Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-03 Transcription #2 Page 1 ITEM 2. STATE OF TIlE CITY MESSAGE. Lehman: (Mayor Lehman reads the City of Iowa City, Iowa, State of the City Address) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #3a Page 2 ITEM 3. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION. a. February 6 American Heart Association "Wear Red For Women Day" Lehman: Item 3 are Mayor's proclamations. (Reads proclamation). Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Dr. Diarme Atkins, Professor, University of Iowa. (applause) Atkins: Thank you very much, Mayor, and City Council. I would like to emphasize the little booklets that you have, that women do have several risk factors for heart disease. We know them mostly in men, but women have them unfortunately just as frequently. And these include high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, tobacco smoke, physical inactivity, obesity and overweight, and diabetes. And I would be remiss to say, since I'm a pediatric cardiologist, that actually these risk factors are becoming more and more prevalent in our young population. Unfortunately it's no longer a stigma for young girls to smoke, and young girls are beginning to smoke just as fast, if not faster, than their male counterparts. In addition, despite the media emphasis on obesity, our young girls and young boys are becoming very fat. Women have the unique opportunity as the true head of households to mold and fashion the health habits of their family, and of their children, and so the "Go Red for Women" campaign has the emphasis of educating women about their own personal risk for heart disease. It also has the potential for increasing the health of our entire country because of women's role in society and in their family. And I'd like to point out, it mentions it in the book but also to our audience, two programs that have been especially designed for women. They are free. They are on the American Heart Association web page which is americanheart.org. One is the Choose to Move which will help women become more physically active. The other is called Simple Solutions which is a focus on health, vitality, and wellness. And one of the things that it has totally free of charge is a cookbook with many heart-healthy recipes. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #3b Page 3 ITEM 3. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATION. b. Sertoma's Freedom Week Lehman: Item 3 are Mayor's proclamations. (Reads proclamation). Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Lan-y McConahay, President, Old Capitol Sertoma Club. (applause) McConahay: I'd like to thank the Council and you, Ernie, for designating Freedom Week. This year we do have essays from every school in the county, which is a rarity, so evidently 9/11 has prompted a lot of kids to start thinking about what freedom really is all about, so we thank you. Lehman: Thank you. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #4 Page 4 ITEM 4. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS - Herbert Hoover Elementary Lehman: Item 4 is going to be deferred to February 17th. The next item is going to be the Outstanding Student Citizenship Award so if the Herbert Hoover Elementary folks would come forward please. Let me get in the middle here. You know, it makes me feel like an old man when I'm off by myself all the time. You know, Connie Champion and I met with some boy scouts just before this meeting, and one of them asked me what was the most fun of anything I've done since I've been on the Council, and I've been on the Council, a lot of people think too long, but it's been 10 years. And the thing that I enjoy the most since I've been on the Council is giving Student Citizenship Awards. I mean, this is really a great time for me, and also for the Council. I mean, we're very proud to do this. We're proud that you're here and that your peers felt enough, liked you well enough, and respected you enough, to nominate you, and I will say nothing, I'm not going to say anything tonight about how proud the grandparents are. (laughter) Now, if you would, I'd like each of you to give your name and why you were nominated. Saeugling: My name is Seth Saeugling and I was nominated because I help my community. Okay, being a good citizen to me means making a difference in our world. Our world is a place where people need our help. We cannot abandon this fact. We cannot turn our backs on the desperate people who are crying for help. When it comes to making a difference, kids are the ones ~vho have the power to. Kids voices are heard in the world. One of the ways to make a difference in the world is to raise awareness of the different topics that need attending to. At Hoover we have made a difference throughout the world by collecting boxes and boxes of school supplies. These school supplies were given to needy children in (can't hear), Thailand, and Cambodia. We have also helped the community by holding a food drive for the local shelter. I'd like to thank my teachers, principal, Mrs. Wertz, grandparents, parents, relatives, and my good friend Woody for influencing me to be a good citizen. I would also like to thank my friend (can't hear) for helping me to educate others about child labor. I'd like to thank the Iowa City City Council and Mayor Lehman for presenting me with this award. I'd also like to thank my teacher Marlene Johnson for teaching me how to make a difference in the world. (applause) Owen: I'm Chris Owen and I help my friends if they need it. Okay, a good citizen is helping others without thinking of getting something back. How I help in the community is helping others as, I mean, if they get injured or loose someone close to them. I help at Hoover by not picking fights or being a troublemaker. Boy Scouts influence me from saying the oath and slogan. Mrs. Begley also helped me by introducing the Hoover Star to me. I help recycle. I volunteer by collecting school supplies, clothes, and small toys for people in other countries. I also volunteer by v/siting residents at Oaknoll ~vith my class. I would like to thank my teachers, family, and principal for teaching what citizenship is. I would also like to thank the Iowa City Council and the Mayor for presenting me this award. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #4 Page 5 Grueskin: Hello, I'm Zoe Grueskin, and I guess this (can't hear). Hello, and thank you, Mayor Lehman, City Council, and guest citizens. To me a good citizen is the person who does whatever they can to better their community. Whether this means by being a leader, being personally responsible, or volunteering their time to help with a project, to help a peer, or something to that affect. A good citizen is a dreamer, a goal-setter. Someone who can imagine a way to make their school, city, state, country, or world a better place to live in, and finds a way to make it a reality. In my mind a good citizen is someone who lives by certain traits, characteristics, such as the 5 points of our Hoover School Star- respect, responsibility, courage, caring, and honesty. Finally, because I'm receiving this honor, being a good citizen must have something to do with having the support and encouragement of friends, family, and teachers, 24/7, to be the best that you can be. I'd like to take this time to thank everyone who's inspired me - my parents, peers, mentors, and my principal Mrs. Wertz. Thank you. Also a special thank you to Mayor Lehman and City Council for presenting me with this award. (applause) Lehman: I have awards; I'm going to read one. For outstanding qualities of leadership within Herbert Hoover Elementary as well as the community, and for sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize these outstanding students cihzens. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City City Council. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #6 Page 6 ITEM 6. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA). Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for folks in the community who would like to address the Council on an issue that does not otherwise appear on the agenda. If you wish to address the Council, please sign in, give your name, address, and limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. Walker: Hi, my name is Jean Walker, and I'm the representative for the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood, and this is concerning the Melrose Avenue, Grand Avenue traffic study. Members, including myself, of the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood are grateful to Councilor Vanderhoef for suggesting this traffic study, and to the Council for allowing input from the neighborhood. The consultant, Earth Tech, did an excellent job in coordinating suggestions from the neighborhood, the City, and the University of Iowa, and in developing the final plan. Taking everything into consideration, this one-way system is the best compromise for the smoothest-flowing traffic in the area, even though it creates some hardship for people from the east end of Melrose wanting to travel west on Melrose, as they first have to go around the system, and there is also some increased difficulty in reaching Lucon Drive from south Grand. The plan is a bit more complex than just a single one-way circle because, for examp0le, there will be two-way traffic on south Grand. This two-way section is most importantly needed for access to the emergency room by emergency vehicles from the west, though if the University had not over the years closed off other access routes to the ER, this might not have been necessary. The plan was needed to address a very congested traffic area. Its success as a free-flowing operation in the future will depend on not purposefully attracting additional traffic there. For example, no more buildings or ramps that attract large number of cars should be built in this area, other than the already planned ramp expansion. Specifically, the University should not build a ramp in the surface parking lot west of the Athletic Learning Center, Lot 14, as this would attract many more cars into the area, thus negating the well thought out plan for smooth-flowing traffic on these city streets. There are many other places for the University to locate ramps that would avoid such a negative effect on this congestion- sensitive area. In the future it would be helpful if the University worked closely with the City concerning any planned changes within this area, for example, new buildings, road closures, etc. In particular, the University should avoid building or irrevocably altering structures or streets in the area that would result in closing future options for improving this traffic system. For example, a system based on three lanes rather than two lanes may be needed in the future. The University should also improve the entry ways to their properties at the east end of Melrose so that traffic is not obstructed by cars backing out onto Melrose, or stopped on Melrose waiting to turn into those properties. One specific additional suggestion is that eastbound traffic from Lot 14 should exit on Melrose Avenue, not This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. Page 7 south Grand, so that cars exiting the lot and heading west do not have to cross various lanes of traffic on a 5-lane south Grand. If such precautions are exercised, this carefully-crafted plan should improve traffic in the area for the future. Finally, I hope that if this system is updated in the future, that once again, neighborhood representation will be included. And, as a P.S., I would note that there is an error in the report in that it designates me from the non-existent Lucon Drive Neighborhood Association, whereas I am the representative for the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Champion: So moved. Wilburn: Second. Lehman: Motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Canganelli: Good evening. My name is Crissy Canganelli and I'm Executive Director of Shelter House, and this is Dottie Persson, President of the Board of Directors of Shelter House. This evening we're here tonight to formally request and apply to purchase the property owned by the City of Iowa City, located between Highland Court and Gilbert Court. Our intent would be to utilize this land for the building ora new facility. In FY04 Shelter House received a CDBG award of $230,000 to be utilized for the purchase of land for said purpose. We need to utilize that fund, those funds, by June 1st of 2004. At this time, we formally request your guidance as to the correct procedure for submitting a formal application, and we ask that you please advise us to our next step in this process. Thank you. Persson: The Shelter House Board wishes to thank the Council Members for the leadership they have shown in moving discussion of the land forward and for the time and energy they, and the City staff, have spent on this issue. The Board looks forward to ongoing interaction with the Council and the City Staff. We thank you very much. Lehman: Thank you. Steve, you'll see this makes it to a work session? Atkins: Yes, sir. Lehman: Thank you. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. O'Donnell: So moved. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #6 Page 8 Wilbum: Second. Lehman: Motion and second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Emalfarb: Hi, my name is Mike Emalfarb. I'm from Illinois but I'm a student here the University of Iowa. I'm trying to create awareness of the lack of security with apartment housing, in particular AUR apartments near campus. I'm a member of the football team and I went to the Outback Bowl on December 24th. My place was robbed December 31~t in 2003, and I was unaware of this until I got back around January 20th. The apartment complex failed to notify me about the burglary, and the only way I knew about it ~vas a policeman wrote a note inside my door. Currently on most of these apartment buildings, anybody could walk in through the exterior of the doors, and anybody within reason could easily kick in any door there is. There's surveillance tapes up there, but their requirement is just to see if there's any vandalism. If there is none, or they don't think there's any, they take the same tape and they rewind it and they don't pursue with police if it's not vandalism to the apartment building, but to any tenant. I'm trying to like somehow pass some kind of ordinance that people, or tenants, that require their landlords who own 10 or more buildings, put some kind of lock on the exterior of the doors. Make it better security for people to live in. No,v, when I had my door broken into, excuse me, when I had my place broken into, I called the place about it and they didn't contact me because they said I failed to notify them within 7 days. Now, coming back to it, like I did actually come in and I told them I was going out of town to the Outback Bowl to let them know about that, but in retrospect, a lot of people during vacation, they're not aware that they have to tell their landlords that they're going home for Christmas and they're going to be home for the New Year's. I think that's an unfair clause that they put in the contracts, and living in Iowa City, it's a really inelastic place, it's inelastic to like try to find apartments that you can live in. Now they own 22 apartment buildings, and I did some research, and in 2003 there was 5 robberies. Three robberies that happened actually in the last month, two happened during break, and then two that happened in my apartment complex, within the last year. They haven't taken any measures to fix the security or do anything about it, and I think they're going to continue so until something is done about it. I talked to one of the head of the City Council boards, and by what he said, by how they term the leasing, if someone doesn't contact the apartment within 7 days if they're going to be absent from the place, that they have no right to contact you in case of an emergency and I think that should be in there as well. If my place either caught on fire or it's robbed and I don't know about it, they're saying they don't have a right to tell me about it, and I think that's unfair, and I'm trying to create the awareness and one of my first goals, a major goal, is to try to put exterior locks on outside of all the buildings to make it a safer place. Maybe some security cameras, but at least try and set some committee task force in the community so tenants and landlords can meet to try and resolve security issues that there are. Lehman: Thank you. Wilbum: Sorry that that happened to you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #6 Page 9 Champion: Yeah, terrible. Lehman: Are there any other community comments? If not, we'll go to item 7. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 10 ITEM 7. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. d. REZONING APPROXIMATELY 119.94 ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY, IDRS, AND INTERIM DEVELOPMENT MULTI-FAMILY, IDRM, TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, OPDH-5, SUBJECT TO CONDITIIONS, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF PEPPERWOOD ADDITION AND EAST OF GILBERT STREET. (REZ03-00020) (1) Public Hearing Lehman: Public hearing is open, which is continued from the 20~' of January. Holland: Mr. Mayor and Council, my name is Joe Holland. I promise I'll take less than 5 minutes tonight because I'm really only here to acknowledge the cooperation we've received from City staff in revising the conditional zoning agreement. I don't know what more I can say about this project tonight, other than it's been the process of many months and years of collaboration and cooperation back and forth, and I hope that at the conclusion of the public hearing tonight, after you've had a chance to consider this, you'll vote and approve the rezoning of this tract. That being said, I'll be happy to answer any questions that may have come to your mind since the last time we were here. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Klockau: Good evening, Council. I'm Dave Klockau. 1 live at 1031 Briar Drive. I've been up here more than a few times over the last couple of years. I did email some information. I hope it got to all of the Council members, awhile back. I'm just going to read this to you because I've said a lot of things about this. So, l want you to understand that I see a conflict here, and one of the things I want to make some points on because it sounds like your minds have been made up on this, but I want you to think about this in the future when you have these situations where you're trying to balance all these interests, that you've got a number of groups that are giving you advice, giving you their feedback. This is obviously on the Sand Prairie project here. Iowa City Planning and Zoning staff are paid to advise Council and serve the public interest. I've had opportunity to interact with your stafl; your zoning staff; and another group, your Planning and Zoning Commission, these folks they volunteer countless hours to serve the Council and the public interest. You've got the south district plan, which I emphasize the word as a plan, not guidelines. And then you've got the individual Iowa City residents, like myself, that have come forward to talk to you about this. My concerns is there's been these conflicts. Council's been advised to follow what the staffhas advised, to follow what Planning and Zoning has advised, and it looks like we're going to end up with a development where once again we're trying to cram a lot of houses into a small area. And so I'll just say for future situations, listen to what your community is telling you. Listen to what your Planning and Zoning Commission is telling you, and listen to what your staffis telling you. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 11 Lehman: Thank you. Klockau: My name is Lori KIockau, and I don't think I've talked to some of you before, you're new to the Council. I want to tell you, I came to Iowa City straight out of high school, and I've lived here ever since because 1 love the place. I have lived at 1031 Briar Drive for almost 20 years because I love the place. I have worked on the south district plan and worked with Southgate because I love the place. All right? You're here today to consider whether or not you should really go against your own Planning and Zoning Commission, whether or not you should go against your own City staff that is trained in these issues, whether or not you should go against the south district plan, which your citizens worked very hard on. You're here to decide whether or not you're going to go against not just the south district plan, but the citizens that have worked on this, the Sand Hill plan, for more than 2 years. Southgate, when they first came to us with their plan from Randall Arndt on doing the prairie preservation and doing an environmentally sensitive development, came to us with a really exciting idea. And I was 100% behind it. This changed in the last year and a half, and it's changed very much to the detriment, not only I think to the development but to the citizens that are going to live there in the future. What you're looking at are lots that are 52 feet wide. You're looking at approving lots that in the case ora fire, very likely going to set the houses on fire next to it. I have an office Iocated at 402 S. Linn that's my office, and it's one of those old neighborhoods. It's one of those old neighborhoods where we used to put houses very close together. It's one of those old neighborhoods that now we're trying to counter urban sprawl by kind of going back to the way we used to do things, by putting places closer together. My building caught on fire several years ago because there used to be a building right next door to it that caught on fire. So what you're looking at, I don't know that you've really thought about what you're doing in making, well you're making allowances for Southgate, and to their credit they've done a great thing by saying they're going to set the sand prairie aside. What are they doing for the citizens of the future by you guys allowing them to make lots 52 feet wide? I don't think it's really very wise. I've lived in this neighborhood long enough, and I live on the sand hill, and I remember back in 1993 when we had all the rain that led to all the floods. One of the things that happened in our neighborhood, even though we're on the top of the hill, all the sewers in the neighborhood collapsed. And not only did all the sewers in the neighborhood collapse, but a lot of the driveways in the neighborhood collapsed because of the substrata there is so unusual that engineering hadn't really taken into account what you were building on. I've not heard a word about why you're going to rezone all of this and allow for all this density. What in the world are we going to do with this area that is so different than really the other parts of Iowa City? Not one word. So you're going to allow all this density on the other hand, what have you done to compensate for the unusual substrata? And 1'11 tell you what, when all those drive~vays collapsed, and all those sidewalks collapsed, who paid the price to repair all that? Was the City. And you can ask Dave Elias about that. That's what happened. And I don't know that any of you have really sat down and thought about what are we doing by permitting this? You've spent a lot of money on Wetherby Park, it's a great park. One of the great things about it is that it's great, wide open vista that looks out on this beautiful, beautiful sand This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 12 prairie. So what are you doing? Are you thinking, okay now we've got all this. We spent a lot of money on this. Now, we're going to go against our zoning ordinance and allow extra-close density in 52 foot wide lots to go next to this thing we built and worked at so hard for what, (tape ends) 25 years? And I think Southgate, to its credit, has done a great thing in trying to set aside this sand prairie, but when the bought this property they knew the sand prairie was on there, and they knew that this was going to be set aside because that is part of the south district plan. So I've got to ask you, what are you really doing by voting for this? I don't know that this is, I mean, I know that a lot of work has gone into this. A lot of money has gone into this. A lot of thought has gone into this, but folks, we're not there yet, and I .would urge you to defer this. To get some more information on the engineering of this, whether or not it's really smart to put houses 52 feet, or lots 52 feet wide so you're going to have houses so close to each other. I don't think it's well advised. I've lived where 1 live because I love it. If you allow this subdivision to be what it's going to be, I'm going to move. If you're going to allow this subdivision to be what it was going to be when they first came to us with this, I was not only 100% for it, I wanted to live there. Now with what you're doing and considering, I don't. Lehman: You need to wrap it up, Lori. Klockau: Well, this is not well advised at this point in time. it's not well advised, and Emie, to quote you, you're looking for the welfare of the citizens today, tomorrow, and for the generations to come, and a subdivision where the houses and the lots are 52 feet wide, doesn't suit those needs. Lehman: Thank you. Siders: Mr. Mayor, City Council, my name is Glenn Siders. I'm with Southgate Companies, the applicant. If you're not familiar with that, I'm the applicant of this project. I'd like to echo the comments that Mr. Holland made on the cooperation of the staffto amend the conditional zoning agreement. I would like to further ask the Council if they go ahead and close the public hearing now, and bring this to the first consideration vote. It's unfortunate that the many good things that this development has to offer has gotten clouded by the controversial issues that have arisen. I'd like to tell you it's a unique development. It's a conservation subdivision. It's the first in Iowa City. It has a lot of new offerings. I think it's something that is going to come to this city in the future. I would like to ask the Council if they do close the public hearing and have first consideration, because of the time we have spent with this application and because there has been concern from many of the Council Members that they would like all present when future votes arise, that you consider expediting this is some fashion, perhaps condensing the second and third reading, or having some special meetings. It's my feeling that once the public hearing has been closed, there is nothing more that the public can offer. It does not benefit anybody to prolong this. There are some current concerns that there are going to be some absent Council members here for the next couple of three meetings, so anything the Council could do to expedite the second and third vote would be appreciated. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 13 Lehman: Thank you, Glenn. Public hearing is closed. Kart: Motion to accept correspondence. Vanderhoef: So moved. O'Donnell: Second. (2) Consider an ordinance Lehman: Motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Do we have a motion? Vanderhoef: Move first consideration. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Champion: Well I'm going to vote no on this project. I do agree with the staffand the Planning and Zoning Commission. However, I do not plan on obstructing this. There has been a tremendous amount of work in it. It really is a very good project. It's not perfect for me, and I'm not going to vote for the first madlng. However, reassure Southgate that I will not obstruct this. I will carry the wishes of the Council on the second and third vote. Bailey: I'll be voting no on this as well. I'm disappointed that we haven't been as responsive to the public process that went into the south district plan, and I really believe that in the south district plan when we talk about garage door design, that a setback doesn't get at that issue, and I've been disappointed that we haven't been more responsive to our own documents in place. So I'll be voting no for this. Wilburn: I also won't be supporting this. I think that it has been stated in the comprehensive and district plans the residential character of the neighborhood is something within the guidelines, the way things are laid out is relevant to land- use planning. I don't know how the timing is going to work out because of some Council absences. I would be willing to come to an additional meeting. I will consistently vote no but I do think that since this is a pretty close and split vote that it's important that the full Council have an opportunity to express that vote. O' Donnell: Well I will be supporting it. And I do respect staff and Planning and Zoning, however, it's my opinion that we shouldn't get into design of somebody's home. I don't have a problem with the garage door. I've said before, I've had houses and I've never had a garage door big enough. We all seem today to have two cars. We have lawn mowers, snow blowers, and I think there's many people that would love to have that third stall. I will support this, and I look forward to this project. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 14 Elliott: Similarly I will support it. I think the main difference that the Council has had with the excellent work of the Commission and staff is the garage placement in front of the front of the house, and philosophically, I think there are probably hundreds of homes in to~vn, and people who live in those homes, and who feel as I do that that sort &esthetic decision should be made between the buyer and the builder, and it's not for me as a Council person to try to force a decision on them so I will be voting in favor. Vanderhoefi Well I'll be supporting this also. It's partly philosophical on designing of a personal home, but the other consideration that I had for this whole project was the, if the houses are going to be closer together, as was indicated earlier, to make them more affordable, then I felt like we needed the compromise of moving the homes further back from the street. When I discovered that no street trees can go in any more with the amount of wires and set-asides in the right-of-way, we need front yards to help with that. There were some diagrams shown of existing houses, or photos actually of existing houses, and they are a little stark without greenery around them, and I feel like this compromise to make sure that we can have trees of appreciable size which the forester tells me will be in the neighborhood of a 30 foot diameter canopy, and be in the 50 foot range, makes a lot of difference on how a 2-story home will look, and I think that's the kind of aesthetics that I think that we as a city should be looking at - not individual housing design. I too want to thank all of the people in the neighborhoods, the developer, everyone that was involved in this. Our staff worked very hard on it, but what I, I am sorry that has not seemed to come out of this, what I think is going to be a great project is a gift to the city in the sand prairie that will be out there, and that certainly is a very large gift to the community, and we should welcome it, and recognize developers who are sensitive to our community. Lehman: I will also support this. In fact, I would support this if the majority of the Council had chosen to keep the restrictions on garages. This is a significant subdivision. This is I think a tremendous layout. I think it shows a lot of vision on the part of the City staff, the developer, and the Planning and Zoning Commission. We have, through the generosity of the developer and working with the staff, have retained a sand prairie which probably legally didn't have to be preserved. In the process of doing that, and I think if we look down the road, we're going to see smaller lots and for the public's benefit, the Planning and Zoning Commission did approve this density. This is not a denser development than was approved by the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. There are a number of regulations. There am a number of agreements that have been reached between the developer and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and our City Staff. There was one issue that there was not agreement on. That was the placement of garages. We have changed that. But with or without the placement of garages, this is a tremendous subdivision. This is a great addition to the community, and I support it wholeheartedly. I could not support the regulation relative to the placement of the garages and not because I think garages are beautiful, because I certainly agree with the motives of the City staft; and what the Planning and Zoning Commission in their desire to make garages less prominent, but I do think that there's a philosophical issue here that is not limited to Sand Hill project. This is a philosophical issue that I think I have as to where the City draws the line in telling folks what their homes are going to look This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #7d Page 15 like. I have no problem with setbacks. I have no problem with height restrictions. I have no problem with setbacks from property lines. I do have a problem and that's telling folks how they have to design their garages. So I will support this. I will support this enthusiastically, and like Dee, I really compliment the staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ali in all this is a 98%-er. We didn't get 2% of what we wanted. You know, we have either a glass that's half full or almost running over, and this glass is almost running over, and I'm proud to support it. Roll call. Before we get to e., does it work for Council to have a special meeting on Thursday? Vanderhoef: Oh dear. Champion: This Thursday? Lehman: Yeah. Bailey: No. Champion: What time? Lehman: Well, morning probably. Doesn't work? Okay. We wilt find a time and get back to you. All right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #9 Page 16 ITEM 9. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DIRECTING TIlE SALE OF $7,305,000 GENERAL OBLIGATIONS BONDS, TAXABLE SERIES 2004. Champion: Move the resolution. Elliott: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion; seconded by Elliott. Discussion? Wait a minute. Do we have the bids here? Oh, I'm sorry. O'Malley: Ernie, I would like to recommend that you adopt this resolution and we had some very favorable bids. We had the most bidders I've ever seen. We had 11, and they're very competitive. Only 20 bases points difference. Lehman: And you're recommending Dane Rosser? O'Malley: That's correct, at the 5.04 net interest cost. Lehman: And these are taxable which... ? O'Malley: These are...that's right. This is different issue. It's a taxable issue and it had to compete with a larger market so. Lehman: Right. Okay. Do we have...the motion was? Champion: It included that. Lehman: Okay. Roll call. Motion carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #10 Page 17 ITEM 10. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY," TO CREATE A UNIFORM PERMITTING PROCESS, TO ESTABLISH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FARMERS MARKET, TO PROVIDE FOR THE NONCOMMERCIAL PLACEMENT OF OBJECTS IN CITY PLAZA ON A TEMPORARY BASIS, TO MODIFY THE PROVISION ON RESIDENTIAL PICKETING, TO CLARIFY THE CURRENT PROVISIONS REGULATING MOBILE VENDORS AND AMBULATORY VENDORS, TO CODIFY SPECIFIC ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AFFECTING SAID VENDORS, AND TO MAKE ADDITIONAL NONSUBSTANTIVE CHANGES. (DEFERRED FROM 1/20) (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Champion: Move first consideration. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion; seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Dieterle: I'm here to object to this ordinance, and my first question is to ask you whether you have yet received a letter from attorney Bruce Nestor that was dated the 28th of January. Champion: Just got it tonight. Dilkes: I've received that letter today and have given you a copy at Mr. Nestor's request. Dieterle: Well basically you probably haven't had a chance to read it, but I think one of the things that make it a problem is perhaps alluded to in your discussion, your short comments here on the agenda, where you say the amendment creates a uniform process by which the City issues permits, and the problem with that is is that you're trying to use, what appears to me, you know, the same rules for virtually everything. And it, I also think it's really unfair to try to put the burden of cost of insurance or indemnification upon private citizens. I think that this, you know, potentially is a big damper on first amendment rights, and would make it difficult for people to exercise those rights in Iowa City, and we've had enough of that kind of thing you know on the national level. I don't think we need it here in Iowa City as well. For example, if the City left all the manhole covers off of sewers and a person was injured during the event, the proposed language would appear to make the applicant for the permit responsible for indemnifying the City, even though the accident was not the fault of the person who applied for the permit. Basically the ordinance increases the burden on average citizens, and appears to create an enormous potential financial obligation for any person wishing to sponsor an event. It makes it appear that the public, expressive political activities is a disfavored use of the public right-of-way. Unless and until that it can be established that it will only create a minimal interference with normal activity. Now, you know, if...I have seen demonstrations that were peaceful demonstrations several times in the recent past. People who were This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #10 Page 18 protesting the Patriot Act. People who were protesting going to war in Iraq, and I think that if you pass this ordinance and then try to enforce, you'll do nothing but cause trouble, and I really think that you should reconsider this, and maybe it would be better to have things left as they are because I think that by and large, the citizens of Iowa City are pretty responsible, and they have a right to exercise their first amendment rights without this type of harassment by the City. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Wilbum: Ernie, let me ask a question. I was looking....there is, in part of your memo it talks about an exception for spontaneous events. Is there any other guideline on that? It seemed to me that it allowed, um, first amendment, (can't hear) ordinance, person must apply for a parade, public assembly permit only 3 days in advance. Furthermore, there is an exception for spontaneous events to assure citizens can protest breaking political or social events without a permit. Is there any...? Dilkes: That's an addition to the ordinance. This ordinance is not new. We have revised it, but for these types of activities, our City code has required that you obtain a permit for years and years. We have revised the ordinance frankly to address issues that we, that my staff has had, first amendment issues, in trying to administer that ordinance. For example, the indemnification and insurance requirements that have been mentioned, have been part of our code provisions for years and years, and in fact have been recognized recently by the United State Supreme Court as a legitimate interest on the part of the City of Chicago. We have revised that insurance requirement to make it in compliance with some court cases, to say that it can be waived if there's a demonstration of inability to pay, or inability to obtain insurance. Similarly with the spontaneous event exception, that is an exception that has been recognized by some circuit courts that we have included that was not previously included in the ordinance. Dieterle: Well I think that you should, if anything, if this has been on the books and not enforced, and things have gone along fairly well, it seems to me the best thing to do is loosen the ordinance, not tighten it. Lehman: I sense that in some degree that's what we're doing. Dilkes: Yeah, I can give you, there's a number of examples in Sue Dulek's ~nemo to you of January 28, 2004. Another good example is previously our ordinance has applied to gatherings of, there's been no number. Now for a parade or public assembly, you have to have at least 25 before the permit requirements kick in. In a park you have to have 100. That has also been responsive to case law. One of the problems with just leaving a sloppy or difficult-to-administer ordinance in place, or an ordinance that doesn't have enough guidance for the administrators, is that it creates the potential for content restriction because there is not enough guidance on the administrators. And the courts have said that repeatedly, and one of the things that we have tried to do by tightening up the ordinance, is to limit the discretion of the administrators who are going to be issuing these permits. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #10 Page 19 Wilbum: I guess when I was reading through it I was looking at it as clarification so that if not only for people applying for the permit, but for people who object to the event itself, that there can be no pressure because it's, you know, folks have a right to do this. That's how I was looking at it. Dieterle: Well supposing somebody thinks that they're not going to have more than a hundred people, at this event, whatever it happens to be, so they don't bother to get a permit, and then it turns out there's a good deal more concern amongst the body politic than they counted on and they have far more than a hundred people. What kind of punishment is meted out to whomever has transgressed this ordinance? Lehman: You know, that might be considered spontaneous. Dieterle: You think so? Lehman: I don't know. If you expected a hundred and got a thousand... Dieterle: Well I'd sure like to think so, Ernie. That would be a very nice way to get out of it. (laughter) But you know, l...sometimes you don't know when you give a party how many people you're going to have. Dilkes: One of the things that the Supreme Court has recently said in the Thomas vs. Chicago Park District case is there may be situations where the ordinance as applied by any particular administrator, may be applied unconstitutionally. That will be, can be dealt with in an as-applied challenge. The challenge to the ordinance as applied, but that does not mean that because there is that potential, that you don't have the right to draft an ordinance, or really the obligation to draft an ordinance, that has specific criteria that govern administrators. Dieterle: Well the trouble is is that then the person who is at the center of the argument, the citizen, you know, then has to hire a lawyer to appeal this, right? Dilkes: Not necessarily. An appeal could be made to the City Council without an attorney, but they certainly would have the right to hire an attorney. Wilbum: I think too, for many of the events that I'm familiar with, people have gone through the existing permitting process, and again I'm looking at this as just trying to clarify and make it easier for folks. Lehman: Clean it up. Bailey: I initially had a lot of concerns about this and was very supportive of deferring this discussion until more people had an opportunity to review it, and I had a longer opportunity to review it and in going through it very carefully, I feel it clarifies a lot of things that have been on the books for a long time that people may not have been aware of and may not have been, I don't know if they haven't been enforced or if people have just not been applying for permits, or what is going on, and I think that it levels the playing field. It makes it very clear, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #10 Page 20 expectations are very clear about ifI have 24 walking through the street I don't need a permit. 26, yes. There are 90 people in the park - I'm good. If 105, I need a permit. It makes it very clear even in all of its ordinance language, so I'ln supportive of these changes because I think that it helps all of us understand ;vhat is expected. Dieterle: But if you have to get a permit, then you have to show that you can indemnify your, and have to carry insurance. Is that correct? Bailey: I think there are provisions in this that indicate if you cannot aflbrd or get insurance, that is to say you're an organization that does not carry that insurance, then it seems clear to me that perhaps that requirement will be there, but if it's an individual and insurance cannot be obtained, that requirement could be waived. Am I correct in my understanding? Dilkes: Correct. Dieterle: What are you going to do about the annual homecoming parade? Well? It's a huge parade. There's all kinds of opportunities for some sort of thing to go wrong. Lehman: University is not required to comply with our ordinance anyway. Dieterle: Oh, good. So...no, well fine. Well how about students...? Dilkes: No...yes, the homecoming parade would be subject to the permitting requirements. Atkins: And that's substantially because we block off streets, and provide police protection. Lehman: All right. (several talking at once) Dilkes: Well it's certainly more than 25. Dieterle: Well so they then, how do they carry the insurance? Do they pay for extra insurance or does this fall under the University's general policy or what happens? Atkins: It's been the University's general policy to the best of my knowledge. Dieterle: Uh-huh, and what about supposing any student organization wanted to do something? Are these people exempt then, Ernie? Lehman: I'm sure that we have to deal with this on a case by case basis, when they come up. I have no idea. I mean, and there's all kinds of different conceivable sorts of things that could happen. Dieterle: WeI1 but you said something, sorry, you said something about how the University didn't have to comply. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #10 Page 21 Lehman: I think, oh I don't know, a student organization would probably have to have a permit. That is not an official action of the University of Iowa. Dilkes: Well it doesn't matter if it's an official action of the University of Iowa. They would require a permit. Lehman: They would? Dilkes: Yes, the homecoming parade requires, we have permitted the homecoming parade in the past, am I correct? Atkins: Yes, yes. Lehman: Because of street closures and traffic controls and that sort of thing? Atkins: It's the use of city streets, yes. Dieterle: At who's initiative was this ordinance put together? Dilkes: Mine. Dieterle: And why did you have enough trouble that you needed it? Dilkes: Because as we have gone through the years and I have identified certain issues that I do not think were clear in the ordinance, I have an obligation to identify those issues when I see them. I did in a number of cases, and took the initiative to redraft the ordinance. If you read Mr. Nestor's letter, and I urge you to do so, there is frankly very little in there. He may, you know, there may be a word here and there that he thinks should be different. 1 frankly don't think he has looked at the old ordinance and compared it to the new one. I feel very, very confident that this is a far better ordinance and it is far more protective of first amendment rights than the one we have on the books. Lehman: Does it for me. O'Donnell: I'm comfortable with that. Lehman: Thank you. Any other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. We are going to... Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Elliott: So moved. O'Donnelh Second. Lehman: We have a motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. (BREAK) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #15 Page 22 ITEM 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN ADDENDUM TO A LEASE OF TItE UNION BUS DEPOT PROPERTY, 404 EAST COLLEGE STREET, PURSUANT TO WHICH GREYHOUND LINES, INC. WILL RENEW ITS LEASE FOR A TERM OF ONE YEAR. Vanderhoef: Move the resolution. Champion: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by Champion. Discussion? I assume this is to make the term o£that lease correspond with the completion of the ground transportation center? Atkins: Yes, generally we're in the midst of negotiating with them right now. Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #19 Page 23 ITEM 19. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. Lehman: We don't have any applications. The appointments for which we have no applications are the Airport Zoning Commission, one vacancy to fill a 6- year term; Airport Commission, one vacancy to fill an unexpired term ending March 1, 2007; Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment, one vacancy to fill an unexpired plus a 5-year term ending December 31, 2008; Historic Preservation Commission, one vacancy for the Woodlawn District to fill a 3-year term, March 29, 2003 through March 29, 2006. And those, when do those applications need to be in, Marian? Karr: We'll announce for another 30 days. Lehman: Another 30 days? All right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #22 Page 24 ITEM 22. COUNCIL INFORMATION. Lehman: Would you like to start, Regenia? Bailey: Oh sure. Tonight I just want to take a moment, it's sort of a sad moment, to recognize Iowa City's profotmd loss with a death this morning of Susan Schechter. For those of you who aren't familiar with Susan, she's nationally known as an advocate for survivors of domestic violence (can't hear), and I think the one thing I'd like to say about Susan's work is she was an example to me and probably to a lot of people about how one person can really change the world. Her work really changed the way (can't hear), particularly children. And I just want to send my condolences to her husband Allen Steinberg and her son Zach. Lehman: Thank you, Regenia. Ross? Wilbum: Along those same lines, Pat Gilroy passed away the other day and a lot of people know her through her work with the Democratic party; that she was also a staff member at the Crisis Center years back with pretty much the champion of the food bank and emergency assistances, and keeping that service and resource available for people in the community so she'll be missed too. Lehman: Dee? Vanderhoef: Just one thing. I should have mentioned it last night and i apologize. I forgot to do it, but I would be interested in having an update on the code review and so forth if anyone else would like a review at the next... Lehman: Didn't we just get one? Vanderhoef: Uh-huh. We haven't had one... Lehman: Comprehensive zoning code review? Vanderhoef: Just the whole code review. We haven't had one for several months. Lehman: It hasn't been that long, has it? Or maybe my time... Atkins: I don't recall. It's been awhile. I don't recall how long it was. Lehman: What's your pleasure, folks? Atkins: Easy enough to do, just prepare something for you. O'Donnell: Why not. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #22 Page 25 Lehman: Okay. Vanderhoefi Thank you. Lehman: Mike? O'Donnell: Just a couple things. Steve, I got a call today on the alley between the Senior Center and the parking garage. Atkins: Yes. O'Donnell: That it was not (can't hear). Atkins: I called 5 minutes after you called, and they should have been out there within a half an hour. O'Donnell: Okay. Atkins: If there's any, if the person does call again, if there's an accumulation of ice or something, then we might, we could miss, please let me know and we'll have it taken care of. O'Donnell: Okay. I also got another cai1 that there's evidence being left behind that there may be one too many pigeons (laughter; can't hear). Champion: One too many pigeons where? O'Donnell: In that parking garage. Champion: I haven't seen any. Lehman: Seen an evidence? Champion: Yeah, I have. (laughter) Atkins: There are a few. O'Donnell: There are a few, okay, and once again, Steve, thank the guys that are out at night late shoveling the snow away and putting down the salt and sand. It's an incredible job. It's a huge task, but we always get it done. It's like you get up in the morning and it's done, and those guys deserve a thanks. Lehman: Absolutely. Connie? Elliott: Nothing. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004. #22 Page 26 Lehman: Okay. Marian, you will be calling and working with Council to establish a date and time for a special meeting relative to the Sandhill thing? Karr: Yes. And if any of you have certain times that you prefer or not prefer, before you leave I'd be happy to jot it down and get back to you. Thanks. Lehman: Okay, and I just want to mention, although there's no official report, probably won't be, we are starting a series of meetings with the President of the University, and the Vice Presidents, and Council folks. I think that's a very, very worthwhile opportunity for us to express to the University some of our concerns and they, their concerns to us, and certainly an opportunity to work with the University wherever we can. We had the first of those meetings on yesterday, yesterday, and we'll have a couple more quite soon so. Yesterday the meeting was attended by Dee Vanderhoef and Ross and myself, and I think we all enjoyed the meeting very much and look forward to the next one. Steve? Atkins: Nothing, sir. Lehman: Eleanor? Marian? Do we have a motion to adjourn? Elliott: You bet. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: All in favor? We are adjourned. Thank you very much. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of February 3, 2004.