HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-08-06 AgendaSubjecl ~o change as finalized by the City Clerk. For a final official copy, contact the Cily Clerkts Office, 356-5040.
AGENDA
CITY OF 101'VA CIT'i'
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
August 6, 1996 7:00 p.m.
Civic Center
ITEM NO. I
CALL TO ORDER.
ROLL CALL.
ITEM NO. 2
CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR
AMENDED.
a. Approval of official Council Actions of the regular meeting of
July 16, 1996, and the special meeting of July 23, 1996, as published,
subject to corrections, as recommended by the City Clerk.
b. Minutes of Boards and Commissions.
Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission - June 11, 1996.
Iowa City Airport Commission - June 13, 1996.
{3) Housing & Community Development Commission
,June 13, 1996.
(4) Iowa City Civil Service Commission - July 1, 1996.
(a) Consider the recommendation of the Civil Service
Commission to approve the certified list for the position of
Police Sergeant.
(5) Iowa City Board of Adjustment - July 10, 1996.
(6) Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission - July 18, 1996.
Rules Committee - July 23, 1996.
c. Permit Motions and Resolutions as Recommended by the City Clerk.
(1) Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for George's
Buffet. Inc., dba George's Buffet, 312 E. Market St. (Renewal)
August 6,1996
- zz7
d.
City of Iowa City
Pa~e g
(2) Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for Cardan,
Inc., dba Joe's Place, 11§ Iowa Ave. (Renewal)
(3) Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for G.A.
Malone's, L.C., dba G. A. Malone's, 121 Iowa Ave. (Renewal)
(4)
Consider a motion approving a Class E Beer Permit for L&M Mighty
Shop, Inc., dba L&M Mighty Shop, Inc., 504 E. Burlington St.
(Renewal)
(§) Consider a motion approving a Class E Beer Permit for Hy-Vee, Inc.,
dba Drugtown #2, 1221 North Dodge St. (Renewal)
(6)
Consider a motion approving an Outdoor Service Area for High
Energy Food Concepts dba Bushnell's Turtle, 127 E. College St.
(Renewal) See memo in Council packet.
(7)
Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for Plamor
Bowling, Inc., dba Plamor Bowling, Inc., 1555 First Avenue.
(Renewal)
(8) Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for Micky's of
Iowa City, Inc., dba Micky's, 11 S. Dubuque St. (Renewal)
(9) Consider a motion approving a Class C Beer Permit for Jay D. Patel
dba A&J Mini Mart, 2153 ACT Circle. (New)
(10) Consider a motion approving a Class C Liquor License for Just Us,
Inc., dba The Breakroom, 1578 First Avenue S. (New)
(11)
Consider a motion approving a Temporary Class B Beer Permit for
Iowa City Fall Fun Festival, Inc., dba Iowa City Fall Fun Festival, 2150
Rochester Ave. (New)
(12)
Consider a motion approving
Iowa City Fall Festival, Inc.,
Rochester Ave. (New)
an Temporary Outdoor Service Area for
dba Iowa City Fall Fun Festival, 2150
(13) Consider a resolution to issue a Dancing Permit.
(14) Consider a resolution to issue a Cigarette Permit.
Motions.
(1)
CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19,408,685.35 FOR THE PERIOD OF JUNE 1
THROUGH JUNE 30, 1996, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT TO AUDIT. DISBURSEMENTS
ARE PUBLISHED AND PERMANENTLY RETAINED IN THE CITY
CLERK'S OFFICE IN ACCORDANCE WiTH STATE CODE.
Aul~ust 6, 1996
e.
Resolutions.
City of Iowa City
Page
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE RELEASE OF A LIEN
REGARDING A REHABILITATION AGREEMENT, A PROMISSORY
NOTE AND A MORTGAGE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 416 SECOND AVENUE, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
Comment: The owner of the property located at 416 Second
Avenue, received a $1,471 loan through the City's Housing
Rehabilitation Program on January 31, 1995. The financing was
in the form of a Rehabilitation Agreement, a Promissory Note, and
a Mortgage. The owner paid the note in full on July 16, 1996;
thus, the lien can now be released.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A
SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY AND UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION,
IOWA CITY, IOWA, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
741 DEARBORN STREET, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
Comment: University of Iowa Community Credit Union has
requested that the City approve a Subordination Agreement for
the owner at 741 Dearborn Street. On December 8, 1994, the
owner of the property received a loan in the form of a Promissory
Note and Mortgage for a total of $3,275 through the City's
Housing Rehabilitation Program. The University of towa
Community Credit Union has granted a home equity loan to the
property owner on May 2, 1996, for the amount of $20,000. The
appraised value is ~118,000 which provides enough equity to
cover the City's third lien position, of which the City's original
position was second.
(3)
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AMENDED
SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY AND HILLS BANK & TRUST COMPANY FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1202 MARCY STREET, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
Comment: By Resolution No. 96-152 the City Council authorized
the execution of a subordination agreement making the City's lien
on 1202 Marcy Street subordinate to the lien of Hills Bank & Trust
Company. The Title Guaranty Division of the Iowa Finance
Authority, which has issued a title guaranty certificate to Hills
Bank, has requested that certain non-substantive changes be
made to the subordination agreement. The amended
subordination agreement makes these changes.
Aut~ust 6, 1996
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
City of Iowa City
Page 4
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE LEASE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND DAVIS
BUILDING PARTNERS FOR THE SUITE, FIRST FLOOR CENTER,
DAVIS BUILDING, 322 E. WASHINGTON STREET, IOWA CITY,
IOWA.
Comment: The two-year lease agreement with Davis Building
Partners dated July 5, 1994, on the suite of offices (2,245 sq. ft.)
utilized by the Assisted Housing Division ended June 30, 1996. This
resolution authorizes the lease for a pedod of two years with an
increase in rent. The rent will be increased from $29,875 to $30,735
for the first year. and $31,635 for the second year. This rent increase
is approximately 3 percent and appears reasonable. The rent
includes heat, water, taxes and insurance. /UI costs incurred will be
home by the Assisted Housing Program. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PRODUCTION WELL
IN THE JORDAN AQUIFER AT THE IOWA CITY WATER
SUPPLY AND TREATMENT FACILITY SITE,
Comment: See Engineer's Report,
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUMP TEST/
PRODUCTION WELL, A PRODUCTION WELL, AND
OBSERVATION WELLS IN THE SILURIAN AQUIFER AT THE
WATER SUPPLY AND TREATMENT FACILITY SITE.
Comment: See Engineer's Report.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE
SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR LOTS 23, 24, 33, AND ~ IN WEST SIDE
PARK.
Comment: See Engineer's Report.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND
THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A TEMPORARY STORM
SEWER CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AGREEMErIT BETWEEN
SMITH-MORELAND PROPERTIES, THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND THE AIRPORT COMMISSION.
Comment: In connection with constraction in West Side Park
Subdivision, Smith-Moreland Properties needs an easement from
the City and the Airport Commission on property to the east of
Lots 1 and 2, West Side Park Addition, for the construction of a
storm sewer in accordance with City specifications, Said
easement will terminate upon the City's acceptance of the storm
sewer as a public improvement,
August 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Page $
(9)
(10)
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A SANITARY SEWER, STORM
SEWER AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND A
SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR QUAIL VALLEY
CONDOMINIUMS IN WEST SIDE PARK, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
Comment: Under the Iowa City City Code, West Side Co.
submitted a site plan for the development known as Quail Valley
Condominiums within West Side Park. City staff approved the
site plan subject to the property owners entering into appropriate
easement agreements upon the acceptance of the completed
improvements by the City. Public Works is now recommending
acceptance of the completed improvements within this
development. This Resolution authorizes the execution of the
necessary easement agreements to facilitate the acceptance of
the completed improvements as public improvements.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A PARTIAL RELEASE
AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
EASEMENT FOR WINDSOR RIDGE PART SIX.
Comment: The Subdivider's Agreement and Stormwater
Management Easement Agreement for Windsor Ridge Subdivision
Part Six obligate the Developer to construct stormwater
management facilities in various parts of the subdivision. This
obligation constitutes a lien and a cloud on the title to the
subdivision lots. In October, 1994, the City and Developer
entered into a Partial Release Agreement for the Developer's
stormwater management obligations on Parts One through Five,
which obligations are secured by an irrevocable letter of credit.
Windsor Ridge Par~ Six is comprised of portions of Parts One and
Three which are already covered by the current letter of credit and
partial release agreement. Public Works/Engineering is in
agreement that the current letter of credit is sufficient to cover the
costs of providing stormwater management facilities for Part Six.
This Partial Release Agreement removes the cloud on the title to
lots in the Windsor Rid~~ Part Six while protecting the City by
attaching the Develooc;'~ obligation to provide stormwater
management to a letter of credit which will be retained until the
facilities and further development which may impact the same are
completed.
August 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Paine 6
(11)
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE IOWA CITY
POLICE DEPARTMENT TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A LOCAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PROCURING EQUIPMENT, TECHNOLOGY AND OTHER
MATERIALS DIRECTLY RELATED TO BASIC LAW ENFORCEMENT
FUNCTIONS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COMMITMENT OF LOCAL
MATCHING FUNDS AS REQUIRED BY THE GRANT PROGRAM.
Comment: The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) of the U.S.
Department of Justice has established a formula block grant program
to be funded under the final FY1996 appropriations bill which will
provide cities and towns with direct flexible assistance to develop or
enhance anti-crime, anti-drug, and violence prevention initiatives.
The State of Iowa was awarded $1,532,350 to distribute to local
governments, and the Iowa City Police Department wishes to make
application for $34,993 in Local Law Enforcement Grant funds for the
purpose of procuring equipment and technology. The Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant Program requires a commitment of local
matching funds in the amount of $3,888 prior to the final grant
application for $34,993. This resolution authorizes the commitment of
local matching funds in the amount of $3,888 and authorizes the Iowa
City Police Department to file an application for a Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant in the amount of $34,993 for the purpose of
procuring equipment and technology.
f. Correspondence.
(1) Deb Liddell, Chair of Parks & Recreation Commission, regarding
Oakland Cemetery.
(2) Shelley Deutsch regarding traffic signal at Mormon Trek/Rohret
Road,
(3) Residents of Kimball Road vicinity regarding request for sidewalk
along Dubuque Street,
(4) Traffic Engineer regarding stop sign installation on Washington
Street at its intersection with Dartmouth Street.
(5) Civil Service Commission submitting certified lists of applicants for
the following positions:
(a) Custodian
(b) Maintenance Operator
/ . (c) Parking Cashier
g. /~pp~ications Tor use of City :streets arfd Public Grbunds. '
(1) Jim Steffan, Regina Fall Fun Run September 1, 1996.
(approved)
(2) Walter Sparks, Jeffrey Street Neighborhood Block party
August 10, 1996. (approved)
August 6,1996
h.
City of Iowa City
Page 7
Applications for Use of City Plaza.
(1) Lisa Barnes, Downtown Association, DTA Sidewalk Days - July 18-
21, 1996. (approved)
(2) Rick McNamara, musical performance - July 18, 19, 31 and
August 1, 1996. (approved)
(3) LeRoy Bontrager, Crusade for Christ '96, distribute literature -
July 20, 1996. (approved)
(4)
LeRoy Bontrager, Crusade for Christ '96, distribute literature,
musical performance - various dates throughout the summer.
(approved)
(5)
and obtain signatures - July 19, 20, 26, and
(approved)
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR.
Jacqueline Gharib, Ralph Nader for President, distribute literature
27, 1996.
ITEM NO. 3
PUBLIC DISCUSSION {ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
ITEM NO. 4
PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
Consider a motion setting a public hearing for August 27 on an
ordinance vacating a portion of Lee Street, an undeveloped right of way
located between River Street and Otto Street, {VAC96-0001)
Comment: At its June 6 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 5-0, recommended approval of the vacation,
subject to the retention of easements for a storm sewer and public
utilities. Staff recommended approval in a report dated June 6.
Action:
#2 Consent Calendar page
NO. 2 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR
AMENDED.
c. (6) Consider a motion approving an Outdoor Service Area for High
Energy Food Concepts dba Bushnell's Turtle, 127 E. College St.
(Renewal) See memo in Council packet.
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton. Discussion.
Baker/ Naomi, can I ask a question for clarification. The packet a
memo mentioned something about the Bushnell's agreement being
in the Consent Calendar. What did we finally decide to do with
that? A one year extension or what was-
Nov/ The fence issue requires a gate. We are approving an agreement
for a liquor license contingent on them putting a gate in. If
we vote on it today, it will not be sent to the state office
until the gate is put in.
Baker/ But that doesn't- is not relevant to the height.
Nov/ The height has a one year delay on it.
Kubby/ We are going to take all the places where people can be
outside eating and drinking and try to see if we can come up
with some regulations that instead of having all of these
different categories, we have two categories of public
property and private public so it is less confusing.
Baker/ But there was no sense to just totally exempt them from the
ordinance?
Nov/ No.
Baker/ Okay.
Karr/ Madam Mayor, for the record, Aziz Longou did call me this
afternoon and indicated he would put in the fence and also
agreed to- I am sorry, the gate, pardon me. And also agreed to
help us, as a committee member on rewriting the ordinance. He
seemed real delighted about that.
Nov/ Okay. So we are expecting the gate to be in shortly and then
we will send the forms in.
Karr/ Yes.
Nov/ Okay. Is there any other discussion of the Consent Calendar?
Thisrepresents only ereasonably accuratetranscrlption ofthelowa CitycouncilmeetingofAugust 6,1996.
F080696
#2 Consent Calendar page 2
Roll call- (yes).
Thisrepresents only a reasonebly accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
# 3 page 1
ITEM NO. 3 PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
Nov/ Please come forward, sign your name and tell us %~hat you want
to say.
Derek Maurer/ Hello. I live on South Governor Street and I chair
Public Access television Board of Directors. You have
materials in your packet this week from the BTCC with relating
to a couple of major items. One of them being a contract
between the city and PATV and the other being the proposed
disposition of funds from the pass through fees that cable
customers are now paying with their monthly bills. I just- I
understand that you have scheduled to consider these items
later this month and I thank you for your timely attention to
them. I certainly urge your approval of these items at that
time. But I want to take a moment here for the benefit of the
public to explain a little bit about what is in this packet of
materials. First of all the contract between Iowa City and
PATV is the result of I think 10-12 negotiating sessions that
we have had with representatives of the city and PATV and on
one or two occasions, the city administrator of Coralville,
Mr. Hayworth, and I must say this has been the most fruitful
and almost pleasant experience to the extent that contract
negotiations can be pleasant. But in all, it has been a very
cooperative process and I hope you understand that this has
gone very smoothly with a lot of agreement on both parts° The
major, what I think are the major provisions of the contract
are of the most interest are that it has a three year
renewable term that it will- that it calls for the
establishment of specific criteria to evaluate PATV
performance under the contract and these criteria will be
negotiated within six months of implementation of the
contract. It includes Coralville as a party to the contract at
such time as Coralville can conclude its franchise agreement
with TCI and it stipulates funding of approximately $153,000
a year with an adjustment for inflation which is the amount
contained in the franchise agreement for Public Access and
Community Programming. When you consider this, I urge you to
approve it. We have been without a contract for more than two
years now and looking forward to approval of this one that
will facilitate our strategic and long term planning so that
we can move forward with the business of serving the community
better which we certainly want to do. With regard to the other
items calling for the disposition of funds from the pass
through fees, some of the major categories for that spending
include the hiring of a full time community programming
coordinator under the administrative authority of the City's
Thisrepresents o~tly areasonebly accuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
# 3 page 2
Cable Division. Also funding for equipment purchases for the
different access providers including PATV, the library, the
Senior Center, and the school district. And funding set aside
for a future access facility. I want to note particularly that
with regard to the funding for equipment purchasers, the
different access providers did meet jointly on two occasions
and agree on recommendations for how to spend this money.
That, too, was a very cooperative and fruitful discussion. And
regarding the community programming coordinator, I think a
very positive development took place. Thanks to the BTC and
the city staff, they have called for the formation of an
advisory panel made up of the different access providers to
participate in the development of community programming
efforts and that was a process that took place through the
good graces of BTCC which delayed its action at one point to
give us time to flesh out some of the issues involved. The BTC
listened and accommodated the concerns the concerns that were
expressed to them and the city staff has already set up a
meeting of this advisory panel and so all and all, I think the
process has been very fruitful and I look forward to a
cooperative and mutually supportive relationship among the
city and the different access providers and I encourage you,
if you have any questions about PATV, don't hesitate to call
either me or Renee Paine, our executive director. And with
that, I will leave you unless you have any questions at the
moment.
Thornberry/ For the record, what is your phone number that people
could call?
Maurer/ My phone number at home is 351-0227 and the phone number at
PATV is 338-7035 and the director's name is Renee Paine. Thank
you very much.
Thornberry/ Thank you.
Nov/ Is there anyone else who would like to address council?
Lyone Fein/ Hello. I live on Burlington Street and I came in
tonight to clear up some confusion I have about the recent
construction at the intersection of Burlington and Gilbert. I
thought that I had recalled seeing a map of the Near Southside
Development plan and it is my belief that on that map there is
a median strip similar to the one on Washington Street that
has trees planted in it and that that median strip is part of
the Near Southside Development plan and it was suppose to
extend from Clinton to Van Buren, I think, or something like
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcHption ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
# 3 page 3
that. Does anybody recall what I am speaking about?
Norton/ It didn't go that far, did it?
Kubby/ Yeah but that is something that is in the plan but it hasn't
been approved yet and I don't know if it went down that far.
I don't think it crossed Gilbert Street. It didn't get into
the intersection of Gilbert Street and it went from Clinton
down towards Gilbert Street but was still on the west side of
Gilbert/ So we haven't made a decision to that yet and so when
we make that decision, we will have to- When we redo
Burlington, we will have to make the decision to do it or not.
Fein/ I guess I was wondering maybe why it wasn't taken up when
this construction was planned because a portion of that, even
if it only extends to Gilbert, a portion of that, a block from
Linn to Gilbert was dug up and if the plan goes through, we
are just going to be paying people again to dig up the street.
It seems-
Nov/ Two different issues. The Gilbert Street area needed a left
turn lane, a protected left turn lane, because there had been
accidents there. Then we had a plan to do something south of
Burlington which was not yet finalized, which was not yet
funded. So they are really two different issues and we will
eventually get to the other one. We don't promise when.
Kubby/ Maybe in the future where a little bit of the concrete that
had to be relayed, will get torn up. But none of the brickwork
will be involved in that.
Fein/ Okay.
Kubby/ The median won't go that far so we would have to tear up the
nice bricks we just put in.
Fein/ Thank you.
Kubby/ It has been awhile.
Nov/ Is there anyone else who would like to address council? Okay.
Moving on.
Thisrepresents only ereasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
b.
City of Iowa City
Page 8
Consider a motion setting a public hearing for August 27 on an
ordinance amending Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article H,
entitled "Industrial Zones," Section 1, entitled "General Industrial Zone
(I-1)" to allow limited retail sales in the I-1 zone.
Comment: At its July 18 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 6-1 with Scot~ voting in the negative,
racommended approval of the proposed ordinance. The Commission's
recommendation is generally consistent with the staff recommendation
contained in the July 11 staff memorandum.
Action: ~/~,4~.~ /~/./~, .'~/
Agreement between Johnson County Iowa, and Iowa City, Iowa,
establishing policies for development of land within the extraterritorial
area of Iowa City and incorporating those policies in the Iowa City
Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: In March 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commissions of
the City and the County recommended approval of an amended Fringe
Area Policy Agreement. Since then, the City Council and the Board of
Supervisors have had numerous discussions and have negotiated a
revised Agreement which is the subject of the public hearing. At its
July 18 meeting by a vote of 7-0, the Planning and Zoning Commission
approved a memorandum of support for the revised Fringe Area
Agreement. The Commission's memorandum suggests minor
modifications to the agreement.
(1) Public Headng
Action:
(2) Consider a resolution
Action:
#4c page 1
ITEM NO. 4C. Agreement between Johnson County Iowa, and Iowa City,
Iowa, establishing policies for development of land within the
extraterritorial area of Iowa City and incorporating those policies
in the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan.
Nov/ May we have a motion to approve this resolution? Moved by
Norton, seconded by Thornberry. Is there any council
discussion?
Baker/ Yeah, I would just like to make a quick comment, Naomi. I
plan to vote for this but I think that we have made a lot of
compromises on this issue over a long period of time and we
had to do that to keep moving forward. I am not- I was going
to say I am not completely happy with this. I should say I am
to happy with this particular agreement and I would like for
us, as soon as we get some new faces on the board of
supervisors, to discuss some of the points in the future. But
I think for the time being, it is an improvement over what we
had.
Nov/
We did ask staff last night to give us a report at about 18
months so that we could reevaluate it before the three year
end of term and so we at least have that much planned.
Kubby/ Specifically what we want to look at when we monitor that in
18 months is what are the proposals that the fringe area has
applied to and how has it played out in the process. Has the
agreement been followed on our side and the county's side or
hasn't it and take a look at it and talk about what are our
courses of action if it hasn't been met on our side of their
side. What is our recourse as a city for the agreement not
being followed.
Baker/ One of the things I want to pay particular attention to is
the whole concept of incentive to achieve what we want to
achieve. I just don't think these incentives are going to
achieve that and I would like to see how the development
occurs and possibly rethink that issue.
Kubby/ We should probably say what those incentives-
Norton/ I followed this pretty carefully since last March as I am
sure most of you have. But it seemed to me we made really very
significant progress. Now how it works is another matter but
I think there has been compromise. I think it achieves
considerable gain in terms of clustering and presumably
preserving the boundaries in more reasonable ways that might
Thisrepresents onlyareasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996,
F080696
#4c page 2
have been possible. I think it is quite an achievement. Let's
hope that it works in practice.
Kubby/ It seems like what we have done is say yes to more kinds of
development, more opportunities for development. In tradeoff
for that, we have said some of the incentives will give you
even more density to develop if you have more open space
within that development that is outside the city's growth
area. And so as well as the 'tradeoff, that the agreement will
be lived out by the county as not a sort of guidelines but as
a contract with the city. And so because of those tradeoffs,
it seems like a worthwhile agreement and I look forward to
monitoring this in 18 months.
Nov/ I think that is the main point. It is a contract, not a
guideline. Any other discussion. Roll call- (yes). Okay, this
resolution has been approved.
This represents only a ~eesonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
d.
City of Iowa City
Page 9
Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by
amending the Conditional Zoning Agreement for WestPort Plaza to
eliminate the requirement for a "cohesive, integrated development," and
to remove the requirement for the facades of the buildings to provide
"horizontal continuity," for property located in the CC-2, Community
Commercial zone at 855 Highway 1 West. (REZ96*001
Comment: At its May 2 meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended denial of the proposed amendments
to the WestPort Plaza Conditional Zoning Agreement. Staff
recommended denial in a report dated April 18. In a letter dated
May 29, 1996, the applicant (Staples, Inc.) requested Council
consideration of this item. This public hearing is continued from July 2
and July 16. In a letter dated July 24, the applicant requested deferral
to the August 27 meeting of the City Council. The public hearing
should be continued to August 27. _ /
Action: ?~A~/~~~
b
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by amending th~'~
Conditional Zoning Agreement for WestPo~ Plaza to eliminate the
requirement for a "cohesive, integrated development," and to remove
the requirement for the f~cades of the buildings to provide "horizontal
continuity," for prope~y located in the CC-2, Community Commercial
zone at 855 Highway 1 West. (REZ96-0~10) (First consideration)
,,
Comment: See comment for Item ~. This item was'~from
July 16 and, at the applicant's request, should be deferred to August
27.
Consider a resolution approving the voluntary annexation of
approximately 80 acres located southeast of Sycamore Street and north
of the South Wastewater Treatment Facility, (ANN96-0001)
Comment: At its June 6 meeting, the Plannin~gg~
Commission, by a vote of 5-0, recommended approval of the
annexation of the property, Staff recommended approval in a report
dated May 16.
Action: ~'~ / J,~, ~t-~.,¢,-~
#4d page 1
ITEM NO. 4D. Public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoning
Chapter by amending the Conditional Zoning Agreement for WestPort
Plaza to eliminate the requirement for a "cohesive, integrated
development," and to remove the requirement for the facades of the
buildings to provide "horizontal continuity," for property located
in the CC-2, Community Commercial zone at 855 Highway 1 West.
(REZ96-0010)
Nov/ I will open it again. Is there anyone who would like to talk
to us about this issue?
Karr/ Could we have a motion to accept correspondence, please.
Nov/ Okay, we have had a motion to accept correspondence
(Thornberry/Vanderhoef). Is there any discussion?
Baker/ Could I ask a question of Karin Franklin, please? Karin, I
just would like to get clear in my mind the sequence of
events. I noticed in the description, the agenda item
description says the original staff report was April 18. Do
you recall when Staples first approached the city? And before
how long it was before they actually got to P/Z?
Karin Franklin/ It was at least a month, maybe two months before
that.
Baker/ Two months before April that they were aware of the
interpretation by the staff about the-
Franklin/ That there was an issue, yes.
Baker/ It is my understanding that before they went to P/Z, went
back to Walmart to seek some sort of relief from them first?
Franklin/ Correct, to get some relief from the parking restrictions
and the restrictive covenants.
Baker/ And before they came to P/Z they attempted to talk to
Walmart and then they came to P/Z?
Franklin/ That is correct.
Baker/ Thank you.
Nov/
And we are still waiting for signatures on that. They still
don't have as many as they need. So I guess we don't close the
p.h.
This represents only e reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
Woito/ The new owner
Thornberry/ That is
Lobster?
#4d page 2
Karr/ Could we have a vote on the motion to accept correspondence?
Nov/ I thought we did. Okay. All in favor, please Gay aye- (ayes).
Larry didn't vote, he just started asking questions. That is
the way life goes. Okay.
Woito/ We do have signatures from Walmart. So there is progress.
Nov/ There is progress but there is still not enough signatures.
Woito/ And there is a signature from the bank but they have sold it
again. So now you have to get another party.
Nov/ Okay, so-
Thornberry/ Who has still not signed?
Norton/ Do we need a motion to continue the hearing?
of the piece that Cub Foods was selling.
it? What about the signature from the
Woito/ Maybe it is a piece from Red Lobster, I don't know.
there are a couple of them that are still outstanding.
Walmart was the hardest one to get. That is underway.
Nov/
Red
But
but
Okay. We need a motion to continue the p.h. to August 27th.
Moved by vanderhoef, seconded by Thornberry to continue. All
in favor, please say aye- (ayes). Okay. Motion carried.
Kubby/ I opposed not closing the p.h.
Nov/ Okay, motion carried, 5-1. And we move on.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
f4f page 1
ITEM NO. 4F. Consider a resolution approving the voluntary
annexation of approximately 80 acres located southeast of Sycamore
Street and north of the South Wastewater Treatment Facility.
(ANN96-0001)
Nov/ Moved by Norton, seconded by Thornberry. Discussion.
Kubby/ I am going to be voting no on this. Did you find a- I asked
Karin to bring a map of the section of this part of he
community. Even though our growth policy, of which I don't
totally agree with, say that this- we should voluntarily annex
this property because it is within a growth area, it is
adjacent to land that is currently within Iowa City. It is
near the sewer treatment plant. So it will be serviceable with
city services soon. I am opposed to annexing more land in this
area at this time because there is a lot of land between our
currently developed area within the city limits and this
property. If this property ends up being rezoned and developed
before some of this in fill property, it is going to cost the
city, meaning you all, a lot of money to take services down to
that area of the community. So, I think we shouldn't annex
more land until we have had a little more development from
Burns and Sycamore towards the south or more of the
development from Sycamore Farms towards the west. I guess I
want to show that area if we can but we can't. I said my
peace. If a bulb blew, you can't.
Nov/ Okay, is there any other discussion from the council while we
are waiting for the new light bulb.
Kubby/ I could talk some more.
Baker/ Karen, I am going to be supporting this. I don't predict the
negative impact that you are concerned about. It is possible,
but I just don't see it happening that particular way. I think
that there is a chance that this could be developed outside of
the city limits and I would rather have it developed inside
the city limits and I think in the long run this will be a
benefit to the community.
Norton/ One thing, it will be easier when we could see this in the
context of the whole southside plan. You know, this piece
needs to be looked at in that whole context. It is not that
far out of line, it seems. I looked at the maps and it looks-
Kubby/ I don't doubt that this area is going to develop in the
future. I just think that we should send the message to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4f page 2
community and toe the development community that we need some
in fill development before we do kind of a leap. even though
it is not technically leap frog development, we will have
developed iowa City, section of non-developed Iowa City, and
then potentially developed Iowa City. And I just don't want to
place ourselves in the position to have to fezone it to allow
development.
Baker/ There is also a possibility that this sort of expansion will
speed up in fill development because if we don't annex, there
is less incentive to develop, I think, in a lot of ways.
Kubby/ Will you explain that?
Baker/ Yeah. If you had a rigid policy of no annexation until you
get in fill development, that property that is undeveloped now
steadily increases in value for the owner of that property by
not being developed as soon as possible. Supply and demand.
Kubby/ I know that I voted yes for Sycamore Farms annexation which
I could use my same argument for that but there were some
tradeoffs for the generalized community where we half of the
400 acres in a conservation easement to protect a wetlands
area and lower cost housing once that development proceeds.
So, it may seem like I am being inconsistent. But there were
some positive tradeoffs for the community for the adjacent
property which I did vote for annexation.
Baker/ Have we talked enough-
Kubby/ The bulb is not going to come and we can go forward.
Nov/ Okay. We are finished waiting for the light bulb.
Kubby/ It looks like there might be someone in the audience who
wants to comment on this. I don't know if council wants to
allow them to speak°
Nov/
Well, I don't know. Was there someone who wanted to come up on
this? Oh, okay, you may. Please state your name for the
record.
Randy Moore/ I live down in the area. And when this property came
up for annexation consideration a couple of years ago we were
very involved with that process. We're concerned how the south
area of Sycamore south of south point kind of that half mile
stretch of county develops. And there's many of the concerns
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4f page 3
I had then I think still are appropriate now and one of them
Karen kind of touched on and that is there is roughly a half
mile stretch of South Sycamore that is most likely not going
to be improved at the same rate as what this central tract
would be and the concern I have there like I did two years ago
is a matter of traffic. I also know that there's a need or
desire to get access to the south to the sewer plant as well
as the soccer fields. I guess I have more questions and that
is I know that the county and the city actively re-discussing
the fringe area development. I think the county has an open
meeting I think on Thursday or is it tonight?
Nov/ Thursday night.
Moore/ Thursday night. Okay. In my understanding right is that
there is no substantial sewer service available for this tract
of land until this south corridor intercept is completed. Is
there any rough idea when that is going to be serviceable for
that area?
Norton/ About a year from now.
Woito/ There'll be construction there this fall and it will be
serviceable.
Franklin/ December of '97.
Woito/ Yeah.
Moore/ Okay. And what about water service? That's the other side of
this. The utilities and services. I guess what I'm saying is
it seems like there's a number of things that have to fall in
place that's at least a year out if not more.
Woito/ The soccer road we have.
Moore/ Okay. I wasn't aware of that. So I guess my question is
really what is the compelling reason to annex it now if it's
not going to be developable for at least a year probably more.
And especially when you consider it in the context that we're
still kind of in the open public discussion stage of the
fringe area and the development and you've actively solicited
input of residents in that area to help put together or at
least contribute towards plans for how that area might
develop. So I guess I just have a question as to if there's
not a really strong compelling reason now, I guess I'd rather
see us wait for a more natural progression of development. Or
Thisrepresents only a reasonably accuratetranscrlption ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4f page 4
if there is a compelling reason, share that with us so
understand what that is.
we
Kubby/ I think the compelling reason is that we were asked to do
it. And it probably increases the value of the property and
makes it more sellable to the current owner.
Moore/ Yeah, I'm definitely not against development. Our interest
is that we want to have the whole area developed with some
forethought and one of my concerns is the traffic flow and
access to that area. If Sycamore was improved all the way down
to that area, it'd probably be a different situation, but the
road as it is right now, there's a fair amount of biking and
walkers and joggers that use that road. And it's really fairly
unsafe, especially if you start increasing traffic with
development that's south of there, but you don't address the
road issue. I think it all has to be considered as a
comprehensive plan, not just do something at the neglect or
ignoring something else.
The main reason we want to annex it so that it is part of our
comp plan. It may not develop now at any other standards then
what we want in our comp plan. And because it's in there for
a year or year and a half before it's developable, we have a
lot more say in how it's going to be developed.
Nov/
Moore/ I can understand the benefit of that. I think the whole area
needs to be considered. That whole area's by our own
estimation's not that far out of being developed and
development progressing down there. And I think that's good.
It's just that if we can, I'd rather avoid doing something
prematurely and limiting our options later. And at the same
time just keeping in mind the impact that bring that tract of
land into the city would have on the space in between that
would still be county which would be outside of the direct
control of us as a city and the council.
Nov/ Of course you may also wish to be annexed at some point.
Moore/ That very likely could be. It's just a matter, if there's
not any- Two years one of the things that would be a strong
compelling reason for not, it wasn't written that way, but
there should be a benefit to the city at no extreme cost for
bringing in property to the city. And I'm just curious to find
out what that is in this particular case other than they
asked.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of tile Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4f page 5
Vanderhoef/ I suspect that there's several things that are
happening there. Number one, I listen that you are real
concerned about the road and that is being addressed right now
in the soccer road because there will be play at the soccer
field a year from now and we have to have a safe way in there.
So there has to be something done on that road at this point
and when you talk about it, you are talking about bikers and
hikers and so forth. We understand that and if we can develop
this is an appropriate way and continuous way, we can address
those concerns in our trails and out open spaces as we go down
there.
Baker/ Mr. Moore, can I ask you a question about clarification on
something you just said. I want to make sure I don't
misunderstand you. Is it your idea that if we annex this now,
it is going to impose an extreme cost on the city?
Moore/ No. As it sits, just bringing it in by itself wouldn't. I
guess what I anticipate is that if development begins or
occurs on that tract of land and the space in between is not
necessarily addressed or getting services down to it- As I
understood from two years ago, getting water down to it would
mean an extension of a water main from the South Point
Development, across roughly half mile of county to the north
edge of the tract of land. You know, I guess my question is,
if that is to happen so that 80 acre tract can be developed,
you know, expenses like that is what I guess I am anticipating
or just wanting people to think about. Whether that makes
sense or to let the annexation progress or the development
progress down Sycamore in which time the people-the developers
pick up the expense of putting those in as it progresses
downward.
Baker/ I am just wondering what is the- maybe this is a question
for Karin. What are the immediate consequences and does this
alter plans or create new obligations for us or alter plans
that we had in the past, accelerate or increase the cost?
Franklin/ I is consistent with plans that we have which are
outlined in our growth policy. This is within our growth area.
Sewer will be available as soon as the line is put in that
Randy refers to that is open in December of '97. Water would
need to be extended to this 80 acres in order to fully serve
it. There would need to be eventually improvements to Sycamore
Street from Burns south to the Sycamore L as development
progressed. When development was proposed on this 80 acres, we
would then look at those particular factors depending upon
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4f page 6
when that development is proposed. It is being brought in as
ID-RS. I think Randy, you are aware of that, which means that
there would not be significant development there now, farm or
I think it is one unit per five acres which is not
economically feasible. So when a development project came in,
we would have to look at it in terms of costs of extension of
many services that are not there at the time that it comes in
and who should equitably pay for those costs whether there is
a sharing of those costs by the city and the developer, should
it be the full developer's costs. At that time we may have
intervening development on either the Lehman Tract to the
Gatens Trust land. It is a timing issue but I think the
annexation is definitely consistent with out growth policy and
as Naomi said, it gives the city control over what is going to
happen on this 80 acres.
Baker/ And the important point here, I think, is that it is coming
in at the ID-RS which nobody assumes it is going to develop
at. So they are going to have to go through a rezoning process
to develop the land.
Franklin/ That is correct.
Baker/ At which time we negotiate all sorts of things as far as
costs.
Franklin/ That is correct.
Kubby/ One of Dean Thornberry's comments last night was that we can
say no to rezoning and I don't know, I guess I have a question
for Linda. That is in any ID-RS, if someone comes in and wants
to change the zone to develop it, do they have a right to have
it changed to a developable zone? If they meet all the rules.
Woito/ Considering all the planning factors that you would apply.
I mean that P/Z applies and that you would traditionally
apply. I mean if there is a valid reason to deny a particular
zone being requested, the city does it all the time. Well, not
all the time but we do it. We don't always give the requested
zoning classification. You have to have a reason for doing
that.
Nov/
And sometimes the rezoning requires a large developer expense
to extend utilities out there and we say that if this is out
of sequence, your problem to extend those utilities and that
turns off the whole thing.
Thisrepresents only areesonablyaccuratetran$crlption ofthelowa CitycouncilmeetingofAugust6,1996.
F080696
#4f page 7
Franklin/ You can base that denial on the burden it would place on
extension of city services.
Nov/ Right.
Norton/ I just want to comment that I understand that this has been
looked at in context of the whole south area plan. I say a
plan that a lot of people have seen. I guess the council
hasn't yet seen it but I understand this is fully consistent
with that whole conception about the south area which we will
be seeing, I take it, in the next few months.
Franklin/ That is right, yes, we are planning on getting that to
P/Z Commission within the next month of so.
Nov/
Okay, thanks. Any other discussion here? Roll call- (yes,
Kubby-no). This resolution has been approved on a 5-1 vote,
Kubby voting no.
Thisrepresents orlly areesonablyaccuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of Auqust 6,1996.
F080696
~August 6, 1996
g.
City of Iowa City
Page 1 0
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by changing the
use regulations of approximately 80 acres located southeast of
Sycamore Street and north of the South Wastewater Treatment Facility,
(REZ96-0012) (First consideration) Plan~n ng --~ ~
Comment: At its June 6 meeting, the and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 5-0, recommended approval of the proposed
rezoning. Staff recommended approval in a report dated May 16.
Action:
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by approving a
Sensitive Areas Development Plan and changing the use regulations
from RS-12, High Density Single-Family Residential to OSA/RS-12,
Sensitive Areas Overlay/High Density Single-Family Residential for a
2.29 acre property located at the intersection of Dubuque Street and
Meadow Ridge Lane. (REZ96-0011) (First consideration)
Comment: At its June 20 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 5-0-1, with Gibson abstaining, recommended
approval of the proposed rezoning and Sensitive Areas Development
Plan. Staff recommended approval in a report dated June 6. In a letter
dated Julv 16, the applicant requested expedited consideration of this
application.
Action:
Consider an ordinance amending City
"Zoning," Article H, entitled "Industrial
"General Industrial Zone," to allow
(First consideration)
Code Title 14, Chapter 6,
Zones," Section 1, entitled
truck terminal facilities.
Comment: At its June 6 meeting, by a vote of 5-0, the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed
amendment. Staff recommended approval in a memorandum dated
May 31.
Action:
#4g page
ITEM NO. 4G. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance by
changing the use regulations of approximately 80 acres located
southeast of Sycamore Street and north of the South Wastewater
Treatment Facility. (REZ96-0012) (First consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Baker that we give this
ordinance first consideration. Is there any discussion?
Kubby/ Even though I voted against annexation, since the majority
said yes to annexation, I think ID-RS is the most appropriate
zoning classification.
Nov/ Okay, anything else? Roll call- (yes).First consideration has
been approved.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meatlngof August6,1996.
F080696
#4h page
ITEM NO. 4H. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by
approving a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and changing the use
regulations from RS-12, High Density Single-Family Residential to
OSA/RS-12, Sensitive Areas Overlay/High Density Single-Family
Residential for a 2.29 acre property located at the intersection of
Dubuque Street and Meadow Ridge Lane. (REZ96-0011) (First
consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Norton. As far as the first
consideration and the expedited consideration is concerned, we
will not do that first. We will do that on second if everybody
wants to.
Kubby/ Karin, there is a critical slope on this particular
property, right?
Franklin/ Yes.
Kubby/ And is the slope encroached upon or is it-
Franklin/ No. The development is all along the frontage road there.
Norton/ While you are there, are we assured that that can't happen
later either? If this is established in three duplexes and a
single on lots 18, 19, 20. Nothing can happen on that back
slope later I take it. Right/ That big lot 19.
Franklin/ Right. Well, any development that would happen there, if
it were going to encroach into the critical slope, depending
upon on what you do with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance
tonight. Well, it would be subject to the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance whether it is administratively or in terms of
zoning. So it would be reviewed.
Nov/ They come in with a new plat and it would be reviewed again?
Franklin/ Yes. The building permit would be evaluated in terms of-
Norton/ But there is nothing now that precludes Lot 19 from being
further subdivided?
Franklin/ Further work could be done on that lot but not without
review by the city.
Norton/ And that would get right into 'the slope, yeah.
Franklin/ Yes unless they didn't touch it at all.
Thisrepresents only ereasonably accurate transcription of tholowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4h page 2
Thornberry/ The back part would, not the front part.
Norton/ Yeah, I understand.
Kubby/ Well, I know the neighbors are concerned about the ability
to get out onto- This is off North Dubuque Street. To get out
on North Dubuque Street, especially at peaks times. And we had
some older traffic counts. We took new traffic counts and
there is only going to be six new units on this prol~erty,
right? So it doesn't seem like that is going to have a huge
impact although we need to monitor this one and if we do any
additional larger scale development on either side of North
Dubuque, we are going to need to invest that half million
dollars to reconfigure that intersection and put a light up.
We have all kind of talked about that.
Nov/ Well, we have talked about someday but you have to say this
development will not trigger that light.
Norton/ But it will be in our CIP somewhere.
Nov/ Somewhere.
Vanderhoef/ Not high on the list at this point.
Nov/ Any other discussion? Roll call- (yes). First consideration
has been approved.
Thisrepresents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4i page 1
ITEM NO. 4I. Consider an
Chapter 6, "Zoning," Article
Section 1, entitled "General
terminal facilities.
(First consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Vanderhoef,
Thornberry/ How long can those trucks
going to be?
Nov/ 45 days.
Norton/ 45 and we cut it from 90.
Thornberry/ From 90.
ordinance amending City Code Title 14,
H, entitled "Industrial Zones,"
Industrial Zone," to allow truck
seconded by Baker. Discussion.
be there? How long is that
Nov/ The original proposal was a 90 day storage limit and it
45 day storage limit. Anything else? Roll call-
ordinance, this consideration has been approved.
is now
(yes). This
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
i.
City of Iowa City
Page 11
Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article K, entitled "Environmental Regulations," Section 1,
entitled "Sensitive Areas Ordinance." (First consideration}
Comment: At its June 19 meeting, by a vote of 9-0, the Riverfront and
Natural Areas Commission recommended approval of the proposed
amendments. At its June 20 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 6-0, recommended approval of the proposed
amendments. The Sensitive Areas Committee recommended approval
in a memorandum dated June 14. In a letter dated July 11, Steve
Moss requested expedited consideration of this item.
Action:
Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article O, entitled "Sign Regulations," to delete the
specific regulation of "political signs," and to amend regulations
applicable to all temporary signs, including political signs.
(First consideration)
Comment: At its June 20 meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed
amendments. This recommendation is consistent with the staff
recommendation as set forth in the memorandum to the CiW Attorney
dated September 24, 1995, and the memorandum from the City
Attorney dated May 2.
Action:
Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zoning," Article E, entitled "Commercial and Business Zones," Section
1, entitled "Commercial Office Zone (C0-1)," to allow small-animal
clinics in the C0-1 zone by special exception. (First consideration) , .
Comment: At its June 20 meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the PFanning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed
amendment. This recommendation is generally consistent with the
staff recommendation as stated in the memorandum dated June 20.
#4j page
ITEM NO. 4J. Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14,
Chapter 6, entitled "Zoning," Article K, entitled "Environmental
Regulations," Section 1, entitled "Sensitive Areas Ordinance."
(First consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Vanderhoef.
Thornberry/ To get things started.
Nov/ Yes, it sounds as if Karin is here to get things started.
Franklin/ You have before you a two page list of the amendments
that were discussed last night and some of these are
consequence of having to do other things in the ordinance to
achieve what you wanted to achieve. Of the first two relate to
changes in the definition section. The first, Naomi, was your
suggestion on a construction area to include in the definition
of construction area, the area that would be used for the
temporary storage on heavy equipment. So the definition of
development activity now includes the temporary storage of
heavy equipment and basically what this means is that area
that is defined as the construction area, which can be
anything outside of a buffer or an identified sensitive
feature. So you can take the entire lot and wherever the
sensitive feature is, exclude that and exclude any buffer that
might be required and buffers are required for wetlands,
woodlands and protected slopes. So back from there and the
rest of the lot is the construction-
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 96-90 SIDE 2
Franklin/ Carry on any development activated which include the
actual construction as well as the storage of heavy equipment.
Is that what you wanted to achieve?
Nov/ Yes, that is.
Franklin/ Okay.
Vanderhoef/ Shall we vote on just that part of it?
Nov/ Well, I think we can probably do the amendments of definitions
in one motion because it is very simple.
Thornberry/ You mean do the definitions separately from the rest?
Nov/ From the rest of it and then we will go on to the more, how
This represents only areasonabiy accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 2
should I say, critical discussion. Critical slopes, critical
discussions. But I think the definition section amendments are
more generic, less substantive. That is what I am trying to
say, good word.
Franklin/ The other definition is that of regulated slopes. Dee,
you requested this. And basically what it indicates is that
regulated slopes are those slopes defined as steep, critical
or protected°
Nov/ Okay. Dee, would you like to move that we change these two
definitions.
Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Kubby that these definition
changes be added to the ordinance. Is there a discussion of
whether or not these things should be included in the
ordinance?
Thornberry/ Were they defined before?
Franklin/ Construction area was defined before, however, it did not
include the temporary storage of heavy equipment.
Thornberry/ Right, I mean the slopes. The definition of slopes,
regulated slopes. Was that defined before? Was there a change
in the percentage of slope?
Franklin/ It is not a change in the percentage of slope. It is
merely putting it in the definition section rather than having
it in the body of the ordinance.
Nov/ It is already in the body of the ordinance.
Kubby/ The term is used a lot.
Nov/
Any other question on this? Can we have a vote just on those
two things, non-substantive amendments? Okay. All in favor,
please say aye- (ayes). Okay. We have amended the proposed
ordinance or changed the proposed amendments. Whatever we have
done.
Franklin/ You have an ordinance that is before you that was the
subject of the p.h. and you are amending that ordinance, not
the one that is currently on the books but the one that you
have before you for the p.h.
Nov/ That is what we are doing.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996,
F080696
#4j page 3
Franklin/ The next section relates to critical slopes and Karen,
this was in response to your proposal. The first two sections
that deal with applicability. Basically these are things that
we needed to do in the ordinance to make this all consistent.
The applicability section and the submittal requirements both
now treat critical slopes as sensitive areas which require a
development plan and a rezoning. Then there is the main body
of the definition of standards for critical slopes which again
amends what was before the p.h. to require a development plan
and a rezoning for critical slopes. The next provision exempts
from the rezoning and the development plan and allows an
administrative review of any project or project on property in
which there is a critical slope if the project does not
encroach into the slopes. So if you have a property on which
there is a critical slope but the development activity, as we
have defined it, does not encroach into that critical slope,
it will be reviewed administratively. If there is encroachment
into the critical slope, it will require a development plan
and rezoning, the process of going through P/Z and the
council.
Norton/ So paragraph G. of your note then is the critical part and
those three things preceding that are incorporated into that
change there.
Franklin/ That is correct.
Norton/ So they are basically editorial corrections to be
consistent.
Franklin/ To be consistent throughout, right.
Norton/ It includes in section G. Okay.
Kubby/ I would like to move that series of amendments about
critical slopes so we can discuss them.
Baker/ Second.
Nov/ It has been moved by Kubby, seconded by Baker. Discussion.
Thornberry/ Do these changes make the Sensitive Areas Ordinance
more restrictive? And if so, in what way?
Franklin/ From what is on the books right now, it is less
restrictive. From what was subject to the p.h, it is more
restrictive. On the books right now if there is a critical
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthe[owa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 4
slope on your property anywhere, you have to go through the
rezoning process. What was proposed and was the subject of the
p.h. was that if you had a critical slope on your property,
whether you impinged upon it or not, it was administrative
review. This steps back a little and goes more toward a more
public process of protection of those critical slopes by
requiring the rezoning if there is encroachment into the
critical slope.
Thornberry/ What then, Karen, you are saying is you don't trust the
Planning Department to protect these slopes.
Kubby/ If that were true, the whole ordinance would be
administrative.
Thornberry/ I mean, why the change from the proposed change to the
Sensitive Areas Ordinance?
Kubby/ One of the purposes, in my mind, of this ordinance is not
only to protect the sensitive areas but to allow some public
process to help protect them and allow development. And
sometimes going through the public process changes how P/Z and
how staff views a piece of property. A huge example is
Sycamore Farms where a member of the public changed the whole
viewpoint of the city as to how we view and allow development
as it is on sensitive areas. So I think the- I think that we
shouldn't neglect the benefits to the development community,
to the city as a whole and to the surrounding neighbors as
well as to the sensitive area itself. The benefits of that
public process when the slope is being cut into. when it is
not, it makes perfect sense to streamline this as much as
possible, make sure the Grading and Soil Erosion Control
Ordinance is followed and I trust staff to do that. But when
the hill is actually being cut into, I think that is a higher
level of intervention in the environment and deserves public
scrutiny. So that the public has a chance to participate in
that decision.
Thornberry/ So then the answer to my question is yes.
Kubby/ No, no, no, no. I am saying I trust staff to do their job
but the public has in the recent past created new viewpoints
about how staff and the city looks at sensitive areas and they
can contribute even to better development than what may be
proposed by the developer or talked by staff. It doesn't mean
I don't trust them. It means we all have things to learn and
that the public deserves to be part of the process when a hill
This represents only sreasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996,
F080696
#4j page 5
is being cut into that we have said, as a community, we want
to protect these slopes that are of 25-39%.
Norton/ This seems to me an excellent compromise between the
original position and then the proposed one and now this final
revision seems to me to get the job done. It streamlines
things, it leaves the public involved when that seems
appropriate.
Nov/
And what started this was an appeal or a couple of appeals to
Board of Adjustment because people said they didn't want to go
through a rezoning based on the fact that they weren't doing
anything to the slope. It was just going to sit there. I think
this would take care of that problem.
Kubby/ I think the amendments just go too far in taking care cf
that problem. That it is not really taking care of that
problem that was outlined. I mean one of the reasons cited for
the amendment for any critical slope whether it was not part
of the actual development or whether it was, was three Board
of Adjustment cases and two out of those three were when the
slopes were not being touched or not getting here and the
other one I can't remember if it was in that category of not.
So 2/3s of the examples, this amendment would still live that
out.
Baker/ Can I ask-
Nov/
Next question. Excuse me, Larry. Let me just finish this
discussion so that I am sure that we all understand. With this
current change, if someone is going to encroach on the slope
in any way at all, the Board of Adjustment is not the place to
go. They have no appeal to the Board of Adjustment. They must
go through rezoning.
Franklin/ No, there is always an appeal to the Board of Adjustment.
However, it is not for the process which is used to review the
impact the development has on the critical slope. There is a
provision within the Sensitive Areas Ordinance at the very end
which is an appeal process that anyone can take. We, the
staff, maintained with the Board of Adjustment on the three
cases that were cited, that is was not appropriate for the
Board to make those kinds of determinations about procedure.
That was not what the ordinance envisioned in allowing that
appeal process. They respectively disagreed and took action.
Nov/ Can we somehow get around that so they cannot disagree? Can
Thisrepresents only areesonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 6
the ordinance be written in such a way that the appeal to the
Board of Adjustment is nothing to do with construction plans?
Franklin/ I am sure.
Kubby/ But that wasn't even an issue at the p.h.
Norton/ We haven't discussed that.
Thornberry/ I guess what I will do is refer to the vote of 9-0 of
the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission recommending
approval of the changes without the additional changes and
also the P/Z Commission by a vote of 6-0 recommended the
approvals without the changes and also the Sensitive Areas
Committee recommended approval of the changes without the-
Norton/ Recent changes.
Thornberry/ Yeah, recent proposed changes. So I think I will refer
to them not knowing Karen as much as you do about this because
I was not privy the Sensitive Areas Ordinance when it was
first enacted. I mean that was a previous council and you were
on it and I was not. I was opposed to the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance to begin with because I thought it was too
restrictive. It is restrictive, it may not be too restrictive.
I also want to protect the environment. But with these three
bodies all recommending-united in recommending the changes
without your changes, I think I will have to refer to them.
They apparently are the ones. The Sensitive Ares Committee,
the P/Z and the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission.
Baker/ Dean, would you suggest that we send this back to them. Send
the amendments to the amendments back to them? I think you
would- I will speak for them. But if that would make the
council feel more comfortable. I feel no sense of urgency in
changing this right away. The applicant does, Mr. Moss, but if
a review by Riverfront-
Thornberry/ Riverfront and Natural areas, P/Z and the Sensitive
Areas Committee all-
Baker/ I have no problem with sending it back to them and dragging
this process out.
Thornberry/ If they would give their blessing to these other
changes, I would fee]. a whole lot better about it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4j page 7
Norton/ It would be nice. It slows things down. It comes very close
to the intent of theirs. Maybe it is slightly different but
very close to the intent of theirs with a different mechanism.
Kubby/ I think part of our job is to take the advice from
committees and each one of us, when it is to our purpose, says
committees said 9-0.
Thornberry/ I am just saying I wasn't privy to doing this is the
beginning.
Kubby/ Some of this, I mean in my mind, is kind of common sensical.
That when you are not going to touch the sensitive area, why
have to go through a more onerous process. I totally agree
with that. Make it as streamlined as possible. So I like that.
But when you are cutting into the sensitive area, I think that
there needs to be some public scrutiny.
Thornberry/ There is really. There is scrutiny by the Planning
Department.
Kubby/ I am saying that I like a different form of scrutiny and if
you want to base- I prefer not to hold this up, the amendment,
because then we get accused of-
Thornberry/ This is your change,
is fine except that there
that-
your idea, and your change which
is three pretty important groups
Kubby/ We have also heard from members of the public who have said
we disagree with those committees about the issue of public
process in certain cases and this is one of them and I don't
want to hold up Mr. Moss's development. I don't want to be
accused of doing that and I don't want to do that.
Thornberry/ I don't either but you are putting in some language
that is changing the power for a long period of time.
Kubby/ I am suggesting that we don't loosen up the ordinance as
much as being suggested to us. That the Sensitive Ares
Ordinance has been on the books for 8 months. This is the
second set of amendments within 8 months.And so we are trying
to make things better. But in the mean time, in my mind, we
have already loosened things up a little bit and I just see
this as a pattern that I am not so thrilled about and that in
this one case, it is a streamlining that makes sense. But in
the other case, it doesn't. So I am saying what I think should
This represents only a reasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowe City council moeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 8
happen and you can vote it up or down.
Baker/ And when I suggested that we could send it back to those
three commissions, I was not advocating that. But Dean, you
used the word compromise, a compromise to the amendments. I
don't even see this as a compromise. I see this as an
improvement over what was sent to us.
Norton/ I think so too, and I guess, Dean, in deference to your
concern about the views of the committee, I do think we do
need to listen to them and ordinarily do very carefully. I
feel in this case if we make the change that we now have
before us with this set of amendments and it doesn't work,
where it turns out to be too onerous, we can always go back to
that other more liberal view yet and change back to the
earlier. We always can make that change.
Kubby/ Calling him a liberal, I like that.
Thornberry/ Listen, wait a minute.
Norton/ No, I said a liberal change. Liberalizing from one point of
view.
Thornberry/ I am more of a moderate, I guess.
Norton/ We could go back to your position if that turns out, if
this seems to cause too many hangups. I don't think it will.
Thornberry/ It is one person's idea compared to three committee's.
Maybe it is fine.
Vanderhoef/ Karin, how many cases might this have impacted last
year?
Franklin/ Well, there is three that we know of that went to the
Board of Adjustment.
Vanderhoef/ No, I am asking specifically of the ones that cut into
a slope.
Franklin/ One.
Thornberry/ On Linn Street?
Franklin/ No, it was the Elk's Club. The golf carts.
Thisrepresents onlyareasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncilmeetingof August6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 9
Norton/ They were building right into the slope.
Franklin/ The garages, whatever they are.
Venderhoof/ Cart shed.
Franklin/ Cart shed, thank you. Yeah, you are right. No, Kevin
Kidwell's on Linn Street was into an altered protected slope.
Nov/ He did not change the slope there, did he?
Franklin/ He encroached into it. That was the first amendment that
we made.
Nov/ That would have been protected rather than critical?
Franklin/ That was a protected slope and we made the distinction
then between protected slopes which are naturally occurring
and those which are altered or man-made.
Thornberry/ Okay.
Vanderhoef/ So we don't think that this will probably come up too
often, the possibilities?
Frank]in/ You look at the Sensitive Areas map and that northerly
part of Iowa City which is undeveloped is one that is
dominated by slopes of varying degrees of steepness. So, I
think that critical slopes and protected slopes- The slopes
are the issue that we have been dealing with the most with the
Sensitive Areas Ordinance.
Vanderhoef/ That is what we are seeing mostly because that is the
land that we have left to develop at this point.
Franklin/ Right until we go south.
Nov/ This is another good reason to start developing on the flatter
side of town.
Vanderhoef/ Because it certainly will be cheaper.
Franklin/ Of course there we have wetlands and hydric soils, so we
won't talk about that.
Nov/ We won't discuss that right this minute but at least it is not
slopes. Okay. Any other discussion. Now, did you feel that
Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 10
this was a substantively enough change, that we have to send
it back and hold a p.h., etc., or should we go ahead and vote
on it?
Franklin/ Linda and I discussed this today in terms of the
substantiveness of it. We felt that one way to handle this
would be to inform the P/Z Commission of the various changes
that are being proposed tonight, this obviously being the most
substantive of all of them and indicate to them that a meeting
with the council, consultation with council was an option if
they would like to do that. They may not feel that that is
necessary. It is a little bit hard to judge exactly what their
intensity of feeling about any of these provision would be.
Kubby/ So what does that mean for our process tonight if there are
four votes for this?
Woito/ In terms of the substantiveness, as far as I am concerned,
this is precisely what comes out of having a p.h. and if I
were to say this were substantive and you have to start over,
it would be circular. The reason why you proposed this is
based on the input from Professor Buss and Knabe and so I mean
it would be ludicrous to keep going around in circles and
going back to the p.h. when basically you are responding to
the p.h. So, it makes no sense. If you want to take it back to
P/Z, if you want to send it back to P/Z, that is your
prerogative.
Franklin/ You can amend it on the floor tonight, see if that
amendment flies. Go with you first consideration. P/Z
Commission meets next week. Your second consideration is on
August 27, third on September 10. So there is an opportunity
for consultation before we finally pass on this ordinance.
Vanderhoef/ There is also a request to collapse for second and
third reading.
Franklin/ Let me give you some information about Iowa City Tennis
and ~itness in terms of that. They have an application before
the Board of Adjustment for August 14 with the same procedural
question that the board has addressed before, that is a
dispensation from through the zoning and having it addressed
administratively, which as you're aware in the three previous
cases the Board of Adjustment granted that administrative
review. So they may find some relief at that point. They also
have currently a rezoning application that has gone through
the P/Z Commission and was recommended for approval last
This represents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 11
Thursday, would come to the Council to set p.h. on the 27th.
You could have the p.h. first consideration on September 10
and by then you'll know whether this is going or not. The
second reading could then be the 24 of September. Pass and
adopt on the 28th or you could collapse another reading on
September 24 and have pass and adopt on 24th. So-
Vanderhoef/ That's two more weeks. That's what you're saying.
Franklin/ We'll have final adoption of that if the Board of
Adjustment does not grant the administrative review and we
will know by the 14th whether the Board is going to grant them
administrative review or not. So that we'll know that before
your second reading. The longest time assuming that you do a
p.h. and first consld~ration at one meeting would be
October 8. I guess what I would suggest is that you go on with
your deliberations on the 27th if you can make a decision if
you choose insofar as how it would affect Iowa City Tennis and
Fitness because we will know then whether the Board of
Adjustment has granted them relief or not. Okay.
Nov/ Based on this, would we exclude them? Would they be exempted
on this the way we're currently proposing?
Franklin/ Yes. Because they do not encroach into the critical
slope.
Nov/ Okay. Thank you.
Kubby/ But they've already started their process.
Franklin/ Um-huh.
Kubby/ And just like when we make something more onerous, we don't
change horses in the middle of the stream. Why when we've made
something less onerous do people get to change horses?
Nov/ I didn't say anything about changing horses, I just asked if
they were going to be exempt.
Franklin/ It's just being nicer.
Kubby/ It would be exempted via the Board of Adjustment, not
through the sensitive areas.
Franklin/ If you decide that you would not place this so called
burden on someone, why would you then continue in a process to
Thisrepresents only ereasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 12
place that burden on someone when everybody else isn't going
to have to?
Kubby/ Because they've already started in the process under the old
rules.
Franklin/ Well.
Kubby/ I just figured that process works no matter what direction,
but I guess I'm incorrect.
Franklin/ I don't know. I mean I can see the one arguing that you
wouldn't have to then continue because it is not onerous.
Norton/ When you change regulations in school, the student always
gets to take the softer alternative then they get their
choice.
Thornberry/ In politics it doesn't always work that way. I remember
a year or two ago when Bill Clinton signed the tax increase
retroactively. I started out the year paying lower taxes and
ended up paying higher taxes retroactively. So that you know
you can do that.
Norton/ It's a cruel world out there.
Nov/
If they chose to start all over again, they could. They could
cancel out the application that they have filed and they could
say we are filing for administrative review because it fits
today's ordinance.
Franklin/ You can always in any process withdraw your application
midstream when you decide. I mean that's what I would do if I
were them. I would say no I don't want you to consider this
any more. Thank you very much.
Woito/ But you're right Karen. Zoning ordinances are not
retroactive. They're proactive. Prospective.
Kubby/ Let's vote on the ordinance change to make it less
restrictive then it currently is.
Thornberry/ No.
Kubby/ Yes.
Thornberry/ What we're voting on now is this.
This represents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4j page 13
Kubby/ There is something that is currently on the floor.
Woito/ Karen's motion to amend is on the floor.
Thornberry/ That's correct. And it's not less restrictive.
Kubby/ And I'm suggesting that it's something that's less
restrictive then what is currently law.
Thornberry/ You've got me Karen. Because the other one restricts it
far less than your restriction.
Nov/
Okay. We are deleting the original amendment to the original
ordinance. We are considering a new amendment to the original
ordinance and we have discussed this. We're ready to vote. The
amendment is, all of the issues under critical slopes on this
page half of page 1, part of page 2, to up to the word where
it says consistent order. Okay? From the word critical slopes
to the word consistent order is now going to be voted on. All
in favor please say aye- (ayes). Need a hand count? Opposed
please sign. Only one nay? Okay then it's a 5-1 vote
(Thornberry-nay).
Thornberry/ Ernie said nay.
Kubby/ Ernie's connected to you by telephone or something like
that?
Nov/ Okay. These other amendments are carried on a 5-1 vote. Okay,
go.
Franklin/ The next amendment is one Naomi had, it's basically to
make consistent to different references on different pages to
the same type of development.
Nov/ It's referring to the list of zones in the same fashion each
time they are referred to.
Franklin/ Claritorial.
Nov/ Editorial.
Nov/ We don't need a motion for editorial, do we?
Woito/ Yes.
Nov/ We do. Okay.
Thisrepresents only ereesonebly accurate transcription ofthelowe City council meeting of August 6,1996,
F080696
#4j page 14
Kubby/ I move Naomi's editorializing.
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton that the list of zones
receive an editorial change for the sake of consistency. Is
there any discussion? All in favor please say aye- (ayes).
Motion carries.
Baker/ I move the adoption of first consideration of the amended
ordinance.
Woito/ No. We have a motion on the floor for first consideration
already.
Nov/ That was Vanderhoef/Norton?
Karr/ That was Thornberry/Vanderhoef.
Nov/ Thornberry/Vanderhoef. I'm losing track here. Okay.
Karr/ So we could have first consideration as amended.
Nov/ Thornberry/Vanderhoef moved first consideration. We've now
done all of the amendments. So first consideration as amended.
Thornberry/ I liked the amendment. The original amendment. The
original amendments.
Nov/ Do you want to reconsider your motion for first consideration
because we have amended it? Is that what you are saying?
Thornberry/ No, I just said I like the original amendments.
Baker/ But what we have in front of us is a relaxation of prior
requirements.
Thornberry/ That is correct. A little more stringent than what
they-
Nov/ We talked about this. We have compromised. Let's move on. Roll
call- (yes). Okay,
are going to move.
first consideration has been approved. We
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 96-91 SIDE 1
Thlsrepresents only a reasonab]y accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
m,
City of Iowa City Page 12
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by designating 36
properties as Iowa City historic landmarks. (Second consideration)
Comment: At its May 16 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 6-0, recommended approval of designating
37 properties as Iowa City historic landmarks. {The Council rejected
designation of one property at its July 16 meeting.) The Historic
Preservation Commission recommends approva!.
Action: ~/~/~//~,~ ~f_~ ~C5 ~/~ ~/~
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by rezoning the
following properties owned by The University of Iowa to P, Public: 1 E.
Park Road (RNC-20), 234 N, Madison Street (RM-44), northwest corner
of Dubuque and Church Streets (RM-44), 230 N~ Clinton Street (PRM),
324 S. Madison Street (CB-2), 300 Myrtle Avenue (RS-5), 421 Melrose ::
Avenue (RS-5), 315 Melrose Avenue (RS-8), 121 Grand Avenue Court
(RS-8), 127 Gri~nd Avenue Court (RS-8), 129 Grand Avenue Court (RS-
8), and 2222 Old Hwy. 218 S, I1-1). (Second consideration) .
Comment: At its May 16 meeting, by a vote of 5-0'with- Gibson
absent, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of
the rezoning of University of Iowa properties listed above to P, Public,
Staff recommended approval in a report dated May 16.
Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14, Chapter 6,
"Zoning," Article J, "Overlay Zones," by creating a new overlay zoning
district entitled "Design Review ,Overlay Zone." (Second cons~eration)
Comment: At its June 17, 1996, meeting, by a vote of 5-1 (Hawks
voting no), the Design Review Committee recommended adoption of
the revised Design Review Overlay Zone Ordinance.
// //
#4m page 1
ITEM NO. 4M. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by
designating 36 properties as Iowa City historic landmarks. (Second
consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Baker. Discussion.
Kubby/ Since the vote, the original vote was a 4/3 split and I am
not going to be here on August 27 which could mean a 3/3 split
which causes this to lose. I would like us to direct staff to
bring this ordinance back to us for final passage on September
10.
Thornberry/ Will all members be here at that time?
Nov/ Yes. We have all said we will be here at that time.
Thornberry/ That is fair.
Norton/ As far as we know.
Nov/ That is fine. We can't guarantee it. That is what we plan. Is
there any other discussion? We have four people nodding heads
in agreement to September 10. Roll call- (No: Vanderhoef,
Thornberry. Yes: Baker, Kubby, Norton, Nov.) Okay, we have
approved second consideration on a 4-2 vote.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4n page
ITEM NO. 4N. Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by
rezoning the following properties owned by The University of Iowa
to P, Public: 1 E. Park Road (RNC-20), 234 N. Madison Street
(RM-44), northwest corner of Dubuque and Church Streets (RM-44),
230 N. Clinton Street (PRM), 324 S. Madison Street (CB-2), 300
Myrtle Avenue (RS-5), 421 Melrose Avenue (RS-5), 315 Melrose Avenue
(RS-8), 121 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), 127 Grand Avenue Court
(RS-8), 129 Grand Avenue Court (RS-8), and 2222 Old Hwy. 218 S.
(I-l). (Second consideration)
Nov/ (Reads agenda comment).
Baker/ Naomi, can we collapse these readings. We got six people.
Would they agree to-
Nov/ If six people agree.
Karr/ We would have to wait for Dean to return.
Baker/ Will he ever return?
Nov/ I wouldn't mind collapsing. It is a long comment to read.
Baker/ I was going to say, it will save you that trouble next time.
Karen, would you like to talk about bulbs or something while
Dean is gone.
Nov/ Karen, do you have an objection to collapsing this. You
usually are objecting.
Kubby/ I don't want to do it unless there is a specific reason like
a construction season or a deadline. Instead of wasting time
now, we can waste time next time having Naomi read the
comment. Let's vote.
Nov/ All right-
Council/ (All talking).
Nov/ Move for second consideration and we will get one here. Moved
by Vanderhoef, seconded by Kubby. Okay. Discussion. Roll call-
(yes). We have approved second consideration, 5-0, Thornberry
absent.
Thlsrepresents only areasonablyaccuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncilmeeti~tgofAugust6,1996.
F080696
#40 page 1
ITEM NO. 40. Consider an ordinance amending City Code Title 14,
Chapter 6, "Zoning," Article J, "Overlay Zones," by creating a new
overlay zoning district entitled "Design Review Overlay Zone."
(Second consideration)
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton. Discussion.
Venderhoer/ Yes. I have an amendment that I will be presenting to
the council for the reading on the third consideration of this
ordinance, correct?
Nov/ We are going to try for third consideration on September 107
Vanderhoef/ September 10 when the entire council will be present.
I still have a concern with the mandatory compliance part of
this ordinance and I have requested an amendment to this
ordinance that will take an extraordinary vote by the
committee to disallow a proposed plan brought in by an
applicant. Did I get that right? Okay. Do you want me to read
the entire thing as it is stated?
Novick/ Yes, I think that would be a good idea.
Vanderhoef/ Under the section of approval or disapproval, this will
fall in within four working days following the meeting at
which an application for design review is scheduled to be
considered. The committee shall approve with modification
agree to by the applicant or disapprove the application.
Disapproval of an application shall only be effective upon an
extraordinary majority vote, or 3/4's of the entire committee.
An applicant may agree in writing to an extension of time if
the committee does not act within this time period. An
applicant does not agree to an extension of time the
application shall be deemed as receiving approval from the
committee. What this really is saying that it is more than
just a 4-3 vote. It is a time for the committee to be solid in
what they are recommending for the applicant. As a side bar to
this same ordinance, in the packet of materials that we have
right now that will be following along, will be changes in the
make up of the committee, the DR Committee. As it presently
stands, there are nine members to that committee. The
committee has recommended to us to drop this down to a seven
member committee. They are asking of those seven members, two
be architects, one be a- Actually they are asking for three,
two of which will be designers or building trades people. And
then the other two would be open seats for anyone. What I am
requesting in that section of the bylaws ordinance is to have
Thisrepresents only areasonablyeccuretetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#4o page 2
two business people who have businesses on the ground level,
street side businesses, to be members of this committee. One
of those people would be a person from the d.t. business
district and one person would be from the Neer Southside
district. So the make up of the committee would still have one
open seat for the general public and the other six would be
designated seats.
Kubby/ So the other issue we are kind of up in the air on is no
matter what the configuration ends up being for the DR
Committee, should they be- What kind of residency requirements
should we have for this committee. Or especially for the two
or however member come from the areas that will be subject to
the DR Ordinance. We talked about that pretty extensively.
Vanderhoef/ We talked about it last night and I don't know that we
came to a consensus. The way it is written right now is that
all committee members must be residents of the City of Iowa
City and if there is any agreement to change that to a
business owner who lives outside of the city, that can be
added also.
Nov/
I was saying that there could be a problem. We may have
difficulty finding someone who lives within the city, who
operates a d.t. business, who is interested in serving on this
committee. But I am not advocating that we change the rules
now. I am saying that we should be aware that this maybe a
problem.
Baker/ I would say- Excuse me. I would say I would hate to see us
change the rules that require Iowa City residency. We have had
this on other commission as a question. I would say that if we
can't get an Iowa City resident, a d.t. business person to
serve on this, leave it vacant.
Thornberry/ I think the d.t. people who will be affected by this
ordinance would be interested in serving on this committee and
I think that it is only fair to have someone or two as has
been suggested be on that committee if this is going to affect
them. In other words, a board, any really- That is enough. I
just think that the business people ought to be on the
committee is if the ordinance is going to be affecting them in
their-
Norton/ Well, we have pointed out that precedent has been set on
Historic Preservation. Those areas have somebody from the
area. No problem about the bylaws. I think that is quite
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4o page 3
different from the issue of supermajority.
Vanderhoef/ And something else that is happening is obviously when
this ordinance gets in place,then we will be putting together
the specific districts and what is important to those
districts and I can't imagine us not having business people
from that area helping to write what is important for their
own business area.
Kubby/ And that is part of the whole process whether they are
members of the committee. For business people who end up being
members of the committee if we make these changes or not. It
is a very open process to have everyone participate. even
people who don't live or work in that area can participate.
Baker/ Can I ask two questions for clarification? One of which was
and Dee this is for you because the distinction you are making
on business person as opposed to property owner. Can you
clarify why (can't understand) going to require the property
owner versus just the business person. And the second
question, I guess, for council is different issue coming up
about conflict of interest in general on boards and
co~nissions and I am trying to see where this, since there is
such a financial stake in the district, in the property, how
this- Are we headed towards a problem there. I mean, I don't
have an answer. But is that discussed.
Nov/
We did discuss it and we did say that if there were such a
conflict, that person was expected to not participate in that
discussion and vote.
Baker/ Very clearly when there is a direct, when you property is
under consideration, sure I understand that. But in other
examples we have had cases where the person's organization is
not directly under consideration but there is still a
perceived conflict of interest because the person's
organization deals with funds and competitional funds. I was
wondering this sets up that inevitability. I don't know.
Kubby/ People aren't going to be competing.
council/ (All talking).
Vanderhoef/ The business owner versus the property owner. Typically
what happens is whether you own your space or lease your space
from an owner, it is the ground floor business person show
sets the tone of how that facade looks of his own business. In
Thlsrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#4o page 4
some cases it may be one in the
lots of times that an owner will
and make the changes because the
going to pay for it.
same person. But there are
say to the lessee, go ahead
lessee is the person that is
Baker/ I have no strong feelings one way or another. Just as long
as everybody else seems to be comfortable with that.
Vanderhoef/ If the wording needs to be both owner or-
Kubby/ That might make it more flexible.
Nov/
Well, in many cases the owner is not directly involved in
those kinds of changes. The owner may be not even live in town
or a trust in a bank or something like that. And they really
just don't get that involved. I think the operator is a good
way to handle it.
Thornberry/ Especially if you have a triple net lease.
Nov/ Let's not worry about that today.
Thornberry/ No, that is exactly what it is. If a business has a
triple net lease, they are responsible for the building. They
have to pay for it.
Vanderhoef/ I will be voting no on this second consideration
tonight on this. I will look at it possibly differently after
we work on these amendments.
Thornberry/ We can't do the amendment to attach it to this?
Nov/ We can but she says she would prefer to wait until the 10th
because everybody will be here.
Vanderhoef/ When everyone is here.
Nov/ I think having given the public an opportunity to think about
the amendments between now and September 10 is not a bad idea.
Baker/ Dee, have you had a chance to talk to the DR people about
those amendments?
Nov/ They were here yesterday and they will have a discussion
between now and September 10 at their meeting.
Vanderhoef/ And I am open for phone calls. Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#4o page 5
Audience/ (Can't hear).
Nov/ And we had concerns last night about whether we should require
a 60% majority or a 75% majority and there wasn't clear
consensus among council members. So those kinds of things are
still being discussed.
Norton/ Or any supermajority.
Kubby/ Or any kind. I would also request that we direct staff to
bring that back to us on September 10 versus August 27.
Nov/ I thought that was what Dee was doing.
Kubby/ Sorry, I didn't hear that that directly.
Vanderhoef/ I think we have it taken care of.
Nov/
Is there any other discussion? Roll call- (Yes: Norton, Nov,
Baker, Kubby. No: Thornberry, Vanderhoef). Okay, second
consideration was approved, 4-2 vote. Vanderhoef and
Thornberry voting no.
This represents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City councilmeeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
p.
City of Iowa City
Page 13
Consider an ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter by conditionally
rezoning a 2.32 acre tract from 1-1, Industrial, to C1-1, Intensive
Commercial, for property located east of Sunset Street on the south
side of Highway 1. (REZ96-0006) (Pass and adopt)
Comment: At its May 2 meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval of the proposed rezoning
subject to conditions. Staff recommended approval in a report dated
April 18.
Action: /%~-~x) / '~/~-4~.~ /} ~ ~L~ __
Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Galway Hills, Part Three,
a 21.29 acre, 53-1ot residential subdivision located south of Galway
Drive and east of Highway 218, Iowa City, Iowa. (SUB96-0014
Comment: At its ,June 20 meeting, by a vote of 6-0, the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommended approval of the final plat of Galway
Hills, Part Three, subject to approval of legal papers and construction
drawings prior to Council consideration of the plat. Staff recommended
approval in a report dated June 20. Construction drawings have been
approved. It is anticipated that legal papers will be approved prior to
the August 6 meeting.
Action: ~_~z(~/~../~/ ~,_,c) ~ ~ ~~
Consider forwarding a le~er to the Johnson County Board~
Supe~isors recommending denial of an application submi~ed by the
Detweiler Family Revocable Living Trust to fezone a 1.58 acre tract
located in Johnson County in Fringe Area 4 approximately A mile east
of the Iowa CiW corporate limits on Lynden Heights Road from A1,
Agricultural, to R2, Two-Family Residential. (CZ9628)
Comment: At its July 18 meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, by a vote of 7-0, recommended that the Council forward a
letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending denial
of the proposed rezoning. Staff recommended denial of the rezoning in
a memorandum dated July 18.
Action: K~/,~'~A,~, .--,
#4r page 1
ITEM NO. 4R. Consider forwarding a letter to the Johnson County
Board of Supervisors recommending denial of an application
submitted by the Detweiler Family Revocable Living Trust to fezone
a 1.58 acre tract located in Johnson County in Fringe Area 4
approximately mile east of the Iowa City corporate limits on Lynden
Heights Road from A1, Agricultural, to R2, Two-Family Residential.
(CZ9628)
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Thornberry. Discussion.
Baker/ Do we have a sense of when the Board will be discussing this
or their action?
Nov/ Karin Franklin is nodding no.
Baker/ Okay.
Nov/ Any other discussion? We ought to say the reason we are
recommending denial is the fact that this particular rezoning
does not meet the current Fringe Area Agreement or the new
proposed Fringe Area Agreement.
Vanderhoef/ This is still a positive vote.
Nov/ Okay.
Vanderhoef/ That we vote yes if we want to send the letter even
though we are denying.
Nov/ We vote yes to deny this application.
Kubby/ P/Z always sends us affirmative recommendations.
Nov/ Okay. Now, this is not a roll call. This is a motion. All in
favor, please say aye- (ayes). Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowe City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Paine 1 4
ITEM NO. 5
CONVEYANCE OF A FOUR-FOOT WIDE TRACT OF LAND FROM THE
NORTHERLY PORTION OF SHAMROCK PLACE APARTMENTS,
3501-3560 SHAMROCK PLACE, IOWA CITY, IOWA, TO THE COURT HILL
OWNERS ASSOCIATION
Comment: The City Council received a proposal from the Court Hill
Owners Association earlier this year to purchase a four foot wide tract of
land from the northerly portion of the tract of land upon which the
Shamrock Place Apartment Buildings are located. The Public Housing
Authority (PHA) has more land than needed to comply with zoning
regulations, and could sell the land to the Court Hill Owners Association.
There are now 72 condominium units on their property, but only 71 units
can be used based on their current square footage. The Court Hill Owners
Association has offered 92,600 for this tract of land, with the PHA
retaining a recreational/access easement for the benefit of the tenants and
guests of Shamrock Place. The public hearing should be continued to
August 27 to enable completion of a plat of survey.
ITEM NO. 6
Action:
CONSIDER
TAXATION
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3,
AND FEES," CHAPTER 4 "SCHEDULE
"CITY FINANCES,
OF FEES, RATES,
CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES," OF THE CITY, TO INCREASE
ON- AND OFF-STREET HOURLY PARKING RATES IN IOWA CITY, IOWA.
(SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Comment:
Swan and
contractors.
The specific fees to be increased are all parking meters, the
Dubuque Street parking ramps, and reserved spaces for
Staff recommends waiver and adoption at this time.
#5a page 1
ITEM NO. 5 CONVEYANCE OF A FOUR-FOOT WIDE TRACT OF LAND FROM THE
NORTHERLY PORTION OF SHAMROCK PLACE APARTMENTS,
3501-3560 SHAMROCK PLACE, IOWA CITY, IOWA, TO THE COURT HILL OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
a. PUBLIC HEARING
Nov/ P.h. is now open. P.h. needs a motion to be continued. Okay,
moved by Norton, seconded by Thornberry. Any discussion?
Kubby/ Why? I missed that.
Nov/ They haven't completed a ~lat survey.
Kubby/ Oh, I guess I didn't read the last line.
Nov/ I did, you didn't listen.
Woito/ We put this on the agenda because you had set the p.h. and
the survey isn't finished yet.
Baker/ Is the survey to determine the fair market value?
Woito/ No, it is to determine the land.
Baker/ I realize that but is the net result going to be that $2600
is going to high or low or the same.
Woito/ No, that won't be affected. It will be up to you whether you
want to increase the price.
Kubby/ It is the fair market value.
Atkins/ This is the fair market. You will recall it came in lower,
you sent us back, that is when we came back with the $2600.
Woito/ Oh, I am sorry.
Atkins/ Yeah.
Nov/ Okay. We have a motion that we didn't vote on, right. All in
favor please say aye- (ayes). Motion carried. The p.h. is now
continued to August 27.
This represents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthalowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#5b. page 1
ITEM NO. 5 CONVEYANCE OF A FOUR-FOOT WIDE TRACT OF LAND FROM THE
NORTHERLY PORTION OF SHAMROCK PLACE APARTMENTS,
3501-3560 SHAMROCK PLACE, IOWA CITY, IOWA, TO THE COURT HILL OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
Nov/ We need to defer to this August 27. Moved by Kubby, seconded
by Vanderhoef that the consideration of the resolution be
deferred to August 27. All in favor, please say aye- (ayes).
Mot~.on carried.
Kubby/ I would like to comment real briefly since I am not going to
be here to vote on this that I would- I am glad that we are
doing this. That we found a way to take some land that we
don't really use but still let the residents of Shamrock Place
use it for recreation and other access purposes. To allow that
72nd unit to be part of the rental market. But I am also glad
that we didn't go with our first impulse to accept the price
that they gave us. There were some council members who were
willing to sell it at below the fair market value and I am
very glad that we are not doing that. That we are going up to
the fair market value. It is going to be a profit situation
for the property owner. It is a good deal for everybody.
Nov/ Okay.
Thisrepresents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#6 page 1
ITEM NO. 6 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCEAMENDING TITLE 3, "CITY FINANCES,
TAXATION AND FEES," CHAPTER 4 "SCHEDULE OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES,
BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES," OF THE CITY, TO INCREASE ON- AND
OFF-STREET HOURLY PARKING RATES IN IOWA CITY, IOWA.(SECOND
CONSIDERATION)
Nov/ Do we have six people willing to waive? All right, Larry, get
out your card.
Kubby/ And what is the reason so we can do this before school
starts. And there are pros and cons. Sounds kind of slimy that
way I said it. But it is good not to change horses in the
middle of the semester.
Nov/ It is easier to start changing now rather than waiting until
we have a-
Kubby/ I will be a sixth vote.
Baker/ We will all share the slime equally here.
Nov/ Yes, go ahead, Larry. Moved by Baker, seconded by Vanderhoef
(waive). Discussion. Roll call- (yes).
Moved by Baker, seconded by Thornberry for final consideration
of this ordinance. Any discussion.
Baker/ You know, the difference between this council and the
council I was on with John McD. John McD had that memorized.
They did it so often, he could do it off the top of his head.
Kubby/ He said it so calmly.
Nov/ He usually did it right every time.
Baker/ They did it all of the time. Anyway-
Nov/ Roll call- (yes). Okay, the third consideration has passed. We
have adopted this ordinance.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City couacil meeting of August 6, 1596.
F080696
August 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Page 15
ITEM NO. 7
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NOS. 94-277 AND
95-79 AND IN LIEU THEREOF RE-ESTABLISHING THE IOWA CITY DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE AND ALSO APPROVING COMMITTEE BY-LAWS.
Comment: At its meeting of June 17, 1996, the Design Review
Committee recommended by a vote of 5-1, the adoption of Design Review
Committee by-law amendments regarding frequency of meetings,
Committee membership, and community education. The Rules Committee
has reviewed the by-law amendments and recommends adoption of the
amendments as provided in the Council packet. Non-substantive
clarifications were added by staff. Council should consider the resolution
after final adoption of the Design Review Overlay Zone Ordinance.
ITEM NO. 8
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING, AND DIRECTING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND
WILLIAMS PIPELINE COMPANY, A DELAWARE CORPORATION,
REGARDING CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS INVOLVING REMOVAL AND
RELOCATION OF A PIPELINE FROM LAND OWNED BY THE CITY.
ITEM NO. 9
Comment: Williams Pipeline Company owns a six-inch high pressure
pipeline located on the City's proposed water source and treatment facility
site. In addition, the Company has easement rights to construct additional
pipeline facilities on the site. The existing pipeline as well as any future
pipeline installation is incompatible with the City's proposed use of the site.
This agreement will cause the relocation of the pipeline and vacation of the
existing pipeline easement. The total estimated cost to the City to relocate
the pipeline and vacate the easement is 9835,000. Public Works
recommends approval of this resolution.
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING PAYMENT TO LOUIS BERGER
ASSOCIATES, INC., OF MARLON, IOWA, FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK
PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT CONNECTION/SOUTH RIVER CORRIDOR
SANITARY INTERCEPTOR AND RELIEF SEWERS PROJECT.
Comment: Louis Berger Associates has completed a!l field work associated
with the archaeological mitigation requirements within the Wastewater
Connection Project construction area. This work was completed without
an approved agreement in order to minimize construction "down time"
damages. Total cost of the archaeological field work is 9163,309.58.
Public Works recommends approval of this resolution.
#8 page 1
ITEM NO. 8 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING, AND
DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND WILLIAMS
PIPELINE COMPANY, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, REGARDING CERTAIN
OBLIGATIONS INVOLVING REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF A PIPELINE FROM
LAND OWNED BY THE CITY.
Nov/ Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Norton. Discussion.
Thornberry/ Go ahead.
Baker/ I am looking at the map that we were given at the staff
report. I used to live right off of Ventura up there at that
sort of right hand corner and I am looking at this line as it
goes through the north side of Iowa City. This seems like a
substantial project that will have an impact on the
environment which we will talk about the people that live up
there. What sort of- What have we done for public notice? Who
is responsible or?
Atkins/ Chuck will take care of that for you.
Schmadeke/ The pipeline company will be notifying the people. In
fact they have been negotiating with them for easements
already. So they have been on contact with the people.
Baker/ When you say negotiating for easements, the cost we are
authorizing here is not going to jump up on us if they have
easement problems? This is the-
Schmadeke/ Well, they have estimated easement costs. If they are
more than what they estimate, the cost will be-
Atkins/ This is as close to as kind of a turn key operation as I
think we can get in something such as this. The intent was one
time and it is their show.
Kubby/ It is my understanding that the new route is the same as the
current route that they have for some other pipes where they
have already cleared and I went and looked at the aerial
photograph, thanks for having that at the desk. And it really
shows clearly where destruction has already happened and that
is where the line, the new pipe, or this pipe will be moved.
Baker/ This line is not necessarily accurate in the report.
Nov/ Well, they already have a pipe there.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#8 page 2
Baker/ I know, I lived by it.
Kubby/ That is the same route, I guess. And so if you think that is
a problem, then it is a problem that you know about. But it is
the same route that they currently have. They are not
expanding their route.
Schmadeke/ Except where it crosses the interstate. It cuts to the
north once you get to the east side of Dubuque Street.
Baker/ So there aren't going to be a trench this long across north
Iowa City?
Schmadeke/ They will be cutting a trench from the river east to
Dubuque Street.
Baker/ There is going to be a trench.
Kubby/ Along a line where a previous trench.
Thornberry/ They are retrenching.
Arkins/ Chuck, as I understand it, for all practical purposes, they
have an existing easement. They have two pipes in there. This
is the third pipe. Will there be a trench, certainly, to lay
this new pipe line. But it is within the existing easement
give or take.
Schmadeke/ That is right. They will do a lot of boring, too. They
are going to start at about the trailer court and bore
underneath the trailer court property, some apartments,
underneath Dubuque Street, over to the east side of Dubuque
Street and then bore again to the north side of the
interstate.
Baker/ Does this mean that they are going-They are doing a third
pipe along the north side and then they are going back across
1-80 at the corner of Ventura there?
Schmadeke/ Right to tie into the existing pipe on the north side.
Baker/ The third line stops at that point?
Schmadeke/ That is right.
Baker/ That is all I have, thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996,
F080696
#8 page 3
Nov/ And are they going to go under the river, too?
Schmadeke/ They will go under the river as well, yes.
Nov/ They currently have pipes going under the river?
Schmadeke/ That is right.
Nov/ We hope that is going to be okay. We haven't heard anything
about those pipes cracking and letting stuff into the river.
Schmadeke/ No, if they do they will be downstream from our water
intake.
Council/ (All talking).
Arkins/ We have a number of river crossings.
Norton/ There must be pipelines under every river.
Atkins/ I was just asking Chuck. We, the city, have pipes under the
river just for our utility system.
Nov/ We aren't pumping gasoline or oil.
Atkins/ Sewage.
Nov/ That is true.
Thornberry/ This is the same pipeline that is in this memo? Is that
correct?
Schmadeke/ Yes.
Thornberry/ I just wanted to let the people know that this pipeline
that is already there will be used, be flushed, and then used.
The University of Iowa has
conduit for their proposed
campus and Oakdale Campus.
dead pipe under the ground.
for the things that would
indicated using the pipeline as a
fiber optics line between the main
so it is not going to be just a
It is going to be flushed and used
seem to me that that would be an
ideal place to put these fiber optics things.
Baker/ Buried electricity, too.
Thornberry/ It could be used for all kinds of things.
enough to crawl through.
It is big
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#8 page 4
Atkins/ Every time it appears that we have any kind of utility
work, I think the University pops up to Chuck's door to put a
little fiber optic line in somewhere. And part of this plan
also, if I recall Chuck, it does already have a river cross
link. It is of some value.
Kubby/ Will we have compensation if we cooperate with the
University?
Schmadeke/ We will own the pipeline including the river crossings.
Kubby/ I would assume that we would charge them for the use of
that.
Thornberry/ And since the city does not have any property rights
over the Williams Pipeline easements, the city cannot conduct
any archeological investigation or mitigation without property
owner permission. It is kind of a moot point.
Atkins/ I was asked to check and see what they plan to do and we
will prepare a letter to them and find out.
Kubby/ Even though it is not a responsibility, it would be good to
make sure they understand that it is their responsibility and
if they have some obligation to do some work, that we make
sure.
Thornberry/ But it is an existing pipe, though.
Norton/ It would be nice to defer some of our or defray some of the
costs of selling that pipe space.
Atkins/ We probably want to lease it.
Nov/ Yes, absolutely. Okay, everybody ready? Roll call- (yes). This
resolution has been approved.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowaCitycouncilmeeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#9 page 1
ITEM NO. 9 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING PAYMENT TO LOUIS BERGER
ASSOCIATES, INC., OF MARION, IOWA, FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK
PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT CONNECTION/SOUTH RIVER CORRIDOR SANITARY INTERCEPTORAND
RELIEF SEWERS PROJECT.
Nov/ Moved by Kubby, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion.
Thornberry/ I had something on that. I thought there were more
fees, more costs than that.
Nov/ There are two resolutions. The other one is a contract-
Atkins/ #10 is the new work.
Thornberry/ Yeah, add those two together and you get $272,138.14
and that was to look for stuff that nothing was found.
Nov/ Well, this amount nothing was found. The future contract we
don't know yet if they may have found something or not.
Thornberry/ I hope we get something for that money.
Norton/ You can't guarantee. You got to do it.
Kubby/ Let's say I-
Thornberry/ Yeah, but it didn't happen. I mean it didn't. You can
say what if- what if they found, you know, 83 graves. But they
didn't find anything.
Kubby/ But that is the point. We have an obligation to look. What
if someone catered with your business for 100 people and you
did all that work and provided that food and they said oh, I
am a vegetarian, they can't eat that. Forget it, you would
still want to be paid because you made a contract and we have
an obligation.
Thornberry/ You can say what if all day long but it is very
expensive peek. I am just saying it is a very expensive peek.
Norton/ It would be pretty expensive even if they had found
something.
Thornberry/ But they didn't find something.
Norton/ But I mean you can't- What do you want to do, write a
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscrlption ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#9 page 2
contract?
Thornberry/ I didn't think there was anything there.
Nov/ That is true and most of us agree that they were not likely to
find something but we had no choice. So-
Vanderhoef/ And we will be doing more of this on the other sites,
the peninsula and up in the plant site north of 1-80 and all
along the trenching as we go through the city for this and
people need to be aware that this is an expense that comes
with this whole process of sewer system and water plant.
Nov/ And that is why our rates are high.
Vanderhoef/ That is certainly adding to the cost of our rates,
correct.
Kubby/ It is not an afterthought. It is our legal obligation.
Thornberry/ It wasn't proposed in the original proposal.
Norton/ Well, it should have been in some sense.
Arkins/ We had secured permission from the Corps under that
national permitting process. They somewhat changed their mind.
We felt we had fulfilled the obligation and they said we had
not and they are the enforcement agency for this particular
regulation and we are fulfilling it. We are in front of it on
the next one.
Vanderhoef/ We won't have emergency costs.
Woito/ No down time.
Thornberry/ Why does it cost so much to live in Iowa City? Never
mind.
Nov/ Never mind, right.
Atkins/ These are state and federal laws. Every city is subject to
this. Every private business is subject to this if they are
doing any- You just don't hear about it. If they disrupt a
large tract of land, they have to perform archeological
studies.
Thornberry/ You know, what about a little piece of land? It could
This represents only a reesonably accurate transcrlptio~l of the Iowa City cour~cll meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#9 page 3
be right over something, you know.
Atkins/ I assume they have a threshold. If it reaches a certain
point.
Kubby/ Just like our Sensitive Areas Ordinance exempts one house if
you buy one lot and one house, you are exempt for a s.f. We do
that do. A difference in law for-
Norton/ (Can't hear).
Thornberry/ well, we got to pay the bill, so-
Nov/ Okay, roll call- (yes). Okay, the resolution has been adopted.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthalowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
.2¢5
Aul~ust 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Page 16
ITEM NO. 10
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING, AND DIRECTING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND LOUIS
BERGER ASSOCIATES, INC., OF MARION, IOWA TO PROVIDE
CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL MITIGATION IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT CONNECTION/SOUTH RIVER CORRIDOR INTERCEPTOR AND
RELIEF SEWERS PROJECT.
ITEM NO. 11
Comment: With the completion of the field work portion of archaeological
mitigation along the South River Corridor Interceptor Sewer route, it is now
necessary to complete laboratory analysis and report production as required
by the U,S. Corps of Engineers and the Iowa State Historic Preservation
Office. The negotiated lump sum fee for the completion of all remaining
archaeological work is ~108,828.56. Public Works recommends approval
of this resolution.
Action:
CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ON UNCLASSIFIED SALARIES AND
COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY,
CITY CLERK, AND CITY MANAGER.
ITEM NO. 12
Comment: This resolution sets the salaries for the City Manager, City
Attorney, and City Clerk. All three Council appointees were evaluated
during Council Executive Session held on July 9, 1996.
Action: 7/~,~-~--~C~,, / ~'~_4~---~z.2
CI~ COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS,
a. Consider one appointment to the Airport Commission to fill a vacancy
for an unexpired term ending March 1, 1997. (Robert Hicks resigned.),~
(4 males and 0 females currently serve on this Commission.)
b. Consider one appointment to the Board of Appeals to fill a vacancy for
an unexpired term of a Licensed P}umber ending December 31, 1997.
(Jane Hagedom resigned.) (5 males and 1 female currently serve on
#10 page
ITEM NO. 10 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING, AND
DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND LOUIS BERGER
ASSOCIATES, INC., OF MARION, IOWA TO PROVIDE CONSULTANT SERVICES
FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL MITIGATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT CONNECTION/SOUTH RIVER COP~RIDOR
INTERCEPTOR AND RELIEF SEWERS PROJECT.
Nov/ Moved by Kubby,seconded by Norton. Discussion.
Thornberry/ I hope they find something.
Nov/ Roll call- (yes). This resolution has been adopted.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
page 1
ITEM NO. 11 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ON UNCLASSIFIED SALARIES AND
COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997 FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY
CLERK, AND CITY MANAGER.
Nov/ Moved by Thornberry, seconded by Norton. Discussion.
Baker/ Madam Mayor, as a matter of courtesy for me and to other
affected individuals, I would move that we vote on these three
positions separately. I am not quite sure of the process of
whether it is an amendment or just an informal agreement. But
I would like to have separate votes on city manager, city
attorney and city clerk.
Kubby/ Second.
Nov/
Moved by Baker, seconded by Kubby that these votes be
separated. Now, the way I understand this, we vote on whether
or not to separate and then we vote on the individuals or on
the joint resolution. Okay. Is there any discussion on whether
or not to separate?
Thornberry/ I think that perhaps since all of the council members
were in e.s., would it be prudent to wait for a full
compliment of councilors?
Baker/ To vote on the pay? Any of the pay raises?
Kubby/ The outcome I don't think would change.
Baker/ There is no reason to, I think, defer this in any form.
Thornberry/ Okay. I am just asking° You know.
Nov/ Well?
Kubby/ And that question should be
together or separate probably
because we don't have Ernie.
relevant whether they are all
if there is a reason to defer
Nov/ I tend to agree with Karen that we are going to get the same
result.
Thornberry/ Fine.
Baker/ And I just want to make it clear that I want to do this
because I have strong feelings about one of the proposed pay
raises and strong enough feelings that if I were forced to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#11 page 2
vote on the joint resolution, I would vote no on all three of
them. And I would like to separate those other two out.
Nov/ Okay. Is there any other discussion? All in favor of amending
this to three separate votes, please say aye- (ayes; Baker,
Kubby, Norton). All those opposed please say same sign- (aye:
Nov, Vanderhoef, Thornberry). Sounds like a 3-3. What do you
think.
Karr/ 3-3. So it is defeated.
Kubby/ Wow.
Baker/ With that in mind-
Kubby/ It is just a matter of courtesy so council members can vote
they way they want.
Baker/ We have done this on other issues over and over again for
years. Previous council, this council and if it is not the
wish of the majority or a majority, I can certainly live with
that. I just want to explain to the public that I will be
voting no on this entire resolution. My reservation is
directed at one particular position, the city attorney's
position. It is scheduled to get an 8.3% pay raise which I
just feel it inappropriate at this time. I would like to
express that in some form and unfortunately I have been forced
to express it collectively instead of individually.
CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 96-91 SIDE 2
Kubby/ For the same reason and for me it is not a matter of being
dissuuisfied with a generalized work product but the feeling
that if a majority of council wants to give a pay increase
like that, that we should do it over a period of time and not
in a lump sum and all the appointed employees who know that
when something goes right, I say it, and when I don't like
something that is going on, I am at your doorstep trying to be
as specific as possible about things I don't like and I feel
strongly enough about it to vote no for all of the positions
and it is unfortunate to be placed in this position.
Thornberry/ Okay, as far as I am concerned, it is not the
percentage increase that I am looking at. I am looking at the
position of city attorney, of city manager and city clerk and
what these positions should be paid. What is the pay scale for
those positions. We have looked at many other cities in the
Thisrepresents onlyareasonably accuratetraf~scription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#11 page 3
Midwest, inside and outside of Iowa City and the city attorney
position was so much lower than any other city of comparable
size in relation to the city manager and city clerk position
that the last council, I feel, was in error in not giving an
adequate increase to that position a year ago. All this is is
a make up from the previous councils.
Nov/ Well, you don't know that they were in error. You weren't
sitting there when they were doing that evaluation.
Thornberry/ My feeling is this, Naomi, that is if that position
isn't worth what we are saying it is worth now, I would like
a city attorney better than a $5.00 or $10.00 or $50.00
attorney. If I were going to an attorney and if I want that
attorney representing the City of Iowa City in litigation, I
would want the best attorney available for my interests and I
think the salary range of that position a year ago was a slap
in the face to the position. I don't think if the city
attorney left, I don't think we could get a competent attorney
for that salary for the job that is done for the city. And I
don't know if I would go to an attorney that costs so little.
I don't think that I would feel comfortable.
Nov/ Part of this is the fact that you can make more money in the
private world than in the public world.
Thornberry/ Absolutely.
Nov/ So, that is not-
Thornberry/ But taking like cities of Iowa City were are getting
now to a point where I think that position should be as far as
the dollar compensation is concerned.
Norton/ I would like to second support to Dean's argument here. I
look at this as an adjustment in substantial part. In
reference to other cities, this position in other cities of a
comparable sort including some outside the state and also with
respect to other positions in the city hierarchy. I think that
were perhaps out of line there. The whole issue of pretty
complicated and we need to revisit it and give some further
consideration of our evaluations schemes and so fourth.
think it would have to be understood that a substantial part
of it as an adjustment.
Thornberry/ And as far as the city manager's position is concerned,
I look at his position as that as a CEO of a corporation even
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the iowa City cour~cil meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#11 page 4
though it is a corporation that deals exclusively in services
other than maybe water. But in the private sector a CEO of a
size of a corporation the size of Iowa city and the people
that Steve Atkins has reporting to him, it is a very very
demanding, very responsible position and as is the city
attorney and the city clerk. And I think that with the people
that are in these positions, they need to be compensated
adequately even though it is less than they could be making in
the private sector. It is a service to the community. It is
their vocation but they still need to be compensated for the
job that they are doing, for the job, for the position that is
there and it is a big job and we need competent good people
and when we get them and when we have them, they need to be
compensated fairly. Not overly compensated but not under
compensated and I think that it is just-
Nov/
While we are on this discussion, I don't know where the Press
Citizen got 12% increase that was correctly stated by Mr.
Baker. It is 8.3%.
Thornberry/ But it is not really the percentage that I am looking
at. It is the dollar figure for the position, more than a
percentage because I think this is kind of a little make up
from the-
Nov/ But I want people who read the newspaper to realize that that
was an error.
Kubby/ And even though I think there are some legitimate points for
the title of the position of city attorney, that there may be
some inequities compared to other positions in the city. When
you make adjustments like that, most corporations and most
human service agencies like we did in this county five years
ago or so, you have a scheme of how to do that over time
because we also have to be responsible to the tax payers and
that money comes out of the General Fund and we have to
balance all of those-
Thornberry/ That is correct but you were on the council last time
they gave raises and I think that you were in error and this
is kind of a make up. Just a personal thought.
Nov/
Okay, any other discussion. Roll call- (Yes; no: Baker,
Kubby.). Okay, the resolution was adopted on a 4-2 vote. Baker
and Kubby voting no.
This represents on]y a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#12 page
ITEM NO. 12 CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS.
Consider one appointment to the Airport Commission to fill a
vacancy for an unexpired term ending March 1, 1997.(Robert Hicks
resigned.)
(4 males and 0 females currently serve on this Commission.)
Consider one appointment to the Board of Appeals to fill a vacancy
for an unexpired term of a Licensed Plumber ending December 31,
1997.
(Jane Hagedom resigned.) (5 males and 1 female currently serve on
this Board.)
Nov/ We need to have a motion to approve these appointments.
Kubby/ I move that we appoint John Penick to the Airport Commission
and I can't remember the plumbers name?
Nov/ Gary Hamann.
Kubby/ Thank you. To the Board of Appeals.
Nov/
Okay, I suppose I could have said that to clear all of this
up. Okay. The council discussed the appointments yesterday and
we agreed that John Penick would be on the Airport Commission
and Gary Hamann on the Board of Appeals. All in favor lease
say aye- (ayes).
Karr/ Did we have the second to that motion?
Nov/ We didn't. I am sorry.
Norton/ I second it.
Nov/ Okay. Very sorry. Moved by Kubby, seconded by Norton.
Thornberry/ And I will be abstaining due to the fact that I am in
a commercial endeavor with one of the applicants. So I have to
abstain from the vote.
Nov/ All right, do you then separate those two or do you just let
him abstain on both. Okay, we abstain on both. All in favor,
please say aye- (ayes). And one abstain. Okay. We approved
those two appoiptments on a 5-01 vote and Thornberry
abstained.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
August 6, 1996
City of Iowa City
Page 17
ITEM NO. 13 ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES.
a. Current vacancies.
(1)
Housing & Community Development Commission - One vacancy
to fill an unexpired term ending September 1, 1997. (Christina
Randall resigned.) (3 males and 2 females currently serve on this
Board.) [Correspondence from Chair of Housing and Community
Development Commission included in Council packet. Staff
memorandum on conflict-of-interest included in information
packet.]
This appointment will be made at the September 10 meeting of
the City Council.
b. Previously announced vacancies.
(1)
Housing & Community Development Commission Three
vacancies for three, three-year terms ending September 1, 1999.
(Terms end for Linda Murray, James Harris, and Elizabeth
Swenson.) 3 males and 2 females currently serve on this Board.)
These appointments will be made at the August 27 meeting of the
City Council.
ITEM NO. 14
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
ITEM NO. 15
REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY.
a. City Manager.
b. City Attorney.
ITEM NO. 16
ADJOURNMENT.
#14 page 1
IT~ NO. 14 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Nov/ City Council Information. Mr. Norton.
Norton/ Well I will be blessedly brief. I mentioned last night my
interest in getting some data together about the parking
situation d.t. because we have different views as the
community about whether there is or isn't a parking so I've
given a few notes to the City Manager today about information
I assume might be useful. The exact form of it I don't know,
but trying to figure exactly if what our utilization is
because of our ramps and lots and street meters and so on so
that we are more shared understanding among ourselves and with
the public about exactly where we stand on this so I think
that's important. I also want to at this point comment on
something that Larry's going to bring up later, but getting
serious about our d.t. planning. That will come up in a few
minutes. One thing I should acknowledge is I commented last
week or two weeks or three weeks ago about the North Dodge
situation and I got a note shortly saying that was all been
considered and arborvitae hedges to planted along there and
things are all under control so I certainly want to back off
that concern.
Thornberry/ I'm glad you're not worried about that any more.
Norton/ Yeah. I've got other things now, right.
Nov/ Okay. Anything else?
Norton/ That's it.
Nov/ Karen.
Kubby/ There was a lot of talk at the Council meeting, last night
at our informal meeting and through the Gazette, the
Press-Citizen, and at least one news channel today about the
water impact fees. And one of the things that I don't think
really got mentioned very (can't hear) in any of this
discussion is that some group of people is going to pay for
the costs of building enough capacity to accommodate future
growth. And most of the people interviewed were people who
were in the development saying we don't want it here and it's
going to be an impediment to growth. But if we pick the small
percentage, I don't know what the percentage is going to be,
the percentage that is attributable to new growth, then old
growth pays for it. And so somebody's going to pay for it. And
Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#14 page 2
so I guess I want that to be entered into the discussion
somewhere to make sure that the 60,000 of us who are here are
going to be paying for it if the 10,000 new people who come in
over the next 20 years don't or whatever the actual numbers
are, so I guess I just want to make sure that that's part of
our discussion.
There's an event happening FYI tomorrow night, Wednesday,
August 7. It's a Share the Road Ride II, and it's a bike ride
to be held in memory of bicyclists who have been killed when
riding their bikes on county roads. And we will be meeting at
College Green Park at 6:00 PM. We'll be riding down Sand Road
to Hills and return via old Hwy 218. If you don't want to
participate in the ride but you want to show your support for
this concept and the memory of the bicyclists who have been
killed, then you can join us for dinner at J.C.'s. If you ride
your bike there you get a 10% discount. Helmets are required,
so be safe out on the road and maybe see you at College Green
Park. You could send us off, too. You don't have to ride. You
can be at College Green Park at 6:00 and send us off.
And lastly, I've been meaning to make a personal call, but
certainly I want to do this publicly. I want to thank Julia
and Philip Mears. They live on College Street east of
Muscatine and their yard is so beautiful. They've got it
totally planted with all these flowers that bloom at different
times of the year and every time I walk or ride my bike or
even take the bus by their house, it's different. It's really
a community service. And you can tell how much time and energy
their family has put into their yard. And I just wanted to
thank them that they're part of what makes Iowa City a
beautiful place.
Nov/ Very good.
Kubby/ Thanks.
Nov/ Dean.
Thornberry/ Just one comment. Karen, on the water impact fee, you
must I think take into consideration or we must take into
consideration in our discussion of this, the people who are
currently living in Iowa City and are paying the water rates
as they are today and yesterday and the day before and move to
a new house, build a new house. And if there is a $500, $1000,
$1500 impact fee, whatever it may be, they're already paying
that increased rate now and through a lot of walking and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14 page 3
calling and help from a lot of people, I found out from
several sources that approximately 40% of the people who buy
new houses in Iowa City are current residents of Iowa City
already. 51% are residents coming into Iowa City from other
places whether it be Coralville, surrounding areas, or out of
the state, so to put a very large impact fee on a new house is
like a double whammy to people who are.
Kubby/ I disagree. Because a new house is still causing the need
for a new plant, so that choice of moving to a new property is
still causing the new impact for increased capacity of the
plant.
Thornberry/ And then once the people who are living in the new
house and then turn around and sell it again, the people who
move to that used house or that pre-owned house whatever, will
in essence be paying that impact fee back to the homeowner
because that's going to be included in the price of the house
to recoup the costs of buying that house. So the price of
houses in Iowa City will just escalate because they're going
to be getting that impact fee back plus the cost of the house
and all the other fees. So I can see the escalation of the
cost of houses down the road if this impact fee were done on
every new house built in Iowa City from now on.
Council/ (All talking)
Thornberry/ But anyway, that will be an issue for discussion when
we get to that point.
Norton/ Well I just thought it premature to go (can't hear) because
this is a extremely complicated issue. Cedar Rapids is looking
at it, Portland. It's extremely complicated and I think that
to imply that we're anywhere close to an impact fee would be
a mistake. I think we're just exploring the concept at this
point.
Thornberry/ Right. Okay. I would like to mention it's very very
warm out there. It has been for the last couple of days and
please people watch out for your pets. The pets outside or in
a car when it's this hot, it doesn't take long for them to go
into heat arrest and die very very quickly. Just in an hour
they can die with nor shade or water so please watch your
pets. Pay attention to your pets.
And just a note for a speedy recovery to Mrs. Bell, Haywood
Bell's mother, a long time resident of Iowa City. I wish her
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting ofAu§ust6,1996.
F080696
#14 page 4
a speedy recovery of her recent disability.
Nov/ Dee.
Vanderhoef/ Last night we had some information put on our desk that
I didn't really read until today about the signage and I had
a bit of concern with the signage, the third page which is the
north bound. It says for both north and south, and this should
be for northbound traffic only. And I questioned why we were
using the exit down at Hwy 1 as the University Hospital exit
and I understand in talking to Joe just a few minutes ago that
the reason that is on there is because the Hospital chooses to
notify how emergency vehicles get to the Hospital and that
they want them to use that route and then go up Grand Avenue
to the emergency section. However I also understand now that
University is a bit behind us at this point but are worki:~g
towards some new signage also to identify places on the campus
and at that time and when Melrose Avenue gets opened then some
signage for U Hospital can be placed on Melrose for an exit
there to get to athletic events and to Hospital events. So
we'll just keep posted on that one but we'll go ahead with our
own as I understand it. We also had a nice memo in the packet
and just a complement to Brad Neumann and to the citizens of
Iowa City, we have decreased our refuse into City Landfill by
another 5.7% during this past year which coupled with another
36.25% since 1988, means that we're doing a good job folks and
thank you.
Kubby/ That last 12% is going to be the toughest for us.
Vanderhoef/ And our recycling has just
in this last year so I expect
watching what we're doing.
increased the possibilities
we'll make it if we keep
The historical site designation I mentioned this last night
and would like it out for the public, we had just one formal
objection to placing a property onto the Historic Site in this
last group of designations. And it slipped by sort of in that
I'm not real clear on when the property owners were informed
of how they formally protest and I just wanted it to be clear
because there'll be some more historic sites coming up and
there is a formal protest because this is a zoning action and
it's a very simple form to fill out and anyone who is
interested in formally protesting can stop at the clerks
office and pick up the paper, fill it out, and it is
notarized. It's not expensive. It's not time consuming. It's
just a simple process and it must be done before the closing
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14 page 5
of the p.h. on the action to be completed. And I'm asking
staff to include this notice of how to do the formal protest
in their materials they send out. They have a three page
sections of questions and answers about the historic landmark
designations and I am requesting that this will go directly
into this information so it goes out first hand and is there
for everyone to resort to.
Kubby/ Just to make sure we have four people who want to direct
staff to do that. I think it's a very good idea.
Vanderhoef/ One more thing with Historic Preservation and it will
also go with Design Review. I would like, not minute by
minute, but I would like some accounting annually of the
amount of staff time that is being used to staff both the
Historic Preservation and Design Review Committees now that we
have ordinances in place that are requiring more official
meetings and materials to put out.
Nov/ I think it's just Design Review that's meeting more often and
only on demand.
Vanderhoef/ Yeah. And I know that it goes up and down with various
things. Design Review's going to be spending a lot of hours I
suspect this next year with writing the new guidelines and
Historic Preservation has been in the process of that and as
more and more areas or properties are designated, this
continues on with more staff time and then the review process
falls in if they are on, they have the designation. So I'd
just like to have an idea of what's happening with that. Okay.
Nov/ Is that possible?
Atkins/ We have all of our Boards and Commissions have a staff
person assigned to them and we can estimate reasonably
accurately the amount of time our faculty minutes are taking,
agenda preparation. If we did see an upturn in the work as I
think Dee is pointing out, we can estimate, I think reasonably
accurately. I think I need to block the times from this point
we'll choose six months to a year or something such as that.
Vanderhoef/ I guess when I would like the reporting would
when we're starting in to the budget process so that
an idea of what is happened the previous year and
we're seeing a huge increase.
be like
we have
whether
Atkins/ Unless I hear objections from you, I'll just simply try to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14
page 6
tell them to find some way to track the amount of time. But it
seems some time ago I don't recall it specifically I think
very early in my tenure here, we did a report for the council
on all the boards and commissions. I think when we were
putting some kind of report together because again you can't
have a commission without a staff person.
Norton/ But I want this in context, not
special (can't hear) Staff spends
Atkins/ No, that's very true.
Norton/ It ought to be in full context.
singled out as though it's
time on a lot of things.
Vanderhoef/ And compare, what I'm interested right now is if there
is significant increase.
Atkins/ I think you verify the fact that Design Review has new work
items. I would just as soon carve off that work item and say
track this work item. How much time do you have to devote to
it? Because if you're going to have a Committee, we're going
to staff it for you.
Kubby/ But on the other hand the way we'll see it is the Planning
Department will be approaching the City Manager to recommend
different staff configurations or they'll have different staff
configurations internally, or be approaching you to recommend
to us additional staff.
Atkins/ They're pretty ingenious about ways to support those
things, so we'll get you some information.
Norton/ No free lunch.
Atkins/ That's true.
Norton/ As we know it.
Vanderhoef/ You're right.
Norton/ No free anything.
Vanderhoef/ That's all I have. Thanks.
Nov/ Larry.
Baker/ A couple of things. When is the next meeting where all seven
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City councilmeeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#14 page 7
of us are going to be here?
Nov/ September 10.
Baker/ We've got some things we're going to backlog right now, I'd
like to see us get to but we need seven members to discuss.
For example, I passed out that memo at ~he last meeting about
the ICAD reporting requirement suggestions that I'd like to
talk about that when we have seven people. The Parks and
Recreation Commission asked us for some direction on the
Cemetery. One of our favorite subjects, I'd like to talk about
that.
Kubby/ We said last night to give us a recommendation, without us
stating a policy that we were or were not going to stay in the
cemetery business or whether it would be there.
Baker/ You want a recommendation without a direction?
Norton/ They asked.
Nov/ Well, they wrote a letter and said would you like our
recommendation. We said yes, send us your recommendation.
That's how we did it.
Baker/ But that letter implied that we need to decide whether to
stay in the cemetery business and then they can make a
recommendation about such and such.
Kubby/ I think we're asking for, do you think whether or not we
stay in the cemetery business, should we expand Oakland into
Hickory Hill.
Baker/ Okay. Let's talk about that. That's going to be a good
discussion.
Atkins/ Either you are in the cemetery business. You aren't going
to get out of it. You may not do any more of it, but you're
not going to get out of it.
council/ (All talking).
Baker/ Speaking of the cemetery business, there's a new sign at the
cemetery- non-perpetual care. What does that mean?
Atkins/ There is a legal requirement on, if I sound like I'm really
kind of tap dancing around it, I am. There is a legal
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa Cit,! council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14 page 8
requirement. Ours is considered a non-perpetual care, although
we do have a perpetual care fund that we do have for this and
it's a designation that we have to notify and had to put a
sign up.
Woito/ It's required by state law, Larry. We all used to be
perpetual care cemeteries which meant that you had a fund and
you had to use that money to take care of the cemetery. They
moved away from that and it's required that we say that we're
non-perpetual care.
Kubby/ Put the word perpetual in a circle with a slash through it.
Atkins/ As far as the cemetery it sounds better, as far as the
cemetery user, the person that uses the cemetery.
Baker/ Here's the problem, and it's going to happen when we talk
about the cemetery, everybody's going to start laughing. It's
a hard subject to.
Kubby/ It's a land use issue basically.
Baker/ It is. And it's a lot more implications, but boy it's easier
to talk about parks then it is about cemeteries.
Arkins/ Um-huh.
Baker/ But I'm looking forward to that one, but I expect to lose
it, to that debate. So they're going to make a recommendation
to us and we'll figure out something after that. Okay. I was
going to thank Dale.
Atkins/ He's on vacation this week.
Baker/ For his memo about the legislative report, these bills. It
sounded very interesting. I am going to see some of those
people at a function next week.
Atkins/ Lisa did that for you.
Baker/ Lisa, I am sorry. Lisa, our city manager's
assistant. The sort of power behind the big
forget Dale. Dale didn't do squat on this.
administrative
cheese. Well,
Arkins/ No, Dale told Lisa.
Baker/ I am going to see some of those legislators probably next
Thisrepresents only a reasonably accurate transcription of thelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#14 page 9
week at a function. We will talk about that.
What did you all decide last night, if anything, about the
memo on the memo crossing cost sharing thing? What is going on
with that?
Kubby/ Well, it matters if you read the Gazette or Press Citizen.
Nov/
What went on is that we agreed that this is an idea worth
pursuing and we would make an application for the funding and
if the funding were granted from the state, we would consider
some kind of local match. A very non-specific, non-definite
commitment.
Norton/ We didn't commit ourselves to any money, precisely. We
committed ourselves to be an agent for getting the grant.
Baker/ As long you didn't commit yourself to (can't hear).
Kubby/ People are thinking about it.
Norton/ They're thinking, but we didn't commit.
Atkins/ I was left with the impression that match is negotiable
because opinions on the Council were all over the place. The
idea was to pur~ue it, but the match was very very negotiable.
Norton/ Starting at zero.
Baker/ I know you talked last night about it to Jim Clark Building.
A parallel issue but not particularly about his construction
was with these new apartments, four and five bedroom
apartments, we're going to see more and more central air units
requiring separate compressors. Currently there's no
regulations on where they can go or should go or how they
should be screened. I talked to Jim about this. He has his
reasons for doing that, but I told him that I would suggest to
Council that it's inappropriate in the long run to continue to
let those compressors be out on balconies. And we ought to
pursue some sort of housing code regulation requiring them to
be placed someplace else than screened.
Nov/ On the roof?
Baker/ It's a possibility. The side of the building.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14 page l0
Nov/ You think four of them?
Baker/ What you may force them to do is put in central air for the
building.
Nov/ Oh, well that's-
Baker/ Which is actually cheaper than 64 different units.
Nov/ It's an energy conservation kind of thing. If we want the air
conditioning on, you turn it on. And don't leave it running
and let everybody else help pay for it.
Baker/ Well, my point is, is there any interest on the Council on
prohibit it, having the Housing Department or appropriate body
take a look and say this is. I've been told by the Housing
Inspection Department that there's some concern on one of the
city commissions about this. I've been following through oD
this. It's not just something that I've noticed, that indeed
there is a problem.
Thornberry/ Mr. Clark did mention last night that he did talk with
you, and they came back and said that they perhaps could hide
them better if they were darker in color and the same color as
they grate around which they will do on this new project as
opposed to the one on Burlington Street.
Baker/ There's the aesthetic question and he assures me that indeed
you can sort of blend that in which is fine but you still have
a different set of problems associated with those on a small
balcony and that's again the impetus for my suggestion is not
aesthetic. Is it appropriate for those things to be on such
small balconies? And I'd like to say no it isn't.
Nov/ Would you have the same concern if the balcony were larger?
Baker/ I'd have to think about that. I don't know.
Nov/
I have a feeling when I look at this and see how the building
is designed, the only reason for the balconies is that need an
outdoor spot for that compressor unit. They cannot keep it
inside. It needs air circulation around it. Therefore all
these apartments have balconies. I'm not sure that the
balconies were designed for the enjoyment of the tenants as
well as the use of the storage of this particular unit. I just
don't know.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996,
F080696
#14 page 11
Thornberry/ Perhaps then that would be up to the tenant to say I
don't want to move into this apartment.
Nov/ Um-huh. Right.
Kubby/ This issue is associated with the compressor.
Norton/ We could have the Housing Department look at all kinds of
new developments. It may change the requirements. It seems to
me the question of considering whether there's anything that
might be said or done about this is something that probably
ought do. There must be all kinds of technical developments
that make it necessary to re-look at the codes.
Kubby/ Would this be the Board of Appeals because they look at the
building codes, Linda?
Woito/ They could.
Kubby/ We could just ask them to discuss it. They might not have a
recommendation. They may say we don't want to recommend
anything or they may say we want to keep it as it is or here's
some options.
Baker/ I think that was the Board that was referred to.
Kubby/ Why don't we direct the Board of Appeals to look at it?
Norton/ Take a look at it.
Nov/ I willing to have them look at it.
Thornberry/ Is that the Board of Appeals?
Norton/ I'm kind of surprised too.
Thornberry/ Would that be the Building Code area?
Norton/ Building official.
Kubby/ Board of Appeals is the group of citizens that work with the
Building Department.
Woito/ UBC, uniform Building Code and Plumbing Code.
Norton/ We're not prejudging but they should take a look and maybe
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of August 6, 1996.
F080696
#14 page 12
there's some information we can get.
Nov/ From what I know about them, they must be on a solid surface
rather than on dirt. They must be level and therefore they're
on a balcony or on a roof. I've never seen done any other way.
Thornberry/ Or on the ground. Mine are on the ground but I've only
got a two level apartment building and they're all the down.
I mean there's a whole line of them. It doesn't look very-
Nov/ You could line them up on the ground.
Baker/ But ahead of time if you know what the rules are that
require on the ground or you can screen it and you build that
into your plan.
Norton/ And there's a serious question of how far you can pipe the
stuff and so on. It's very interesting and ought to be
considered.
Thornberry/ For that many units you'd need to have things all the
way around the building.
Baker/ The last thing is Mr. Norton referred to a memo that was
coming from the actually this memo is from Dee Norton and
Larry Baker and I want to give you the standard caveat which
is Dee and I agree about the substance of this memo. We might
disagree about the style. So if you have any complaints about
the language, about the style, about the tone, direct them
towards me. Dee takes no responsibility but we both agree on
the substance of this which is we would like for the Council
to start, well, it's self explanatory but we'd like to get us
thinking along these lines about organizing a effort to
coordinate all of these d.t. projects and talk about the d.t.
for the 21st Century. It's a radical, potentially radical
solution, not solution, proposal about how to approach a lot
of these issues. And Dee and I would like think Dee can speak
as well would like to get this discussion as soon as possible
so we have three weeks before the next meeting but we'd like
to have seven members. I think that would be appropriate but
we've got a meeting with the library. This affects the
library. Dee, I mean maybe I can ask Dee. Karen's not going to
be here at the end of August. I would say we can still discuss
this but we couldn't resolve anything certainly then.
Norton/ I just think that we've got so many different things
happening d.t. and Larry enumerates a number of them in here.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City councilmeeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#14
page 13
Some of them are happening. Some that ought to happen. The
signing. The security issue. The plaza and so on and on. That
we need to take a coherent look. Somebody's got to get this
organized so that we don't just go off in a random direction
and possible at cross purposes.
Baker/ We've got to do something comparable and follow through on
it with what we did on the south side.
Norton/ So we're trying to develop-
Baker/ To coordinate a lot of local efforts under one hopefully
coherent vision of the d.t.
Kubby/ How about September 10 informal meeting?
Baker/ What?
Kubby/ How about September 10 informal meeting?
Baker/ When are we going to meet with the Library?
Nov/ September 4. We'll meet them the 9th rather than the 10th. It
would conflict with the formal meeting.
Baker/ That's fine with me, the only drawback is that I was hoping
we'd have a good discussion before we talk to the Library
because the Library's involved and is a part of this.
Norton/ We really can't do that.
Baker/ Read the memorandum and we can talk to the Mayor and among
ourselves in the next three weeks.
Kubby/ We could do it on the 26th and I could make sure before I
leave town that I make some comments.
Baker/ Great. I appreciate it. And Dee and I, we're going to take
the approach of the Broadband Telecommunications
Communications Commission which is unless we've heard back
from you formally, we're going to do this. Which is my last
thing on the agenda, which was I the only person who was
bothered by that particular approach?
Council/ (All talking) No.
Thornberry/ You were going back and forth outside, not wanting to
Thisrepresents only e reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
Baker/
Kubby/
#14 page 14
come in.
Kubby/ I called it governing by silence last night. And I think
it's not a good trend.
Baker/ I have some concerns about that particular position. Talk
about it at the last meeting or September?
Atkins/ 26th.
Norton/ 26th.
Atkins/ You can put it on anytime you want.
Kubby/ Are we going to say anything about scheduling issues for the
17th?
What about it?
Thinking from 3:00 to 8:00 to 8:00 to 1:00.
Baker/ We have a meeting scheduled for Tuesday 8:00 in the morning?
Karr/ Yes. I polled all of you and you all agreed to that time.
Kubby/ Larry may-
Baker/ How could I do that? I teach Tuesday and Thursday mornings
every year for the last 400 years.
Norton/ This is your chance to cancel.
Baker/ Let's not do this publicly. I'm going to call in sick or
something.
Karr/ The only concern that we originally had was the afternoon
that there's a Dee has a conflict with the Convention
Visitor's Bureau meeting at 4:00 in the afternoon.
Baker/ Okay.
Karr/ But if you have a conflict in the morning then it's-
Baker/ Every Tuesday and Thursday I teach.
Kubby/ One thing is the job thing and the other is representing the
Council, maybe we need to wait.
Thisrepresents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowo City councilmeeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
#14 page 15
Nov/ The Convention Bureau may be something we can skip this once.
Baker/ I've got to work.
Nov/ We don't want Larry to lose any money.
Karr/ Do you want to move the 17th? We need to get it firmed up if
we're going to be taking a look at a facilitator and
scheduling. It's important we decide so we know what time.
Kubby/ Move it back to 3:00 to 8:00 so Larry doesn't lose out.
Baker/ Even 3:00 to 8:00 I'm going to be a little bit late.
Thornberry/ Three minutes to eight?
Baker/ Because I also teach in the afternoon, but it is like 2:00
to 3:00.
Kubby/ But you can accommodate that.
Karr/ So do you want to go 3:00 to 8:00?
Norton/ It is up to those who have the problem down there. I am-
Karr/ 3:00 to 8:00 on the 17th then. So we will change that.
PM to 8:00 PM?
Thornberry/ 3:00
Kubby/ Correct.
Nov/ Remember what you just changed in your date book.
Thornberry/ A five hour meeting to talk about-
Nov/ We may not go five hours. We have allowed that block of time.
Thornberry/ No problem.
Nov/ Okay, that is pretty set, 3:00 on the 17th. And we all go home
and erase the calendar and change it back.
Karr/ I will send another memo.
Thornberry/ Don't waste the paper.
Vanderhoef/ Would you please send one to John Beckord at the
Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of August6,1996.
F080696
#14
page 16
Chamber? He and I had a conversation to day about that time.
Karr/ Sure.
Vanderhoef/ Thank you.
Thornberry/ I move we end.
Nov/ Well, we have a few other things to talk about. We have a new
city committee all of whom are city employees and they are
asking everyone of us to come up with ideas to improve how the
city operates, how we interact with our citizens and if you
want to tell people about these wonderful ideas, talk to Lisa
who is co-chair of this committee. Okay.
Next item. Marian has a birthday this week and we are wishing
Marian a happy birthday. Happy Birthday. We promise not to
sing but you do have to open your card. You have to open it
right now.
Thornberry/ While she is opening it, TEAM, I like this name TEAM.
Together everyone achieves more.
Nov/ Isn't that a neat name for a committee.
Thornberry/ Neat committee name.
Kubby/ That is better than the acronym of two heads are better than
one.
Thornberry/ Would you like to show that to the-
Karr/ No, I am not selling cards. I could read it.
Thornberry/ Read.
Karr/ Birthdays through the decade. Have a far out birthday-1960s.
Have a wild and crazy birthday was the 70s. And have a
profitable birthday was the 80s. But in the 90s, opening the
card, have a completely recyclable environmentally safe,
politically correct and oh yea, happy birthday. Thank you.
Kubby/ Happy birthday, Marian.
Nov/ You are welcome, happy birthday.
Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of August 6,1996.
F080696
City Council Work Session Agendas and Meeting Schedule
199~
August 5
7:00 p.m,
Monday
Special City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Times Are Approximate
7:00 p.m. Review Zoning Matters
7:45 p.m. Fringe Area Agreement
8:15 p.m. Relocation of CRANDIC/Iowa Interstate Railroad Interchange
8:30 p.m. Building Plans, Old Library Parking Lot
8:50 p.m. Family Bus Pass/Family Swim Pass
9:05 p.m. Water Impact Fees - Future Direction
9:25 p.m. Council Agenda, Council Time
9:40 p.m. Council Appointments: Airport Commission, Board of Appeals
L.August 6
7:00 p.m.
Special City Council Meeting - Council Chambers
Tuesday
IAugust 26
7:00 p.m.
City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Monday
IAugust 27
7:00 p.m.
Regular City Council Meeting - Council Chambers
Tuesday
S_,eptember 4
3:00 p.m.
Wednesday
Special City Council Work Session/Library Board Joint Meeting -
Council Chambers
September 9
7:00 p.m.
City Council Work Session - Council Chambers
Monday
ISeptember 10
7:00 p.m.
Lsep_tember 17
8:00 a.m.
Regular City Council Meeting - Council Chambers
Tuesday
Tuesday
Special City Council Work Session/Goal Setting - Council Chambers