Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-09-05 TranscriptionSeptember 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights 7:00PM Iowa City Council: Horow, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Nov, Pigott, Throg. Iowa City staff: Atkins, Woito, Karr, Franklin, Davidson, Fosse, Smith. University Heights Council: From, Jacobson, Jones, Martin, Swanson, Yarbrough. Tapes: 95-104, all; 95-105, Side 1. Introduction 95-104 Sl Horow/This is an occasion for both council members to kind of look at each other in the eye and come to some sort of discussion about the issues that are involved here. We are obviously not going to solve anything this evening. We know that we are waiting for recommendations from the consulting company who did the environmental impact study. They have to present the options. Iowa City has to make some sort of recommendations based on those options as well as based on input tonight and the citizens that give us their input. Rather than a p.h. I would remind citizens that they certainly are urged to get to their own council members and discuss this as well as get to other council members from either city. But this is more of a meeting for the two councils to really talk with each other. The issues this evening obviously are the Melrose Avenue Project and the Neuzil Tract and any other business that any of us wish to bring up. So with that in mind, why don't we just go around and, for the record, make the introductions. (Introduction of council members). Melrose Avenue Pro~ect 95-104 S1 Horow/As I mentioned, the environmental impact study has been finished. We all had input through the focus group. The firm has to make a recommendation and then council has to select the options with reasonable input from all of us and- You have received the draft copy of this. You know there is like about 2200 and some pages. I might be exaggerating as in terms of the number of pages of public input. But there are certainly has been quite a lot. What we are interested in right now is the main issue that University Heights still feels strongly, still feels strongly, because it has come a long way over quite a long period of time. Looking through my notes, out two communities have been dealing with this since 1977. A long time has passed. A lot of cars and trucks have gone over that and we are close to the point of being in trouble with that bridge. Actually, that maybe might not hurt to start if our Thisrepresents onlyareasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa CitycouncilmeetingofSeptember5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 2 City Engineer could give us a briefing. Where-what is the status of this bridge right now? Rick Fosse/The engineer that did the inspection on the bridge is Steve Jacobson, who is here this evening. So correct me if I goof up at all. The calculations are not complete on the most recent inspection. However, it does look- That on a three axle truck we will need to lower the weight limit from 17 to 13 tons. On a five axle truck from 27 to 22 tons. And then on a six axle truck from 27 to 26 tons. And for municipal vehicles, it affects the garbage trucks about the same. Our small garbage trucks can still go over fully loaded. The large garbage trucks can only have half of a load. On our buses, only the Scandias can cross fully loaded now. The other manufacturer buses cannot cross with a full load on them under the new rating. And one concern that we have is as the deck continues to deteriorate, so does our chances of keeping the bridge open during construction because as you begin to slice that up and take part of the bridge off to replace it while you are keeping traffic on the other part and as the integrity of that deck deteriorates, so does your possibilities of keeping that open and another thing that has turned up is the Wolf Avenue Bridge is also deteriorating in an accelerated rate from what we originally anticipated. And, of course, what we want to avoid is getting in a situation where we are closing both of those bridges at the same time. So that adds a little bit to the urgency of this issue. Horow/What-you didn't address the emergency vehicles. What is the tonnage of the vehicles, for instance, fire? Fosse/Steve, can you address that? Steve Jacobsen/NNW, Inc. and Consulting Engineers. The issue is emergency vehicles. The number of passages we have of emergency vehicles, that is just not a problem. We can maintain emergency vehicles for another year or so. Fosse/Other questions? Gloria Jacobson/When you mentioned Scandia, is that sort of all inclusive with the Cambus, too? Are they that make or is that the Iowa City buses that you are talking about? Fosse/These are just the Iowa City buses that I was talking about. I need to check into the Cambus and their manufacturers. Thisrepresents onlyareesonably accuratetranscription ofthelowsCttycouncllmeetingofSeptember5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 3 Atkins/(Can ' t hear) . Jacobsen/So that would be an issue. Richard Martin/How about fire trucks? Fosse/As Steve said, what we are really interested in here is repeated loadings. So if we have an occasional crossing of a heavy vehicle, we will be in okay shape for a while yet. Horow/Any other questions for the engineers in terms of the bridge? Thank you. Kubby/You know what would be helpful for me, Sue, is maybe Iowa City folks and University Heights people talk a little bit about their vision for the community in that area of town so that we have kind of a general understanding what you want to have happen in University Heights over the next 20 years or even 50 years, if that is possible because we are talking about a huge investment for a long generational time span of the life span. Donald Swanson/I can address that. First of all our visions are going to be somewhat more limited than Iowa City. We have reached out maximum growth for the most part. There is very little undeveloped land. We are looking more preservation, preserving the neighborhoods in University }{eights and our big concern is if Melrose Avenue is widened four lanes that that would have a significant impacts on people living along Melrose to the whole community and I don't think there is anything unique in University Heights. I think of most neighborhoods when you talk about widening streets through residential area where there is no option of widening it through a field (can't hear). Most neighborhoods would have told us that and want to maintain the neighborhood and that is the position that we are taking. Horow/Gloria- G. Jacobson/I would say that I would second that. Yarbrough/Yeah, I think we are all of that mind. For one thing our political constituents there are for the most part in streets that either connect to Melrose or live directly on them. So we are speaking almost as one voice because this is the message we have been hearing for 30 years. Thisrepresentsonly a reasonably accuratetranscrlptlon ofthelowa Citycouncil meeting of SeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 4 Swanson/We are a small community and this is a bog issue. Kubby/I think that it is always good to start with what the obvious agreements are. That the bridge is deteriorating. We need to do something. We need to do something with Melrose Avenue and that the parameters are from two lanes to five lanes and something in between is most likely going to be where we end up. Maybe the real discussion is where in between that in terms of the bridge and the approach from University Heights to the bridge, what is the configuration that is acceptable. Yarbrough/One thing that I want to emphasize, particularly in the last 3, 4, 5 years and you two correct me if I am not quite accurate. But we have made a lot of efforts to move cars through there as quickly as we can. And you need to-I am not quite sure where we are in the traffic light but we have often had police officers go out to just move people right through the 4-way stop. We did the traffic study and I guess that needs to- G. Jacobson/Well, we did do a traffic study to see what are needs are and some of that was precipitated by the fact that the light at Melrose and Sunset is so old and it is forever needing repair and we have had to scrounge around and get parts because it is so old. So we had to do a street survey to see what the car, bus, passenger, bicycle, you know, walkers and so forth-To see what the count was to enable us to apply for federal money. Once we had that count, we did apply for money which Jeff can verify and received it. So that we will get 80% of the cost of a new light there. At the same time that we conducted that study in that area we also did the same thing at Melrose and Koser and it was determined that we really do need a light rather than the 4-way stop that we have now. So, we will sometime in the next few months be erecting those lights and I think that will probably move traffic better than the 4-way stop has. Horow/Are the traffic counts that you had also projections over the next (can't hear). G. Jacobson/Yes. Martin Jones/The proposed figures in this study was done by Shive Hattery out of Cedar Rapids. I got a copy of those which were provided to JCCOG. Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of September 5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 5 G. Jacobson/We have given all the correspondence we have had with IDOT and- Horow/I was interested in terms of projection in development on the other side of University Heights. As University Heights has almost in its entirety a community- G. Jacobson/I don't know that we could address that exactly. We do have counts coming over the bridge at various times and going in each direction from Iowa City and to Iowa City. Jeff Davidson/The report essentially states that obviously the one signal is there and it is warranted at the present time. At the other location existing traffic counts warrant the traffic signal. So there were not projections made to justify it because existing counts justify it. Horow/I find this interesting in terms of the vision that we had talked about. Karen asked the question about vision that University Heights has there. I think your encapsulation of a limited, almost a preservation mode, is a good which I think Iowa City values by having University Heights maintain it and maintain it in a healthy mode rather than letting it deteriorate. And I also think that it is part, just as each suburb is part of a metropolitan area, of not just Iowa City but Coralville and North Liberty. The whole area has to look at its development, at its future along with Iowa City and that is my vision. It wouldn't be seen just in isolation. Throg/I guess I would like to say something similar with regard to Iowa City, at least with regard to the south side of Melrose Avenue in Iowa City. I would think that we would want to do what we can to preserve the quality of that neighborhood while also trying to provide the kinds of transportation capabilities that are necessary. So, I don't think it is a matter of Universtity Heights only facing that issue. It is one that we face as well. The preservation part (can't hear). Horow/ I think especially around a tertiary care hospital. City after city, the hospital has had to build up the area of the neighborhoods around the tertiary care hospital to maintain the (can't hear) purposes for both the patients, visitors and the staff. And so, I am going to disagree with you. It is in both of our welfare to keep the University Heights and the neighborhood around there healthy. Pigott/I was going to echo just what Jim said basically. That we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 6 share that vision-Well, I share that vision of preserving the neighborhoods and the area along with meeting the needs. You had mentioned in detail several ways in which you attempted to facilitate traffic in the area without expanding the road in that area and I value that undertaking and I guess what we are discussing tonight, specifically, is the bridge width. The width of the bridge and whether we are in agreement or disagreement on what width that has to be in order for us to satisfy our cormmon goal of meeting the preservation of those neighborhoods, both in University Heights and Iowa City and facilitating transportation because it seems to me that our city council will deal with the issue of- And I am not saying it is unrelated. It is related but we will deal with the issue of Melrose Avenue beyond the bridge. They are related. They are intertwined but in terms of our interaction specifically we have to figure out a common width and that is where I am thinking. What do you folks think in those terms of whether- Maybe we should start talking about that. Yarbrough/There is one other issue we ought to just mention before it gets too far away from constraints on University Heights. There is a small district in here in University Heights and those businesses are so close to the bridge that any decisions about the bridge have direct impact on the businesses. When the planning started and I am not sure, in '77, '76, the businesses came to University Heights council meeting. They were concerned about two issues: would their parking be disturbed and would there be downtime for them. The business owner what is in what is now Melrose Market said that if traffic were cut off for six months, they would be out of business. That was a highly important issue for the council at that time. So, at that time, we initiated a request that we be involved in the planning about the bridge for no other reason that we can keep our citizens informed and that the businesses can prepare for what might be a worse case scenario for traffic be routed elsewhere for that period of time. So that was really the initial interest of University Heights in the bridge. It was driven by the businesses, not by some fear that the bridge would be used to leverage widening Melrose through University Heights. That came much later as things like this do when people begin to talk about it and their fears begin to surface. Horow/Don, that is a good point. Rick, can you address phasing of construction so that we know whether or not these fears are still viable? If they are, then we will have to deal with them. If they aren't then- TMsrepresents~n~y~reas~n~b~yaccur~tetr~nscr~pt~~n~fthe~~waC~tyc~unci~meet~ng~fSeptem~er5~19~5~ W$090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 7 Fosse/The phasing- The only phasing scenario that we have worked through completely is the scenario for a four lane option. There may be other options that we can work through. It is feasible to keep the bridge open if it is re-constructed at a width of four lanes. However, the staging will probably interrupt the parking in front of the businesses during construction. But there will still be parking behind. What we have not studies is if we reconstruct a bridge at a narrower width is it possible to do the same thing. Yarbrough/It would help me if we talk about bridge widths because striping is independent of width. Horow/But the down time is what I am concerned about. Yarbrough/But am interested when we talk about a 4-lane option, I want to know the width of the bridge. Fosse/Steve, is that about a 50 foot bridge, barrier rail to barrier rail? S. Jacobsen/Yeah. Kubby/And the width is relevant to the staging to whether you can logistically have one lane open. Yarbrough/So you are saying that 50 feet would be the minimum width that would remain open? S. Jacobsen/That is what we looked at. Fosse/We have not evaluated narrower scenarios. The scenario at 50 feet was quite complex to work through. And if necessary, we can work through other scenarios. Yarbrough/I am not going to ask you to do that. I remember in some of the earlier plans there was a narrower width that was mentioned to me by an engineer as being workable. But I have to go check my notes to see what that was. And that was speculative. Kubby/I though we were talking about, at one point, a 56 feet width 4-lane bridge and we narrowed it to a 4-lane 50 foot bridge. So maybe that is the difference. The scenario- Fosse/I believe the original request to DOT standards was 56 feet and we talked to them about narrowing it to 50 feet. Thlsrepresentsonly areasonably accuratetranscrlptionofthelowa Citycouncllmeetlng ofSeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 8 Yarbrough/So, with a 50 foot scenario, traffic will continue to flow through one lane and it will not be closed off entirely and you would have officers there then directing traffic through? Fosse/ No. The 50 foot scenario would be one lane in each direction. And again, that is contingent on enough structural strength left in the deck. Horow/So, the sooner it gets done the better you will have that ability to do this, Lehman/What is the life of the new bridge? Fosse/70 years roughly. Nov/Is that about the age of the current bridge? Fosse/How old is the current one, Steve? S. Jacobsen/I think it was built in '34. Fosse/Things we are doing differently now is we are using a denser concrete, using epoxy colored reinforcing steel so it will get a better life out of the new structure versus the old. Nov/It is about 60 years old. Lehman/It seems to me that if we had this discussion 30 years ago, it would be a totally different scenario. Melrose has changed a great deal in the last 30 years. So, I think probably one of the most important things from all perspectives is that whatever we do, it be something that is flexible that perhaps 20, 30 or 40 years from now, if the cities choose to change their minds about something, we have the ability to make that change without investing huge sums of money. Melrose right now, you wouldn't recognize it compared to 30 years ago when it comes to the buildings that are there and there uses and who owns them or whatever. Maybe that will change in 20-30 years. Maybe it won't. I think what we need to do is something that is compatible, something that is acceptable to all of us that gives us the option of changing whether it be 15, 20, or 30 years from now. And something that is not going to cost us a fortune for that option. The big thing to me is probably the bridge~ If you make the bridge two lane, it will be a very very expensive thing to change it to a larger if at some point we need it. So, I guess I don't know that I can support a 4- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 9 lane street. I don't think I can. But I certainly can support a capital expenditure for a four lane bridge even if 30 years from now we are not using four lanes. After football games we will fill it anyway. Yarbrough/Can we talk a little bit about striping now? With this 50 foot scenario, what is the current plan for pedestrian and bicycle traffic across the bridge. Actually I want to get that question- With the bridge under construction, another issue that came up at our council meetings pertain to a pedestrian traffic and we saw nothing in the plans that addressed the continuous pedestrian and bicycle traffic across the bridge. Davidson/Yeah, one of the directions given the consultant which the-And I would remind both councils that the information that is fourth coming is not only an environmental assessment. It is also an alternatives analysis because that was requested by the Iowa City City Council. So it is both of those things. And one of the directions given to the consultant in evaluating this 7 scenarios, 7 design alternatives, that are evaluated, is to accommodate all modes of transportation that are now currently using that area, both the street and the bridge, certainly pedestrians-not only parallel down the street but crossing the street. And I guess, to answer your question Don, all modes of transportation in all directions are to be taken into consideration in the evaluation of those alternatives. Nov/ What about during construction? Will there be pedestrian access during construction? Davidson/That is probably more of a question for Rick. Fosse/Yes, there will be. Under the-again, the 4-lane scenario that we worked through, we can accommodate pedestrians. Kubby/It would be ironic not to because a lot of people use the alternative of getting into their cars and going over a bridge that is deteriorating. It is in everyone's interest to do that. R. Martin/You mentioned something about the 7th option. Has that been looked into carefully and studied? Davidson/Yeah, it has been looked into carefully and I will tell both councils that preliminarily that is the only option of the 7 that has an environmental impact that will be a problem. The other six it does not look like have impacts that will be Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa CltycoundlmeetlngofSeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 10 a problem. The 7th alternative is the only that has a new road back through University property and it is has a received I believe it is called a 4F designation which means that because of the disruption is would cause, the city would need to show that there was no reasonable alternative and the consultant does not believe that could be proven. And so consequently, the consultants recommendation will be to not consider that alternative. Louise From/I have a concern. If this is a 50 foot bridge and we were talking about the parking in the business section of University Heights and it comes down to 2-lanes or 3-lanes, does that interfere-When I look at the scenarios, it looked like it interfered with the parking of the businesses. Fosse/The striping plan can be worked out to preserve all or most if not all of those parking spaces by tapering it back down to three lanes in University Heights. From/Meaning that turn lane and then the two? Fosse./Correct. One through in each direction. From/And didn't you have a striping that was the same width? It was a 3-lane bridge. I mean it was both 50 feet but one was striped 3-lane and one was striped 4-lane? Fosse/Sure. You can take that 50 foot bridge width and stripe 3- lanes within there and also maintain bike lanes on the outside there if you wish although we would have to find an ending point for the bike lanes once you get into University Heights. Davidson/I would just add to that the consultant, when you receive the information from the consultant. The consultant has referred to those as shoulders because they are also intended to be used by transit vehicles. There are a number of bus stops in that area and since the purpose is both transit vehicles and bicycles, there are being referred to as shoulders in the report by the consultant. Horow/Has University Heights actually taken on the pedestrian and bicycle path situation in terms of the rest of Melrose that goes through University Heights? Martin/In regards to the strip of Melrose Avenue from the bridge going east to Boyd Law Center, now you talk about bus stops. Do you a specific number of bus stops in mind? Th~srepresents~n~yare~s~n~b~yaccur~tetr~nscripti~n~fthe~waCityc~unc~meethmg~fSeptember5~1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 11 Davidson/I don't believe there is any plan to change the current location of bus stops. I mean that is up to both Iowa City and Cambus operate in there and that would be a decision up to them. There has been nothing I have heard to change any of the current bus stop locations. Martin/In a similar vein now, the other points of access-would they remain the same as they are today? Davidson/The instructions to the consultant were that all of the existing access would be maintained on the south side of Melrose Avenue, the individual driveways as well as the streets. Martin/On the north side will there be maybe an additional one or two points of access? Davidson/There will be one additional access to the University, the new hospital facilities and parking ramp. Martin/Is that the end of it? Davidson/As far as I know, that is the end of it. Martin/What if there is another addition to the hospital? Davidson/That is a question for the hospital. Yarbrough/You know it is interesting and somehow I have to agree with Ernie completely, if you want a bridge that you are not going to need to replace in 30 years- Of course, we don't know if in 70 years we would need a smaller bridge. Cars might be tiny and fuel high. We can't really predict that. The real issue here is what is going to happen to the lights and striping and the streets on both sides of the bridge. And that takes this kind of discussion. You know, we have to we if our visions match at all and our concerns are enough overlapping that we are comfortable with the construction. Kubby/And maybe adjust where we are going from so that that mesh is smooth. Jones/(Can't hear). But we go back 4-5 months ago when we were preparing the document we sent off to the IDOT and if I understand correctly, off to the feds, that was literally a vision statement from the two communities and when that document was approved, Mandy simply voted against it because This represents only e reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 12 the motion was placed on the table to change our vision. In that original version that vision did (can't hear). And there were concerns voiced by a number of members from JCCOG, on that Board, that said by approving such a statement, they felt there would be repercussions. I mean, that vision statement was placed (can't hear). That document was put out there. Where we g0 from here, I don't know, but- Kubby/The reality of something we just approved recently and it is to widen Melrose from the interchange of the highway towards West High and thinking about north-south collector streets from Coralville south. If there is a way to do that in the future, near and far. And all of that doesn't necessarily mean that all that traffic comes through University Heights and across the bridge into Iowa City but some of it will most definitely. So, there is some conflict of the realities of Iowa City growing in the west and some of that traffic coming through. So how do we mitigate these differences as much as possible? Lehman/Karen, I think one thing that we can do and I hope that we would do that. When we extend any north-south arterial between Coralville and Melrose, we at the same time we extend that to Highway 1 so that we don't force those folks who want to go onto the southern portion of Iowa City to have to use Melrose. Jones/You have to go past West High School with basically one way in and two ways out and those were discussed in somewhat informally on issues about that school and I didn't see any problems and I am not aware of that discussion really going any further. The development to the south of the high school and what would happen there. Part of the options that we had as far as entrances and exits to that high school (can't hear). But as we go back to a regional or urban planning meeting (can't hear) arterial extension off of Highway 6. The concern about this time and what would that affect of just having any arterials coming off of Highway 6 onto Melrose. Virtually all the traffic is going to go in front of the high school and I mean that is not something that is unique to University Heights. It is everyone who lives on the west side (can't hear). Swanson/So how soon would the environment assessment before it would be coming back? Davidson/We are hoping to get it end of this week, first part of the middle of next week. I have been in contact with the This represents only a reas0nebly accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 13 consultant practically daily and they are finishing up the report. We want to make sure it is complete before it is funded. G. Jacobson/What is the progress on the court case regarding the boundary? Horow/I will defer to our lawyers on that one. Linda, can you address this? Woito/City Attorney for Iowa City. Steve Ballard, who is over here. He is University Heights Attorney told me today that he has not met with you University Heights folks yet and so you have not responded to our petition yet. You have 20 days to do so and he was not of a mind for you to discuss it tonight is my understanding until you have had a chance to talk about it in executive session. Steve, you can speak for yourself. Steve Ballard/That is about it. Horow/Thank you very much. Yarbrough/I has a question just about procedures. We have talked about when you will get the environmental assessment and the evaluation of the various plans. I think we are all hoping that the decision will ba made yet this fall to proceed with bridge construction and it we would get a new bridge in there. My question is if you have any plans to include or even to inform University Heights City Council about your decisions or involve us in any of the decision making? Horow/I certainly think, obviously, we would inform you on this whole thing. But you asked about the involvement in terms of the decisions made- I am not sure I can address that. Davidson/Susan, if I can just take both councils through what the remaining procedure is and that there are some questions that will have to be answered by the city council of Iowa City with respect to the timing of this. Maybe after I lay this out you will- Yarbrough/ Just to make this clear-See, we get questions on a fairly regular basis that we simply cannot answer because we have no information. So, that kind of taking us through the steps I think is extremely important. Davidson/Sure. As I indicated to Don, we will be through the Thtsrepresentsonlyareasonablyaccurate transcrlptionofthelowaCi~ councllmeetlngofSeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 14 remaining documents-Essentially, there will be three final documents that are officially used by the Iowa City City council to make their decision. There is the environmental assessment/alternatives analysis which is already completed and this is the document that had extensive public review prior to the hearing in April and that document remains intact. Probably the version you have, unless it is stamped draft, is the current version of that. The two documents that are being finalized right now, one is a sumanary report which is just something to take the lO0's and 100's of pages of material and try to synthesize it down so that there is a summary document and I think that is about 10 pages or so. The other thing that is probably the most important official document is the request for a finding of no significant impact or FONSI and this document is being prepared by the consultant and it is the thing that goes to the Federal Highway Administration who ultimately controls this whole process and it is being completed, everything except for the recommended alternative. And that is what will be inserted after the city council makes their decision, Now, those will be the three things then. There are seven alternatives as I think everyone is aware of by now. The next step, once those documents are received, is for the City Council of Iowa City to make a decision on the recommended alternative. This will be a recommended alternative for both the bridge and the street because remember, there is federal funds for both projects. So, the environmental assessment covers both projects. The timing of that is where there is some flexibility by the City Council of Iowa City. It will be at their option if they want to consider it yet this year or with the new council at the beginning of the year. There is enough flexibility in the process, notwithstanding, everything you have heard from Rick about the need to move as soon as possible. There is that flexibility in the process for the City Council of Iowa City. Now, once that is done, whether it is between the first of the year or after the first of the year, the recommended alternative gets sent to the Federal Highway Administration. They have indicated it will be approximately 30 days and they will let us know if they concur with what Iowa city has recommended. FHWA has been part of this process every step of the way. We are assuming we are not going to run into any last minute snags. We have been in contact with them through this whole process. Assuming in that 30 period they concur with what City Council has recommended, at that point the funds are released and Iowa City may proceed. Rick and his people then would proceed with the design of the project. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa CIty council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 15 Horow/And the design will take how long? Fosse/ Steve, if We go with something other than a 4-lane alternative, are we talking how long to rodesign? Steve Jacobsen/Four months. Fosse/Four months approximately. Pigott/So it could be summer- Horow/Summertime, right. Fosse/Then we are looking at about a 15 month duration of the project. Nov/Rick, I heard you say something other than 4-lanes. If it is 4-lanes, then are you prepared to go out for bid sooner? Fosse/Yes. It would probably take about a month. We have gotten quite a ways on that design. Kubby/So, for me the process questions are probably two-fold. One, in addition to this meeting with University Heights, what kind of input in any form do we get and secondly, for the Iowa City Council is we have the option of holding a p.h. or public discussion or not. We don't have to but that has been brought up in the past which we need to fit into the time schedule. ¥arbrough/And that decision has not been made about- Council/(All talking). Pigott/Personally speaking and not as a representative of council. Of course it makes some sense given the fact that we are neighbors and people who share commonalities and visions for the growth and development in that side of town. That it seems to me that as a p=~z~n it makes sense that we want and that is the reason that we got together today. We want to talk about it..That at least the bridge and then discuss the other things. Of course the final decision I believe rests with the city council in terms of the width of Melrose Avenue beyond that bridge on the east side of town. However, you know, I ](now it impacts University Heights and I think it would be wrong of us to totally disregard the concerns of the residents of that city as well as our own. And that is why I think we needed to have this meeting tonight and maybe we should think Thisrepresents only areasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City council meeting of September 5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 16 about meetings in the future. I don't know what anybody else is feeling about this primarily because we haven't discussed this issue very much except for offhand remarks we haven't delved into the seven alternatives. That's (can't hear). Horow/It's very difficult to get all of us together. It seems to me if councils, if the recommendation comes back to council, and it's something other than the 4-lane bridge, and council seriously entertains something other than that, then definitely it's my recommendation that we get back together again as quickly as possible, because we agree that the bridge is the problem. But, so delay is at this point is foolhardy. Kubby/Well, we can also envision another process when we invite the University Heights city council to the meeting where we're talking about this, and that means that we have a long time scheduled to talk about this so that we can have our discussion uninterrupted by either the general public or cross discussion between the city councils. And then get the city of University Heights city council some time to talk in front of us about what they heard, what your feedback is about what you heard our discussion be, and then we'd go on with our discussion. Horow/You mean there are ways that you need to hear us, other than other than the 4-lane? Kubby/No. I mean in any case. Jacobson/Are you saying that if you decide that you want to have a full blown bridge and 4-lanes going east that there would be no need for further discussion? Horow/I am not saying that we need. If the design is set for 4- lanes right now, it is almost on a fast track. If we decide something different which we really haven't discussed this evening, then it seems to me to be useful- Kubby/I would suggest a process of inclusion no matter what- Yarbrough/(Can't hear) if you should decide to include us, I think we could be very brief. I think we wouldn't take a lot of your time. I think we could be very focused. I would defer to Don. Swanson/I certainly think the 4-lane bridge is more controversial than (can't hear). Thlsrepresentsonlyareasonablyaccuratetranscrlptionofthelowa City councilmeeting of September S, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 17 Yarbrough/Would you clarify for us- Again, I think it is a mistake to talk about this option to the 50 foot bridge to describe it necessarily as a 4-lane bridge. I keep- Horow/Right, that is very true. Yarbrough/You are talking about a 50 foot-You have a 50 foot bridge option but you stripe that anyway you so choose. And there is some of us who are hoping that you will be more flexible in discussing striping of the bridge. Now there is another thing I need to have clarified before we follow that. You are saying that your intent is to have 4 lanes from the bridge east of the bridge- Council/We have not discussed that. Yarbrough/Well, that is what I thought I understood and- Pigott/That is one of the 7 different- Horow/ I take back the words 4-lane bridge. I think your description is much- Yarbrough/Now we said a 50 foot bridge but you have not yet decided what to do to Melrose? Throg/That is correct. Kubby/We have not decided on the 50 foot bridge. We haven't decided on it. Yarbrough/I am assuming- Let's say that we concur on the 50 foot bridge. I don't think we will. I mean you guys may. Lehman/No, I think we will. Yarbrough/I want to know if the size of the bridge has any affect on your decision about how to reconstruct Melrose east of the bridge. Throg/If it is a 2-lane bridge I would think it would. Davidson/One point of clarification. ¥arbrough/There are some things, Jim, for example, you can have Melrose east of the two lane bridge, three in some places and even with three and turning lane and still keep traffic moving Thisrepresents only areasonablyaccuratetranscrlptlon ofthelowa City council meeting ofSeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 18 because what slows the traffic down so much of the time right now is this turning and the egress out of the side streets with lanes that follow people into traffic so that it can get out and get moving and- I just see other possibilities regardless of what the bridge does. Similarly, if you have a 4-lane bridge there is nothing that says you have to put 4, 5, or 6 lanes east of that bridge either. That is what I thought you tieing those things together and I was hoping you were not. Davidson/One quick point of clarification just for anyone in the room so there is no confusion. The reason that there is a 50 foot wide bridge designed that is approximately 70-80% along is that about three years ago the city council of Iowa City directed staff to begin that and that is why that is that far along. That is not something that has occurred recently. Yarbrough/No, in fact it was University Heights desire to be included in that decision at least in a provisional fashion that got us mobilized because we were not. Davidson/There was a whole bunch of events that started unfolding. / I have a question for Rick. That pretty much hardlined that bridge. Lehman/ Rick, I have a question for you. If that bridge was constructed as a 4-lane bridge, what is going to happen to the cars when they get on the west side? Fosse/On the west side? (Mic problems). We have to go through a transition to get it back to three lanes that currently exists at the intersection of Koser. So that transition can occur and would make a fairly smooth transition. Yarbrough/(Mic problems). I am not sure that was clear that there currently is a left turning lane. So there are actually is three lanes in front of the market. Fosse/That is right. Yarbrough/But it is a little bit of a bubble and (mic problems). I am sure we would want to continue that road up further anyway. (Can't hear). Fosse/Right and what the current plan has, the current plan-the old plan, is the two west bound lanes will go into that. So Thisrepresentsonlyareasonablyaccuratetranscription ofthelowa City councllmeetlngofSeptember5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 19 you have the one left turn lane to go on through and then the east bound lane in University Heights will split into (can't hear). So it is a fairly simple transition. Nov/ I have a question for Don. When you said you were concerned about businesses in University Heights, it would seem that you are 2-lane option which impact severely on those businesses because you would not be able to (can't hear). Yarbrough/In fact that issue came up and that was certainly an opinion of our engineers as well. That he had no question about that. Nov/The businesses do understand? Yarbrough/Yes and the businesses are against it (can't hear) for that reason, At least the one I spoke with now. Maybe the rest of you have other information. But again, I am not sure that-I sort of categorically oppose calling this bridge by a lane name and some width you can no longer maintain traffic flow and the engineers can tell you what it is. How that bridge gets striped after it gets built is an entirely different issue and I assume that 50 feet-If 50 feet maintains two lanes of traffic than some smaller width will maintain one alternating lane of traffic. Maybe a lane in in the morning and a lane out in the afternoon. Davidson/With all of the 7 alternatives, the actual geometric lane widths are included and it has been part of the analysis. I do believe, Don, because I don't have the report in front of me-I don't want to say anything for sure. I believe the four lane and the three lane plus shoulders options which are the same width have been-I believe they are 47 feet now, aren't they Rick? Yarbrough/They are bigger than they were before. Naomi, back when this discussion came out we asked our engineer with Shire Hattery to tell us what the minimum would be that would maintain some traffic flow and we begin to call that the three lane option. Again, we seem not to be able to avoid labeling it. Nov/We all pretty well agreed that we want a bridge structure that will keep some traffic flowing (can't hear)o CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 95-104 SIDE 2 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 20 Fosse/We have not worked through the scenarios (can't hear) and until we put a pencil to it we don't have a definitive answer. Nov/So, can we at least agree the bridge will be wider and if it doesn't fall down in between it will be open during construction? Do I hear everybody agreeing on that? Yarbrough/I think if that particular issue were discussed (mic problem). I suspect a majority of citizens of University Heights would like to see (mic problems). But again, I am arguing that that is a very different issue (mic problems). You guys decide to stripe it after it is built and because there is this concern that if the bridge is to be striped five lanes, it will be striped that way. I mean that is the fear that you hear. Kubby/And it is hard for us to respond. We haven't, as a group, talked about that. So it might be- And it may be that you have already said it but I guess I would like to- If you could have us do the ideal thing from your perspective, what does that mean in terms of the width of the bridge and how many lanes and what is happening on the approach to the bridge. I guess I would like to hear that point blank. If you could design this the way that you wanted to from your perspective, what would it look like? Yarbrough/Well, you may get five different answer because we never had had that question put to us. We would probably want to talk to our engineer, too. I always find as one citizen of University Heights rather than a council member, I would like to see the bridge something close to the minimum width that it could be and still stay open to traffic, even two lanes of traffic, as long as there was some assurance that it would be striped a lane going east, a lane going west and a turning lane in University Heights and that would be the expectation and the understanding of both councils. That that is the position of this council, University Heights council. That we move as quickly as possible as many cars as possible through two lanes of traffic in University Heights. For as long as people live on Melrose there will be no council that can stay in office in University Heights that votes to widen that street. And I am not a prognosticator but I don't see that changing. That may change. Throg/It also makes no sense to destroy the neighborhood (can't hear). Thisrepresentsonlyareasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City councilmeeting of September5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 21 Yarbrough/This is not my area and I know it is Jim's. But there are communities that choose not to have wide arterial streets. Phoenix, for example, has this large matrix of streets carrying cars and they are dispersed throughout-You don't have to have (can't hear). The issue for us is that we have (can't hear) and the people who live there don't want to be the only (can't hear). We are willing to do our part but I think by becoming a major thoroughfare with it will (can't hear). Throg/There is another point that I heard Sue alluding to and that is all else being equal (can't hear) if you continue to have those two lanes in University Heights that traffic will continue to increase and the level of service on those two lanes will decrease. I assume the projection (can't hear). Davidson/The information that the city council will received, Jim, established a corridor for evaluation, you know, the project area. And you will receive a level of service summary for that area for the different scenarios. The portion of Melrose Avenue in University Heights and it is stipulated in there for the different types of environmental impacts that are evaluated, the range, how far out beyond the corridor you go varies for those and that is all summarized. So many of the impacts in the evaluation area goes to University Heights. Remember the evaluation of traffic service did not include the portion of Melrose in University Heights. Kubby/Although the consultant has a really interesting quote that I hope that I feel that we would all fully agree with (can't hear). "However in order to minimize potential impacts on the adjoining residential neighborhood the roadway improvement should be no greater than absolutely necessary for (can't hear)" That may be another issue that we take up. Horow/(Can't hear). Lehman/Rick, I have another question for you. Compare the ability to carry traffic east of the bridge to three lanes to (can't hear). Fosse/The projected ability. Jeff is actually probably better at addressing that. Davidson/I guess I hesitate, Ernie, that is going to be coming. Off the top of my head I can't remember exactly what the differences is. However that evaluation was made in the information that you are going to receive. The one major Thisrepresents only areasonablyaccumte transcrlptlonofthelowa City councilmeetingofSeptember5,1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 22 difference in three lane or four lane scenarios was the accident rate. The consultant has done a very elaborate analysis of accident rate and quite frankly, the four lane facility versus the three lane plus shoulders facility, same width, the accident rate that we have projected is much lower on the three lane with shoulders. So I think that will be important information for us. Lehman/Lower on the three lane? Davidson/Lower on the three lane. Lehman/We have three lanes that work quite well at First Avenue and (can't hear). Davidson/The one major difference in this area is the mix of various modes of transportation. Pedestrians, bicycles. I don't know of another area in Iowa City except possibly the d.t. in which you have got that mix of all modes and the consultants tried to do a real good job, I think, of addressing all modes of transportation. Jacobson/Despite that. I mean (can't hear). I went that every single day and I can't remember very many times that it was backed up because of an accident. Davidson/It is not a high accident rate. G. Jacobson/It is not high the way it is right now. So anything that widens that is going to be even less but it is not high. Yarbrough/Melrose west of the bridge and east of the bridge are a very different streets, because of the number of (can't hear) that come into Melrose. Every other (can't hear). Davidson/And I think that's reflected in the accident rate at Koser corner. From/What is the Iowa City Council's idea for (can't hear)? Council/(All talking) We haven't talked about it. From/We haven't talked about ours either. I just wanted to- we need a question like that, too. That would help us, too, knowing what your thinking. Would one of you like to share what you're thinking? Thisrepresents only ereesonebly accurate transcription ofthelowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 23 Jones/ If you look at the regional planning documents I've produced, like the long range plan which is (can't hear). That's been used for financial management and what not. That's where those documents come from. The plat maps of the city where they identify the areas. Were they 20 and 40 years? Is that correct? And those long range estimates were in the range (can't hear). I don't know, the consultants, they used new (can't hear). Am I correct? Davidson/(Can't hear) They use both, Marty. They use the existing streets because that is adopted plan by JCCOG. The City of Iowa City uses it as well. They also augmented some (can't hear) peak hours. Thr0g/I'd like to respond as an individual member, but only on that basis. I wondered is the quote that Karen gave us, at least a portion of it. It says, the roadway improvements should be no greater than absolutely necessary for projecting traffic volumes. I want to, I would point to two parts of that and urge us to try and address the two different parts. The first part is for accommodating the projected traffic volume. I'd say if we take the projected traffic volumes as a given, then there will be a very powerful need to widen the road. And you're going to feel a lot of pressure with it, new heights as the years go on. So the first challenge I think is to find someway to reduce projected increase in traffic on Melrose and to work together to find ways to do that. That's the first thing I would suggest to to do. The second thing is I think the statement that I just quoted kind of inverts the priorities. I think that the first priority should be to maintain the quality of existing neighborhoods and then accommodate traffic in its own fashion, rather than as this quote has it, project traffic volumes and do what's necessary to widen the road and kind of minimize the effects of the maintenance. Pigott/I should have been thinking when it come to discussions, just to lay out further bits. That means it's a three lane road, a two lane road. It's still up in the air. Really there are so many other factors I see involve (can't hear) in terms of. What does a three lane road mean? How wide is that? What does that mean in terms of the future? Those questions I don't have the answer to yet. I would look at those. So I think that Jim's broad outlines I share greatly It's time to start thinking about the nitty-gritty stuff is where it's really hard. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 24 Horow/I am almost envious of University Heights in terms of the fact that you have got a smaller community in which you can get unanimous opinion on things. In this regard and this particular issue. Because it will be up to this council then to almost work, drag or certainly be aggressive in terms of getting the associations to the west and certainly along Benton Street to have their input into our city council decision. I think it's a good idea because traffic projections we are figuring for this bridge is going to be 75 years. That does impact not just University Heights and the people around West High School. We look at the increase of residential are an Coralville, North Liberty, the various communities that work (can't hear) as well as the neighborhood associations to the east some of whom do go that way like George Street and over and down. And this is difficult. It is very difficult to get people actually to really understand that they need to get back to us. Many of them who are transient renters do not see that. They don't see the 75 years and we need to have input about that. So I am envious. Yarbrough/Well, to some extent this is a philosophical issue and I would agree with this outline. People make a decision. They make a decision to move farther out, have a larger property, larger house and a longer commute or they make a decision to come closer in, have a shorter commute and a smaller property. There will be pressure to change that equation and when it hits then you will lose all of your innercity. You lose everybody who lives close in and then you have what you have in so many communities of what we don't yet have here. There is a little bastian here, University Heights, where there is a commitment to living close in on smaller properties and putting up with some degree of traffic coming in from those who are outside and certainly in some cases it has been made to look at those of us who are in University Heights are hostile people who won't let- It is not that at all. It is just that as a simply rational matter your whole community begins to become less than it should be once you tip that balance too much in one direction or the other. And I like what you said. I mean, our goal as a council and I have served on University Heights council since 1993, I have seen us always opt for quality of life, always, because we have no pressures to develop businesses or new products and so if we had to sum in in words what has driven our actions, I think it would be that. Horow/But because you are not a isolated community, not a gated community, you also then as a council have to realize the Thlsrepresentsonlyareasonablyeccuratetranscrlptlonefthelowa CiW councilmeetingofSeptember5,1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 25 pressures that this- ¥arbrough/Absolutely and that is why we try to (can't hear). Jones/The traffic work that we have done over the last year to get a better handle on what is actually going on. The traffic light, the issue of will that be interconnected and how will it be set up. Will it be set up to restrict the flow of traffic? Is it going to be set up to increase the flow of traffic at certain times? (Can't hear). There is a vision that we have or our citizens have that has been (can't hear). Kubby/Well, I think the real crux of the discussion is going to be between 3-4 lanes and what the width of those will be. I personally don't believe this council will support a five or tow lane option. And it may be that in the way future that we end up having to combine some options. Maybe option 7 that has been deemed very inappropriate. Maybe there are other ways to do option 7 that is doesn't have to go the route that we specifically looked at. That they is another route or another couple of routes options that in the future might have to be looked at so there is a combinations of things. Bruno started to talk about and Jim certainly touched on was finding other ways for people to get around. It is going to be hard to come up with strategies but maybe we need three different things to solve this issue. But I can say right now for me that I am going to be looking at-that I think the discussion is going to be around 3-4 lane options and then discussing what the widths are and how to stripe it. Then there is a-And it wasn't in the summary. Really the only thing that council has gotten at this point is the summary unless council went to t) e city clerk or public library to look at the whole report. It didn't include pictures of three and four. I was actually at a another meeting where these were passed out which motivated me highly to go to the public library for the other document that showed the 3-4 lanes options both being the same width and I hadn't gotten that point in the summary. Maybe I didn't read it carefully enough but the illustrations certainly perked my interest (can't hear). We haven't done (can't hear). Horow/Is there any other issue around this? Pigott/One of the questions it leaves me with just thinking about this is so what does this all mean? Where have we gotten to? Horow/Well, as Jeff has given us the scenario (can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 26 Pigott/I mean in terms of the bridge and whether we have sort of informally agreed- Did I hear an agreement about something about width? Naomi said something about that earlier. Nov/I thought I heard there would be a minimum of 50 feet or 48 or whatever it happened to be in order to maintain the traffic flow unless the bridge is in such terrible condition that it could not be done that way. Horow/I guess I ask you though in terms of the consultant report that is coming in for the recommendation. We take a look of the implications of that. Pigott/With the bridge included? And then maybe we can talk with the council of University Heights after that? Lehman/Sue, I really think-I wasn't around when we talked about it last. I know that very little except what I read from the consultant. I don't think that we are equipped to really discuss the specifics at all tonight. I think the one thing that we would like to do something that is mutually agreeable with everybody. Something that is flexible and I think maybe we can even get together and draw up a proposal. Horow/Okay, well, we will certainly work on that one. Kubby/Well, there are a couple of other issues that I don't know if tonight is the appropriate time to talk about it. But one of them is there needs to be additional routes open. That even though there might be one lane of traffic going in each way during construction, do we need to do other things to facilitate people choosing other routes during this window of time of construction and how do we do joint education of people to figure out what those routes are and get the word out. Horow/I wonder whether that couldn't be possible, a structure of a subcommittee of both councils to work on something like that. I think the public education is absolutely necessary but before we (can't hear) the financial recommendation for the construction. Yarbrough/Meet with the hospital, too, and I would suggest that maybe not the whole council but maybe subcommittees out of the council meet with the hospital about their education of their patients. Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowaCltycouncil meetlngofSeptember5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 27 Kubby/When they send their maps out. ¥arbrough/When they send their maps- Kubby/To make a short term different map. Yarbrough/Or even to review their long term map. Nov/ I would also like to include a educational factor (can't hear). Because that is another route to the hospital and if that bridge is deteriorating at a faster rate than we expected, we are going to have to phase construction appropriately (can't hear). Throg/I need to ask a question for clarification having to do with what our understanding is. What I hear on the one hand is that we do intend to keep the bridge open so that traffic won't be impeded and I totally support that. But I think I heard Naomi say that we agreed that the bridge would have to be a minimum of 47 or 50 feet in order for that to happen and I guess I need to say that I didn't hear Rick Fosse saying that. Kubby/That he needs to look at those numbers. Pigott/They wanted to reexamine- Throg/We don't know. In other words, I don't know what the minimum width is necessary in order to keep the bridge open. Nov/I thought I heard that . So let's hear it finally. Fosse/ That is correct. We need to-If you desire we will put a pencil to it and find out other scenarios under which we would be able to keep the bridge (can't hear). Horow/Is that the final-Is that the only criteria that will govern the width of the bridge? Kubby/No, we are saying that is a point of agreement. Martin/ I have a question I would like to ask the engineer. Considering the feasibility of a 4-lane, we have a 2-lane now. What would be the difference in cost of having a 4~lane at the present bridge site as compared with leaving the two lane or rebuilding the two lane or having another 2-lane over here (refers to map) north of the Athletic Club? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 28 Fosse/Okay. Martin/In other words, have two bridges instead of one. Is there a big difference in two two laners as compared to a four laner? Fosse/Yes there would be and for two reasons. One is the existing bridge is so far gone that we need to replace both the deck and the beams and the piers. So there is really nothing to salvage in the existing bridge. There is no economy there. Martin/That bridge will come down then? Fosse/Right. Martin/Okay, now you have to start from scratch to build a new bridge. Could you build a new two lane bridge and another two lane bridge at the same price range as one four lane bridge? Fosse/ No, two independent structures will cost more from a mobilization perspective alone and there will be additional factors in there and probably the most significant factor is getting the traffic on and off the new location. It is the approaches that will cost more on that option. Martin/I just kind of hate-I talked to so many people that like that 7th option. I hate to see it dismissed by saying it is not feasible and that the only-that other things are more feasible. I hate to just toss it in the waste basket and forget it because so many people are asking about a different location for the bridge. G. Jacobson/One of the problems is it isn't Iowa City's land and it isn't University Heights land. I think that land is all the University's and you see, we can't-It is partly their land. Kubby/You could make the argument that if we underbuild and they want to still have their facilities accessible to the people using them, that they will need to look at that providing some other option. I mean we could make that argument. I don't know that that be the best position for me to take. Martin/The University shares our interest in having a new bridge. G. Jacobson/They do but I am not certain one way or the other if they would like to give up some of their land. Thlsrepresentsonlyareasonably 8ccuratetranscrlptionofthelowa Clty councilmeetingofSeptember5,1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 29 Martin/Like the edge of the golf course for a road that might go a quarter mile up northwest (can't hear). Jones/One issue of concern has to do with Olive Court and the lane that runs east behind this bridge and its abutment literally begins the access point to these areas. Are there any special acco~nodation that is going to be provided for those folks to make sure they can get in and out? Fosse/ That is part of the staging plan is to minimize that disruption and we will be moving the west abutment to the east. So that will help that situation. There will still be some interruption there. We can't guarantee that life will be as normal during construction. Jones/One way or the other they will be able to get in and out and ambulance or fire. That is what I am talking about. Fosse/Our best efforts there will still be interruptions. Swanson/It is probably time to start looking at the second item on the agenda. Kubby/Before we go on I just want to make one more comment and that I really will be advocating that council involve University Heights in some way that we are very specific about when we make our decision and that we at some point need to talk about what those options are and how to implement it and inform you in time that you can get your schedules to coincide with ours at one of our regular work sessions. Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetransc~ptlonofthelowa Cl~ council meetlngofSeptember 5,1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 30 Neuzil Tract 95-104 S2 Swanson/The second item on the agenda was the Neuzil Tract. had presented (can't hear). Susa~ Horow/This tract has certainly been in peoplers minds for quite awhile. It is a- The lake itself is a basin for the watershed in that area. Obviously you know that even though that it is Iowa City property, the only way they can access it is through University Heights. The issue of its development certainly each year increases in importance. It has been proposed certainly I know by the owner in previous years that if the two cities were to be interested in terms of purchasing it for a park or whatever that the owner would be interested in it. That is in previous years. I have no way of knowing that is still a case. But the question would be if the two cities can share in this somehow, obviously financially, what value would it be to both cities. Recently the Iowa City P/R Commission took a tour of this tract and made an interesting observation that diagonally, a path diagonally through this, would be very useful to both pedestrians and bicyclists. And would possibly cut down on traffic on Melrose Avenue. Whether or not that would be true I don't really know. And so the question really comes up it is currently zoned RS-8. Karin, would you be able to assist us in terms of the dwelling units that could possibly be built upon this land. What the overlay means because of the lake. What sort of impact the streets would feel from this being developed at its whole potential. Karin Franklin/Director of PCD. This is about and 8.5 acre site and with the current zoning that is in place it would be conceivable weakly to develop it for approximately 85 units. Now that is not taking the topography into consideration. It is taking into consideration only those legal requirements in the zoning that are placed on that. Yarbrough/Is there a setback because at the time that this zoning was discussed and it has been 8-10 years ago, there was some argument that a setback be highly recommended. Franklin/Well, I think probably because of the topography of the site, the ravines that traverse it, that anybody who does develop it probably would want to do it in some kind of planned development if they were going to get close to the maximum density that was allowable. If you were to develop it in s.f. or duplexes because of the ravines and having to put streets in there would be some difficulty in getting those 85 units or even something close to it I believe. So, it was Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meeting of September 5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 31 developed with a planned development which, at this point in time is at the discretion of the property owner and that is basically an overlay on the property where you take an underlying density and you put together a project that has the units clustered in zero lot lines or could be apartments or condominiums, then when review it we can require greater setback. So, that might have been in that discussion. Yarbrough/But it is at the discretion of P/Z? Franklin/It is at the discretion of city council in making that decision. P/Z Commission would review it and make a recommendation to the council. And often a lot of these kinds of issues are resolved at that level and then it goes on to the council. And it matters, too, about the Sensitive Areas Ordinance that is going through P/Z I think next week and it might put additional kinds of parameters on the developer in the future for that piece of property that would leave it up to the discretion of the developer. Franklin/For a planned development. Kubby/It might not mean that they have to do that. Franklin/Well, in fact the discretion would be there to a certain- Well, no, it probably wouldn't on this property because of the steep slopes and the trees down there. It wouldn't require (can't hear). I think probably the most-Well, there are two significant things about this tract. One is the environmental issue certainly. Then the other is the traffic and whether it has access. The access to this property if from University Heights on Marietta Avenue, Tower Court and Olive Court. So that the impact of development of this property wouldn't no doubt be felt by residents on those streets and within University Heights which I am sure why there is some mutual interest in looking at this piece of property. Jacobson/I am not familiar with this tract other than I know where it is located. But I don't know how long the citizens who border that who are Iowa City citizens have had to come through University Heights to leave their property. How long ago was it determined that there would be no access for those Iowa City residents into Iowa City itself. That they were closed off on any road that would lead them directly into Iowa City without going without coming through another community. Is that something recent? This represents only a reaso.ably accurate transcription of the iowa City council meeting of September 5, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 32 Franklin/No. Jacobson/Does anybody know the history of why that was done? And the other question is is there any way now that you could provide an outlet for those people into Iowa City without coming through University Heights? Is there anyway at all to make a road into Iowa City? Franklin/Not without taking someone's property and relocating them. Because the development to the- First of all, because of the nature of the property, the ravines through it and the existence of Melrose Lake, I think probably for its development part of the tract, approximately 6 acres would go to the north or would develop to the northern part and about an acre of the south. The northerly part is harder to access because of the apartment development and the lake and that is a private road for a certain extent there on Woodside. And then there is the railroad tracks. So between the lake and the railroad tracks there are limitations of how you could get access through there and you would have to go through that apartment complex to get an access into Iowa City from the northerly part. To the south you would be coming into Tower Court and it would mean taking houses. Yarbrough/Tower Court ends in a cul de sac. Franklin/Then there is the ravine and other apartments south of Tower Court on 0akcrest. That development of Tower I would guess probably took place in the 60's, 50's or 60's. And then the apartments around Melrose Lake, some of those are newer but I think the earliest are the 70's. Martin/Is there anyway to determine whether it is for sale, this tract? There is a persistent rumor that Mrs. Neuzil does not want to sell it. I don't spread rumors but I try to investigate it and find out if she is willing to put it in front of us. Is she willing to sell? Franklin/We could certainly contact the family and see if there are willing to sell. Martin/That has been done by several people and got a negative answer. (Can't hear). Horow/We have received all kinds of words. At one point she was willing to sell to both communities. That was like around 1983, '85 or '86. I think what we are faced with is we really Thlsrepresentsonly areasonablyaccuratetransctlptlonofthelowaCitycouncil meeting of SeptemberS, 1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 33 don't know. We need an update on that. Franklin/I am sure it depends upon the price. Horow/Sure. Franklin/That will be a factor. Martin/The story comes back that she wouldn't sell at any price. Jones/(Can't hear). contact made and the point was-This was during discussion about talking about de-annexing and annexing. Our earlier previous joint meeting after that at the public library as I recall we were basically informed that they didn't want, and this was about annexing and de-annexing, anything to happen that would hurt or reduce the value of their property. But we didn't query or ask about actually selling it to but we talked. Kubby/We did instruct P/R on this issue and they said that it would be something that they would be interested in looking at but would want to have some kind of commitment, some financial commitment from University Heights to have a joint effort. Martin/ Susan, what year were you talking about that she was willing to sell? Horow/This was around 1984, '85. Martin/Marty, what year were you talking about? Jones/I am talking the last year or year and a half. Yarbrough/I think that issue is really not as pertinent as the issue whether or not the two communities would like to cooperate on purchasing some portion of this property at a fair price at whatever would be the going rate for a joint development effort. It would not have to be the entire parcel either. It could be some portion of it that would help alleviate some of the problems in that area. That area I know is the highest density area of Iowa City without a park and I know you are divided into districts or sections or whatever you call. And I know there is also a problem in that area with runoff effect. That the volume of water that enters (can't hear) at the border needing treatment. So any additional development could push this into that expensive solution for the stormwater runoff. There is flooding below that property Thisrepresents only areasonablyaccuratetranscrlptionofthelowa CitycouncilmeetlngofSeptember5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 34 already in the little park down there and some of the houses complain as well. So additional construction will reduce the amount of absorption. There is just a lot of arguments for at least some of the property being purchased at a fair price for a joint development. The issue I think is how to proceed if we agree to do that. G. Jacobson/(Can't hear). Horow/We invested-We increased the size of the sewer pipe along Benton to take care of water. So we have already invested in this and I don't know whether that is at a maximum capacity for what is planned there, Karin. Franklin/i don't know the answer to that question, Susan, but I would guess that it was not constructed so that this property could not be developed. We do have a stormwater management ordinance in Iowa City which would apply to this property. The storm water would have to be retained. So, there is water shed issues here nit all of which can be certainly be attributed to this property. Yarbrough/Right, it is already a problem area. Horow/In other words, our zoning regulations would decrease the amount of land that could be developed automatically to mitigate those problems. But I think your point is well taken and I think it is just at the time where if both communities would be willing to investigate this (can't hear). feedback from your citizens in terms of whether they feel strongly about this development. Yarbrough/This is, as far as I know, a very low visibility issue except for the people who border the property who are aware of it and I don't know that we would-I mean, we would proceed with some kind of p.h. on that. We also have another large tract in University Heights that is undevelopable that is a candidate for parkland. Probably the two would have to be discussed simultaneously (can't hear). Franklin/A first step might be for both communities to invest in an appraisal of the property (can't hear). Kubby/It may be a two step appraisal. One that does the whole thing and what would sections be. Franklin/You will need to reach some consensus among yourselves as Th~srepr~sents~niyareas~n~b~y~ccuratetranscript~n~fthe~w~Ci~c~unci~meet~ng~fSeptember5~1995~ W5090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 35 to what those parts are. Horow/Perhaps the councils could put this on the next agenda in terms of going along with that, paying for the appraisals, Approximately how much could we-are we talking about here? Franklin/0h, probably a couple of thousand. Kubby/(Can't hear). Horow/All right. So, in other words, if Don-you and I will get back together (can't hear). Jim- councils wouldn't mind, if we agree or disagree Throg/Would it be premature to ask our P/R Commission to begin suggesting park might look like? P/Z commission-I mean out some parameters of what a Kubby/I think the idea it might even be more inclusive to have a subcommittee of P/R and some people from University Heights to do that and go back to their respective bodies. Yarbrough/We have a little different model than you. We rely a lot on expertise in the community or we contract for services. So, when we have the engineering problem we contract directly with an engineering form. But we have some very well informed citizens who will volunteer for this sort of thing that constitutes kind of ad hoc P/R. so we could get set up to do that if the council votes to move ahead with this. From/Shouldn't we fins out if she wants to sell it? Horow/We can always make an offer. I think the family, the person to deal with is someone in Cedar Rapids. We haven't really pushed it because we didn't know whether there was a feeling- From/Our budget is more limited than your budget and you know, even going in to appraise the land. If she is not keen and doesn't want to sell I don't know if it would be wise for us to go into an appraisal. Horow/If there is a question about it though and there is an appraisal from the owners point of view, both of these councils need to know what the other appraisal is. I don't think we should go into this without our eyes wide open. Ballard/You can always sell the appraisal. Thlsrepresentsonlyareasonablyaccuratetranscriptlonofthelowa City councilmeeting of September5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 36 Nov/I think we have to say if this person who owns the property is wiling to sell it then the councils are willing to get together and pay for an appraisal. There have to be a couple of ifs in it. Martin/A couple of years ago I talked to the son of Mrs. Neuzil who is the legal owner and I couldn't make contact with the woman, 93-94 years old. The son attempted to speak for her said no, she wouldn't sell it for any price. Unless you are talking about eminent domain? Nov/No, we are talking about a willing seller and a willing buyer, Horow/It seems to me we asked Ralph Neuzil and he referred us to Mr. Meardon or Mr. Suepple and there is someone in Cedar Rapids who is family spokesperson. I think we would go back to them. Lehman/Sue, I think if they are of the opinion that they will not sell at any price, there is no point in spending money on an appraisal. On the other hand, if you can walk in with an appraisal, if they are not real firm, and say make an offer for short of the appraised value, sometimes dollars will open your eyes, too. If they are not interested in selling in any price, I don't see us spending money on this. Martin/ The question is does he speak for her. That is the question. Horow/That is what I am saying. Our indications from the lawyer is someone other than that person. Jones/How would you split the cost of that appraisal? (Can't hear). Jacobson/I have to ask quickly, what has made this a pressing issue? The property has been here for a long time and obviously we have known that this lady has not been eager to do anything with her property. Why now that suddenly you are worried about it? Horow/I will certainly say that I have been interested in it ever since (can't hear) and I have been aware of (can't hear). Her age is what I would say makes it more urgent. Yarbrough/The discussion goes back to at least 1982 when (can't hear). It has been going on for a long time because it is the Thisrepresents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthelowa Citycouncilmeeting of September5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 37 8 acre undeveloped parcel of land in this whole area of Iowa City and University Heights. So that in itself makes people wonder (can't hear). Horow/We are also seeing infill development. There is a concern. Certainly the developments. I remember when the last apartment building was put in there. Lehman/I think this too is a matter of being proactive rather then preactive. If that property were sold the day after tomorrow it could be developed 85 units and there is not a whole lot we can do about it. If they keep our requirements or whatever, those cars would be going down whatever street onto Melrose and there is nothing we can do about it. G. Jacobson/So, what you are feeling then as a council is that we don't wish it to be developed at all. We prefer to consider it as open space or parkland or something like that as opposed to having someone come in and develop it. Horow/We haven't talked about it. G. Jacobson/I was just curious if you had made a decision. Nov/I think there will be some people who will be inclined to say lets have at least part of this as park but lets not have the whole thing as (can't hear). But we have not made that decision. CHANGE TAPE TO REEL 95-105 SIDE 1 Lehman/All those cars are going down streets that really aren't designed to carry them. It might be better that we look at at least part of this parcel for (can't hear). Yarbrough/Mine is definitely concerned. There is also the concern for the people in Iowa City who back onto this property who don't have access. Now they can go to Willow Creek but that is quite a bit a ways away and it is so dense with so many apartments. So, yes it would be an accommodation to University Heights. There is no question that there is concerns about how these automobiles will get in and out onto Melrose at this juncture. Horow/Okay, we will investigate the willingness to sell on the part of the owner and then get together with you in terms of making a decision about the (can't hear). Are there any other Thisrepresents onlyare~onably accuratetranscription ofthelowa Ct~ council meetlngofSeptemberS, 1995, WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 38 issues that councils would like to bring up about this? If not I just have one. Thlsrepresentsonly areasonably 8c~ratetranscrlptlon ofthelowa City council meeting of September5,1995. WS090595 September 5, 1995 Iowa City and University Heights Page 39 Other Business 95-105 Sl Horow/ I was talking to Mercy Hospital today. They asked me to extend to both council members an invitation for a reception to honor the new CEO Ronald Reed and his wife Helen. Tuesday, September 12, 4:30 to 6:30 at McCauley Room at Mercy. They apologize for not getting out all the invitations to everyone and just- Pigott/The times again. Horow/4:30 to 6:30, Tuesday, September 12. Anything else? If no, thank you very much. Adjourned: 8:45 PM. Thisrepresents only areasonably accuratetranscription ofthelowa City council meetingofSeptember5,1995, WS090595