HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-07-16 Transcription Page 1
Council Present: Alter,Bergus,Dunn,Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
Staff Present: Fruin,Jones, Goers, Grace,Hightshoe,Kilburg,Havel, Sovers
Others Present: LeFevre,USG, Monsivais,Alternate
1. City Hall and Public Safety headquarters space need study update
Teague: It is just 3:30 PM.And it is July 16,2024.I'm gonna to call the meeting for the City of Iowa City
work session to order.Welcome to everyone that is here virtual-virtually,and then to anyone that
is here in the room.I want to make sure that Mayor Pro Tem,we can hear you and you can hear
us.
Salih: I can hear you,very well,Mayor.
Teague: Awesome,welcome from Egypt. All right.Um,we are going to move on to the first item on the
agenda,City Hall and Public Safety headquarters. space need study update. I'm gonna turn it over
to our City Manager Geoff Fruin.
Fruin:Yeah. Thank you,Mayor. So it's been a few months since we last gave you an update on this
project, as you recall, several months ago. We were really focused on evaluating the need.Y'all
did some tours of the building,both the City Hall side,and the Police and Fire side.And we
generally talk to you about,uh,some of the challenges that we face,uh,both with our current
work spaces and projecting out,uh,uh,the accommodation of our future growth. Uh,since that
time,we've been working on,uh,scenarios that will define how we take the next steps forward
into,uh,uh,thinking about our-our space needs for Police,Fire headquarters,and City Hall here.
So I'm gonna welcome,uh, OPN up to the microphone,and they're going to give you an update,
uh,on the project.
Bishop: Good afternoon. Thanks, Geoff.Uh,my name is Justin Bishop,partner with OPN Architects.
Good to see all again.Uh,and with me here is Sophie Donta, another architect who's been
working on this,uh,that rounds out the rest of our team and others back in the office. So as Geoff
said today,we wanted to sort of recap where we've been and what we've been working on,but
really focus on,uh,design scenarios,um,and those associated costs that might be with that. So
that's what we're going to get into today.Uh,as a-I'm just checking my slides here.Um, so as a
reminder,last time we left,like Geoff said,we were-we were wrapping up that data collection
phase. Uh,we had done the building assessments,user interviews,to building tours,uh, a lot of
sort of background work to inform the decisions that are made in the concept phase. Uh,and so
that was really thinking about what we have currently and our existing conditions,and then what
do we need,uh,in the future to-to support operations of the City Hall,Fire, and Police.Uh, so
you all got the behind the scenes tour,uh,in- in sort of the nooks and crannies of some of the
spaces here,thinking about sort of the basic needs of-of a proper office space or-or work spaces,
thinking about access to daylight,uh,just sort of the quality of space that people are working in,
but then also the support of the infrastructure and the systems that are needed to-to keep the
building operation a long term. Um, and then,these are the words that we heard,uh,really in the
staff and the-the steering committees um, sort of priorities,uh,and different themes that could be
driven into future design iterations and solutions. I'm not gonna read each one line by line,but
there's a lot of aspirational things here. I think it's not just,uh,a- a square footage sort of
conversation,but really about doing the right thing for all the-the employees and the people that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 2
are working here.And when you sort of put some of these responses of the surveys into that-that
sort of Wordle diagram.You can see that the biggest ones were the most obvious,um,that were
the most reoccurring with more space and growth for fixture,uh,more privacy,and then basic
things like restrooms and-and a break area. So-so I think there's uh,pretty,uh expected sort of
solutions,but these are all pretty basic needs,too. There's nothing extravagant here.You know,
we're-we're not looking for anything,uh,over the top.It's really about modernizing to what we
would think of a current standard. And again,not new information here. This is the same slide
that we presented last time,but you see the-the square footage.Um,the different colors represent
the different blocks of program. The green is office for the City Hall,uh,blue is Police and red is
fire. So currently,the top bar,there's about 65,600 square feet grow square feet total,uh,among
those three,uh,different blocks of program.And through our surveys and investigations,we're
projecting 119,000 square feet total would be needed to meet the fixture needs. So,again,not-not
new information,but sort of resetting the context of where we've been and where we're going.
And this kind of falls in line with the overall timeline of the building.If you think back in,um,
the early 60s when the first couple pieces of this building were built. It's been a cadence of about
every 30 years,uh,and we're at another 30 year milestone here for another,uh,rather significant
investment as an opportunity to think about the fixture. So from the 60s to the 90s, it almost
doubled in square footage,uh,and-and you can imagine the growth that's happened in the City
and all the operations that have evolved that gets you,uh,to 119,000 square feet too. So with that,
I'll turn it over, Sophie and she'll walk us through some of the-the rest of the content here.
Donta: Yeah. So after we sort of determined space needs,the next piece was,you know,how does-how
was the built solution come into play?And what do the different sort of plan options look like for
this? So,we started with program,basically,who would stay on the site?Uh,everybody,nobody
or a combination of-of functions. Uh,and pretty quickly,identified that nobody moving off site,
having a full Fire Station,Police station,and City Hall,uh,of adequate size on this site was not
going to happen,was not a feasible thing. Uh,everything gets very vertical,and just the logistics
of getting fire trucks and people and everyone into the site does not work anymore.Uh,and then
the other one that was kind of ruled out as we went through with city staff and the steering
committee was City Hall physically moving off site.Uh,and so with the options remaining,we're
looking at,uh,Police moving off site. In both scenarios,they were identified as the department
that did not really need to be headquartered downtown,uh,and then either having City Hall and
Fire remain or Fire looking for another site downtown for Fire Station 1. So as I said,we started
with,uh,site constraints. This is the existing site,the existing building. Uh,one thing that was
identified for the Fire Station needs was to have some most modern Fire Stations.Uh,you can
drive the truck in from both sides. Uh,just from an operation standpoint,then you don't end up
with,uh,vehicles double parked and having to do this sort of arrangement to get people out in a
timely manner. And so that red bar represents basically how you could accommodate,uh,a full
drive for- for fire vehicles on this site. And then the blue line,uh, is the flood-floodplain. And so
these were kind of two things we were working with as site constraints,uh,as we were looking at
these options as well. Uh,some of the baselines that we decided,uh,were goals for all of the
options.Uh,again,the Police would move off site. Of the three fimctions,that is the one that
could easy-easiest to move off site and needs the least connection to the other two.Uh,the west
side of the building should not be reused. Uh,the current Fire and Police side was in poor
condition. Uh,is having some maintenance issues,structural issues,as well as it's just either one
or two stories. It's not making the best use of that site. And so keeping and remodeling that end
was also ruled out. Uh,again,Fire Station number 1,having modem dual entry drives,improving
operational efficiency and response times in that Fire Station was also identified as a priority. Uh,
new larger Council Chambers,uh,replacing all the mechanical,electrical and plumbing systems,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 3
uh,with more sustainable fiorctional systems,uh,than what you currently have. And then
simplifying circulation and all the level changes throughout the building for accessibility and
minimizing program in the floodplain. So I'm not going to go through all these,but just to say,we
went through many-many options,looking at this in a variety of ways,exploring who moves off
site?What are the sizes look like?How does this work from a building and site perspective?And
in the end,uh,we ended up with two sort of preferred options that we then sent out for a cost
estimate. Uh,these two options,one would be,uh,total replacement, and so basically in order to
fit that modern functional Fire Station on site,uh,as well as a City Hall,you would completely
replace this building, start from scratch on this site,or,uh,Option 2,and this is the preferred
option we decided working towards it,uh,was that you would move Fire Station number.1 And
Police headquarters off site,and then build in addition to City Hall on the west side,uh,that was
more modern office space and larger Council Chambers. And so I'll go through option 1 just
quickly. Uh,so this is kind of what a site plan would look like. For phasing,you know, first,you
would move Police off site,either to the former transit site or another site. You would then,uh,
have temp space for City Hall,um,employees,as well as Council Chambers during that time.
You could then,uh,demolish the east half of the building,build a Fire Station,demolish the west
half of the building,build a City Hall. And this is kind of a-a very rough sketch,what that
massing ends up looking like.Both buildings on site with the necessary fire drives.And some
considerations for this one. Uh,you know,by starting from scratch,you can basically try to solve
most of the issues related to floodplain and level changes,and you're not needing to acquire a
new site.Uh,but there's some significant downsides. Uh,the Fire Station just still isn't really
ideal. It ends up three stories. Um,the vertical nature isn't good for response times,either if you're
sleeping two levels above your truck Uh,and the site plan really is completely driven by getting
the trucks in and out. And so the massing of the City Hall and how that all works is driven by fire
trucks rather than what would be best for employees,what's best for daylighting,what's best for
the people coming in?Uh,there's not a lot of room for fixture expansion trying to put both of
these programs on site unless you were again to go more vertical in the fixture. Uh,and then the
total demolition of the whole building,you know, it has character impacts. We lose this room,we
lose the history with that,we lose the original plan. And also,uh,the embodied carbon footprint
that comes with demolishing a building and starting completely over.Uh, and then as we'll see
toward the end,I'll go through the cost estimate for both, it is a higher cost per square foot for this
option.Uh, and so the preferred option we landed on was option 2,where Police and Fire are both
fmding new homes,new modem facilities,and sites that are more well suited,and we are taking
down the public safety half of this building and building up,uh,maybe three story office and
council addition, and that would include shell space. So room for fixture growth even beyond this
study.And so this one,again,you'd start with,and it could go in any order,Police,or fire
buildings,identifying sites and moving off site.Uh,you would still need temp space,uh,but for
less time as they did the renovation of this half of the building,um, and then you would do the
addition onto the west side after that. And this is kind of a rough sketch of what that ends up look
like-looking like. Um,everything kind of to the right side of the U is what's existing and it would
be kind of U shaped addition. So you get a courtyard in the middle. Uh,everyone gets windows
and access to natural light,and then you also get,uh,outdoor space adjacent to Council
Chambers.Um,so for city events,public events,things like that,you have that indoor outdoor
space. And so with this one,uh,Fire Station number 1 can really,uh,be built at the usual 1 to 2
story scale on a site that accommodates the drives and can just plan that out.You know,if you're
going to invest in a new Fire Station,do it right and do it in a way that functions for them on a
site that's ideal for that.Uh,the outdoor courtyard space is a plus,the sort of donut shaped
circulation for way fording,but also for natural light. Uh,there's room for growth.Uh,this option
and the cost estimate includes shell space for fixture growth or potentially moving departments
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 4
that are offsite,uh,back into City Hall.Uh Preserves the original character of this half of the
building at least and then uh,lower cost per square foot.Uh,but in keeping this-this half of the
building,which is kind of the-the nicer higher quality office space,there are some issues that
remain. Uh,there are some lower level uses in the floodplain on this half of the building. This
half of the building will still be split level. It would only be the one section,the rest,the floors
would all line up,but you would have,uh,you know,the elevator as it is to get you up and down
on this side of the building. And then sustainability improvements to the envelope could be part
of this,too. And so replacing glass,things like that to bring the exterior of this,uh,in more in line
with the new building as well. And so going through,uh,the cost estimate,so just to go through
what it does include,what it doesn't include,what it does include or direct costs,it's basically
construction costs, cost of the building itself. Some indirect costs,so contingencies,uh,
contractors fees,insurance,permits,uh,and then furniture, fixtures and equipment. So this would
include,uh, f rmitures fixtures,things like that for these as well. Pricing would not include,uh,
rent or fit out costs on temporary space,uh,escalation. So if this is built today,this is the price,if
this is built 20 years from now,ten years from now,the price can change. Uh, financing costs,
professional fees,uh,stead the architecture, engineering. Uh,additional site acquisition for fire,
uh,is an unknown.But then on the other side,this doesn't include any of the potential,uh,credits,
incentives,rebates for electrification or sustainability upgrades,things that could be in the
Inflation Reduction Act or other incentives could actually bring this number down.And so,you
know,these are really broad numbers at this point.We're basically taking the program that we
work through with staff.We're taking the square footage, and that's what the cost estimator is
estimating of-of,you know,it's not a design building. It's basically saying this much Fire Station
or this much office space at this level of quality. So option 1,this is the total building
replacement,uh,plus an additional Police facility. This comes out to approximately$97 million.
This would be the cost of demolition and essentially three new buildings,two of them on the
same site. Option 2 actually came out right around the same.Uh, again,cost of two new
buildings, and then in this one,uh,renovation and substantial addition, including the demolition
of the West Half. And just to go to this comparison quick,you can see the estimates came out
about the same,but you are getting,uh,more square footage for about the same amount of money
with the renovation and addition concept. So I'm going t turn it over to Geoff,but I know those-
you know,we went quick, and those are scary numbers.I know they're scary numbers.But you
have to picture,you know,this is three buildings,um,to-to a high quality standard and high
sustainability standard.Um,and also,you know,the cost of doing nothing is not zero. Um,there
are maintenance issues already,you will have to continue maintaining these buildings,and also as
staffs grows,you know,fmding places for those staff to be. And as you look at these numbers,
um,try not to compare them in your head to a zero,but more,what is the cost of just business as
usual versus what's the investment we need to start making at this point.
Fruin:You know thank you. So,uh,I appreciate what you're saying,but the-the cost of inaction is not
zero,right?We're spending money to repair the-the apparatus bay floor now.You can see that
work happening,your agenda tonight includes the process to replace the roof here,a partial roof
here,and will continue to have those,uh,I would say, fairly small scale projects that add up over
time. So in any given year,we're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and just pretty much
patching or extending the life of what we have. So I-I appreciate your-your willingness to
engage in this. And what I'd like to do tonight is allow you to ask any questions,clarify,think
about the scenarios that are presented,and then as you wrap up that discussion,um,I'd like to talk
about next steps,depending on kind of how your conversation goes,and how I see us moving,uh,
not only to final report here,but beyond final report,so we can keep some of this momentum
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 5
going.But for now,I think it's important that you just have time to ask questions and engage,um,
our team here.
Teague: I'm sure there'll be a lot of questions asked about what was presented with.I have an initial
question relating to the Fire department because proximity,I thought I understood that this was an
ideal place. So,Chief Lyon,if you can kind of speak to us on that. Welcome.
Lyon: Good afternoon,Counsel. Um, Scott Lyon,Fire Chief Iowa City.Uh,downtown is an optimal
location. Um,I think that,um,given the-the constraints of what we're dealing with,that we can
expand our circle just a little bit outside of the immediate downtown area.Maybe,uh,Johnson
Street over to the,uh,east of here,maybe Market Street on the north side. Somewhere in that
general vicinity,um,we can certainly still make things work So I don't believe that we have to
necessarily be here on this site.
Teague: Okay.
Fruin:And,you know,certainly acquisition is going to be challenging in the downtown area,but we-we
think it's worth exploring,and that's one of those steps I'll talk to you about at the end,because if-
if we do believe in this,and this is the path we want to go. It's obviously staffs recommendation.
We need to be thinking about acquisition,even though Fire Station 1 may not be tomorrow's
project or the top priority tomorrow.We need to be thinking a few years ahead and securing
property,uh,as quickly as possible.
Moe: I would like to ask-
Lyon: Go ahead.
Moe: I would like to ask questions. I don't know who this is for,but order of operations,I mean,this
seems like we're very much looking at three separate projects,even though they're all connected
at the hip,Police,Fire,City Hall.Um,Police and Fire from what I heard appear to be the building
components that serve us the worst and are in the worst parts of the building. So probably first,is
that kind of the direction that I understand correctly?And then between Police and Fire,like,how
do we make that-you're standing at the podium, so I know what you'll say.But I am curious
about how we think about this thing that's huge.
Frain:Yeah. In my mind-in my mind,the-the needs of the Police Department are the most acute.We
have to address those first. And I see that as the first moving piece here. Um,Fire would be
second, could be simultaneous,um,but would also be second. And then um,City Hall,it's not
that the needs don't exist,but I don't think they're as of high priority. We have some greater
flexibility,and um,whether it's remote work or securing offsite office space. You know,that's
always an option.Is that we lease space or we buy,you know, a swing space off site. And we can
accommodate that a little bit easier. It's not easy to do a second Police location or a second Fire,
you know,headquarters. Those kind of need to move as one big group.But City Hall,we've got a
few more options on how we can manage that growth while the other two projects move forward.
Moe: I was also curious about opportunities for these buildings to collaborate,I know that the county just
received their report um,on the jail and their needs um,are there opportunities for Police or Fire
or City Hall to collaborate with other public entities or private entities?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 6
Fruin:Absolutely, from the- from the law enforcement standpoint,that would be one of my
recommendations for next steps is that we approach the county and uh,explore,uh their desire to
um,kind of walk down the path of looking at a joint facility with us.I don't think the County or
the City is in a position to say,yes,that needs to be done,that is the answer.But um,there's
definitely efficiencies that need to be explored,uh,particularly thinking about the taxpayers and
paying for two public safety buildings of significant size,I think we really need to look at what
that option looks like if we plan that and work together. So that would be one of my
recommended next steps.From a Fire and City Hall standpoint,it's not as-maybe not as obvious,
but we would absolutely look at partnerships with other-particularly other public agencies um,if
those presented themselves.
Bergus: Can you just speak to how you arrived at these very ballpark numbers in terms of,you know,the
City Hall side,we got just a little more detail. The Fire and Police,you have specific numbers for
the new construction with just,you know,squares on the screen. So can you just speak a little bit
to the methodology for coming up with those estimates?
Danta: Yeah, so we had um,DCI group professional cost estimator to look at this.And basically what we
gave them was um,the square footage and then the list of spaces. And they're looking at
comparable projects at this point. Um,they're looking at um,in terms of system,city,
sustainability goals,uh,being met,um,the quality of construction in line with what we'd be used
to in the region. Um,but they're basically looking at comparable projects and history to get those
numbers. There's not a building designed at this point,it's purely um,you know,a Fire Station or
a Police Station of this quality and this size. So they're broad numbers at this point.
Bergus: And the seven to eight plus $100 a square foot,can you or staff just give us a sense of where that
lands in comparison to other types of buildings?
Danta: So um,there's kind of a range of how much things cost,you know,your high end would be really
specialized. So labs,hospitals,things like that.Public safety is kind of in the middle. Um,there
are some specialized spaces.Um,you know,your office space is sort of toward the lower end of
just open,you know,um,medium end finishes. So public safety,I'd say is in the middle there,it's
not the least expensive,but it's not your absolute highest dollar space. It's going to be more than a
City Hall,though per square foot,absolutely.
Bergus: Sure.
Alter: This might be a little bit more in the weeds than the questions that have uh,come before,but I still
think it's high level. You had noted about the lack of desirability of the Westside for Fire and for
Police because it's in the floodplain,right?But I did see that the recommendations for the
additions that City Hall would be right up in the floodplain.
Danta: So it's the other way,sorry,if that line wasn't clear. Um,this-we are in the floodplain.
Alter: Okay.
Danta: It's downhill toward the east.
Alter: Got you. Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 7
Danta: Yeah. Sorry.
Alter: Thank you.
Danta: Um,so leaving this building would leave it in floodplain.Most of this site is technically in the
flood plain.
Alter: Thank you. I just misalign myself,thank you.
Danta: Yeah.
Fruin: That's one of the things. So if you go back to that slide with the line,right now, our public safety
agencies are-are technically out of the floodplain where Police and Fire are located. As we
looked at scenarios that kept either Police on or Fire and you really don't have a whole lot of
options,but to move them either all or partially in the floodplain. Having City Hall in the
floodplain is not ideal,but it's manageable.Um,when your public safety first responders are in a
floodplain,that's that's a problem. And so that's one of the main reasons as we projected the
growth in square footage that we just couldn't fmd a scenario in which either one was going to
best serve the public on this site.
Teague: Was parking in the temporary block designs,was parking also-I just wanted to maybe hear a
little bit about the parking and how that will play out?
Danta: So it was considered as we looked at some of these that would,you know, fill in the entire site.
Um,having no parking on site was seen as undesirable. Um,increasing the amount of parking on
site was determined to be not a priority. You know,there were options that was parking garage
with building above or things like that. And the determination was,you know,keep some as
existing,but not to prioritize parking um,as we have limited site area over building out um,
space.
Fruin: One thing to keep in mind with the parking,Mayor, il�um,Police-largely the first floor of
Augusta place,you know,that has a parking lot,and we own the first level of parking. I kind of
think of it as a condo regime there. So I don't recall the number of spaces,I'm guessing 70, 80
spaces or so um,are mostly used by Police,but a little bit Fire,too. So as those move off site in
City Hall,uses would be able to take that Augusta place parking. And while we certainly are
further in the weeds now,than we really got,we would try to move our City vehicles. We have a
lot of City vehicles parked in Chauncey. I guess I'm pointing the wrong way in the Chauncey
Swan deck,that we would probably move into Augusta to free up uh,more public space and
more space for fixture employees that would remain on this campus.
Alter: I actually have one question to circle back to the path that you want to recommend,and that I know
Councilor Moe talked about with potential collaborations with the county.Right now,the idea
would be that sort of that conversation can be fully open as to possibilities or not,whatever.I
mean,but to have that conversation number one,but it wouldn't be tied in advance of the
conversation to say,hey,this is about the Police department or this is about Fire. I mean,since the
county also has um,you know, significant control and oversight over EMT,I'm wondering,the
conversation is wide open,in other words,about what a path forward if there's a path forward
would be,or is there already some inkling of,like,well,it might make the most sense for talking
about how the Sheriff and the Police might collaborate. I don't know,I guess I'm just asking,have
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 8
any parameters been set about that conversation yet,or is it really, like,let's talk about needs?
Let's talk about possibilities.
Fruin:Yeah,I would say no parameters have been set. We really haven't.Informally,we've talked about it
with Sheriff Kunkel,uh,knowing that we could end up in this scenario.But um,really beyond
that,we haven't engaged the county in detailed discussions. The one thing I would say,when it
comes to moving Police offsite,we don't envision uh,Police staying downtown.Um, so
incorporating Fire into that scenario,at least replacing Fire headquarters in that scenario,
probably would not make sense.Now,if we build out,say,near the airport,would we absolutely
engage the Fire Department to say,hey,is there space that we should be thinking of due to the
proximity to the airport?Which I think that the Fire Department would probably be interested in
at least having those discussions. And we would welcome any other uses,you know,whether it's
Johnson County ambulance or anything else that the county's identified as a priority in looking at
that as well.Um,the site that was shown is the former- is the-what we call the old Public
Workscampus. We'd like to evaluate whether that site works,it does work for a standalone Police
department that was part of this exercise. Um, as we bring the county in,if we go down that path
and we look at the sheriffs office needs. I'm not sure if that Riverside property still works,but
what that next step would tell us is basically give us some site constraints to say,okay,this site
would work or this site wouldn't work. And if you want to look at alternative locations,you're
going to need X amount of acreage,um, so that we can jointly look at land acquisition if that's
indeed the path that we end at.But for me,the biggest reason to work collaboratively with the
Sheriffs office is really just again,thinking about the taxpayer expense of building two
standalone facilities. And I think we need to be able to talk about,this is the cost of what the
Sheriffs office is looking at,this is the cost of what the Police looks at,if we're pursuing separate,
and what efficiencies are there?Um,I can't tell you that right now,I don't know how meaningful
those efficiencies would be,but I suspect that there are a lot of cost savings,uh,to be looked at,
and frankly,operational um,efficiencies that may serve um,Iowa City and Johnson County um,
well into the fixture.
Alter: Thanks.
Grace:Mayor-Mayor Pro Tem hand is up.
Teague: Uh. Yes.Mayor Pro Tem?
Salih:No. That was a long time ago,but I think so,you know,our City Manager answered my questions
while he was talking because I was trying to see what's the plan for the employees and,like,you
know,how they're going to work while the construction on.But while we were here,just so I can
ask another question,I was trying to see if there is a possibility of,like, a small office for City
Council, and so we can have our mail there,and we can come and fmd a quiet space to answer
questions and send emails,you know,just sitting there.Well,did you consider something like
that for City Council?
Fruin:Yeah,we-we certainly could.I can't remember if that was factored into the square footage or not
for City Council offices. There actually used to be a City Council office in this building.
Unfortunately,as staff needs grew,we ended up sacrificing the Council office for-for a growth in
our finance department,so yeah,Mayor Pro Tem,I think,absolutely,we could explore that
space. I know the-the Mayor is often asked to entertain groups that come through here at City
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 9
Hall,and this space is often used. It's less than ideal,and we would look at those types ol�um,
kind of flexible spaces for meetings as well.
Salih:No,of course,that you know,the space was great for,like,public meeting,even with -yeah,I
attend many meetings with MPA.But what I mean,like way we can have our mail,like -not like
area,we can see a public at,like area,can be like a working station or something like that.
Fruin: Sure.
Salih: Yeah,but if you cannot fit,of course,the employees have the priority and after that you can think
about us
Teague: Yeah,and Mayor Pro Tem,just feel free to jump in whenever.I do have the -the iPad in front of
me now,and I'll be looking at it.
Salih:No problem. Thank you.
Teague: Great thanks. And I would echo all the need for council to have dedicated space- office space.
Moe: I'm curious about the decision making to recommend saving portions of the building,this building
here,just to sort of talk that out as far as the historic integrity and history of the space and its
value as a structure and how that process happened. I think there's some cool parts of the
building,but it also has some pretty serious deficiencies, so can you talk through that a little bit?
Danta: Sure,yeah,so we looked at both,and that was kind of,you know,runner up option was full
replacement. There are a couple of reasons. One,as office space,you know,this-this wing is
frankly pretty nice. It's a usable office space. The structure is pretty open. It's more flexible. There
aren't baring walls and weird places. It just-the proportions were right,you know,it- it was
designed as office space and using it as office space continues to work. It gets natural light. It
doesn't have a lot of the-the sort of deficiencies that the West half has,and then the other sort of
arguments were one,just that both the environmental,the carbon savings and the cost savings of
keeping half of the building intact,particularly the 90s infill,you know,that's not that old and-
and relatively good shape.But then also just sort of,I don't know. The more sentimental aspect
of- of keeping this,the original entry and the original sort of part of the original design and
keeping what's added, even though it's a higher scale kind of in line with that original design.
Moe: Thanks.
Harmsen: This was kind of implied,but just want to make sure that I'm clear on this. The office space that
we have now in the basement is the opposite of what you just described-
Danta: Yes.
Harmsen: -lack of light and everything else.
Danta: Yes.
Harmsen:Would all of that office space be repurposed to storage?I mean,would there still be any sort of
anybody relegated to the basement in this option 2,I guess is what I'm asking.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 10
Danta: Um,the sort of,I guess I'd call it half basement directly below us by the perimeter with the
windows would continue to be office space,or that could be shell,you know,you could use that
last. In this option,there is extra space to decide where people go day 1.All the windowless
basement,it would be storage.In this option,everyone has access to daylight,at least indirectly,
at least through an open office scenario.
Harmsen:In talking about that part of the City Hall being in the floodplain. Two questions. One,I don't
know that you'd be able to answer,but I'm just curious if it's ever flooded because of that in its
history,and second,if there are in this design any sort of mitigation components for stuff that's
stored down there.We certainly better than flooding out people's offices,but we certainly
probably wouldn't want to have important records and documents destroyed either.
Danta: Yeah, so we haven't gotten quite into that level of detail yet,but the assumption would be off the
ground.Resilient surfaces that we'd kind of design around the fact that it would very rarely
possibly flood,and again,that's why you sort of minimize people down there,but any important
documents,yeah,you could store above the ground or work with things like that.But the thought
is that we wouldn't,you know,we wouldn't put vital building systems in the floodplain or
anything that couldn't be moved with enough notice,and defmitely not people in the windowless
basement anymore.
Harmsen:And I know one of the other things when we did the tour was looking at the different-the
problems with like the HVAC system and the different inefficient zones. Would this-by keeping
this half of the facility,would we still be tied to some of those same problems,or is the redesign
option 2,does that take that and- are we going to improve some of those problems,even though
we'll be sticking with the same basic floor plan and layout.
Danta: Yeah. All the MEP systems would be total replacement in both options,so we'd be keeping the
structure,basically, and potentially the envelope,so like the-the exterior in the structure.
Harmsen:I guess- sorry.My question was like,does that envelope and structure limit the ability to fix the
problems that are currently had with the current MEB,I think you called it?
Danta: Structure,no.Envelope could be more efficient than it is but,um,you know, it's more of,I think,
the building hitting capacity at this point of systems and length of runs and kind of being tacked
into over time.Was the sense we got from the engineers that a systems replacement could be
effective.
Harmsen: Thank you.Does everybody know that this has ever flooded down the lower level?
Fruin:Um,I'm looking at Ron.You might have the most history here.Do you recall any not to our
knowledge in recent history. Thank you.
Goers: I'm aware of that. I think we've gotten water in the basement.But is that what you're asking or
what you mean?
Harmsen:Yeah,well,mean both water in the basement,but also has the creek flooding,and since your
office is down there,you might-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 11
Goers: I-I have a special interest.
Knoche: Uh,Ron Knoche Public Worksdirector.Prior to the Ralston Creek flood improvements,so the
Scott Park basin and the North Branch basin.I would say that it definitely flooded.But since
those improvements,I think there's been some mitigation that's helped reduce that potential
impact.Not saying that it can't happen,but I'm not aware of my time here of us having that issue.
Obviously,there are the flood doors,and,you know,there's been some flood mitigation in the
basement space to be prepared if that would occur,but I'm not aware of my time of having that
issue.
Harmsen: Okay. Thank you.
Moe: I have one more question for Ron, actually, since he's up there. A lot of the design seems to be
predicated on the floodplain and avoiding that. Is - are there plans or opportunities to further
mitigate problems with Ralston Creek to make this full site more utilizing-utilizable?
Knoche: I think-I think I don't believe so.
Moe: Okay.
Fruin:You're just going to add certainly we haven't seen the-the flood waters -other than flash floods,
which-which we've struggled with at times. Certainly our friends across the street at Newf`,have
had their share of water problems from the creek, so while we haven't experienced it,it's-it's not
too far off, and given the intensity of the change in storms,if we think out the next 30 years,we
should probably know that it's a realistic scenario that we would face some flooding challenges,
even if we hadn't in the last several decades.
Moe: Thank you.
Bergus: Geoff,you just mentioned the next 30 years,and Justin,in your part of the presentation,you kind
of showed the every 30 year renovations replacements. Is that the scope of what we're talking
about for City Hall and also for the other two buildings,were you imagining like a 30 year usable
life?
Bishop: Yeah,that would be a great goal.I think anything from a programmatic standpoint gets hard to
plan for that long.But if we have the flexibility and the adaptability of-of the building as
departments shrink and grow,I think that's a reasonable expectation.Like,we would want to
design a 30- 50 year building,you know, from a maintenance standpoint, for sure.
Teague: With added on to that question,the current building,since in this proposal,it'll be saved. Can we
build up on this building,if ever that need arose?
Bishop: In the fixture,you mean or this-
Teague: In the fixture.
Bishop: Uh,maybe. That's always really challenging to-to build over occupied spaces and logistics and
things like that. It's not out of the room,but-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 12
Knoche: When we added the third floor, for like the engineering space,that marks that part of the
building out, so we can't build any higher in that area. Obviously,we're talking about demoing the
other half,so we're maxed out on space in regards to the ability to move up without having some
major structural improvements at the lower levels.
Bishop: That was planned for,that last level edition is something that we can think about for this if it's a
fixture edition here as well,so it's not easy to do,but it's defmitely something we can plan for, and
I think that extra elbow room or sort of fixture growth is key to any-any successful plan here.
Teague: Any other questions by council?
Harmsen:I think the City Manager was going to talk to us about next steps.
Fruin:Yes, so next steps, OPN is-is-you see the red arrow is not quite to that final report. We wanted to
hear some of this conversation before we closed out this phase of the project,and there's really
three recommendations in terms of moving forward for you tonight. One is that I have your
consensus to approach the county and,kind of,to your point Megan,explore what they might be
interested in looking at,right?We're not-we're not necessarily limiting it just to the sheriffs
office,but certainly our priority right now is exploring that partnership between the sheriffs
office and-and Police,and we welcome any other needs that the county's identified. That would
be the first recommendation is that you give me the go ahead to-to pursue that engagement.
Second would be for us to start looking for possibilities for Fire Station 1.Again,it's not
necessarily an urgent need,but we need to be on the lookout,and we need to be mindful that
those opportunities could come up in the next several months,the next several years, and with
your permission,I'd like to-I'd like to add that to our focus list for this project. Then the second
piece,we didn't spend a whole lot of time on,but really through these scenarios,what we've
determined with OPN is that we may need about 25,000 to 30,000 square feet of swing space.
Meaning as the puzzle pieces move as we purs-pursue any of these,we could need offsite office
space to accommodate us on a temporary basis,and we need to be thinking about that,so we need
to be thinking about what those opportunities look like,and that may mean temporarily leasing
space. Frankly,it means thinking about the RFP that we're going through at 21 South Lynn and
asking ourselves, at least, should we be thinking about some office space there,knowing that
we're going to be having some swing space needs in the next 10 -20 years?I need to give that
some more thought.But we need to be anticipating that because there's not a whole lot of room
left to grow. You know,as an example,currently in engineering up on the third floor there,um,
we're looking at spending several hundred thousand dollar to retrofit that space to add a couple
more offices,really,as that department continues- continues to grow,so with City Hall being that
third piece of the puzzle,I think we're going to have to-to seriously consider looking at some off
site leases or at least some opportunities to house departments offsite until we could complete all
of the projects that are articulated in this-in the study,so those are the three things,collaboration
with the county,looking at Fire Station 1 acquisition needs and starting to evaluate swing space
opportunities.
Alter: With the Swing space,is that beholden to being in this general vicinity of downtown,or can you
expand that search?I just-I know that like you say.
Fruin:Yeah. I don't think we're beholden to the downtown there.I personally,I like the idea of City Hall
and public,uh,employees being downtown.I think there's a lot of benefits to that,but we also
have to recognize if its- if we're viewing it as maybe temporary needs,that there may be some
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 13
existing opportunities elsewhere in the community, so I wouldn't limit it to downtown,but I'd like
to-I wouldn't want to exclude that either.
Alter:Right. Okay,thanks.
Harmsen: Speaking of steps forward,it'd probably be good to mention what kind of time frame we're
talking about for this whole thing,unless anybody think we're talking about making a decision in
the next month.
Fruin:Yeah. So,uh,uh,from that- from the Police standpoint,really,it's going to take a few months,
probably engaging the County, and just what does this next step look like,and then you're talking
about engaging some professional services,and you're talking several months worth of study,so,
you know,we could be -we could be 6-12 months out from having a conversation with you about
what we learned through the exploration of a joint facility. Um,we don't have funding sources
identified.I wish I had$97,000,000 right now that I could recommend to move forward on all
these pieces.But,um,I think at this point,um,you should plan on at least another 6-12 months
of- of study and engagement on the County and Police side.
Harmsen:And that would be step 1?
Fruin: That would be step 1. Yeah. Fire Station acquisition, again,we-we would look at right away,but I
wouldn't expect that a solution's magically going to appear in the next few months.
Harmsen:But we're not rushing into a purchase,I guess point I'm making sure.
Fruin:Yeah. There's-there's no -we're not rushing into any- any expense other than perhaps a
professional-another professional services contract,comparable to what we've just engaged OPN
with,um,with this study.
Moe: Can you-on your question 2,Fire Station land acquisition,can you talk through any recent
examples of where we located a new Fire Station close to a residential neighborhood that hadn't
been there before.I'm just thinking of we need a downtown Fire Station. If it's replaced where it
is,we can simply say it's always been there,but if we're looking for anew site,I can imagine
there's going to be challenges. Can you talk through any previous examples of that happening?
Fruin:Well,our last Fire Station was 4,and that we opened in 2010,2011, somewhere in that-in that
ballpark,and that's really not directly adjacent to residential. That's out on North Dodge Street
and Scott Boulevard. You know,certainly with Fire Station 1,while this has been here for a
while,Augusta Place was just built, so the reverse scenario in which we've had a lot of residential
built around that.Uh,I-I struggle to think of other examples. We-we went through a certainly a
remodel of,uh, Station 2.But-but-but nothing new.
Moe: Okay.
Fruin:Yeah. And that's your right to identify that-that concern and that sensitivity to identifying a
location.
Teague: I think the other thing,you know,I would just mention is while things are being explored and
talked about,there could be an opportunity that the Council may need to at least learn about of an
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 14
acquisition or something like that,so I just mentioned that for the public,of course,those will be
in executive session,that there could be,you know, an opportunity that does come up that we
would have to move on relatively quickly. So I just want to get a consensus if folks are okay,
giving permission to the City Manager to do the three things that was stated. Okay.All right. So
you're good to go.
Fruin: Thank you.
2. Review preliminary steady and recommendation on Dodge and Governor 2-way street
conversion
Teague: Great. We're going to move on to item number- Thanks to you all for coming and doing this,
thanks to the City Manager and all the individuals that was involved in kind of,helping this move
along.
Danta: Thank you.
Fruin: Thank you.
Teague: We're going to move on to Item number 2,which is review preliminary study and
recommendation on Dodge and Governor to a street conversion.And are we going to start with -
Fruin:Yeah,Alin from our engineering department is going to introduce the project,and then we will
tum it over to our consultants on the Project Strand Associates for the presentation.
Teague: Awesome.Welcome.
Dumachi: Afternoon.Mayor and counsel,my name is Alin Dumachi. I'm a senior engineer in the Public
Works Department and fixture engineer-project engineer for Dodge Street Reconstruction
Project.
Fruin:I can just pull the mic up a little bit Alin. Thank you.
Dumachi: This afternoon,I will introduce you Jeff Held with Strand and Associates to present to you
Dodge and Governor,uh,one way to do a conversion study.
Teague: Great. Thank you. Welcome.
Held: Good afternoon. Thank you. Thanks for having me.Um,again,Jeff Held with Strand Associates,
and I'm the project manager for this one way to two way conversion study,also the functional
design,which was a very preliminary design of the Dodge Street reconstruction.And Josh Straka
is with me today also from Strand.He will be the project manager for the,um,upcoming
reconstruction of Dodge Street,the design of it,the consultant project manager. So- so today,
we'll talk about,um,kind of,an introduction in the background to the two way conversion study.
We'll look at some data along Dodge Street and Governor Street. There are jurisdictional
implications associated with these streets because they are,uh,Iowa State Highway 1.We'll talk
about some costs and impacts of possible two way conversion, and then have time for questions
as well. So to provide a project introduction and background,um,we've been studying the Dodge
and Governor two way conversion. It is in the current Strategic Plan for the city. Currently,they
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 15
are Iowa State Route 1,and they are owned and maintained,um,by Iowa DOT,and our study
corridor nuns from Bloomington Street on the South up to where Dodge and Governor meet on
the North end.Um,there is a reconstruction project that is planned,and it does need to move in
design fairly soon for planned reconstruction to begin in late 2026. Um, it is an existing one way
pair,and so Dodge Street has two travel lanes southbound with a bike lane on the right hand side.
Governor Street has two lanes northbound with the bike lane also on the right hand side.And
typically,when communities are looking to convert one way pairs,it's often for one of the
reasons here. Um,sometimes the volumes on these streets no longer suggest that they need to be
a one way pair. The volumes have dropped.Um,oftentimes two way operation can reduce speeds
and provide a better environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. It can decrease the barrier effect
of a one way street. Sometimes there's a goal to improve safety with these two way conversions,
and in some cases,the hope is to spur economic growth or redevelopment. We'll kind of,walk
through each of these points and how they relate to Dodge and Governor. So starting with the
data review,um,the cu-the current traffic volumes out there provided by Iowa DOT,Dodge
Street carries about 6,000-8,000 vehicles per day,and Governor is about 4,000-6,000 using round
numbers. So if you combine those together,you're looking at kind of,9-15,000 vehicles per day
total. If they were to be converted to two way operation,one of the two would remain as Iowa
State Route 1,and likely,we anticipate that that would probably be Dodge Street.It's just a little
bit more of a direct connection. Um,and if we assume that about 80%of the existing traffic
would-would then use Dodge Street because it's signed as Iowa 1,and it's kind of,the main
route, and 20%would remain on Governor.We end up with about 8,000-12,000 vehicles per day
on Dodge Street. So that's an increase,and then Governor Street would drop down to about
2,000-3,000 vehicles per day. Um,so the volumes after conversion suggest Dodge Street,we
need to consider probably a center left tum lane along the route. Um,that's the 12,000-15,000
vehicle per day range is kind of,where left tum lanes are needed at intersections. And because of
the closely spaced intersections as well as the alleys in between the intersections,it's likely you'd
need a continuous left turn lane along the route,so you're talking about widening the street. Um,
Governor Street,the signalized intersections could likely be replaced with stop control because of
the volume drop. So that's another consequence of potentially converting to two way. And then
the intersection at the north end where Dodge and Governor meet would need to be reconfigured
in some way as well if it were two way. So looking at the typical section or sort of,the
dimensions of the roadway,um,this is both the existing condition as well as the proposed,if it
were to remain as one way. There's about 33' from the back of the curb to the back of the curb,
that's the total street width.Um,the parkway area behind the curbs,it varies quite a bit,and it
kind of,depends on where the sidewalk is along the corridor.But it's generally about 6 feet-17
feet, and that's the area where you'll have your signs and trees and things like that behind the
curb. And so,um,if it were to be converted to a two way condition,and it were determined that
we needed that center left turn lane,which our initial review suggests we probably would. Um,
we're looking at widening to provide a 14 foot center turn lane,that's the typical width. So it's
going to be about a 20 foot wider street. There are implications for trees along the route. We
roughly counted up the number of trees.40-45 trees on each side are within that area that would
need to be expanded. So that's one of the consequences of potentially going to two way.If we
look at some examples of how that would look,we've got a couple of them here. This is on
Dodge Street south of Bloomington. On the left hand side is the aerial view,the orange is the
existing footprint,and the yellow shows that additional widening that might occur.And then
there's kind of,a view looking down the street as well. So you get a little bit of a sense for what
lies within that yellow area that would be the wider street. In this example,there's a couple of
signs and there's a power pole.Another example. What happened there? So this one is south of
Ronald Street.And in this example,on the right hand side,you can see that there's a few trees
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 16
that within- are within that parkway area that would be where the street would be wide. So just to
give you a sense for what that would look like.Another of the reasons to consider two way
conversion is travel speeds for motor vehicles and as well as the pedestrian and bike environment.
There were speed feedback signs that were added at the bottom of the hill on Dodge Street near
Brown Street.Anecdotally,these do seem to have helped reduce the speeds along Dodge Street.
Uh,there's as far as pedestrian conditions,there is sidewalk on both sides today,as well as some
high visibility crosswalks at the higher volume crossings. And for bicyclists,there's a buffered
bike lane,so there's a little bit of a buffer provided southbound on Dodge Street that was added in
2018 per the MPO and City Bike Plans. So the facilities are there today for bicycles and
pedestrians,as far as the bike and pedestrian environment goes. From a safety standpoint,another
reason that sometimes two way conversion is considered.Based on the MPO's urbanized area
collision analysis,um,this -the analysis ranks intersections and roadway links based on crash
rate,the severity and the total number of collisions are all around Iowa City and the metro area.
That report has 213 intersections that were considered and 77 sections of roadway.As far as
where Dodge and Governor ranked,there's only three intersections within the top 60. You can see
two of them there are on Dodge Street at Brulington and at Washington, and one was on
Governor at Jefferson. And neither of those corridors had any of the street sections between
intersections that ranked in the top 77. So,um,there's not a notable crash history out there,at
least as far as the records are showing. And then on the economic development and
redevelopment side of things,um,we did a literature review,and there's,um,a number of studies
that,um,have been done to recommend either conversion or maintaining one way. They typically
don't quantify the amount or the rate of development or redevelopment that happened after two
way conversion. It's rare that communities look back and try to quantify that. The increases in
economic development are generally predicted due to better pedestrian and bicycle
accommodations.Um,in this case,the accommodations are pretty good.Um,also,parking is
usually a factor in these studies,um,with both corridors currently do not have parking,so that's
less of a factor in these situations,and we don't expect that Dodge Street would have parking
added,even if it were converted to two way. Um,Dodge and Governor,yeah. As I note,there's
reasonable bike accommodations already don't plan to add parking. Um,and it's also notable that
these are predominantly residential corridors. A lot of the corridors that are converted. So Cedar
Rapids has done a lot of this.De Moine has done a lot of this. They tend to be more in their
downtown areas,and that's more the traditional condition where a lot of these were converted to
one way pairs back in the 60s. Um, for many downtowns,the volumes have dropped since then,
and there's not really a need for this one way operation anymore. And especially in Cedar Rapids,
that's been part of what's driven their conversions.Um,but again,it's kind of a downtown
commercial corridor and these are a little more residential. So Dodge and Governor are just a
little bit different animal than some of the others that have been converted.Jurisdictional
implications. So I mentioned that Iowa DOT owns and maintains both roadways today.If
conversion takes place,DOT would transfer one of the corridors back to the city.We expect that
would probably be Governor Street, as I mentioned in Dodge Street would remain Iowa 1. Um,so
we did have a meeting with Iowa DOT to kind of,talk over this concept. They do anticipate,um,
that there would not be any additional improvements made to Governor Street. They feel that it's
in a state of good repair. It was resurfaced in 2018. Um,they also would be taking on a little bit of
additional roadway with on Dodge Street due that center left turn lane. And it's worth noting that
two blocks of Burlington Street would also be transferred to the City east of Dodge Street,where
it would no longer be Iowa 1. Overall,Iowa DOT is not seeking out two way conversion,but they
would be willing to work with the city if that's -if that's what the -what folks would desire.
Teague: I assume that you're going to get to who's paying for this at some point?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 17
Held: Yes.
Teague: Okay.
Held: Yes. So that's a big factor,and that's right here. So the current,uh,estimate for the opinion of
probable construction cost is OPCC, for the reconstruction of Dodge Street is 17.6 million dollar.
That would maintain one way and fully reconstruct the street,including the utilities. The city cost
share is estimated at 10.6 million dollar of that right now.Um,so there's always cost share on
these,um,state routes. In this case,the city is electing to replace a lot of the utilities that are out
there,and that's really what's driving a lot of that cost share the$10.6 million. If it were
converted,we do expect there'd be some additional costs. Um,about additional$3,000,000 due to
that additional roadway width. Um, signal upgrades on Dodge Street,so currently they're all
facing to the north because it's southbound traffic. You'd have to have signals that control both
directions of traffic. There'd be new signs,there'd be signal removals on Governor Street,and re-
striping for both of the streets,both corridors. Um,additionally moving forward,there'd be
ongoing maintenance to the city for Governor Street,which currently Iowa DOT pays for,
plowing,re-striping, street sweeping,those sorts of,things. And at some point, Governor would
need to be reconstructed, and that would be fully on the city's dime instead of shared with Iowa
DOT, and we estimate that could be 15-$20 million somewhere down the line. So that 15-$20
million represents 2-3 years of the city's annual budget for streets. So it's a size-able thing to take
on. And it's a big consideration,which is why you asked about it. As far as the schedule goes,as I
mentioned,you know,preliminary design does need to get going.Most of the design would occur
in 2025,and any easements needed for construction would be obtained in 2025. Construction
documents prepared in 2026 with construction starting in the fall, so about two years from this
fall, construction could start. And expected to be a two year construction project,two seasons of
construction.If two way conversion were pursued further,there would be additional time needed
for real estate likely. We expected there might need to be some permanent real estate acquired
instead of just easements. So it would push out the completion of the Dodge Street
Reconstruction project probably by at least a year.
Alter: When you say additional like,not just easements,but real estate,I mean,do you mean properties?
Held: Yes.Yeah. There could be the need for additional properties in order to accommodate the wider
street,the parkway for trees,and there's also currently planned to be a ten foot path on the west
side of Dodge Street,that multi use path.And so we could run out of room in a two way scenario.
Alter: Thank you.
Salih: How wide does the streets should- should be or two way?
Held: Yeah so it's a-today,it's about 33 feet from the back of the curb to the back of the curb,and it
would need to be about 53 feet if it were two way. We would need to do a little more
investigation on that center left turn lane. There may be a few places where the volumes and the
side streets are low enough that you wouldn't need it.But because they're so closely spaced, it
might not be worth narrowing the street up only to have to widen it again. So that would need a
little more investigation,but about 20 feet wider for two way operation.
Salih: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 18
Moe: You mentioned that some of the -the reason that the cost share seems burdensome for the city is the
infrastructure replacement costs.Is there others -is the infrastructure under that street currently
ready to be replaced anyway?I mean,we at a moment where it has to be done or?
Held: Yeah,I would defer to the city a little bit more on that,but my understanding is portions of it,yes.
The sanitary and the water mean. There'll also be some storm - storm sewer upgrades as well.
And that would happen either way,whether it's maintained as one way or two way.Yeah.
Teague: You mentioned-
Salih: And how much that will cost?I'm sorry.But how much that would cost if we did not do the street
and only repair the sewer and everything there?
Held:Well,I think the plan is the street would be reconstructed either way.Um,the 10.6 million dollar
city share decent amount of that is the utilities. I don't know that we have that on hand,the share
of the utilities,but-um,and that's something the city is ready to do at any rate.
Salih: Okay.
Teague: You mentioned the reasons w-why cities typically convert,you know,one to two ways. Is there
any rationale or reason why we're considering this?
Held: I think it goes back a ways. I think it's been-it's in the city plan to-to consider it to evaluate it. We
talked about it before we started the functional design several years ago,and at that time,decided
to just move ahead with a one way condition. Um,but I know it's been,um, it's been something
that some former council members have asked that the engineering department look at. So I think
that's-now is the time to do it because this big reconstruction project is coming along and it does
impact the design. So we sort of need to understand if it has legs if we're going to pursue this or
not.
Teague: Sure certainly we've heard of speed considerations for these streets. Yeah.I'm sorry,go ahead.
Alter: I was just going to say,but based on what you were talking about with the study,the current
mitigating-mitigations that have been put in place,signage and reminders seem to have helped a
little.
Held: Yeah,I think anecdotally,we haven't collected data on that,but I think even myself driving it,it
does seem a though people are moving a little bit more slower coming down the hill. The speed
feedback signs are pretty effective.And there could be an opportunity to implement a few other
things that might help slow vehicles down,even if it were to remain one way. That would require
some additional discussion and there's a cost associated with any of those kinds of things as well.
Moe: I'm curious.You mentioned that our couplet is odd and that it's for a residential neighborhood. And
also cities that are doing this are typically ones that are seeing declining downtowns with fewer
people,I think ours is pretty robust and great.Do you have any examples of places that have done
this that have a similar situation to us?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 19
Held:Well,I do have a pretty good example. Um,a study that we completed for City of Madison. Um,
about five or six years ago,it was on Johnson and Gorham Street,which is a one way pair on the
Isthmus and downtown Madison. And that's also-it's fairly residential,but it does have a stretch of
a few blocks where there's storefronts and some commercial. Um and the study -in that study,
parking was kind of the driving factor. And so that's not quite an apples to apples comparison
with Dodge and Governor. But in that case,um,in order to convert to two way,um,they were
going to need to-there was on street parking existing. They were going to need to restrict the
parking during peak hours to provide two lanes in the morning and two lanes out in the afternoon,
just from a traffic volume standpoint, it carried about double the traffic as this one-way pair.And
the businesses were really concerned about losing that parking during the peak periods. And that
was a key reason in that case why the city maintained the one-way operation. So it's still not a
perfect example,but it is more residential.And it is a case where it was studied,but one-way
pairs were chosen to remain. Yeah.
Salih: You have mentioned that,you know,you might need more space to make Dodge street wider. And
that's when maybe you're going to take some of the wide the street,you're going to take like some
of the houses.You mean like the front yard,you take from their front yard or how is that?That's
what you mean?
Held: Yes.Yeah,I would likely be if right away was needed,if more space was needed,it would be strip
takings along the front of these properties.I don't think any buildings would need to be
purchased. It wouldn't be a complete purchase. There are some areas where matching into the
existing carriageways that walks up to the street. There's some places that have steps and things
like that. So once we get into design,there's going to be some challenges with matching all that
in,but that's pretty typical of a street reconstruction project. There may be places where short
walls are needed and that sort of thing,particularly because of the ten-foot wide multi-use path on
the west side. That's a pretty big change to fit that in there.But again,with a two-way conversion
and a wider street footprint,there may need to be some strip takings of right away along the route.
Salih: And if you-yes you mean the right of the way,or you mean like we take from property and do we
pay them or how that work?
Held: Yeah,that's right. It would be paid at market value to the property owners,but yes,it would be
coming from people that own the houses or the businesses along the street.
Salih: This is included on that$10,000,000 that was shared or there's going to be extra?
Held: The$10,000,000 cost share assumes one way operation is maintained and we don't expect to need
property in that situation.We'll probably need some easements in order to construct it.But so the
$10,000,000 does not include any real estate cost, any permanent real estate cost.
Salih: Oh. Thank you.
Dunn: It's now a good time to share just general feedback.Yeah. Okay. So as I'm thinking about this,I'm
thinking about it,um,using kind of the pop method. The purpose outcome process way of just
thinking about the whole thing,and I think the purpose is generally admirable.I think we should
um,always be moving towards slower streets for,you know, safety reasons. The outcome and the
process is what really kind of concerns me.It seems to me that we would be spending a whole lot
of money to achieve basically slower streets in a way that is extremely disruptive to a lot of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 20
neighbors. Um,and I just-that really concerns me personally. Tens of millions of dollars,three
years worth of fimding that would have to come through,um,eventually and that number is only
going to go up as time goes on and completely losing the state's,um,contribution towards the
maintenance of North Governor.Not great.In my opinion,honestly,I would feel much more
comfortable if we're really super concerned about speeds,maybe putting a more moderate amount
of money into you know,additional speed mitigation on those areas or,you know,something like
that,but the cost is really considerable,especially with the long term costs of maintenance and all
that.Right.
Held: Yeah.And that kind of that's a good segue into the last slide here and that is our recommendation,
also.I think the typical benefits of two-way conversion just aren't as applicable to Dodge and
Governor as sometimes for other I mean,you know,Market and Jefferson is going to be
converted from one-way to two-way and that's probably a better candidate right here within Iowa
City. So I would tend to agree with you.But there's definitely-there's pros and cons to consider.
Alter: Can I ask just a general question?Were there any outcomes that were unexpected to you in
conducting this study?Based on what kind of you like,okay,here's what we have.And then
when she dove into it,was there anything that was unexpected or interesting to you that,again,
we might take that nugget and be able to do something with?
Held: Sure. Well,that's a good question. I think you know,once we saw the volumes and we saw that
and-we've been working on this corridor for a while,so we have some sense for what it's like.But
I think our initial inclination was that maintaining one way would work.We wanted to see the
safety record,especially.And,you know,crash records that's always we're looking backwards
with crash records,and so you always want to be cognizant of you know,the perception that's out
there as well. So that'd be something to consider.I don't know if any of you get complaints about
Dodge Street often or that sort of thing.But looking at the numbers,I think I sort of agree that for
the dollars it would cost to convert it, as well as putting another street on the city's books again, it
doesn't seem like the benefits are worth that. So I don't know that anything was unexpected.
Although the corridor itself is just it's just sort of a little bit of a different animal because of the
land use and uh,it seems to work pretty well the way it is and I think it could work better even
with one-way operation. So I think that's why we landed where we did.
Alter: Thank you.
Held: Yeah.
Moe: I share,Councilor Dunn's sort of-I was excited about this project and interested to see,but to
understand what it does for people who live on Dodge Street and what we get for it. It was kind
of-I'm not very excited about it right now,especially because we are absolutely picking winners
and losers in this situation.If you live on Governor,things get a lot better. If you live on Dodge,
you're going to lose front yard and have an increased traffic in front of your house.Like,I,er.
Alter:Much wider,much more road.
Moe: Yeah. Yeah. And that that's a disappointing outcome,not your fault,but um,definitely influences
how I think about this being not a great idea for us, and accepting this recommendation.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 21
Alter: I would also just note that many councilors previous and kind of present tend to say,we absolutely
want road diets and slower streets.And yet,I will say this,that and I know it's been pointed out
that Dodge and Governor that it's a drawback that they're not signalized a lot. On the flip side,
This is one of the only ways to get from the south to the north and vice versa. And it is helpful for
commuters to have a fairly direct way of doing this with out stop-start,stop start, stop start that
much of East West Iowa City has. So sure.I just wanted to put that out to Council as well that
there's also a real use value and having basically a streamline way to get from north to south. So
Yeah.
Dunn: That's a good point.
Salih: I agree.I also agree with everyone. What you said council Dunn and Josh and Megan.But also,
you think about it,we're spending a lot of money. 20,000 for governors, 10,000 million. Sorry, 10
million for Governor, 10 million for-10 million go Dodge and 20 million for Governor. You
know how many affordable housing that can build?If we remain this,we cannot just focus on the
street and leave the people live in the street. You know,I think-I think this is not the time for it. I
agree that for Jefferson and Market,because this will really become beneficial for the businesses
who are there. And,you know, it is really great.But for Governor and we need to spend all this
money,I'm really against it because you know,we don't want to build the streets and make the
people live in the street. So we have to really be careful on doing this. Thank you.
Teageu: Dodge Street,is it going to be 10 million, 10.3 million cost share regardless. Correct, correct?
Held: Correct.Yep. And probably goes up a little bit if it's two way. Yeah.
Teague: Sure.And it will go up if it's two-way.Yeah. So as I think about and then Dodge Street,
regardless of if it's two-way or kept one-way,the DOT will continue to keep that under their
umbrella?Correct.
Held: Yep. That's what we anticipate. That hasn't been finalized,but I think everyone's initial reaction is
Dodge would remain Iowa 1 and Governor would go back to the city.
Teague: Sure. One of the things that,you know,when I look at Market Street,we will be talking about
that at some point about, should we convert that or not?To two-way. There are businesses along
there.And I remember back in the day where we got the presentation and it talked about the
advantages a business could have when people are going opposite directions. And that's not the
situation for Dodge.Now,I do want to acknowledge that on Governor Street,we do have the old
DHS building. And then on Dodge Street,we have over by Church and Dodge. We have Ace and
a few businesses right there on the corner. So you don't want to,you know,not acknowledge that
we do have some businesses there.But this,to me,doesn't seem like the need is there, especially
when we think about the increase of 50%of traffic that's going to take place on Dodge.
Held: Yeah.
Teague: I guess the one question I will have to the staff or to whomever is,is there ever going to be a
desire?Can you anticipate a desire in the fixture where specifically Dodge would be asked again
to be to two-way streets?
Dunn: That's a good question.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 22
Teague: Is there any type of situation in your professional that would bring that up again because now the
prices would be they're astronomical now. They're a lot.But if we wait 15,20 years and this come
before the council again,you know,that number is going to be way more than what it is now. So
that's just a question that I wanted to know,if there's anything that would say in the fixture,this
may be converted.We try to begin with the end in mind.
Held: Sure.
Fruin:I'm struggling to think of that scenario,Mayor and I'm not getting anything different from our
Public Works staff. So I think you're right to think about that. This is the time if we're going to do
it,but,as staff,and we've been really supportive of some one-way-two way to one way
conversions even on this corridor,south of Burlington,we've done this work.We've done this
work downtown with Washington Street. Too you may remember that there used to be some one
ways in downtown Iowa City, as well. This one just doesn't compute for us, and I think the fact
that the state owns it and maintains it is a huge factor.And then,as you noted,the largely
residential makeup of this corridor.
Alter: And I could be wrong,but I think that the only way that this would be something that a council of
20 years from now would be looking at is if we stagnate or grow smaller as a city,whereby the
need for having that kind of egress happens.But it seems like the gains of having it two way to
slow down actually end up countering some of the walkability neighborhood feel because of the
widening of the road to that extent.Not to mention,people feel very strongly about small walls
built in their front yards.Just mention all of that.But the thing that I'm thinking about is 20 years
from now,the reason why we would need to have this kind of,you know,traffic calming or what
have you,again,if it were to surface again,because primarily of safety would be if we've not
grown at all and there's a walkability or neighborhood perception of it,or that Dodge became
commercial,right?
Held:Right.
Alter: So.
Held:Right. Which is probably pretty unlikely.
Alter: Exactly. So I'm just kind of I'm trying to think through this absolute question to try and say,at least
this is what I'm thinking about,even though I'm a lay person,but just based on the information
that you've given us,that would be, so thank you.
Teague: Well,and thanks to everyone,just for chumping in on that. For me,I am fully convinced that
keeping it one way at this point is the most appropriate direction. I'd see my co-my fellow
councilors nodding their heads. So any other questions?I don't hear any other questions. Thank
you.
Held: Thank you.I'm on to the design.
Teague: Great. Any other,uh,discussion on this by council?Does staff need anything more definitive?
Held:No. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 23
3. Update related to the new Tobacco Permit Moritorium
Teague: Okay.All right. We are going to move on to Item 3. Update related,uh,to the new tobacco,uh,
permit moratorium. We're going to tum it over to our,um,city attorney,Eric Goers.
Goers: Thank you,Mayor. So I'd like to just kind of situate us first,uh,on procedural posture and then go
through,um, some introduction,probably more for the benefit of the public than the council who
was,uh,I'm sure had an opportunity to read the memo I produced,uh,last week on this topic. So
as council is aware,uh,Council passed a moratorium on new tobacco permits that is to run
through the end of this calendar year.Uh,and then,uh,Council did that in order to allow time to,
uh,research different mitigation,uh,means of the kind of rapidly expanding,uh,tobacco uses
within the City and the public health effects that come with it.Um,circle back to that for a
moment.But first,as you recall,I laid out in the memo,kind of the regulatory framework and
some potential solutions for Council's consideration this afternoon. I'll try to set the table for that
discussion and summarize my memo very briefly,uh,including my recommendation,should
council wish to do something on this topic.But from there,I'll be seeking council's guidance on
what you would like to do,and,of course,we'll do our best to effectuate your wishes in that
regard. So first,uh,I want to kind of center our discussion on the rationale for regulation. Council
should center their discussions on the public health effects of tobacco and tobacco sales. And I'm
using tobacco and tobacco products as a bit of a broad term because there are alternative nicotine
products or alternative,uh,tobacco products,there's vapor products.Many of those don't contain
tobacco,but just as I mentioned in my memo,I'm just going to refer to them as tobacco products,
although it's broader really,ah,than that. When, ah,Council expressed a desire to consider
regulation in this effort.My first step was to,ah,reach out to Johnson County Public Health,
who's represented today here at the meeting by Susan Valletta,who's a health public health
educator from Public Health. The reason I point that out is that,again,that's really what this is
about is trying to mitigate,uh,the public health harms that come with tobacco use and the
negative externalities that oftentimes follow,particularly proliferations of tobacco outlets. Um,
we need to focus on the public health perspective. Oftentimes,that's focused on preventing those
who are under 21,which,of course,is the legal age for using the tobacco products from accessing
tobacco and or reducing the ease of access for adults,uh,of tobacco products,again, for public
health reasons.Um,now,as you're aware,there are different kinds of retailers of tobacco,there
are convenience stores,there are grocery stores,and there are tobacco and vape shop,uh,they all
have the same tobacco permit.But again,even if you focus on the public health,uh,
considerations of all this,you might choose to treat them differently. For example,you might
choose to treat vape shops or tobacco shops differently because,uh,of their higher percentage of
gross sales in tobacco. The focus of their marketing,uh,on tobacco products and tobacco
products alone,ah,the primacy of the,uh,sales and the lack of really any other kind of sales,
unlike convenient stores or grocery stores,of course,that have,um,products that are more,uh,
helpful to the communities.But-but I want you to keep your laser focus on the public health
aspects,ah,of tobacco and tobacco use when considering what,if any,regulations you'd like to
pursue. So first, ah,there are a couple,as I mentioned in my memo, a couple of different flavors
of,ah,regulation that you might consider. First are the non zoning,uh,options such as setting a
hard cap on the number of tobacco retailers you will allow in city limits. Um,you could have that
just as a firm number,or you could have that float with the number of residents within the
community,such that if the population of Iowa City went up or down,the requisite number of
permits that you would allow would go up or down in a corresponding fashion. Or,ah,you might
consider the zoning options,usually,that would entail,uh, a minimum separation distance
between tobacco retailers and/or minimum separation distances between what I'll characterize as
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 24
sensitive populations such as schools,um,public parks,libraries,places you would expect to fmd
young people.But,of course,because the legal age used to be 18 for tobacco is now 21,that
could well include University properties since,ah,I don't have statistics in front of me,but I
would assume that a large percentage of their student body would remain under 21 at any given
moment.You also asked me to consider other substances such as Kratom or nitrous oxide.
Sometimes referred to as using or misusing,I should say,as part of Whippets.As I mentioned in
my memo,both are presently legal.I think it would be easier to regulate one Kratom than it
would be to regulate nitrous oxide because of the legitimate uses that come with nitric oxide or
laughing gas,both in dental or medical offices and and whipped cream dispensers,whereas,I'm
unaware at least of any legitimate uses of Kratom. I shouldn't say legitimate and-I should say
healthy choices of Kratom,as it's not presently illegal. It's listed as a drug of concern by the FDA,
but it's not currently illegal. So again,if Council chooses to regulate,as I mentioned in my memo,
I would recommend somewhat of a hybrid solution that is including some kind of cap,whether
fixed or floating would be up to you,as well as separation distances,ah,from-at least from each
other, so you don't have the effects of a higher density,um,which can lead to external problems,
um,and of course,greater access,particularly in areas of higher density living,such as
downtown,where you have a lot of young people living in particular,um,and/or,ah,minimum
separation distances from schools or public parks,libraries,that kind of thing. Uh,it came a little
late to include,but I'll be sure to a mail to each of you a link that Johnson County Public Health
was kind enough to put together. In my memo,I made reference to the map that they had done
and was able to depict where present tobacco retailers are within the city limits, so you can kind
of see the-the spread in the density in different parts of town.But they've also been able to add a
couple features. So one is the ability to add either 500 foot or 1,000 foot buffers around each of
those retailers. Also identifying,ah,parks and schools and adding buffers of 500 feet or 1,000
feet around them as well. If those are the kind of things that are interested-are interesting to you,
I would recommend doing that piecemeal.If you do it all at once,it gets to be an awfully busy
map.But,ah,it's easy enough to kind of toggle those on and off so you can get a good sense as to
what is where and what a 500 foot or 1000 foot buffer zone around each of those various,uh,
kind of things would result in. With that,I'll be happy to hear your thoughts and hear more about
what you would like to see achieved,and happy to answer any questions. I can.Admittedly,there
may be some that I'll need to come back to you. And one other thing I should lay out as well.I
mentioned that there's both zoning and non zoning possible solutions or tools that are available to
you. Of course,if we go with a zoning solution,that would need to go through Planning and
Zoning before coming back to you. This would be Council driven. So I would write it up
consistent with your guidance and then send it to P&Z for their recommendation to you. If you
did not do a zoning solution,it would just come straight back to you. That's all.
Teague: Just for clarification before we actually,uh,start having some discussion here.With what the
county sent all these sites?
Goers: Yeah.
Teague: Your recommendations,everyone has grandfathered in that is currently with-with a permit,is
that correct?
Goers: Well,that's what I would recommend. Of course,that's up to you.And if you were to set a cap,
you could presently there are 63 retailers. You could set that number at-at what you wish. Uh,I
would probably want to include some language making it clear that with,um,cessation of use,
that is, if any of the present retailers were to, ah,stop operating or stop selling tobacco for some
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 25
set period of time.Much like we do with alcohol,drinking establishments downtown,uh,that
they would lose those grandfather rights.But again,that would depend on what you folks would
want to see insofar as right sizing the number of retailers within the city limits.
Teague: Thank you for the,uh,clarification. All right.
Dunn: I have a series of comments,and the first thing I want to do is I want to thank you for,uh, all the
work that you guys have put in on this. This clearly took a decent amount of time. So I really
want to share that appreciation.Um,in terms of my perspective on,uh,where we should go with
this.I think that capping the number of retailers coupled with keeping retailers away from
sensitive populations and,ah,minimum distances between retailers.As well as a ban on Kratom.
I'd also like to explore creative ways to potentially regulate Whippets.Like one of the things that
I think of in that context is are we allowed to say that they-it can't be sold by an entity, like Hy-
Vee,for example,you wouldn't say like that,but like can we say that they have to have the
required permitting that,for example,like a grocery store would have to have?A lot of the places
that are currently selling these products would not have that same permitting level-level of
permitting.
Goers: When you say the permitting,what-what permitting are you talking about?
Dunn: So,whatever I-I assume that like a grocery store,for example,that's going to be selling nitrous
oxide in the sense of like whipped cream,they're going to have to have different certifications
from the Iowa Department of Public Health in ways that they-they operate and sell food,and
they also store food,right?
Goers: Well,certainly,I-I don't know that that's specific to nitrous oxide.
Dunn: Yeah.No,I'm not saying,but I'm saying, could we say that in order to sell this product,you have
to be either,like,licensed for medical use or whatever however we'd want to carve that out for
medical uses of that product,or basically having the certifications and,um,permits of a grocery
store?
Goers: That's something we could explore.
Dunn: Yeah. That would be what I'm interested in just exploring that. Other than that,the rest of things
as- as recommended seem really great to me.
Moe: Go ahead.
Harmsen:I was going to say,I could I agree with at least the first couple of things that Councilor Dunn
was talking about in terns of limiting on licensing.I'd like to discuss,like,where we want to put
that cap, certainly no higher than what it is currently. If we reduce that number,then it would be
sort of one of those,like,byattrition not yanking them away,but as- as they phase out,I would be
okay with looking at those would be some factors I would be happy and actually will look
forward to talking with. In terns of minimum distances,so that's the,uh,the zoning related
issues,again keeping away from more vulnerable populations and what that might look like,I'm
very interested in-in digging deeper on that. I'm going to depart from-from you on the whipped
cream issue. I don't see that as being a feasible thing,uh,to,uh,to implement. And certainly,I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 26
would-the Kratom ban,too. I would agree with you on that.But in terms of,like,those first three
things,I think-
Dunn: So you're with me with the Kratom?
Harmsen:Yeah.Yeah,the Kratom,yeah.But those three,I think,to me,are the priority,I'm not so sure
that that fourth thing is-is doable or desirable,although and that's-that's something that's been
around since before I was a kid. So,I mean,it's just-it's not a new thing,where some of these
other issues the understanding of the risk health risks of tobacco certainly have become much
more robust since I was 20 years old so-
Moe: I tend to agree that hybrid solution makes sense.I think that zoning tool alone can lead to some
unintended consequences. And our 500 foot-bar rule has done some real good,but it's also had
some unintended consequences, so I like coupling it with some caps,and then,of course,we will
be focused on sensitive populations. I would say that that absolutely should include the
University of Iowa. And then as far as there was a brief discussion about percentage of sales,uh,
that I would suggest is probably not something that administratively the City wants to try to do a
lot of and track that on a regular basis. I-I just feel like that seems,er,regulating certain
businesses differently based on percentage of sales,um,something we do in other actually
realms,but it seems not something that the business City maybe wants to be in?
Goers: Yeah,we do a little bit of it in the alcohol realm.We have,uh,exception certificates for the under
21 ordinance.Normally,these are restaurants,but it could be bowling alleys and- and something
else if they have,uh,more than 50%of their sales and something other than alcohol. And we
cause them to,uh,require them to submit an affidavit kind of a sworn affidavit about their
percentage of sales. We reserve the right to audit those numbers at their expense. Is there some
administrative burden with handling that?Yes,there is.Would we,ah,have some difficulty kind
of proving of that case,if we had to.Maybe we haven't been in that position before,but
potentially. Certainly that's more complicated than is it 500 feet away from another retailer or
from a school property?Like,well,that's-that's simple. Yeah.
Fruin:Yeah getting back to what Eric said earlier,I think you really just need to ask yourself if there's a
public,uh,a compelling public health reason to look at stores that have a large percentage of their
products in this realm,in the tobacco realm,right?Are they marketing,uh,exclusively
differently?Are they- are they-is there something unique about them that creates a unique public
health hazard to those?And I think that's ultimately,if you want to go to percentage of sales,you
should be able to articulate why you think,um,those businesses that have a higher percentage of
their sales in tobacco and tobacco related products create a,uh,more significant public health
concern than those that don't.
Alter: Um,I have a question about,uh,uh,uh,I recognize we're,I-I'm in agreement with Councilor
Harmsen and most of what,um,Councilor Dunn said,although,yes,I-I think at a certain point,
we need to kind of take our hands off of- of some of the regulation-regulatory things that were-
that were proposed. Um,but say we hash this all out. Um,I'm interested in timeline because
we've had a couple of different contacts where we've had some unintended consequences,right?
And I-you-we have been emailed about the pause on uh,this is-the potential cessation of,uh,
sale right now of a business that would go to. That- so I'm wondering on the timeline of this,like,
can we do-like once we have agreed upon what we want and give Eric and staff direction,how
does that work in terns of then being able to cease the moratorium,allow whatever our,let's call
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 27
it 63 plus our floating,you know,what have you? Once we've hashed out our details, and we say
this is the direction we would like to follow,what then do we do to enable,um,the businesses
that are current would be covered-sorry,I'm not putting this way.What would we do timeline-
wise so that somebody who wants to sell their business can?
Goers: Okay. Sure. Well,um,part of that would depend on,uh,whether you folks choose a zoning or
non-zoning,uh,solution for the reasons I outlined here.You know,we add a step if they're
zoning because it needs to go through Planning and Zoning before it comes back to Council.
Then normally there'd be three readings. Of course,you could collapse,if you so chose,uh,to
make that typically two readings, if you-if you wanted to do that.It is my vision that once you
get to the point of deciding what it is you want to do in that way,certainly no later than that final
reading of the ordinance,you would lift a moratorium and-and,you know,go from there and-
and implement whatever it is. The new solution is that you folks have decided on.Um,you know,
of course,you could,you know,modify the resolution or the moratorium by resolution now,but I
would be hesitant to do that just because at least I'm not yet clear where you want to go,and we
want to make sure that whatever you do is consistent with,uh,what you want to see achieved
through the regulatory steps-
Alter: Yes.
Goers: -that you do implement.
Alter: Yeah.No-and I'm-it's this kind of very delicate-
Goers: Yeah.
Alter: -balancing act because,um,you know,I'm absolutely in favor of trying to limit,um,you know,
public health hazards,um,and I was surprised only to see it was seven businesses,which is
actually quite a lot,but it feels like it's more.
Goers: Yeah.
Alter: Um, and so I was surprised at that,and yet,I'm also concerned about something that was in process
and was going to go through the-namely the sale of- of this,uh,business and to-through no fault
of their own,have that-
Goers: Sure.
Alter: - stopped in its tracks.
Goers: Yeah.
Alter: So,but I do agree. I,um,I do not think that we should just say,lift it and not have this vision
clearly delineated before we do that so.
Fruin: So a-a sample timeline might be,if- if you're able to give us some general direction tonight,right?
We're hearing hybrid solution,and we might have some prompting questions to kind of wrap
things up.We would probably want to return to you in this type of setting,a work session,um,to
say-and let's say we do that in August,we'd say,okay,here's what we heard. Here's-here's the-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 28
the-the framework of the regulations,and then we would be looking at,uh,Planning and Zoning
meeting. Uh,that's-that's at this point,probably going to be a September Planning and Zoning
meeting,and then best case scenario,you know,you're looking at completing this in October and
that may depend on your willingness to collapse. Otherwise,you're probably into that first week
in November. And that assumes,right?We dra-we-we have the-the capacity to draft it. P&Z
can process it in one meeting,and that,again,you guys can process it in two or maybe three
meetings. And then as Eric said,we're rel-we're-we're releasing that moratorium,or ending it,
um,at the time of the third reading. So after that- after that third reading is done,one of your next
agenda items would be to terminate or end the moratorium.
Harmsen:What are the pros and cons of if we take a hybrid approach of doing both parts of the hybrid
simultaneously versus the-you know, in two different time frames?Is there,uh,any thought on-
Goers: Well,yeah,I would recommend doing them together.Now,to be clear,the Planning and Zoning
portion I-I-I should say the zoning portion would be the only portion that goes to Planning and
Zoning,but it would feel a little funny to me to,you know,do the non,um-
Harmsen:No cap, for example.
Goers: Yes.Right. Of course,you could. Uh,but it would make sense to me to kind of time it in such a
way that,you know,you're done with everything at- at one time.
Harmsen: Okay.
Dunn: Would it be a good understanding to say that we could also just take care of the Kratom thing at
our next meeting,like-
Goers: Well.
Dunn: -we can do that sep- different- separately,right?
Goers: I'm sorry.
Dunn: We can do that separately. That action should be separate,right?
Goers: Uh, sure.
Dunn: Yeah.
Goers: Uh,you could do it separately. Again,I think that would be an ordinance, so you'd be three
readings,two if you choose to collapse,but I would need to more and hear a consensus on that
and then to make sure that there aren't any exceptions or,you know,I- ca-I can't think of any,uh,
but I wouldn't want to make sure I understand,uh,your wishes and if so,and you were willing to
consider it as a standalone measure.I could certainly bring something like that back to you at
your next meeting.
Dunn: Cool.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 29
Teague: So one thing that I-that hasn't been discussed is,uh,for the capping,um,of the number of
retailers,if that's gonna be imposed on the en-you know,on the entire city,or is that going to be
within a geographical area?I mean,we have 2,600-we have 26 square miles in the city. And,of
course, as we continue to grow,you know,there's probably going to be some permits or some
desire for,you know,uh, some of these activities along- along those areas,which until I
understand if this is gonna be citywide or within a geographical area,I don't know that I can,you
know,um,really say that you know,the minimum distance should be 500-1,000 or whatever that
might be or the sensitive locations. So at least for my colleagues,I would like to know what are
people thinking. Is it Citywide or is it gonna be a geographical area?
Harmsen:I mean,I guess that's-uh,I-I guess in my mind,I was thinking Citywide. Um,you know,I
hadn't really thought about it in any other terms to be honest with you until you just mentioned it
now. So that's,um,you know,for, like,we're talking about the cap now or the zoning?
Teague: The ca-the cap.But everything- everything depends the cap. Yeah.
Harmsen:Yeah.No-no. That's-I mean,that's-that's what I was thinking of. If that was your question,
Mr.Mayor.
Dunn: I-I think of it Citywide,just because I think that we're going to get into some fraught legal
territory.If we say,this area can have this many,and this area,can have this many and all that. So
I would-I would tend to go towards Citywide.
Goers: It's certainly cleaner to just do it Citywide,and- and know you haven't had the benefit of looking at
this map with the buffers,but I have.I have it in front of me,in fact,um,right now,and even a
500-foot buffer,um,you know,eliminates,and-and I'm sorry.Just 500 feet between retailers
eliminates a lot of downtown if not most of downtown.Um,if you were to add in sensitive,um,
you know, spots,especially if that included University property,you would take up most of the
rest of the downtown area.Whereas the rest of town is quite a bit more sparse. Of course,it's
concentrated as you might expect along commercial corridors,you know,Highway 1 and 6, for
example,um,has a few.
Salih: I agree as well,you know,Citywide makes sense.
Teague: Okay.Yeah. Thanks for at least that clarification of Citywide,because I-I wasn't sure where
people thoughts were.
Fruin:Yeah,I'd-I-I'd encourage you to think through,um,a-a- a Citywide cap. If you set it below the
number that we have right now,you're probably going to run into more of the examples that
Councilor Alter was talking about,where you might have some isolated retailers that,um-um,
may fall subject to this. So if-if you were to set the cap,um,at the-at the current number,I think,
with the 500-foot rule,you-you're-um,if-if one goes out,the next one is not gonna come in next
to a sensitive area or next to a sensitive population or in a heavily concentrated area now.But we
probably just wanna think through a little bit,um,and- and that's really,uh,you know, staff can
do that as we work on this.But,um, setting a hard cap below that number right now,I think the
chances for unintended consequences on retailers that probably aren't at the top of our,um,
concern from a public,uh,health standpoint. Um,we could see more of that.
Harmsen: Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 30
Bergus: And just one observation,I think,Geoff, following up on that,it would be helpful to have staff
walk us through when we have our next discussion about if there's that cap kind of if there's a
sweet spot that you could identify or help us identify because even setting it at the exact number
right now,I think we know from the,um,liquor license limitations,really,um.
Teague:Nobody gets rid of them.
Bergus: Yeah,I-I mean,i-it almost guarantees that there will be a liquor license in a place where there
has been one before,and so I think,you know,thinking about,is there a place where we could set
the cap that the 500-foot rule would still minimize in the areas that we're trying to avoid the
concentrations,but wouldn't create maybe as much pressure financially for there to be a vape
shop replacing a vape shop every time?
Harmsen:Yeah,see.
Fruin:Very much on our mind,too.Yes.
Goers: One of the other things we'd want to consider,if you were to set the,uh,cap,um,below the
current number or even close to the current number,um,are the situations in which,uh,I believe,
uh,Councilor Alter was referring and which we've got,you know,a retailer who's selling to
another-you know,one convenience store, selling to another chain of convenience store and so
forth.Well,that's a chain of ownership, so that's a new permit.Well,do you want to allow that?
Yes or no,you know,um, and I would want to get them sense from Council. Um,whether you
would consider that in some fashion,a grandfathered,you know, a location,which has,you
know,in the last year operated or had a,you know,tobacco permit would be allowed or-or not,
you know.
Harmsen:If we kept it at the current number or close to that,that would be allowed under that,right?It
would still be under the total Citywide cap.
Goers: Well,I need to confirm with the clerk's office,uh,because I-I think yes,uh,because I,uh,think
those businesses remain in operation with,I'll-I'll say the sellers tobacco permit in place,and so I
think yes.Uh,but I would wanna confirm.
Harmsen: Sure.Now,that sounds like a good-good answer or a good question to answer.
Fruin:Yeah. And again,I think that's where the sensitive populations layer can come in,right?And under
that see- scenario that Eric mentioned,is that,um,new convenience store in that example within
500 feet of a sensitive population or not?I think we can look at that-that nuance,too.
Moe: It's just for our next conversation,I guess the hypothetical I'd be interested in is what happens if we
have bad actors who have a permit,who follow our rules,what's talked through the process of
somebody who's repeatedly selling to minors.We in this situation currently the current,um,
situation,we-we don't issue a tobacco permit or take it away. How do we-do we need to write
something extra into this fixture code to sort of address that?
Goers: I-I don't think so because it's long been the,um,our office's position that because the state
specifically spells out consequences for sales to minors. This is a first offense, second offense,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 31
third offense, fourth offense,we said,like,well,that's the remedy for that, and we're kinda- for
better or worse we're stuck with that remedy. We kinda feel like there's field preemption there,at
least in so far as those consequences are concerned. So I don't think we need to write anything
like that into whatever new regulatory scheme you folks consider.
Moe: Sure.I just wouldn't want a situation where the-a business would have their license taken away and
immediately sell it to the next business because we've used a zoning tool.
Goers: Well,i- in that case,they would sell it-let's hypothetically,say they would sell it to a new
business,and again,that would depend on how you wanted the craft to grandfathering. That
would have to be a new permit because,again,the change of ownership needs a new permit. And,
you know,if you didn't want to see that kind of thing allowed as a grandfather rights,we could
exclude it.
Teague: And I think that's a public health question that we have to consider.Um,if we're going to be
putting in place these buffers of whatever that distance is,that is something that,um,I-I don't
know you. You may be looking for some direction now.
Goers: Yeah.
Teague: On that. Sorry
Moe: Go ahead, Sorry.
Teague: Well,I was just gonna state that currently for,uh,the liquor license, as,uh, Councilor Bergus
talked about,you know,many people don't uh,get rid of them because at least downtown where
we have some re- some buffer restrictions. Uh,once a property is sold or business is sold,they
have one year to occupy,um,to be able to use that liquor to able to-to be able to get a liquor
permit that will be allowed. So the question would be, for us,you know,how do we envision
once,um,ownership is changing,you know, are we going to be taken into consideration?Um,
you know,the-the buffer distance,sensitive locations at that point,or are they just grandfathered
in with a time frame of one year that you would have to,um,occupy the space or at least-yeah,I
think it was to occupy the space.
Goers: Yeah,with alcohol,it's-you have to either abandon or cease the drinking establishment use for at
least a year to lose those grandfather rights,and that's happened. I mean,that's led to some
attrition,uh,downtown.Now it does,you know,as you said,it's a year in alcohol. It doesn't have
to be a year with tobacco.I've seen examples or,um,advocates in this field say 60 days,you
know,um,that's up to you, folks.
Dunn: I guess me-me personally,I,um-I would like to see a policy that gets the-the currently permitted
people or rather not necessarily the currently permitted people.But,um,the current areas that
would violate would be grandfathered in pretty much out of there as soon as possible.You know,
of course,we can't prevent them,but I-I don't want to see personally a lot of easy ability to
transfer to other folks. Um,I think that that should be a priority. Our priority should not be to
make sure that these spots are-that are currently held up in these sensitive areas where we-our
policy will eventually exclude them from being. I think the policy should lead toward not pushing
them out,but as natural attrition occurs,I'd-I'd like to see those places,um,not present anymore.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 32
Goers: So would you like to see that,um,only upon,you know,uh,interruptions in use of tobacco permit
or even just,you know,consistent use,just a sale from,you know,buyer to seller,Person A to
Person B?
Dunn: I'm not sure I quite understand.
Goers: Yeah. Um,well,to use the Mayor's example of the,um,one year for alcohol licensing and- and so
forth,that has less to do with I mean,not that there isn't licensing with alcohol,of course,there is,
and if there's a change in ownership,stuff needs to happen there,as well.But my question to you
is,would you like to just track that,or would you like to even say,if you sell your business,you
know,to someone else,that will require a new permit for that buyer,they don't get a tobacco
permit.
Dunn:Bingo.
Goers: Okay.
Dunn: That would be my stance.
Goers: Is there-I'd like to see if there's a consensus on-on that.
Alter: It is a bit on the sensitive areas?
Dunn; Within the sensitive areas.
Teague: It-it would still depend on the sensitive area-
Dunn: Yes.
Teague: -and the buffer.
Dunn: Yes. Yeah.
Bergus: I-we're talking about layering both the 500 feet and the sensitive areas?
Goers: Well, 500 feet might be for both. I would say the two groups are retailer-to-retailer.
Bergus:Right.
Goers: That's would be more separation than-
Bergus: That's the one and I'm sorry.
Goers: - sensitive,um,you know,populations of schools,etc,would be the other.
Bergus: Do you have any sense of what,um, if there are ways we could craft this to minimize the
likelihood of preemption?
Dunn: It's a good question.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 33
Goers: Sure.Uh,I suspect if we were to say no more tobacco,we're not going to issue any more tobacco
permits,you know,on July 1st of 2025,which would be the next time Council does that,absent
new stores and so forth. I am guessing that would draw,uh,legislative attention. Um,I suspect
that many of the larger chains,uh,that have tobacco permits,think grocery stores and
convenience stores, for example,um,you know,have strong lobbying forces behind them.If you
were to take action that they didn't like I could imagine there would be some lobbying done with
that. I don't know,you know,what form that would take. Um,you know,I don't-I don't know
that there's a big,you know,I mean,anyone wants you to be seen as championing the tobacco
industry,uh,at the state level,but I don't know.
Dunn: There's plenty-there's plenty.Um,I guess one thing that I think of to specifically kind of address
those concerns,because I think those concerns for us would typically come from,you know,
different grocery store chains or convenience store chains. That could suggest that we might have
an opportunity to say, like,you know,unless you have,you know,less than 50%of your sales in
tobacco,because,like,there's-there's no real reason I think that we should be preventing like a
grocery store like Hy-Vee from renewing their permit.
Goers: Okay.
Dunn: On a location where they've been forever,you know,or decades,in my opinion.I mean,I think
that,that's-that goes without saying,like,it is a bit of a different situation.
Goers: So you would like to see grocery stores and-would you put convenience stores in a similar-
Dunn: Yeah,like a gas station I think. I think that that's a bit of a different situation than what we're
necessarily trying to prevent.
Teague: I would just say,only because we're talking about a big store,um,and I understand,you know,
we've been having-this discussion is really because of the public health concerns that we have
from so many of these being put in,you know,concentrated areas.But there is-we have to
consider small business as well. I think the sensitive locations is probably what's going to get us a
little bit raffled at the state level because,you know,even,for example,if we keep the sensitive
locations in let's say,a Hy-Vee want to go next to a school or something like that,they can't do it.
You know,if we keep that sensitive location. So I just want to bring up that there are small
business owners that are going to be excluded potentially if we go with what you just mentioned.
Dunn: Well,no-I th-the way I think you might be understanding it differently,I think,like if we have,
for example, like, a Hy-Vee going in next to a school,I think that's something that we could
manuf-like put in-in part of the regulation would be,well,that,uh,applicant for a permit is not
doing more than 50%of their sales on tobacco,ever.Like,even gas stations aren't doing more
than 50%of their sales on tobacco I'd assume.
Goers: Yeah. A number I was given by Casey's senior council I thought was something like 6%.
Dunn: Yeah. So,I mean,like, something like that,I think,would allow for some flexibility there and
ensure that,like,the areas that they were trying to protect are being protected. The businesses,big
and small,are being protected and it's really targeting the more problematic areas in my opinion.
The problematic areas and the areas that are also trying to market these dangerous substances
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 34
much more provocatively,much more targeted towards sensitive populations. A grocery store
doesn't do that as much.
Goers: Well,and the-the clarifying comment I'd offer about the grocery store opening next to the school
is that,of course,they could open next to the school they just couldn't sell tobacco.
Harmsen:Um,one of the things we started this talking about the health stuff,and we do have somebody
from the Health Department here, so I wondered if I could invite you up to the thing to answer a
couple of quick questions. One is,you've heard us talk about a variety of different approaches
that we as a council are concerned about taking. I would love to get your input on kind of
bringing us back to the health portion of this.Do-are these the kinds of things that in other places
have had a positive health impact in communities?Have other communities done this?Um,you
know,I would some- some-I have a couple of follow up questions,but can we start there,
maybe?
Valleta:Yeah.
Goers: And Susan,can-can you just for the record,state your name and your position fust?
Valleta:Yeah, Susan Valletta. I work at Johnson County Public Health,and I've been working on tobacco
prevention and control for about 16 years. Um, for states that have preemption,what Eric has
outlined is what you can do,right?Laura,you said what else we can-of course,I would love you
to try something else because it hasn't been tried in this state,right?But legally,right? Those are
the-that's the list. The things that I want to point out are making sure that,like these unintended
consequences,that we don't move folks to a certain neighborhood,right?Um,I encourage you to
look at what convenience stores do look like in certain neighborhoods versus other
neighborhoods. Um, and while you think that Hy-Vee,right?For instance or other grocery stores,
convenience stores,that's where tobacco comes into the community,you all. I know you think of,
like,the vape stores and what they look like but where folks are buying,yes,downtown, students
and folks that frequent those areas.But everybody else is buying it where they get gas and
groceries. They are. So I'd encourage you not to think about them differently.And maybe- and
you can feel free to ask me any questions about that.Um,and then the number. That's something
that we can look at per percentage of the population. So there might be 63 now. I'm not-math is
not my strong suit. So somebody could probably run that right now.But there's kind of a-there's,
um,what's the word?
Harmsen: Tipping point?
Valleta:Yeah,kind of a tipping point. Yes.We did some research around the whole state in 2016,like,an
amount per population that seems more reasonable than others. So that's something that we can
get back to you on too.
Moe: I kind of want to follow up on a statement you made about where people are buying tobacco
products.Do you know-are,uh,young people buying tobacco at different places than not young
people?
Valleta: So sales information is difficult to get.Um,sometimes in terms of those numbers. Um,I'm trying
to think back over the years. Um,there usually becomes those places,right?That young people
know they can buy alcohol with their fake. They know they can buy-you know,get tobacco
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 35
products.Um,it's all about what kind of kind where you frequent the most.But kind of where
you're walking by,right?Easy access is kind of what Eric said at the beginning. Um, and that's
how it happens.I can look to see if I can give you better numbers on that.
Moe: Yeah.
Harmsen: Could we expect some of the things we're talking about here to have an impact on especially
among youth smoking,which is,you know, a concern of mine and I have high school age kids.
You know,they see a lot of their friends,you know,with the vaping and other products.Um,I
have a wife who's a physician and have heard quite a bit about the damage that we're just now
starting to understand. So that's where I'm really coming from,from this and why I'm really glad
that we were on this path. Can we expect some improvement from the things we're doing?
Valleta:Yeah.
Harmsen:If we do them?
Valleta:Yeah. The more-you know,evidence shows,the more that young people see it in the
community,in those store fronts,the more apt they are to start.It's absolutely connected with
initiation. The more they see it the more likely they are to start. People trying to quit,much harder
to quit.If everywhere you go,you're looking at it as well. It's that whole normalizing,right?If I'm
going to stop and grab a water,granola bar,and then that whole wall.Like,look at that wall
sometime when you go in a convenience store,right?And you try to quit and stop there for gas,
right?
Teague: I have a question about the fake IDs and what the regulation is,um,you know, from the state?
Some places scan your ID but not every place.What is the requirement at the state level?
Valleta:I don't know that.
Goers: Yeah,it's just kind of a reasonable-uh,reasonableness standard. Um,if I were to walk in
regardless of whether they scan my ID or not,they would comfortably sell to me because I'm
clearly not under 21.But there's no requirement that they scan it or anything like that.
Teague: Is that-is that something that could be a potential?
Goers: Well-
Teague: That we require?
Goers: Uh,we could. I know that that's come up in the context of alcohol years ago. Um,that's-that's
something we could consider.Um,again,you have to kind of think of the effects on big versus
smaller businesses oftentimes.Um,you know,many of the bigger businesses have access to
scanning and scanning equipment.You know,it's-obviously,it's more and more prevalent so it's
easier.
Teague: I guess,uh,you know,I don't know if my colleagues would be okay with them just exploring
what ID reader would cost and seeing what that would be legally. If that's an option.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 36
Goers: Sure.I can look at the cost. The other thing I would add about that is kind of a question of
enforcement. You know,it's easy enough to require,you know,ownership and use of- of an ID
scanner. It's easy to enforce the ownership part because you can just walk in and see there it is.
Um, enforcing the use is a little more difficult.
Teague: At least anecdotally I think that most people would-you know,if they're checking IDs at all and
that's part of their protocol,I think they would use it unless there's a good friend of theirs that,
you know.
Goers: Sure.
Teague: So but I hear-I hear what you're saying. Um,but I- if we can just explore what that cost and what
the legal remef-what the legal options are for the city. Um, and I would also expand that to
alcohol as well if people are okay with that.
Harmsen:It was like a good thing to look into. I have one additional question on a slight-on the Kratom
issue if you don't know much. Okay.
Valleta:Not my wheel house but it's all over my notes to learn more.
Harmsen:Yeah,I was just-I was just,okay,thank you. That actually answered my question. I was just
trying to-I know that Councilor Dunn has-has voiced some urgency on that and I just was
looking for some additional information as well.
Valleta:But speaking about that when you write it,and I'm sure-this is probably already in Eric's notes,
and I just haven't seen that.But think about laws as they might change for marijuana and THC
products as well. Just something to keep in mind as you write it to stay ahead of it if you can.
Teague: All right. Thank you.
Fruin: Can I- can I ask you a quick question?Do you know if,uh,the county or anybody else in Johnson
County is considering something similar?
Valleta;Um,you're the first. It has been brought to another City Council's attention just by email as far as
I know.
Fruin: Okay.
Valetta:But there are other cities in Iowa that have already passed something somewhat similar.
Goers: Sure.Uh,I think I mentioned in my memo that Cedar Rapids has a somewhat complicated zoning
ordinance which combines alcohol and tobacco outlets in the same categories.But there's three
different tiers having to do with whether it's on premises or off premises consumption and
whether it's above or below 50%. There are other cities within Iowa that are quite a bit simpler in
their solutions and approaches to,uh,reducing the number of outlets.
Valleta:All relatively recently.
Goers: Yeah.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 37
Valleta: So-
Teague: Thank you. All right. Councilors,we have less than seven minutes before we're going to take a
break
Dunn: Seven minutes.
Goers: I'm sorry.Were you going to summarize?I want to make sure I walk away with -
Teague: Yeah,please go right ahead.
Teague: Sure.Just wanted to make sure.
Goers: So the consensus that I'm hearing and this one will be a statement. There will be questions that
follow is we'd like a hybrid solution that is both with a cap and zoning,is that correct?All right.
Seeing some nods. Um,what do you want to see for the cap?Do you want to see a fixed number
and a floating-or a floating number and if so what are you looking for with either of those
answers?
Dunn: I'd say fixed,personally.
Harmsen:I'd be inclined fixed at where it is right now would be my inclination although I can certainly
listen to other arguments.
Goers: Okay. Do we have a consensus?
Teague: Can Mayor Pro Tem just jump in,of course.
Salih: Yes,of course,yeah. I agree.
Goers: Was that agreement,Mayor Pro Tem in fixed at the current number?
Salih: Yes. I agree.
Goers: Okay.I think I've heard at least three. Is that- is four? Okay.
Moe: I agree with Councilor Harmsen.
Goers: Okay. And how about sensitive locations?Would you like to include both separation from retailer
to retailer and from sensitive populations or just one of those two?
Dunn: Yes.Both.
Goers:Both. Okay.And what sensitive locations do you want?Do you want to have schools,parks,
libraries,pools?There's any number that you can do. It gets obviously more and more inclusive
or,well,exclusive,I guess I should say,the more you add. Um,but I guess I would recommend
schools if that's something you're interested in.Um,the rest,I'll kind of defer to you folks.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 38
Dunn: I mean,schools make the most sense.
Teague: So one of the examples that you have in,you know,as far as,like,the separation you have,it
would be 1,000 feet from a school.
Goers: That's one of my next questions is the separation distance,but yeah.
Teague: So I wonder if the-if the separation distance could just be what we do and get away from the
sensitive locations. I do have some maybe it's not real,some concern about the sensitive
locations,just from kind of that being a target that the state will look at and-and-but I think the
distance buffer could do what we want,with the sensitive location,although it could be still
adjacent to a school.
Harmsen:I like the idea of looking at schools as the low hanging fruit for sensitive locations. I certainly
would want some time to spend with the tool that you mentioned before me coming to a decision.
So I don't have as strong of a direction in my head right now. I'm just speaking for myself.
Goers: Yeah. What I'll say is that the tool,uh,as of early this afternoon includes the possibility to look at
both schools and parks.It does not include pools although we don't have that many so you could
probably quickly figure that out on your own.
Harmsen:And then parks.
Teague: I think we can look at the-the school district plan. I mean,the only school that I think of
immediately is,uh,that's next to a gas station as Liberty.Um,and-
Goers: Of course,it's outside of city limits.
Teague:Right outside of city limits. So I mean, schools may not-we can put it there,but that may not be
the-
Fruin:I think schools is going to catch up more than you might think particularly if you get to 1,000 feet.
Goers: And particularly if you're talking inclusively of private schools not just public schools.
Teague: Sure.
Fruin:Yeah,you could,I mean,you think about Tate,you think about Regina,those are all-there's close
proximity to,um,tobacco retailers. These is and I'm looking at some of these buffers now. Twain
might get caught up. That buffer may catch a few.
Alter: I was going to say,um-
Fruin:Yeah.
Salih: I just have a question. Are we talking about new license or even for the people who have current
license which is close to school or anything?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 39
Goers: Well,it's my understanding that the consensus from Council is to allow grandfathering of present
permitees. Does that sound correct?
Harmsen:Yeah. So we wouldn't be kicking somebody out of a location,but if they leave,nobody else,
you know,and it's however we decide a gap.
Goers: That's how that would work,yes.
Harmsen:Plus there would be new ones.
Salih: That makes sense.
Goers:Right.
Salih: Yes.
Goers: Okay.
Alter: So when you mentioned schools,is that public schools,or is that also-we talked a lot about the
University of Iowa.
Goers:Right.Well,that's my next question. So I guess I'm assuming public schools. I'm going to assume
private schools as well. And then the final question on that for schools,is the University,whether
you-we should include University Property?
Dunn: Yes.
Harmsen:I'd definitely be interested in that as an option so we can kind of consider what that looks like.
Um, again,without looking at the tool and looking at what some of those distances actually mean.
But.Pop the table.I've been talking a lot on this topic,I apologize.
Bergus:No,I'd like to just see that option as well.I think the between retailers will solve a lot in the
University area.But yeah,I think at least K-12,or I don't know.What about daycares?What
about preschools?
Goers: Well,we thought of daycares,but it's,you know when there are fewer children wandering away
from daycares on their own back,stray into a thing as opposed to a junior higher.
Bergus: For now.
Goers: Well,you would hope. All right. So what I'm hearing is schools,public,private,and the U of I. Of
course,we can change this at the next discussion,but I'll do that,and that would be the only
sensitive location.I'll come back with you. Okay.
Salih: Is that also including elementary school?
Goers: Yes,that would include elementary schools.
Salih: Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 40
Goers: And next question is 500 feet or 1000 feet. I think 500 feet would go far. Okay-okay.And do you
want to treat those that sell more than 50%in tobacco products differently than those that sell
under 50%of tobacco products?
Harmsen:I'm a fan of the Kiss principle,a bit simple.
Goers:Right.Yeah.
Moe: With Councilor Harms.
Harmsen: Okay. Treat them all the same?
Goers: Sure.I think so. Also that unless we have some better corroborates what we learned from the
public health expert.
Goers: Sure.
Salih: I agree to treat them the same.
Goers: And I think finally,Kratom were like to ban Kratom?
Moe: Is there a logic to separating them in the event that we get challenged by the state?
Goers: I think we would be separating them regardless. I was envisioning this in at least two pieces,the
CAP because that's non-zoning,it would appear somewhere different in the zoning code,I'm
sorry,would not be in the zoning code,and,you know,buffers,which would be in the zoning
code, and thus need to go through P&Z. It's some advantages to treating those separately. If you
wanted to add to Kratom,I could do it one of two ways,I could just,you know,ban it in yet a
third piece,or I could include it with the cap,you know,which would probably be located in the
city code in the same location I'm imagining.
Dunn: We should definitely do it separately.
Goers: Sorry.
Dunn: I think should definitely.
Goers: Separately sear three pieces. Okay.
Dunn: Yeah.
Salih: I agree.
Goers: Okay. I think that is what I need to at least bring back a draft to you at your next meeting.
Moe: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 41
Teague: Great-great. We are at 5:45.We are going to recess from our work session, and we'll come back
after our formal meeting. So I will see you back here at 6:00 P.M. For our formal meeting.
Salih: Thank you.
5. Information Packet Discussion
Teague: Okay,we are returning from a long recess for the city of Iowa city work session on July 16,
2024.We are at item Number 4. That's where we left off, and that was clarification of agenda
items.We've already covered that, so we will move on to item Number 5,which is information
packet discussions,and we're going to start with June 20.June 27. July 3. July 11.
Moe: I'd like to bring up July 11,IP6 on Taxicabs and look for counsel support to take the staffs
recommendation. I was compelled by the memo that we don't need that requirement anymore.
And there's-
Teague: Agree. So I majority.Yeah. Great-great.I will mention and I don't know which IP it is,but it's
the pending work session on July 11. So August 6,we will be hearing about our$3.75 million
that was awarded to us by Hud or the Pro Housing Award, and that is promoting and reducing
obstacles to housing is essentially what that stands for. So excited about that,and we'll also be
hearing from our Harvard Fellow that is actually here,Bloomberg,Harvard Fellow that is here,
and looking forward to that update from her on August 6.
Dunn: I'd like to gauge council support for a pending work session item for food insecurity in the
community.No immediate urgency or anything like that,but I'd like to have a discussion on what
the situation is with that sometime.
Alter:Maybe that's a good Joint Entities.
Dunn: Could be good Joint Entities.
Harmsen:Yeah,we like that a lot.
Bergus: Yeah.
Teague: All right.
Harmsen:Yeah,I Agree.
Teague: All right, so we will,uh,make sure that our next Joint Entities meeting.We have food
insecurities as a part of that.I know that we-so in our late handout,well,that was probably our
clarification of agenda items.But if I may,just throw this in. So in our late handouts,we did hear.
We did get a letter from-and they were also here today Escucha Mi Vos.I'm wondering if
counsel would be comfortable with the City Manager office and maybe NDS reaching out to
them just to kind of talk about the grant application that we sent. So they'll just have information
about that if people are okay with that. Certainly,Mayor Pro Tem and I,if you all are
comfortable-are comfortable can be a part of that.But we'll- are you all okay whether we are able
to make that happen or not?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 42
Alter: I'm okay.
Goers:Mayor,the one thing I would add is there's a lot of requests that I heard as part of Public Comment
about steering all the money toward immigrants or immigrant groups. Of course,we can't
discriminate based on national origin,and we would probably have to communicate that to them
as well.Now,certainly,we have a lot of programs that benefit immigrants,but we're not able to
limit it.
Alter: That actually was a question I was going to email you.
Goers: Yeah.
Alter: So,thank you.
Teague: I mean,again,I think the hope is just to discuss with them what this,you know,program.What
the application is is really to give information,the same information that's going to come August
6,but I thought,you know,potentially,it would allow them,you know,this one-on-one
conversation to get facts from the staff on the application,of course. Things will come before the
council for discussion and direction as well,but thought this might be one way just to have a
conversation before we,you know,at that request for this one particular item. So if counsel is
okay with that,then we'll move forward with that. Okay.
Alter: I hesitate to say this is a pending work topic.It's almost like,I,um. A we past that item?
Teague:No. I mean,we're still on July 11 with pending work items.
Alter: So a pending work item. One thing I would like at some point,and I have to have some
conversations,but I've talked to at least Councilor Dunn on this. We had a public comment from
a downtown district worker employee who was a bartender,I believe,and who talked about
parking rates for city- for employees in the downtown area. And,I would be interested in
gathering some information and then coming and maybe we can talk and-and to find out what
staff might,if there's any discussions about collaborations or partnerships or something between
the downtown district and parking to allow them a discounted rate for when they're working.
Fruin: So we're-this maybe what you're talking about. We are actively working internally to evaluate a
downtown district request for an evening parking permit.Right now,our parking permits are 24
hours,but some-some reduced hour permit,say,like,you know,4:00 or 5:00 through 2:00,3:00
in the morning,geared towards workers. That could be at a reduced rate. So we're looking at that.
Kind of evaluating whether our parking system can handle that,by the hour.
Alter: Just to know that you're working on it.
Fruin:It might require LPRs,though. Sorry,too soon.
Alter: I was just going to say that parking can be like this hotbed of contention.But no,that's wonderful
to know,and that basically takes care of what I wanted to kind of see if we could get initiated.
Fruin:We're working on that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 43
Alter: Thank you.
Teague: So you're withdrawing the work session.
Alter: I am.
Teague: Option. Okay.
Fruin:And it would require an ordinance change. At least that's our initial thought. So it would come to
you eventually.
Alter: Okay.
Teague: Any other comments on July 11 or passage end to items? Okay.
6. USG updates
We're going to move on to item Number 6. Oh,wait a minute.I know-I know. So,honestly,I did speak
to them before the meeting.I have one question for the Council when it comes down to the Work
Session Agenda.Yes. Yes. Are we okay with kind of shifting USG towards the top?And I am
also wondering if counsel would be okay with me moving clarification and information packets
toward the top. Are you okay with that?
Alter: That was quick
Teague: Okay.All right.
Moe: With a shot.
Teague:Now,welcome,USG.
Monsivais: Thank you guys kindly for being able to consider that. I was going to ask selfishly,anyways.
Before I start with my announcements,I'm going to briefly turn over to Director Amin to
introduce yourself.
Amin: Hi guys. I've met some of you. I was at the Hud Grant Ceremony a few weeks ago,actually
interned for the assistant Secretary that present to the city with the check. So that was a cool,full-
circle moment.But my name's Anna Amin.I'm a student at the University,rising Senior. If you
ever met Keaton Zimet,he was my predecessor. I'm the New Keaton this year,the Director of
government relations,which I was really excited about until I realized what this year is
politically,and then I was like,wow,I really did that to myself. So my job as most of you know
is to set the legislative agenda,the local,state,and the federal level. I'm also the director-the new
Director of Legislative Affairs for the Association of Big Ten Students. So I have the very fin job
of figuring out what legislation 600,000 students applies to about 600,000 students,and what we
should focus on. So it'll be a busy year. Um,I just kind of want to let you know what direction
USG will be taking at these three different levels.We're trying to focus on civic engagement and
education.Matthew,will talk a little bit and his final point about,I really want to educate our
students and our residents on what the parking increases will pay for,what they'll cover. I don't
think a lot of people know what they'll cover.Not that that will make them feel any different
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 44
about having to pay more to park,but information for people our age is good because we noticed
that particularly being in USG,that people tend to jump to conclusions,and giving them
information is really helpful. So since USG is nonpartisan,we're really taking an educational
approach.We'll probably be collaborating with you guys in some voter civic engagement
education things just so that we can make sure that our students and who are residents for four
years here in Iowa City are as educated as possible.But,yeah,I will be meeting with some of
you. I know we'll be meeting with Geoff and Kirk soon to talk about what your legislative agenda
is. Students are residents here for four years. Sometimes more. It's important that the city and the
University collaborate. I also think it helps Des Moines take us a little more seriously when we
can say,well,this is not just our initiative,it's also the City's. So hoping it is more collaboration
with you guys.I don't know if I'll be at another City Council meeting since it's 10:00. I don't
know.I can't swing that every other Tuesday,but I'm hoping to work with you guys soon.Nice to
meet you all.
Teague: Yes.
Monsivais:For USGs visibility. All right. So first of all on the announcements. So per Directors of
Sustainability Cambus or the University's free busing system,applied for a grant from the Federal
Transit Administration called the Low to Zero Emission Grant. Cambus was one of 62 applicants,
and we were awarded$16.4 million,which will go towards six electric buses and a new
maintenance facility building that will start construction in 2025. Eighty percent of Cambuses are
beyond their lifespan,so this will help us start revitalizing our fleet. USG is proud to see the
impact of Cambus in Iowa City every day. And this is a huge accomplishment for us. I give all
credit to Director Marco Morel,who championed this initiative,and USG is so proud of all of his
work Given the recent Iowa Supreme Court ruling on abortion,USG has released a statement
that reads in part,USG calls on the Iowa Legislature to allow such a vital issue to be decided
through a statewide referendum with polls conducted by the Des Moines Register having shown
that over 60%of Iowans believe that access to safe abortion should be legal. We believe that the
Supreme Court's decision undermines the will of the people of Iowa.A referendum on the ballot
would allow Iowans to take their voices to the polls and protect the reproductive rights that the
Supreme Court has violated. The full statement is available on our website and on our Instagram
at UI Student Gov.And then third point and kind of what Director Amin said earlier,
unsurprisingly,the fee increases for students living here over the summer has not been received
very well and amongst many others in our community,while USG does not have an official
statement on parking,the senate liaisons plan to do a social media informational posts to better
inform our new Hawkeyes,as well as students returning in the fall about the city's reasoning and
justification.For this motion,we aim to help students understand and reduce any shock value that
might be associated with this. Thank you.
7. Council Updates
Teague: Thank you-thank you both. Yes. All right.And the last item is Number 7. Council updates on
assigned boards,commissions,and committees.
Dunn: We had an excellent Economic Development committee meeting.
Teague: All right.
Bergus: That we did.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024
Page 45
Teague: All right. We are adjourned. Have a good night.
Alter: Good morning,Maz.
Teague: Have a good night,Mayor Pro Tem.
Salih: Hi. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of July 16, 2024