say
as deep as we could, but still keeping that 50% woodland retention. So we will be removing
some trees as you ... as you come through there, and in this drawing, um, that heavy black dashed
line really represents the limit of disturbance, um, that a individual property owner, when they
buy the lot, or the developer when they're preparing the lots, um, that's the limit of any work
that will be done. And so on outlot A on the west side of the street, it does ... it kind of follows
more that orange dashed line is like the grading limits, so that would be the limit of any work.
So the existing trees that are on that western park boundary or eastern park boundary, western
development boundary, those will not be ... not be removed from where they are now. So those
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 27
trees will remain, and the majority of the development is in, um, impacts the areas that are
currently in grass (mumbled) or just those open areas of development.
Bergus: Okay, and so just to be totally clear, along that western, north -south boundary, it looks like
from what I'm looking at, there's that existing tree line, the entire way north to south. Is that
your understanding, that that's...
Welch: Yep!
Bergus: Okay (both talking) and so those would stay?
Welch: They would up on the northern end. We do get into ... the kind of the edge of it. Um, I know
you made the comment earlier about losing those condo lots up there, um, and that was one of
the... kind of concessions to get above that 50% woodland retention, and... and we met with, um,
with Forestry and other staff. Um, we did identify there was some kind of highly valuable trees
up in that northwest corner that ... that when we had the original condo development was getting
into those, um, so by pulling that back, we were able to ... to preserve some kind of higher value
woodland that ... that we weren't originally.
Bergus: That's helpful, thank you.
Welch: Yep!
Teague: And I was the one and... as well as Mayor Pro Tem, that asked this question related to kind of
the buffer, and so I think, at least for me, I've ... I gained the information that I needed.
Salih: I just want to ask Michael, uh (laughs) what can you do to improve some of the concern that the
resident have, especially about the buffer, what John Thomas was referring to. Is there is any
way you can do something?
Welch: Um, I guess I would have a couple thoughts on that. One, I appreciate what Council Member
Thomas is looking for and... and seeking. Um, I guess I think what gets lost in these
conversations when you bring a plan to Council and P&Z, um, is ... is I don't think we see the
amount of work and the amount of concepts that we do before we get to this point. Um, and
we're kind of in that ... in that situation of trying to meet code and present....present documents
that were used too on the engineering and development side of presenting, um, so that's a lot of
to John's point, a lot of 2-D, um, documents that take some interpretation, and it can be
challenging to kind of grasp everything, um, and we were trying to balance that with ... with all
the technology that's available and all the vis... visualization that we potentially could do, um,
but all that comes at a cost, and cost them money and time and ... and capabilities that, um, that
are ... that are hard to ... to put to a project of this ... of this scale sometimes, and the other one too
is if you, um, you know, it's ... we look at these on a sheet of paper, on a laptop screen, um, but
the overall size of this property, it's really large and so those, you know, that 50 or 70 feet of
elevation change that we have on here, even when we do 3-D, you know, visu... visualization,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 28
it's really hard to ... to keep track of that, those changes in elevation, given the size of the
property, because they end up just not looking ... they look different than they do in ... in real life
when you're looking at it. So I think that would be, I guess that's what I would say. So I think,
um, yes, there's some things that we could do, but I don't always know that they're gonna really
get to a spot where it actually makes a difference for people. Like I said, we ... this is what we
do for a living and ... and we're pretty confident in our ability to understand land forms and
understand what we're proposing. Um, I don't know if that answered the question or not, but...
Salih: Thank you, Mike.
Welch: Yep!
Teague: Danielle, I do have a question as far as the multi -family area. Can you show that and maybe
speak to what the thoughts are there?
Sitzman: So the multi -family housing would be located in this area of the development. Um, did you
have a specific question?
Teague: Um, I just wanted to know what are the thoughts of the type of housing.
Sitzman: Well it's a type of housing that's considered, and I'd have to grab the staff report, but it's group
living, because of the care nature of the residences. So rather than considering everybody
having their own dwelling unit, it's more of a communal living situation. As the applicants
described, it's a senior care facility with various levels of care, and it's designed around the
amenities and the layout that they need to accomplish that.
Teague: Okay. So the... and this is, of course, the memory care, uh, component of this project.
Sitzman: Right.
Teague: Okay. That was the only question that I have there. I did want to know if Councilors had any
other comments or questions for staff or..um, also (laughs) uh, you know, if there's conditions
that we want to create, um, that are allowable, I guess (laughs)
Weiner: (both talking) Sorry, Mayor. I ... someone had met... couple of people had mentioned that the
traffic study and COVID and so forth, and I ... I just wanted to point out, and it's on page 341 of
our packet, that it noted that the traffic volumes are ... are impacted by the pandemic, so that
traffic volumes were increased in their study by 35% during the AM peak hour and 30% during
the PM peak hour, and they determine that based on non-COVID 19 counts at the intersection
of north I" Avenue and Scott Boulevard. What... and... and comparing link volumes, whatever
link volumes are, which I'm not sure, between the intersection. So, I mean, in essence it
seemed ... it struck me when I was reading that that they were trying to compensate for the fact
that it ... that they were measuring this during the time of COVID, to make sure that they tried to
capture what the actual traffic would ... would be as close, as they could get.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 29
Teague: Okay. Any other questions or comments? Yeah, and, um, all right, I think we are ready for a
vote. I think her computer disconnected. I think since we're in the middle of a vote, and she
was a part of this, we should probably wait and see if we can't get her back connected. (pause)
All right, I was just texting Mayor Pro Tem (laughs)
Salih: (both talking) just freeze, yeah.
Teague: Yes!
Salih: Go ahead! Sorry!
Goers: We're ready for your vote.
Salih: Okay.
Goers: We already called your name and we lost you. What ... what's your vote on this item?
Salih: Yes.
Teague: Okay, motion passes 6-1. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence?
Bergus: So moved, Bergus.
Weiner: Second, Weiner.
Teague: All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 30
11. Lower City Park and Kimball Road Storm Sewer Improvement — Resolution approving
project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Lower City Park and
Kimball Road storm Sewer Improvement Project, establishing amount of bid security to
accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders, fixing time and place
for receipt of bids.
1. Public Hearing
Teague: I'm going to open the public hearing (bangs gavel) and staff presentation please.
Clow: Good evening. Can everyone hear me? This is Melissa Clow with Public Works and
Engineering, and I've been working on the Lower City Park and Kimball Road storm sewer
improvement and riverbank stabilization project. As you can see, there are four different areas
that we are working on with this project. The first is at the intersection of Kimball Road and
Gilbert, north Gilbert Street. We will be installing two storm sewer intakes at this location to
help with drainage concerns that we have. We will be working on storm sewer removal and
replacement in Lower City Park, um, basically from the Lower City Park access drive all the
way out to the river. At 900 North Dubuque Street we are doing driveway improvements
and ... and adding a storm sewer culvert there as well, and we're also adding approximately 500
feet of stream bank stabilization along the Iowa River. Touch base on Kimball Road really
quick. So everyone knows there is no storm sewer located on Kimball Road, until you get to
Governor Street. There's also no storm sewer located on north Gilbert Street, until you get up to
the Brown Street intersection. We've been watching this intersection since the completion of
the Iowa City Gateway project, and there is a considerable amount of rain water, storm water
that flows down both roadways and comes together at this intersection. So at this time we're
going to be adding two double intakes on the east side of the Gilbert -Kimball intersection, on
Kimball Road, to try and pick up all of that drainage coming down Kimball. There's also, we've
discovered, um, an existing dip in a concrete panel right in front of the ADA ramp at the
southwest corner of Kimball and Gilbert that causes some ponding issues. So we're going to
remove that, try and finish it, smooth it out. A lot of this drainage is causing the build up of
sediment in this ADA ramp. It also ponds in the ramp, goes up over the sidewalk, and
settlement...um, sediment settles on the sidewalk farther down on Kimball towards Dubuque
Street. While we recognize that this is not going to solve all the problems that we have there,
there is a future Gilbert Street improvement project, where we will continue to look at these
issues and address them more at that time. The 900 North Dubuque Street driveway, um, below
there's a picture of its existing condition. This is how it was installed for the Iowa City
Gateway project. Due to the ... due to the NEPA, or the National Environmental Protection Act
limits for the gateway project, we were not allowed to fully construct that driveway as far as it
needed to go. The existing driveway drops down and away from the sidewalk on the east side
of Dubuque Street to match the grade of the drainage swale. Improvements will add
approximately 50 feet of new concrete drive, um, up to ... to match into existing. It'll be a
consistent grade from the sidewalk up, so that we will be getting rid of the (mumbled) um, a 15 -
inch culvert will be added at the low point to maintain existing drainage patterns. And in Lower
City Park, we will be replacing the aging CMP storm sewer that runs from the access drive all
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 31
the way out to the river. It, um, it's been out there for quite some time and it's rusting out, um,
so it's not carrying the water as efficiently as it should to the river. Um, the storm sewer
connects to (mumbled) on the access drive, um, and also in the park. You can see in one of the
pictures we have some low points. We're going to grade those out, add a few intakes, and try
and dry those areas out for more usable space. This area was also outside of the NEPA limits
for the Iowa City Gateway project, so we've been patiently waiting until we can pull together a
project and get this taken care of. While we're in City Park working, um, I have a photo at the
bottom, which shows rip -rap that was placed with the construction of the Park Road bridge. We
will be meeting the north end of that rip -rap, and adding additional stabilization 500 feet north
along the west bank of the Iowa River. Um, if you're out there walking that river, the river bank
is pretty eroded. There used to be trees along this river bank, and it's at a pretty steep slope as
well (mumbled) many places, so we're going to flatten that out, add some rip -rap, and try and
protect that edge of City Park. Estimated project cost is $250,000 for this work. That's for all
the storm sewer, the pavement, and a majority of it is for the (mumbled) the rip -rap. Design
development has been taking place. It started in May, through this month, June of this year. We
plan to let the project July 13, 2021, and construction will begin as soon as possible in August
and be complete yet this fall. Construction will include a complete closure of Kimball Road
during construction. We will be keeping the Kimball -Gilbert Street intersection open, and we
will have a detour sign. There will be temporary lane and sidewalk closures on Dubuque Street
for driveway construction, and also some temporary trail closures in Lower City Park for storm
sewer construction. That is what I have right now. If any of you have any questions, I'd be
happy to answer them.
Bergus: I did have a question, Melissa. Um, when you mentioned the NEPA limits and needing to...
guess we couldn't exceed those during the Gateway project. Is that like a time frame, or can
you just explain why we can make some of those changes now, when we couldn't along with
that project?
Clow: Um, the NEPA limits were established, um, its the National Environmental Protection Act, and
it...it was pretty much the study that was done for two and a half or three years prior to the
Gateway project beginning, um, and it is ... it looks at historic properties, parks, endangered
species, um, all sorts of different aspects, noise pollution, all of that, and it establishes specific
limits on the amount of land that can be impacted on certain properties and really in City Park,
um, there were limits placed just because it was parkland, it was public land, so we were trying
to minimize our impact to the park, um, when we established that and didn't know about the
storm sewer at that time, that we needed to get that replaced, um, and include that, so we are
doing it now.
Bergus: Thank you.
Teague: All right, any more questions? Seeing none. Anyone from the public like to address this
topic? If so, please raise your hand and I will call upon you. Seeing no one ... I'm going to close
the public bearing (bangs gavel) Could I get a motion to approve please?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 32
2. Consider a Resolution
Salih: Move, Salih.
Mims: Second, Mims.
Teague: All right, Council discussion?
Taylor: They all sound like very much needed projects.
Teague: All right. Roll call please. Motion passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 33
12. Nevada Avenue Sanitary Sewer Replacement Construction — Resolution approving the
project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the Nevada Avenue Sanitary
Sewer Replacement Construction Project, establishing amount of bid security to
accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders, and fixing time and
place for receipt of bids.
Public Hearing
Teague: I'm going to open the public hearing (bangs gavel) and staff presentation.
Welter: Yes, good evening, Joe Welter. I'm a Senior Engineer with the Engineering division, and I've
been working on this project with consultants since July of 2019. We had a public meeting in
December of 2019, addressed a lot of concerns with the design after that, uh, point and then for
most of this calendar year have been out meeting with a lot of the residents, uh, dealing with the
owners and residents on lots of issues that they had during the acquisitions of the temporary
easements that are associated with this project. So we've had quite a bit of public interaction on
this project and (mumbled) really taken that into consideration with the design, which went
through quite a few iterations. The project is located south and east of Grant Wood Elementary
and Fair Meadows Park, and it is located in the ... the backyards. When this subdivision was
done in the late 60s and early 70s, this was a pretty common practice. Um, inside of, uh, can
you see my cursor? Inside of the, um...
Fruin: Joe, your screen's not being shared.
Welter: My screen is not being shared. Okay.
Teague: There you go!
Welter: Is it ... is it coming up now?
Teague: Yes.
Welter: Okay. Nothing like technical difficulties. Okay, so I was saying, Grant Wood Elementary Fair
Meadows Park there. So the location of the project is in the backyards. That was a, um, that
was part of the original subdivision design. In fact there's a sanitary sewer is going through,
um ... uh, several of these areas throughout this whole subdivision and some sewers cutting east -
west, as well as north- south. The project, as I mentioned, is located in the backyards. There's
an existing permanent utility easement. It's 20 feet wide total. Ten feet of that is on the back of
each of the properties of abutting the project. The project is to replace, uh, existing 8 -inch
sewer pipe with new 8 -inch and 10 -inch PVC truss pipe on the center of the permanent
easement. Currently the... the... the existing sewer is offset a little bit to the west of the center
line, and so we're going to try to put that right ... right in the middle of the permanent easement.
The existing sewer could not be rehabilitated, in fact, several of the north- south and east -west
sections of the sanitary sewer throughout this subdivision were lined and rehabilitated by us this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 34
fall and winter and spring, but this particular line has several low points in it and sags, and you
can't line that. You have to dig it up and replace it. So that's the... that's the impetus of this
project. Again, the original pipe was installed in the 60s with the original subdivision. This
project will also put in new private sanitary sewer services for the residents, up to the edges of
the easements. The first phase of the project is up at the low end of the sewer, up in Lakeside
Drive. This is the only part of the project that will involve pavement removal and restoration,
which will include half of the driveway on 62 Regal Lane. We are intending, as you'll see in the
schedule, to try to get that work done before the beginning of the school year so that we won't
have as much impact on the local elementary school. So otherwise the work is in the backyards
and there'll be minimal disruptions to the streets. The contractor has access from Whispering
Meadow Drive and also from Lakeside Drive. There will be temporary easements, you can see
that in the gold on the side of the ... the exhibit here. And we'll be taking down a lot of fences in
the backyards, but we'll be putting up temporary fencing, and that's chain link fencing. That's
not like orange construction fencing. That's actual chain link fencing that we'll be putting up.
There's people that have dogs. There's a daycare in this neighborhood. So we want to make
sure that we're putting up good quality fencing during the construction. The existing fencing,
which is some wood, some chain link will be salvaged, what ... what is salvageable and be
reinstalled on the same property. If the materials are damaged, we'll be replacing those. We'll
be working around other utilities in this project. There's, uh, cable, telephone, and power also
running through this corridor. We have coordinated with those utilities and we have a good
approach for working around those utilities. We won't be relocating them and... and really don't
have a ... a design approach really should be impacting those utilities too much. The restoration
of the yards, so that'll be the temporary easements, will be with sod. We want to give them a
chance to really get going, um, in the late fall, and then next ... next spring and summer
with ... with some good, um, with some good replacement grass. The permanent easement we'll
be seeding. The ... the dashed lines here, that's the permanent easement. The fence lines'll be
restored on that, so there'll be a full 20 -foot corridor through here, so that we have access to that
and the other utilities have access to that corridor. Some of the fence lines go all the way to the
property line, and it makes problematic for us to get in there and maintain this sewer, and for
the power and cable and telecommunications companies to get back there. Bid opening is July
81h. We pushed back the start date a little bit because of the change in the Council dates, and so
that'll be August 9`h. We're intending to complete this in middle October, with some punchlist
time to ... to maybe clean up some of the seeding or address some issues that the... the residents,
the owners might have with the ... with the fencing or the gates or different things like that. So
the total cost, estimated cost by the engineer, was $462,000. I'd like to thank Anderson Bogert,
did a fantastic job through this, um, really put in a lot of effort, um, was ... was always there to
support City staff, and to answer questions that the residents and owners had. So really pleased
with the work that they did, and there's my contact information. Be happy to answer any
questions.
Bergus: Joe, I appreciate what you said about getting, um, working with the property owners all along
there. I'm pretty familiar with the area, and I know that some of the backyards were really just
like probably entirely over the easement area. Um, when that's a permanent 20 -foot corridor
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 35
between the backyards, will there... are we installing access from each property, cause I assume
property owners will have to maintain the easement area?
Welter: That's... that's correct. Um, that... that's absolutely correct. We're ... so most of them had a gate
and some of the gate materials are in pretty good shape and we'll try ..we'll try to salvage those.
Some of them had a gate at one point and don't anymore, and so we'll be installing new gates in
those locations. If it's a wood picket fence, it'll be a wood picket gate. If it's ... if it's chain link
fence, it'll be a chain link gate. Um, we'll work with the owners on ... on where they want those
gates. We didn't really necessarily specify location on the plans, because it isn't going to make
much of a difference to the contractor really, so we'll probably be doing some coordinating with
them. Generally we're probably going to try to put them towards the middle. Um,
seems ... seems like the best place, but we will ... we'll be working with the ... with the residents, if
they have a real strong opinion and some of them already have told me they do have a strong
opinion, so we'll be aware of that.
Bergus: I appreciate that. Thank you.
Teague: I imagine people will have very specific spaces where they want the gate. My question relates
to the size of the gate because if people need to get a mower out there, some people use a riding
mower. So will that be a question that is asked to the home owner or will it just automatically
be ... I think 42 -feet wide or something like that, uh, or 36, I don't know what size.... what size
riders. I think 36 is probably the more residential rider.
Welter: Right, right. So we, again, if they have an existing gate, the ... the intention is put the ... the same
material back up. If they don't have a gate, um ... right now we're looking at fairly standard sizes.
I don't know that the cost will vary very much between the gate materials and the other chain,
you know, chain link or...or wood material. So I know on the wood picket fences, um, at a
certain size that ... that you would have to actually probably install two gates back to back to do
something like that. I don't... right now our design isn't accommodating those things, but we
definitely can work through that if it ... if it gets to be an issue that needs to be identified. I didn't
have anybody on the corridor that I've talked to that, um, that talked about a riding mower.
Obviously we're not just building this just for the people that live there currently, but we're also
looking at this for a long-term, so ... so that's certainly something to think about, Mayor. I
appreciate that ... that comment. We'll ... we'll certainly... I'll write that down and bring that up
during the ... the pre -construction meeting when the contractor's selected, so we can... we can
start those conversations, make sure that we ... we put back the right things.
Teague: Great. Thank you.
Welter: Yep.
Teague: Any other questions for Joe? All right, we're going to open this up to the public. If you want
to address this topic, please raise your hand and you'll have three minutes to talk about this.
Welcome, Gary.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 36
Beckman: Hi, how are you? Can you hear me?
Teague: Yes, welcome.
Beckman: Yes, I want to really thank Joe. He really did a nice job with us here at 50 Regal Lane.
Thank you, Joe, and I really appreciate it (mumbled) good working with you!
Welter: Thanks, Gary.
Teague: Would anyone else like to address this topic? And we need to mute Joe (laughs) Seeing no
one, I'm going to close the public hearing. Could I get a motion to approve please?
2. Consider a Resolution
Salih: Move, Salih.
Weiner: Second, Weiner.
Teague: All right, Council discussion?
Mims: I just want to thank staff for their, you know, understanding and concern of the neighbors.
Laura, you know, asked some really good questions, and when you're getting into people's
backyards where they've had fences right up to each other, and now that's going to be separated
with that permanent 20 -foot easement, that's going to be a real change. So closely working with
those people and trying to accommodate the best we can their needs, uh, really appreciate staff
doing that kind of reaching out and hearing what their needs are.
Bergus: I agree (both talking)
Teague: Roll call please. Motion passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 37
13. Amendment to 28E with University Heights — Resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign
and the City Clerk to attest an Amended and Restated 28E Agreement with the City of
University Heights for the sharing of property tax revenues.
Teague: Could I get a motion to approve?
Bergus: So moved, Bergus.
Mims: Second, Mims.
Teague: All right, staff presentation on this.
Fruin: Uh, thank you, Mayor. So we're returning to you with this item which we foreshadowed when
we were going through the annexation and rezoning here. If you recall, this is the project that
originally straddled the line of University Heights and Iowa City, near Finkbine Golf Course.
We did a boundary adjustment to make all of that property that will eventually hold the senior
housing project in Iowa City. Um, we've been going through that with University Heights. We
negotiated with them to share tax revenue on a 50/50, uh, basis in perpetuity. Unfortunately,
when you take an annexation through to the State, uh, City Development Board, they limit such
agreements to 40 years, and so what we told you at that time is that, uh, we are coming ... what
you originally approved was a 40 -year agreement that split revenues 52% to University Heights
and 48% to Iowa City. The difference in the 2% was really our incentive to come back to the
table, um, to make this agreement go beyond the 40 years. So we're now making that the 50/50
split, even for both communities, but this will extend it in perpetuity, so it won't be limited to
those 40 years. The project has been approved by the State Development Board and has been
approved by the Board of Regents, so with those two approvals and ours and University Heights
this project can proceed when the developer is ready to do so.
Teague: Any questions for Geoff? Anyone from the public like to address this topic? If so, please raise
your hand and I'll call upon you. Council discussion?
Salih: I think this is a project that we did not follow the rule of the annexation. Uh, you know. I'm not
going to be supportive of this. Because we really like follow the rules and the boxes when we
need it and we don't do it when we don't need it. So I'm not going to be supportive of this
project ... of this whatever (laughs)
Teague: The, you know, I thought long and hard about this, because I certainly am 100% on board with
my interpretation of annexation. Even though this was kind of (mumbled) the City. At this
point, because this is a 28E agreement, Council majority approved it, um, at this point I will
support this, but I do get what you mean. It's like it's already ...it's happening and so I want the,
you know, the ... the perpetuity (laughs) you know, what was promised, so I'm going to support
it, but I do...I do hear ya. Roll call please. Motion passes 6-1.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 38
16. Community Comment
Teague: We are at Item #16 and let's see ... 11 right (both talking, garbled)
Van Heukelom:Yes, good evening, everybody. Um, I don't have really any updates for you guys, but as
we all begin to meet in person for City Council, Student Government also had their first in-
person meeting this past Sunday, so we're really excited to ... Elle and I are really excited to meet
you all in person, um, so thank you, good night.
Teague: Thank you, thank you, thank you and welcome back to in-person meetings (laughs)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 39
17. City Council Information
Teague: So chime right on in there.
Salih: I just wanna let you know that I will be gone to visit my family in Sudan on the month of July, so
I will be back for the meeting for August. But, you know, I really would like any help that I can
attend this two meeting for the month of July, will appreciate it, and good luck with, uh, you
know, the in-person meeting. I'm not gonna be here to start out with you, but yeah, can't wait to
do it when I come back.
Teague: Mm hmm.
Weiner: I just ... the, it's ... I really just want to recognize all the teachers and staff of all the schools, who
really, as well as our colleagues on the School Board and the School Administration, who had a
year like no other, who worked really hard to try and serve all our students and wish them a
good summer and a smoother next year. It was just... what... what they had to deal with is really
can't be compared with virtually anything else here.
Teague: Well, I want to mention that this is, uh, kind of a week celebration of Juneteenth. I gave the
proclamation, and so last night it was Real Talk and I know that some of the Councilors were
there last night. I know Mayor Pro Tem and I believe I saw Councilor Weiner were present,
um, last night. If I... I actually was so engaged in listening to the presenters that, um, typically I
scroll through. I didn't do that much (laughs) It was really good last night. There were several
events happening, and I would encourage people to go to www.JohnsonCountylowa.org.gov,
sorry, JohnsonCountyIowa.gov/Juneteenth. It's going to be lots of opportunities for people to
come out and celebrate. We're super excited that this is a natural ... (mumbled) um, actually
there'll be some national opportunities, um, that I think Council Weiner just mentioned. So
we'll be listening for that as ... as it unfolds. But this is great for this to be a City holiday, and I'm
super excited to celebrate this inaugural year for Juneteenth, and look like we're, you know,
going to be trailblazers, um, when it comes down to what's happening federally. Tomorrow,
wait Thursday there will be the 5:00 PM, um, at Chauncey Swan Park. It's going to be a huge
celebration, so I hope people come out, and it'll be followed by Juneteenth, the ... the movie, and
so looking forward to that. We have the divide... Diversity Market, and that was mentioned
earlier today, as well. That's going to be happening this Saturday, the 26th of June, the 3rd and
the I Oth of June, 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM at the Kingdom Center. Uh, the first event happen this
Saturday. So yes, I hope that people can make it.
Salih: And just to add to Juneteenth, um, you know, I know that we have this holiday right now for the
City, right. (mumbled) is just Saturday. This time it will be weekend, next year also will be a
Sunday, but I think after that the City will be closing their doors for public. Am I right?
From: Yes, we're actually, um, this year observing the holiday on Friday so City (both talking)
Salih: Oh, that's good!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 40
Fruin: (both talking) so there will be limited services. We don't close all our operations, but most
employees will ... will not be working on Friday, and then next year it'll be recognized on
Sunday, and then it will be on the actual day.
Salih: Okay, yes, just year after that, but I wanna just like really tell Councilor Weiner thank you for the
idea. Appreciate it.
Weiner: Thank you. (mumbled) did you actually say, Mayor Teague, I may have missed it, that the US
Senate just voted unanimously to make ... to make Juneteenth a national holiday, and I expect
that the Senate voted, then it goes to the House. If the Senate managed to do that, I expect the
House will do it too. It's not a done deal yet, but, yeah.
Teague: Super exciting (laughs) Any other updates?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.
Page 41
18. Report on Items from City Staff
C. City Attorney
Teague: And we have our new City Attorney (laughs) So, Eric Goers, welcome.
Goers: Thank you. Great to be aboard. I'm grateful for all the welcoming comments I've received and
thanks for going relatively easy on me at my first meeting here.
Teague: All right, it will not happen next time, so be prepared.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of June 15, 2021.