HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-12 Transcription#2 Page 1
Lehman/Before we get started I'd like to recognize a special group of folks who are here
tonight, came here, actually came here about, actually they came here at 6:00 for a
6:15 meeting, I like that, being prompt and early, in fact we couldn't even get in
the chambers, but the cub scouts from Regina, Dens 5 and 9 were here, we talked
for probably about half an hour about city government and what the council does.
It was a fun time and I want to thank you folks for being here. We probably had
more fun than you did and as a matter of fact the entire council for a part of the
discussion, it was a lot of fun, and you guys come back any time you'd like.
ITEM NO. 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATION - OUTSTANDING STUDENT
CITIZENSHIP (Longfellow Elementary)
Lehman/If those folks would come forward.
Karr/Come right up here. Two on each side and face the audience please. OK. Great.
Josh, you can come over here, there you go.
Lehman/Josh, we'll let you be first.
Josh Cambridge/OK. I would like to thank you for this recognition award. I was
nominated by a majority of my class from my effort in staying active in and out of
school. In school I've been involved in a variety of activities, I was part of a
PALS program for one year. It was a group of kids that helps others solve
arguments and fights on the playground. I am also currently in friendship group
that meets once a week with our schools counselor and a variety of students. I've
volunteered to help explain our students recycling procedures in the first and
second grade classes. Last year I was in two class plays, and one I had a leading
role that I had to memorize the lines for while keeping up with all my other
schoolwork. To learn more about differences of others I went to International
Day and learned about child labor laws and sports in different cultures. This year
I've been trying to be more involved with schools decisions making for my last
year at Longfellow. I decided to become more active with my school by running
for student council. I have several jobs outside of school that I do too. I baby-sit
a 1st and 4th grader, sub for one of my friends on his newspaper delivery route,
mow lawns, help my dad do some boring???? trenching, and cleaning the
equipment for his job. And I also am a member of Youth Leadership Program
during the summer, we work at the community by helping others clean up after
the big storm. Again, thank you for this award.
Kayla Casavant/Receiving the Citizenship award means a lot to me because I try to do
my best for my school and my community. One of the things I do for my
community outside of school is a paper route. Where I deliver over 40 houses in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#2 Page 2
my neighborhood once a week. I enjoy going to church and being in my church
choir. I was also one of the cast members of a played called "The River of
Broken Glass" which was about a jewish family living in Germany during the
Holocaust. We did 5 public performances here in Iowa City and 6 performances
in Cedar Rapids. For over 2,000 junior and senior high students. I enjoy being
actively involved in school as well. I always put forth my best effort when it
comes to school work. I try to be considerate and fair while playing games on the
playground and as well as try to be good friends, a good friend and friendly to
everyone. I'm a safety patrol member and have also served as a safety patrol
captain. I take responsibility as seriously as my membership on the student
council as a cite council representative. I was involved in our Unit C musical,
Freedom Bound, and also a reading buddy to a kindergartner at Longfellow. I
attended a human rights seminar organized by the University of Iowa on campus
with some other class mates. We brought back to school some ideas about how
to educate others about human fights. I appreciate the City Council taking time to
recognize the efforts young people are attempting to make as good citizens.
Thank you.
Betsy Pusack/When I look back at the things that I did that would be considered good
citizenship, most of those things were fun things to do. For example, I worked
two years in a row, once with my friend Hannah and once with my friend Erin to
run a lemonade stand during the Parade of Home. We earned several hundred
dollars that we gave to the animal shelter and Habitat for Humanity. I helped the
4-C's community coordinator child care set up and run the booths at their family
fun day. At school I am now secretary of the student council. In the past I've
helped solved conflicts as a member of PALS, and have been on safety patrol.
Each year for about six weeks I help my dad deliver food from EconoFoods to the
crisis center food bank. I volunteer with a few other people in the children's
department at the public library on Wednesday evenings. During the summer I
work 7 hour days for 2 weeks at the Home Ties childcare center. In December I
went back to Homes Times to bring the children gingerbread houses that they
could decorate and take home to their families. If you perform an act of good
citizenship not just the people you help will get something out of it you do too.
You may learn a special talent or maybe you just had fun work, working with,
talking to the people you were working with. I think that if more people would do
things like that they would find them fun and would want to do more. I hope that
there will be a time when citizenship is so regular that it won't need to be
recognized. Thank you.
Betsy Pusack/This is a letter written by Sarah's teachers and I'm going to read it for her.
Dear Council we are so happy to nominate Sarah Bums for the Youth Citizenship
award because she exemplifies the spirit of the Longfellow School community.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#2 Page 3
Caring, inclusive and loyal. In her neighborhood, church and school, Sarah
exhibits a special genius for social relationships. Her mother calls her the
equivalent of Lucas Street welcome wagon, because she greets and is greeted by
every student on the street. She supports her brothers teams at City high school,
and attends their musical performances. She and her father lined the soccer fields
for the Iowa City Kickers soccer program for years. Their alums are enthusiastic
vocal support to all City High efforts. Sarah also helps with the St. Wenceslaus
church reception and services. At school Sarah has a sixth sense for the student
who is concerned or needs a cheerful word. She not only never forgets a student
but remembers peoples names and special traits within an encyclopedic memory.
She contributes to school projects like the recycling program and friendship
group. She has been a lunch room helper and part of the after school program
service project, Longfellow helpers. She has volunteered at the animal shelter and
has helped with litter removal on the school grounds. In social conflict situations
with peers Sarah consistently models effective social problem solving technique.
She knows how to seek adult help when she needs it, and how to make amends or
smooth ruffled feelings. When Sarah goes to Southeast Junior High next year
she'll leave big shoes to fill. We will need a full-time day brightener who will
remind us what is really important about a school community, the people. Sarah
is a special needs student because she has Williams Syndrome, which limits her
independence in academic areas. However, her special gifts in social areas are
unequaled. She has taught the Longfellow community how to strengthen our ties
with one another and by simply greeting, noticing, and caring about everyone.
Lehman/Well as you folks can see this is a really really very very special time in our
council meetings, there's one that I personally truly enjoy and I'm sure the rest of
the council does. And you know folks, this is what it's all about, were here
making decisions that affect all of you but what we really do is make decisions
that affect all of these young folks. And I think we can be very very proud of
them. I've got a proclamation which I will, or award I will read. They all say the
same so I will readjust the one. This is a citizenship award. For her outstanding
qualities of leadership within Longfellow Elementary, as well as the community,
and for her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others we recognize Betsy
Pusack for as an outstanding student citizen, your community is proud of you
presented by the Iowa City City Council. Kayla Casavant, I know I'll have this
one right, Josh Cambridge, Sarah Burns. Thank you.
Champion/Those kids are really cute, their Longfellow, which is my neighborhood
school and I'm really proud of them.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#3 Page 4
ITEM NO. 3. MAYORS PROCLAMATIONS.
Lehman/I'm sure your Mayors Proclamation, for us in our community there's a need for
blood for the protection of patients, where there's a need for additional healthy
regular volunteer donors who joined the ranks of those who already give of
themselves so generously whereas their are no substitutes or replacements for
blood, now therefore, I Ernest Lehman, Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa
proclaim the month of January, 1999 to be volunteer blood donor month in Iowa
City and urge all citizens to pay tribute to those among us who donate for others
in need. I urge citizens in good health to donate regularly, I also urge all civic and
service organizations and businesses if they have not already done so to form
blood donor groups to provide blood for others.
Karr/Here to accept representing the Red Cross is Betsy Tatro.
Betsy Tatro/I just want to thank the council for making January blood donor awareness
month. It's very important for everyone that is eligible to donate to get out and
donate. And in Iowa City you are lucky there are several opportunities to donate
on a regular basis. There is the regular Red Cross drive which is held on the
second Friday of every month at Old Capitol Mall. You can donate at the
Mississippi Valley Blood Center which is on Sturgis Drive, and at the DeGowin
Blood Center at the University of Iowa. Eligible donors, your basic eligibility is
to be at least 17 years old, weigh at least 110 pounds and in good health. If your
not a current blood donor we encourage you to get out and donate. Thank you.
Lehman/Thank you. I don't think there's a maximum weight is there?
Betsy Tatro/No.
Lehman/I do donate blood regularly, and I think it's the only way I know of you get 2
hours of free parking, 2 glasses of V8 and if you want you can get a muffin for
nothing.
Thornberry/Something for nothing.
Lehman/It is so, oh so easy, and something you really ought to do.
Tatro/Thank you.
Lehman/Glad to do that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
Page 5
NO. 4 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS ITEM
PRESENTED AS AMENDED.
Thornberry/Move adoption.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry, second by O'Donnell. As Item 2.
Karr/4e2, 4 e 2 will be deleted by motion.
Lehman/OK.
Thornberry/Move to delete.
Karr/No, as amended.
Lehman/As amended.
Thornberry/As amended, oh OK. right.
Lehman/Discussion. As one of the items (can't hear) setting a public hearing for
issuance of bond that will be replacing bonds that are currently in place, and my
understanding is that were probably issuing bonds at a lower interest rate.
Atkins/What this does is grant us the authorization of the time we would sell bonds in
March under the regular, our regular sale. We may possibly depending upon the
condition of the market actually refund, which means we would get a lower
interest rate on these bonds.
Norton/Ernie, I have one other question, I think it was on e2, on the setting of public
hearing on for January 26, for plans and specs regarding some Foster Road work.
Karr/That's been deleted.
Lehman/That's been deleted.
Norton/Oh, that's the one were taking out.
Karr/That's the one.
Thornberry/4e2 is deleted.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#4 Page 6
Norton/OK, cause it had things in it I didn't fully understand, that's good.
Atkins/We know.
Lehman/Any other discussion. Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#5 Page 7
ITEM NO. 5 PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA) (UNTIL
8:00 PM).
Lehman/This is the time we reserve for input by the public for any item that is not
included on the agenda. If you wish to address the council please come to the
podium, sign in, and limit your comments to 5 minutes or less.
Barbara Buss/Barbara Buss, 747 West Benton Street. Tonight I would like to speak to
the effect at the staffs recommendation for the widening of Benton Street. May
have on those of us living on or near West Benton Street. In particular, on those of
us who live in the Miller Orchard neighborhood at the very eastem end of the
street. It's not my purpose to outline the particular disadvantages that this
widening will impose on us. I will leave that task to others. My purpose is to
remind you that there is a neighborhood involved and that it is as a neighborhood
which plays a role in the composition of neighborhoods which make up Iowa
City. Home owners in this area own property which we could not as easily afford
in many other parts of the city. This is true because ours is a neighborhood of
mixed youths, single family, multifamily, commercial. It's center is an arterial
street. All of it's through side streets are or are quickly becoming collector
streets. Ours is not thought of as a desirable neighborhood. It is more often
referred to as an affordable neighborhood. We know all of this. We accept the
terms as they now stand and feel that we have faired well in the bargain. We
recognize that are assets to our neighborhood and we do not want to lose them,
unnecessarily. I would like to address 2 bits of what I should call "common
wisdom" which I believe are influencing you in ways I wish you would
reexamine. The first bit of common wisdom I would call the remodelers trek,
well as long as we have the wall tom down we might as well go ahead and fill in
the blank. Seductive as the impulse may be might as well is hardly a sound
reason in of itself for spending a small amount of extra money. There have to be
more compelling reasons. It is my understanding that the reason for improving
Benton Street is that it's surface and underground utilities need to be upgraded, I
don't argue with this. It is my suspicion, however, that the real reason for
widening the street is that at least in pan the unsubstantiated belief that once we
have the street tom up we might as well tear up wide it as doing so would add
only a relatively small amount to the total cost. Benton Street is described as
under capacity as a two-lane street. But nothing in the planning staffs' (can't
hear) never random to you. Addresses the possibility that widening the street and
thereby making it more car friendly that the street will invite more traffic and soon
once again under capacity. Simply by virtue of its having been widened and this
would be true regardless of the number of lanes added. I'm not saying that this
will happen, but it is a possibility which should be considered, and I believe that
you should require the planners to address it before you act on their
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#5 Page 8
recommendation to throw out the 2-lane option and create a problem where you
thought you were solving one. The second bit of common wisdom I would like to
address is that of the concept of greater good. As individuals we are often asked
to subordinate our particular interests to those of the larger community, and I
believe that this is appropriate. In the case of the Benton Street project as it
impacts the Miller Orchard neighborhood its tempting to make the case that the
city' s need for a wider arterial street in this part of the town outweighs the cost to
Benton Street residents. More commuters will be advantaged than homeowners
disadvantaged. That may be true as far as it goes. I would argue, however, that
the Miller Orchard neighborhood can make a greater contribution to the welfare of
the city as a whole by existing as a stable mixed neighborhood by accommodating
a 3 or 4 lane arterial street. In plain language, if the widening of Benton Street
further devalues the property in the Miller Orchard neighborhood home ownership
there will be discouraged in the stability of the neighborhood will be undermined.
I don't have to remind you that the stability provided by long-term renters and
homeowners offers more cost effective security to an area than can ever be
achieved through community and or police intervention. The cost of which are
paid for by all Iowa City taxpayers. Looked at this way it is the commuters who
use Benton Street twice a day who are the individuals who should be asked to
accommodate their interests to those of the greater Iowa City community. We're
not asking these commuters, not these commuters not to use the street, were
simply asking them to use it safely, respecting the speed limits and the fact that
the street is and will continue to be designed with consideration for the
neighborhoods through which it passes. I believe that the principles for creating a
healthy neighborhood which you have embraced for the development of the
peninsula should guide you in your actions for our neighborhood as well. You
may be familiar with the following quote from H.L. Minken, "There is always an
easy solution to every human problem, neat, plausible, and wrong." I know that
widening Benton Street seems neat and plausible, I would ask you to seriously
consider that it just might be wrong. Thank you.
Lehman/Thank you Barbie.
William Buss/My name is William Buss, I am the husband. It's a once in a lifetime for
us and I suspect for you as well. In response to Jeff Davidsons memorandum
about the widening Benton Street I want to discuss briefly 3 points that I will
cover in greater detail in a written statement that I will submit to you. First,
Benton Street is an arterial street that no rational planner would have planned an
arterial street with this combination of qualities. It is too steep, many houses are
too close to the road, it separates two schools from the children who attend them.
It has a 20 mile per hour speed limit instead of the 35 mph minimum
recommended by the arterial street plan. It is less than ¼ mile from another and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#5 Page 9
more major artery and ½ mile from a 3rd arterial street. And it is fundamentally
at odds with the mission of Iowa City' s comprehensive plan that an arterial street
should define the boundaries of neighborhoods and not direct through traffic into
the heart of residential areas. These non arterial street characteristics and others
require that Benton Street should be planned and used in a way that is consistent
with it's uniqueness. Second, the (can't understand) of congestion and delay on
Benton Street based on a map showing traffic counts and the table taken from the
arterial street plan must be carefully analyzed. At the posted speed limits at
midnight when there are very few cars on the road it takes 5 miles to drive the 2
miles from the intersection of Rohret Road and Mormon Trek down Benton Street
to the intersection and Riverside. I experimented by driving the same 2 mile road
several times at or near peak traffic times, it repeatedly took me about 7 minutes.
Putting the one side the fact the arterial street, that the arterial street plan says
increased delay and congestion may be acceptable if the only alternative is to
negatively impact the neighborhood. Putting that aside I do not think reasonable
people can believe that a 2 minute delay for a short period twice a day represents
an unacceptable delay. The experience of a driver on the ground should be
compared with a map and table and the memorandum in one other way.
According to the map and table the part of Benton Street that is congested is the
part between Sunset and Miller and especially between Greenwood and Miller.
Yet the only part of Benton Street that a driver experiences is having congestion,
if you can call it that, is the light at Riverside where one sometimes might have to
wait as much as two traffic light changes. Adding more lanes for traffic on the
Benton Street hill may worsen what little congestion actually occurs at the
Riverside-Benton intersection, that is so because the greater the capacity of the
wider road will produce an increase in traffic and that additional traffic would
seem to have no where to go except to wait behind the cars already stopped at the
traffic light. It is true that on this as on any two-lane street through traffic
sometimes must wait for left turning cars but those waits for included in my 7
minutes and many solutions other than a general widening of the street must be
considered to solve the problem of the left turning delay. It is also true that traffic
might increase in the future, but predictions of where people where live and what
numbers, and where they will work and what numbers, and how many cars they
will have and how many trips they will take and what their destinations will be
and how they will get there is all extremely speculative. Third, both the arterial
street plan and the comprehensive plan require the need for street improvements
to be weighed against neighborhood impacts. And not just on Miller Orchard, the
balancing process has not yet occurred, and it must not occur superficially. The
comprehensive plan places great stress on Iowa City as a community of
neighborhoods. The comprehensive plan explicitly contemplates that it will be
supplemented by a district by district planning process. The comprehensive plan
explicitly recognizes that planning of streets is a major part of district plan of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#5 Page 10
district planning process, in general, and for the southwest planning district in
particular where West Benton is located. It make no sense to go forward with
decisions about Benton Street now and then to pick up the pieces when the
southwest planning district becomes the focus of the city's primary attention.
Good planning imperatively requires integration with street planning with the
general district planning and the southwest district. As Jeff Davidson said in his
introductory letter to the arterial street plan for Iowa City, March 20, 1991,
"Grandios capital improvements which have no regard for the scale and integrity
of the community are clearly unacceptable. No longer does the identification of a
street capacity deficiency carry with it the assumption that the street will be
widened" end quote. Thank you for your attention and thank you for indulging us
in talking to you on this subject tonight in addition to the time you are giving
other neighbors on January 25 when we can't be there. Thank you.
Lehman/Thank you Bill. Is there further public discussion on something not on the
agenda?
Audience/... Harmon bldg... ?
Lehman/That's on the agenda though, come on up then.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 11
ITEM NO. 6b PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. Public hearing on an
ordinance designating 2 South Linn Street as an Iowa City Historic
Landmark. (Harmon Bldg.)
Lehman/Public hearing is open.
Steven
Yardley/My name is Steven Yardley, I live at 1820 Jeffrey Street, I would like to
take a few minutes of your time to discuss my feelings on the Harmon building
decision to demolish to build a parking ramp. I feel the decision to demolish the
Harmon building and build a new parking ramp is unsound. As there are dozens
of commercial properties are vacant around Iowa City that can not be filled,
therefore we don't need additional 37,000 feet of retail space in the downtown
area. This factor alone should tell the planners that something is wrong with this
idea. There is more cost effective methods of beautifying Iowa Avenue while
increasing efficiency of downtown parking. I believe that we need to examine the
scheme fully before investing such a large amount of our capital. Iowa City's
Planning and Zoning commission believes that improving Iowa Avenue and
building the parking ramp are more important for the whole community than
saving this particular building. Having lived in Iowa City for 15 years I believe
that I have a good sense for what the community feels on most issues and
spending 12 though, $12 million dollars of tax payers funds on a parking ramp is
not high on their wish list. Without building or demolishing a single structure
there are viable alternatives to Iowa City' s parking problem and the city needs to
consider some less permanent more cost effective solutions before rushing to
building another ramp. I've lived in several cities that have utilized the park-n-
ride system and Iowa City could easily implement a similar method of mass
transit. A park-n-ride system would benefit everyone involved, save money and
help reduce car emissions. There are several large under utilized shopping areas
that have empty parking lots minutes away from the cities center than could
become remote parking lots for the downtown. Combining these satellite lots
with a free shuttle type of bus where the current transit system would entice
people to park at one remote lot and travel these to work or shoppers who visit
downtown area. This alternative to a $12 million dollar parking ramp plan would
be considerably less expensive as these parking lots already exist and the
investment to improve our mass transit would be negligible in comparison.
Another benefit of this plan is the flexibility of change with the long-term needs.
In the future we may see driving, changes in driving and shopping habits, or
fluctuations in population density and this will allow for adjustments. But a $12
million dollar block of concrete is permanent. Iowa City is at a stage in its
existence that needs to be managed carefully. Maintaining Iowa City as a thriving
community requires a solid business community and the parking issue influences
whether we will grow or start to decay in the future. A park-n-ride concept would
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 12
help all downtown merchants while bene~ting depressed shopping areas like
Sycamore mall, Eastdale and Peppenvood Place. I believe the merchants such as
those at the new Gateway One Plaza would allow park-n-ride customers to utilize
there mostly empty lots if it would mean more shoppers would spend cash in their
stores. Park-n-ride would be a win win situation for everyone involved. A
historic building would not be destroyed and Iowa City's parking problem would
be eased. (can't hear) would see more customers and the taxpayers wouldn't have
to spend $12 million on a permanent concrete eyesore. However, if the
government of Iowa City is determined to build a new ramp downtown then there
is another option that might be considered and that is the other location on Iowa
Avenue.
Lehman/Excuse me Steven, the issue here is whether or not the building is historical, not
where we want to put parking ramps or fide-n-shop and whatever. This is strictly
relative to whether or not the Harman building should be designated a historical
landmark. So if you'd like to comment on that, then we'd be more than happy to
hear it.
Steven Yardley/OK.
Dilkes/Mr. Mayor, respectfully, I'm going to have to disagree with you, one of the
aspects that you have to consider is the historic nature of the building but you also
as P & Z did consider how that relates to the planned public improvements, the
comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance.
Lehman/Proceed.
Yardley/OK. Thank you.
Lehman/I stand corrected.
Yardley/The alternative spot would be on Iowa Avenue, right now it's a staff faculty lot,
next to the Psychology building. This is university property but as these students
of the university are a major contributor to the parking problem downtown Iowa
City, I feel that the university needs to be part of the solution. Consistently all of
the ramps on the University property are full, while the city ramps are not at
capacity. This would indicate that shoppers prefer not to use the parking ramp so
encouraging students to vacate spaces on Iowa Avenue would ease some
congestion but only if another ramp were made available. The university is
willing to allow Eastlawn to be bulldozed which is another historic landmark for
the sake of a parking ramp, but the impact of the university students is what is
creating a large portion of the parking problem so why does the city have to knock
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 13
down one of our buildings to make another under used parking ramp. Right now
in Iowa City you can see dozens of vacant stores and commercial properties that
are vacant and can not be filled so why do we need additional 37,000 feet of retail
space in the downtown area? But a few minutes in Coralville new businesses
arrive daily while were debating about parking ramps and historic buildings. I'd
like you to ask Planning and Zoning chairman Lea Supple how many ramps are in
Coralville and how many Historic Landmarks were destroyed for the mall. If
Iowa City wishes to remain competitive with our neighbors we need to develop,
we need to develop a strategy that makes commuting and shopping more
attractive and efficient. That our past decisions, decisions surrounding the new
parking ramp have not been sound and there are more cost effective methods of
beautifying Iowa Avenue while increasing the efficiency of downtown parking.
We need to reexamine the scheme before investing such a large tremendous
amount, such a tremendous amount of our capitol. Thank you for your time.
Lehman/Thank you.
Champion/Steve, this might be a good time if you don't mind to explain to the public
how parking ramps are paid for.
Atkins/The intent and of financing a parking ramp is that it is paid for by the user. That
is, it is not subsidized by property taxes. A long-standing council policy has been
that a parking ramp must be paid for by the users that is, the parking fee, fines,
and other revenues from the parking system. That is the intent with respect to the
construction of this parking garage also.
Champion/I think it's important for the public to realize that, that the parking ramp is not
part of our capitol improvement plan that is (can't hear) it has a different name
with it.
Atkins/It's a parking revenue bond.
Champion/Tax based.
Atkins/Yea, that is you pledge the revenues from the parking system for the payment of
the bond, in turn you create cash which allows you to build the projects.
Champion/I think it's important that people understand that, that it's not through your
tax dollars to pay for the parking ramp.
Michaelanne Widness/My name is Michaelanne Widness, and I live at 629 Melrose
Avenue. Mike Gun is here and I are here tonight representing the Historic
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 14
Preservation Commission and actually are here to speak for a agenda item that's
coming up later, but since I'm here I'd take a couple minutes to set the record
straight on what happened with the Harmon building nomination and to make a
brief plug for a survey of the downtown historic district, what we think will be the
historic district. The Press Citizen wrote an editorial on the subject of the Harmon
building and suggested that the timing of the nomination of this building for
national register destination was calculated at the least. In fact the commission
was more or less a bystander to this whole nomination process, because what
happened is a very concemed and interested citizen, Richard Carlson, who also
happens to be an architectural historian came to one of our meetings out of the
blue one night, talked to us about what he proceeds to be the importance of the
Harmon building to the downtown setting. And volunteered to prepare
nomination papers for this building. I can assure that this never happens, you
never people have people come up to you and say we would like to fill out this
long nomination form and take color photographs, blah, blah, blah. And I will
remind you that the one of the jobs of the historic preservation commission is to
identify historic, historically significant buildings and subsequently to nominate
them for designation or registration so certainly we had no intention of denying
Mr. Carlson, his request. He came back the following week with the nomination
papers completed. Again he talked to us what he had found had reinforced his
belief that this was truly was a significant building. We took the nomination
papers, we forwarded them to an expert for a second opinion and she concurred
that this building was worthy of nomination for register listing. At this point it
was truly inconceivable that the commission would do anything except forward
the nomination. We would be derelict in our duties if we found a building that 2
experts felt was worthy of being nominated and then we look the other way.
And so we agreed to go ahead knowing full well that this would certainly cause a
problem in terms of the Iowa Avenue redevelopment but it was the feeling of the
commission that this was not within our perfue???, that this is what you are so
handsomely compensated for to work out these naughty decisions and so we
forward the nomination on to you. There was nothing sinister or calculated in the
timing of this decision. Be t hat as it may, it was certainly embarrassing for
everyone I believe and certainly regrettable and it is my belief that given what is
likely to happen downtown in the next few years, this is certain to happen again
unless we can identify those buildings ahead of time that we want to preserve. It
is my understanding that Thursday you will be having budget talks and the
historic preservation commission will send to you a formal proposal requesting
funds to underwrite a survey of the downtown historic district. And I hope you
will consider these, our request favorably and give us your good thoughts. Thank
you.
Lehman/Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 15
Lloyd
Warmveer/Hi, Lloyd Wannveer, I've been before you on this before about the
Iowa Avenue parking garage. I think this gentleman covered the issues very well
they haven't changed and to me the whole idea is so defies??? good logic or any
sense of priorities that I have to believe since you are obviously all intelligent
people that there' s an intelligent reason why you have made this decision other
than we have the debt capacity so we might as well, it will pay for itself. There's
no limit to that logic that it's not a reason. So, I was prompted to write to each of
you individually and ask you to please disclose as public officers your holdings in
municipal bonds such as those that would be issued to purchase this parking
garage. And holdings and bonds in Coralville, stocks and bonds related to the
University of Iowa building projects, any projects in the local area that might
reveal a conflict of interest with this parking garage. And since then, you as a
council, not individually, except for Karen Kubby, who I talked to incidentally.
As a council, you voted to deny my request. Now I find that extremely, yea,
disconcerting because I assume as most citizens do the council will be very open
and reassuring citizens ifthere's any possible conflict of interest in advance.
Now since then, there' s other projects that have been brought up that are equally
baffling, like the idea to use taxpayers funds to secure low interest loans for the
poor and a building project on the peninsula, I have to wonder is this another wish
list, let's build a parking garage. Let's fund the poor with low interest loans, I
would like to find the intelligence behind these decisions, so I ask again the
council to reconsider it's, my request to disclose any possible conflicts of interests
with these projects, there is no intelligent explanation for this Iowa Avenue
project, it's just baffling. So, I ask you to reconsider, can I have an answer, or
shall I write you again?
Kubby/I personally have no problems disclosing that I don't have any stocks or bonds
that have any thing to do with municipal bonds.
Lloyd Wannveer/Thank you.
Lehman/Well, I told you that on the phone as well.
Wannveer/Well you told me that you have no stocks and the bonds were essentially none
of my business. That you had only bonds and because bonds are not public
corporations that you had no obligation to disclose. You don't have an obligation
under Iowa law, but it's a very trusting state, but there is no obligation.
Lehman/I also, also don't have any bonds as far as that goes.
Wannveer/OK. OK. You do not own any bonds from Iowa City or Coralville.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 16
Lehman/None.
Wannveer/You own no stock.
Thornberry/Well I don't think that's an appropriate question.
Lehman/Well (can't hear) but in any event I think.
Kubby/I don't know were public officials I think its, personally, I don't have a problem
in the question being asked or answering it.
Thornberry/I don't think this.
Kubby/My level of propriety and if people knowing those things about us as public
officials.
Wannveer/This is not the way I would prefer to ask, I mean, which is why I requested
formally but I believe the wrecking ball is poised on the Harmon house and that
the city is prepared to spend $12 million dollars on a project that was originally
priced at about $4 million so it could obviously be built at $4 million. So I ask
again to find the intelligence.
Champion/I would have to say that if any of us had a direct interest of profit making
interest in any project that we do that, I think that any of us might be rewarded
financially for that would not vote on the issue. I mean were all, I think were all,
fairly ethical. And, I just don't.
Wannveer/Well, I would, I would.
Champion/I guess the question is inappropriate and insinuate that I'm going to make
money by building a parking ramp.
Wannveer/But my question may be inappropriate, but spending $12 million dollars of
the taxpayers money demolishing two historic buildings in the downtown area
that obviously is going to benefit the university should be financed by the
university, not by the city.
Champion/University students are part of the community and so is the university.
Wannveer/Well I am aware that there is a delicate balance between the obligations of the
university to its students and the obligations of the city to university students.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 17
O'Donnell/(can't hear) balance, their very important part of the community.
Wannveer/They are an important.
O'Donnell/Their an asset to every business in Iowa City and we all support them.
Wannveer/The city.
O'Donnell/Because parking is not only for the students, it's for Iowa City.
Wannveer/Well, that part does not make sense.
O'Donnell/Well, thank you.
Wannveer/And when you have, have a whole Iowa Avenue being built up by the new
biology building and here you have a $12 million dollar parking structure going
up and you want it, and there' s plenty of parking on Iowa Avenue and now it's for
the university students. This doesn't make sense so I still do not find any
intelligence behind the decision and I again my reiterate my request, there must be
intelligence that is hidden and used.
Lehman/Thank you.
Rich Carlson/Hi my name is Rich Carlson, I'm a, I live at 309 Finkbine Lane. I'm the
architectural historian who prepared the nomination for the Harmon building and
just like to make a few comments tonight. Not so much on the nomination itself
because you have that, you've read that, that (can't hear) sort of the process in the
larger issues involved. Let's see. Well first the building itself it's already the best
example and certainly one of two or three best examples of 1920's commercial
architecture in Iowa City and it seems ashamed to see it demolished. It's, it's all a
sensitive area that is, there are several buildings within one block of this building
that are, that have been locally or nationally designated as historical landmarks so
it's like plopping down an enormous parking garage in this area it will severally
damage the integrity, the historic integrity of the area. And another thing that I
met to say tonight, Michaelanne covered some of those, that is what the process
by which this was done the Historic preservation commission basically was asked
to give an opinion on the, on the historic importance of the buildings without
being the time or the information that it needed to make an informed decision and
historic (can't hear) downtown that the commissions now recommending is a
vital and necessary thing that the downtown needs to do in the near future. I'm
also concerned about the, related to that, the lack of concern for citizen input
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 18
throughout the whole process here. And the city maintains that it's been pursuing
this parking garage alternative on this site since the fall of 97. Which from the
city's perspective I'm sure is true but for the citizens who only learned about it
April of the 1998.
Side 2
not much longer, last time and the time between when the people first learned
about the implications of this and the October vote that essentially sealed the
city' s rein, you know towards the present project was only 6 months, and as
Councilor Champion pointed out in the context of the Mercy Hospital building, 6
months is not a lot of time to organize, or you know get a organized grass roots of
citizens movement going to oppose a demolition of (can't hear) buildings. So I
would, I would have hoped at that time that Councilor Champion and other
councilors who voted to proceed with the project in October would have thought
the same thing about the building the city is planning now to demolish. Let's see.
OK my concern too with the, let's see with the vast increase that I mean, I'm
concerned with the vast increase in both scale and price of the parking ramp you
know under rent during the summer when Eastlawn was added to the project.
And basically went from under $5 million to $12 million dollars that's an
enormous increase, it's, the size of the building increased enormously and again
between the announcement of this in around early September and the vote in
October there was one month for citizens to actually come forward and express
their concerns about the new scale and the new price tag of the project which
again I think is, was not being fair to the citizens of Iowa City. And I'm
concerned about the wellness of the city to commit this level of funding to a
highly destructive project when far less could achieve the same result through
increased investment in public transit, that is targeted specifically to students and
commuters. Reducing the number of cars the need for a parking ramp disappears,
it's that simple. The saddest thing about the project though is that it is really
completely unnecessary and I'll be writing a letter to council that will detail this
more but basically what we get for our $12 million dollars is to save a few
percentage of commuters those that currently park on Iowa Avenue and walk to
destinations noah of Iowa Avenue. A two block walk. For the rest of the people
who park on Iowa Avenue who shop downtown to come south on Iowa Avenue
there no closer in the proposed ramp than they are in any existing parking ramp.
So by accommodation of existing parking ramps and transit you would achieve
almost exactly the same effect as spending $12 million dollars for this new ramp.
And so it just seems unfathomed, unfathomable to me why the council would
chose that route. That, those are the main concerns I have again, like I say I'll
address them more in a letter. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6b Page 19
Lehman/Thank you.
Kubby/(can't hear) thanks for taking all the time to fill out the nomination papers and I
hope that you'll kind of track when there are openings on the historic preservation
commission.
Carlson/I'm doing just that.
Lehman/Other discussion. Public heating is closed.
Karr/We have a motion to accept correspondence.
Vanderhoef/So moved.
Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, second my Kubby. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 20
ITEM NO. 6C Public hearing on an ordinance changing the zoning designation of
approximately 0.2 acres located at 703 Benton Court from Medium Density
Single-Family Residential (RS~8) to High Density Multifamily Residential
(RM-441). (REZg8-0016)
Lehman/This is the Oaknoll property, I am a member of the Oaknoll board of directors, I
will not be sitting in on this discussion. Mr. Thornberry will conduct the public
hearing.
Thornberry/The public hearing is now open.
Dilkes/Mr. Thornberry I need to address another conflict issue before you start. Dee
Vanderhoef informed me last night that her husband Pete is on, is on the board of
Oaknoll. It is my conclusion that the the spousal relationship in of it self, my
understanding being there is no compensation on that board. There' s no financial
benefit, does not pose a conflict for Dee as long as she's able to state that, that it
doesn't, and that her relationship with Pete does not compromise her ability to
make a decision based on the land use issues before her.
Thornberry/Can she so state?
Vanderhoef/She can so state.
Thomberry/OK. Proceed. Thank you.
Robert
Downer/Mr. Mayor Protem, members of the city council, I am Bob Downer, I am
here in my capacity both as an attorney for and as an advisory director of
Christian Retirement Services Inc. the owner of the Oaknoll retirement residence
and the owner of the subject property. To provide a little bit of background with
respect to Oaknoll this is a facility which has been in existence for approximately
a third of a century located at 701 Oaknoll Drive and currently providing 147
apartment units for senior citizens, 32 bed skilled nursing care facility, and 16
intermediate care beds. This organization was formed by a group of local citizens
in the early 1960's who saw a need for this type of facility in the community. The
original part of the facility consisted of 54 apartments and 32 skilled nursing care
beds. It's been expanded numerous times since then, there has been a total of well
over $10 million dollars invested over the years in its facilities with a replacement
cost estimated at several times that. This is an organization that has been
determined to be exempt from federal income taxes under section 501c3 of the
intemal revenue code for charitable organizations and it's health care facilities
enjoy a an exemption from property taxes. The only requirement of residence at
the time of admission is that they be able to live independently and no resident
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 21
who has run out of funds has ever been removed from occupancy of this property.
Over the period of Oaknoll's existence one of the stresses that have been
associated with the operation of that property has been parking. Since 1973 there
have been various parking special exceptions in place by reason of action of the
Iowa City board of adjustment. Those have been granted because of the fact that
many of the residents at Oaknoll, because of their ages do not own motor vehicles.
However, there are staff there, there are many visitors and meetings that have
occasion to be on the facility and therefore parking has been at a premium. The
particular application that is before the council this evening arises out of a 14 unit
expansion of Oaknoll that is located near the intersection of Oaknoll Drive and
West Benton Street. Part of the area that is covered by that addition was
originally a parking lot, and in order to meet the needs for parking during
construction while that parking area was being removed, the property at 703
Benton Court was acquired, this was a single family residence that was located at
the extreme noah end of Benton Court on the west side and was bordered on
noah by Oaknoll property and on the east across Benton Court by Oaknoll
property. In October of 1976, 1996, the city staff agreed that this property if
properly surfaced and graded could be used for parking purposes on a temporary
basis during a time that this addition was under construction. But clearly
indicated at that time that in the event that the property was not rezoned by the
conclusion of construction that it's use as a parking lot would have to be
abonded.??? The property at 703 Benton Court was then and currently is zoned
RS-8 the balance of the Oaknoll complex with the exception of 2 residences also
on Benton Court that are owned by Oaknoll is RM-44. The staff has determined
and I think properly so under the ordinances that in order for this property to be
used for parking purposes in conjunction with an RM-44 use that it also must be
zoned as RM-44. Even though the construction of this 14 unit addition is now
virtually complete and it includes with it a parking structure, a 2-level structure
that was built in an attempt to alleviate parking problems in that area. This does
not mean the parking problem has been solved and that the use of the property at
703 Benton Court for parking purposes would not continue to be beneficial not
only to the residents, staff, and visitors at Oaknoll but to the surrounding
neighborhood as well. This has relieved on-street parking in the area, it is not
going to change as far as the physical appearance of the property is concerned
and the property was given a permanent parking surface at the time that it was
approved for temporary parking. The requested rezoning as was indicated earlier
this evening covers an area of approximately 0.2 tenths of an acre that is tucked
away at the north end of Benton Court and adjoined on two sides by Oaknoll as I
had already indicated. I had MMS consultants do some calculations for me as to
the amount of RM-44 property that is zoned in this area to which this will be
contiguous, they came up with a calculation of contiguous RM-44 property of 40,
58.4 acres. This is 0.2 tenths of an acre and according to my calculations this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 22
would increase the amount of RM-44 property in that area that is contiguous by
approximately 1/3 of one percent. To assure that this property would be used only
for parking purposes, Oaknoll has signed a conditional zoning agreement and in
addition has tendered a restrictive covenant both of which would be enforceable
by the city to assure that this property will be used for no purpose other than it's
present surface parking purposes without coming back to the city council for
approval. It is no secret that Oaknoll has done some long-range planning and has
I mentioned acquired a couple of other properties in the area and is interested in
some others that would involve an addition that would represent according to
preliminary design something of a transition between the multifamily areas to the
east and north and the single family residents to the south and west. However,
under the conditional zoning agreement and restrictive covenant there could be no
action taken with respect to this property of any nature without coming back to
the city council and securing approval for those changes. No one to the best of
my knowledge has suggested at any of the public meetings that have occurred on
this that the parking is not needed or is not beneficial to the neighborhood. The
only objections have been concerns with respect to what might be done with this
property under the RM-44 zoning classification. I would submit that that issue
has been adequately addressed through the conditional zoning agreement and the
restrictive covenant and I believe that staff concurs in that analyses. I would
respectively urge your approval of this application so that needed parking and
only parking may be provided for this community resource. I do have and would
like to make part of the record here this evening a petition that is signed by I
believe 86 residents of Oaknoll requesting the granting of this request. And I
appreciate your indulgence I'm sure I've exceeded my time.
Thomberry/Thank you Bob.
???/Thanks.
Kubby/Just so unclear Eleanor that the covenant and the conditional zoning agreement
doesn't ensure that it will that that land would only be used for parking, it states
that they'll have to go back through a public process to do anything other than
parking.
Dilkes/That's right.
Kubby/But if it meets the criteria with any use besides parking that met criteria outlining
the covenant that it would be compatible with the neighborhood. Would we be
able to say no to that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 23
Dilkes/I think as Karen told you last night you have to look at this in the first instances
whether this is a proper rezoning to RM-44. Because they do get the underlying
rights that are given by RM-44 designation. As I read the CZA and the restrictive
covenant it requires P planning and zoning and then ultimately your review of the
design issues, the height, and the design, and that kind of thing to make sure the
structure if there is going to be one is compatible with the with the neighborhood.
I think the restrictive covenant perhaps goes a little farther than that and that was
something that was voluntarily placed on that by the property owner that is not
something we could of required of them. That was a voluntary thing that they did.
Thornberry/Right.
Kubby/Could you outline?
Thornberry/And that's what would I'm sorry go ahead.
Kubby/Will you outline what you mean by those further than that? What further
protection does that offer the neighborhood or the city than the CZA?
Dilkes/Let me get in front of me and then I'11.
Thornberry/They couldn't just do what then would be permitted under an RM-44 zone
without coming to council. They can build whatever they want to build if its
compatible with an RM-44 zoning, is that correct? And then with this covenant
that they've graciously put on this property to keep it parking lot, to do anything
other than parking they would have to come before the city council and get it
changed.
Kubby/Right, I'm just trying to clarify that it's, it sounds kind of good on the front end
that they can't, it will be parking and that may the intent, but that's not what the
underlying rights will allow if we approve this and I just want to make that clear
now during the public hearing so that if people want to speak to that issue they
can.
Thornberry/What your, What your saying then is if they came before, if someone were to
buy that from them, if they would like to sell it, which is neither here nor there
but, but if they would indeed sell this property, this RM-44 property and someone
would like to do something other than a parking lot they'd have to come to
council and what your saying is then that the council couldn't say "yes, go ahead"
with. Good.???
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 24
Kubby/Their underlying rights that would if they met some of the neighborhood
compatibility criteria we put up we would have to say yes to them or be liable.
Thornberry/Well I don't know, I'll wait and hear ~rom Eleanor because I think that
covenant.
Kubby/That's what she said earlier, that was my point.
Thornberry/Yea.
Champion/But if it meets the criteria of fitting into the neighborhood, why would she say
yes?
Kubby/Because it's a density change and that, once we change.
Champion/But there are criteria that also control that. That's a pretty small piece of
land, you can't very well put a 10-story apartment there.
Kubby/I mean, I guess I didn't bring this up to persuade, X will do that at the next
meeting, while we vote on it once I make my determination of finally how I
would vote. But I just want to make that point clear because this statement from
the attorney makes it sound if you don't understand all of that it makes it sound
like the covenant and the conditional zoning agreement ensures that it will be just
parking and that is not necessarily so.
Thornberry/Well, it would be for as long as Oaknoll owned it.
??????/No.
Kubby/No.
??????/No.
Dilkes/No. No that's.
Kubby/Not even under either of those documents is not correct.
Norton/No.
Thomberry/Well they'd have to come before city council to request that the covenant be
lifted.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 25
Dilkes/No. No.
Thornberry/And to do what is available under the RM-44.
Dilkes/No. What the CZA and the restrictive covenant do is require if then, if they, or if
they have agreed to in the event that they ever decide not to use, to use it for
something other than parking that they have to come back and get approval for
that. But that doesn't mean that you can just say no, it always has to be parking. I
mean you have to, they have the underlying rights that they get by virtue of the
RM-44 designation.
Thornberry/Even knowing that that property has that covenant with it?
Dilkes/Yes, and it's just, the way I sort of look at it is there's a rezoning application in
front of you, and there's no structure being built here. And a lot of times when
your rezoned your looking at, you know your looking at a structure, your looking
is what's planned for that compatible with the surrounding area that's and this will
afford you the opportunity to do that at that time.
Thornberry/What were looking at is a non structure.
Norton/I'd like to inquire (can't hear), no application has been submitted for the other
lots that you own along Benton Court correct?
Robert Downer/Correct.
Norton/Those are still RM-8.
Downer/RM-8.
Thornberry/RS-8 yea.
Norton/Is there one, that's two and there's one extra?
Thornberry/There's four and one is.
?? / There's 4.
?????/(can't here) and
Norton/Oh you have three of them and you have one more.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 26
Downer/There are five platted lots that face Benton Court but there all divided with one
full lot and a fraction of another one. The lot that is immediately south of the
subject property is owned by another owner then the two lots, or the two
properties south of that going out to the comer of Benton Court and Benton Street
are owned by Oaknoll. One that was acquired several years ago and the other one
this past summer.
Norton/The other one faces Benton doesn't it?
Thornberry/Yea. Yea.
Downer/The far south one faces Benton Street that's right.
Norton/While your there could you answer something that I'm curious about? Oaknoll
has been there now quite a while.
Downer/Yes.
Norton/And what I'm trying to get at or consider, is how did they get into the bind on
parking. This isn't a new happening, have they overbuilt and under parked?
Downer/Well it it's has been an attempt both to meet needs for this type of facility has
have been manifested by the applications that they've had for assuming
occupancy there and also attempts to preserve as much green space as possible.
As I mentioned for the last time there was a parking structure that was a part of
this latest construction and I think that Oaknoll is probably closer to meeting the
parking requirements of the ordinance at this time without any special exceptions
than they've ever been since this structure was open. But still there are over a
hundred full and part-time staff persons who are there around the clock, now you
don't have that many all at once, there are a lot of people there, there are various
residents who have meetings of organizations that they are part of that they have
there in the lounges and bring people in, people visit their families and the like
and so at times particularly there is a considerable need for parking.
Norton/I understand that, there' s no mystery that there' s gonna be though, that action,
that is there' s gonna be
Downer/Extra????
Norton/(can't hear) extra personnel??? to work, that' s not a mystery.
Downer/That's true.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 27
Norton/Totally predictable. My concern is if for example this particular lot is built for
RM-44, and presumably at some point a request for the other two or the whole
rest of that half of Benton Court then, do you want to move over to George Street
pretty soon?
Downer/It is not.
Norton/And (can't hear) is considerable dense, looking at that neighborhood issue that's
come up earlier this evening, there's already a lot of density in that region beyond
the Oaknoll as you know.
Downer/It is not contemplated that there would be any further removal of houses for
parking purposes in that area at all. There are some overall long-range plans as
far as Oaknoll is concerned that would if fully implemented would change the
entrance would create some relocated public space as well as some assisted living
facilities in connection with that. What is being contemplated in that regard
would not have a density in terms of residents that would be anywhere close to
what is on the property at the present time. And so these other houses that were
acquired were not acquired for parking purposes, they were acquired in with a
view toward potential long-range expansion and there are persons living in one of
those houses at the present time and soon the second one who are actual Oaknoll
residents in terms of having the fights to meals, health care and other benefits that
are offered and that' s the plan for the indefinite future.
Kubby/How many parking spaces were taken up from the new 14 unit, do you know that,
or removed?
Downer/Oh it would have been in the 20 area I think, and there have been more many
more than that replaced because of the two levels.
Kubby/Do you know the numbers?
Downer/But also there are additional units there at this time?
O'Donnell/I'm very comfortable with this, this is a 50 by 150 lot it's obvious it's going
to be for parking, I just don't have any problem with this at all.
Champion/I don't either.
Christine Denberg/My name's Christine Denberg and I live in Iowa City and I've spoken
to you before on behalf of my mother, one thing you mentioned about how
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 28
Oaknoll had gotten in this problem with the problem. I don't know if you realize
that when Oaknoll was built virtually out in the country, or very very on the
outskirts of town and when they acquired their land one of their problems was
they didn't really acquire enough. And then people started building around them,
and it's a really wonderful facility and it's a great plan and so there trying to
expand more and now they've ran into a problem where people have built around
them and so their kind of trying to correct a situation where there really
entrenched in that spot and the space isn't there for them to grow like there was at
one time when they originally purchased the property. And I also want to admit I
am a family member that goes there with the spaces opened right now with the
parking lot has made such a world of difference, I can tell you that for the first
time I am consistently parking legally. So, it's really been great great help to all
of us and I hope you can go ahead and approve this. Thank you very much.
Champion/Well we sure want to keep her out of jail.
Thornberry/Thank you Christine. We'll send the tickets.
William Knabe/My name is William Knabe, I live at 1101 Weeber Circle, and I am here
speaking tonight as a representative of the Weeber-Harlock neighborhood
association. I think it's very fine, it's a wonderful group of people we have from
Oaknoll here, I see some people who often walk through our neighborhood, they
don't jog but they walk. And it's very good to see that they came out on this
night. I hope you will get indulged with me, my remarks will be brief, I would
like for you to recognize the fact that even though we are talking about a specific
incidence here, I would like for you please try to think about at the big picture.
For the benefit of those that are relatively new to the council or are unfamiliar
with our neighborhood, the Weeber Harlock neighborhood consists of 52 single
family homes located on Weeber, Weeber Circle, Harlock Streets, at the top of
West Benton Hill. Our interest in this issue should be apparent, Benton Court is a
direct extension of Weeber Street. The neighborhood association is obviously
disappointed the council is seriously considering changing the zoning for this
property from RS-8 to RM-44. We are strongly opposed to this request for three
reasons: 1) we believe it is critically important that high density uses on West
Benton Hill not be expanded, the neighborhood communities in this area are
relative very fragile, a change in zoning from RS-8 to RM-44 is a drastic change.
2) We believe the rezoning recommended by staff will accommodate the interest
of a single private property owner to the detriment of the community of other
private property owners. 3) We believe it is unacceptable that a more modest
solution one that is acceptable and takes into consideration the needs of all parties
cannot be found to facilitate the continuation of a temporary use previously
granted by the city. On this one point we are on agreement with the planning and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 29
zoning staff. You will recall Karen Franklin's remarks at the informal meeting
last night, this request is not about a parking lot, it is a request for a zoned
boundary change, everyone involved in this request agrees that continued use of
this property as a parking lot in and of itself is inoffensive. But we are concemed
that the proposed rezoning will authorize much more broader range of activities
and the current property owner or future owner will be flee to initiate other land
usage activities with little or no additional restrictions and no legal obstacles. One
of the issues discussed at the informal session last evening pertained to the
appropriateness of making such a zoned boundary change. The argument was
advanced that it would be appropriate to zone this property RM-44 because it's in
line butts up against property owned by Oaknoll and that property is already
zoned RM-44. I'm having some difficulty understanding exactly what constitutes
the designation of an in line, this property as was originally stated, contained a
single-family dwelling which faced Benton Street. It would seem to me that the
front property line was Benton Court. It would also seem to me that the back
property line or in line would be adjacent to the single family dwelling which is
presently zoned RS-8 that faces George Street and not adjacent not adjacent to the
property owned by Oaknoll. There is one minor correction I would also like to
make Oaknoll owns the property that is north of this particular piece of property,
it owns the property on the east side of the street, it is not adjacent on the east
side. It owns property on the east side of the street to this property. What we are
asking you to do then is to consider the interest of all of the parties involved not
just the interest of a single property owner, of course you need to be concerned
about Oaknoll's desire to continue to provide a parking area for their employees
and guests. But you need also to be concerned about the following, first of all the
adjacent property owner who does not wish to see this property zoned RM-44 out
of fear that it could eventually result in construction of a large (can't hear)
structure. I'm sure her son is here and will speak to that point. The neighbors
who are deeply concerned that West Benton Hill will become further saturated
with high density apartment houses to the extent that older established
neighborhoods which have already been pushed beyond reasonable limits will
begin to disintegrate. The members of the planning and zoning commission who
in this particular case did their best to interpret and apply the city's
comprehensive plan which speaks a fairness to all. And last but not least, the
future groups who will have to wrestle with this same problem for developers will
soon discover the wisdom of taking adjacent lower density property applying for a
temporary parking permit under the guys of construction and then using that
parking lot to obtain a rezoning of the property to a higher density that is
comparable with the adjacent property they already own. I can name several
instances where this could be done right now. Changing the zoning from RS-8 to
RM-44 is not the solution. You are sending the wrong message if you do not look
for another solution. It would be easy for you to accept this zoning change of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 30
gUyS Of a covenant agreement, but we ask you to consider the ramifications for all
of the parties involved, not just the special interest of a single property owner.
Thank you.
Thornberry/Mr. Knabe I have a question for you, are you, you've mentioned this
neighborhood association
Knabe/Yes.
Thornberry/and all the people that live there, around this area. Are you the spokesman
for this neighborhood association?
Knabe/Yes I am. Yes I am.
Thomberry/And you speaking for them.
Knabe/Yes I am.
Thornberry/OK. When was when was your last neighborhood association meeting?
Knabe/We had an informal meeting about 3 days ago.
Thornberry/Informal, with.
Knabe/Well it was not a complete meeting with all of the neighbors, we usually have a
pretty good turnout of all the neighbors at our meetings.
Thornberry/How many were at this one a couple days ago?
Knabe/10.
Thornberry/OK. Out of how many?
Knabe/We have 52 homes in this neighborhood.
Thornberry/Thank you.
Edgar Volk/My name is Edgar Volk and I'm one of the residents at Oaknoll and I'm
very pleased to talk to my friends and members of the council. There's only one
issue here tonight and this concerns a very small parking, relatively small parking
lot. It is not a parking lot, and I for the personnel and visitors, it's much more
than that. I have a few figures that I so I can explain my last remark that it's an
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 31
essential parking lot. Now I reiterate that this is the only issue of the evening and
for the indefinite future. This parking lot is more than needed for visitors but it's
also needed for residents. There are 147 apartments in the building and we cannot
assign an automobile to each apartment because some people do not drive,
however, there are caregivers for many of those individuals there and they take
the residents out shopping, and they must park their cars. There are and I've
counted them, 85 assigned places for cars here. So that it includes the new
parking ramp. That gives a deficit if we do assign a parking place to each of the
apartments, quite a large deficit, so this past year that lovely year ofhardtop has
been extremely welcome and a very happy thing because of the problem with
parking. So the solution that I, well let me say one more thing, and that's a bit
about visitors, there is pressure in the area more than by just the residents, the
number of visitors you often meet in the corridor, five family members visiting a
particular apartment and that, so we have to have flexibility, it's rather
inconceivable that we could lose that we could lose this lovely area ofblacktop. I
can give you one personal example of how the visitors will be coming there over
the indefinite future. My wife Bess and I have 8 children and they were prolific
on their 15 grandchildren, they were prolific, we have 15 great-grandchildren, the
15 great-grandchildren are not yet driving, but they will. This gives you just a
little bit of the atmosphere of a very pleasant place to live and I beseech the
council to find the appropriate way of keeping the small bit of blacktop.
Thornberry/Thank you Edgar.
Edgar Volk/Thank you..
?????/?????(can't hear)
Thornberry/Connie, do you know Edgar?
??????//Did the anybody get the part on (can't hear).
William Buss/I spoke earlier for which I apologize, am I suppose to sign this again?
Champion/No.
William Buss/Means and ends. Means and ends. No one questions the end. I hate being
here opposing this particular application. I like Oaknoll, I'll probably be at
Oaknoll in a couple years if they'll have me. No one wants to deny them the use
of this parking lot but this is not the way to do it, I zoning ordinances set up
restrictions on what we do with our property. There's a lot of talk in planning
circles now suggesting that zoning ordinances are not such a good idea, but we
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 32
have them. And they do work if at all if they work even handily, it's not a
justification to change zoning from one district to another because we happen to
like the applicant or the applicants purposes. I will hope that there will be a way
to keep this parking lot for the people who want to use it. I hope that all of the
benefits that have been described will continue but I do not think that changing
the zone from RS-8 to RM-44 is the way to do it.
Ed Ruppenkamp/Good evening, my name is Ed Ruppenkamp, my grandmother is the lot
directly south of the property were discussing. A few points I'd like to make this
evening, one the lovely area ofblacktop that's so eloquently described earlier is
12 feet from my grandmothers window so she is directly impacted by what
happens here. All parties in the process have agreed that the parking lot is of
value to the area having no off street parking is a real detriment to the
neighborhood and having the parking lot there will help alleviate some of these
problems. However, we do have some concem for the underlying rights for
rezoning an area to RM-44 that you will run a great risk of having that area
developed possibly beyond our control that the city council may not be able to do
anything. Oaknoll has also indicated that in the future a lower density use for the
area on the west side of Benton Street is what they intend, if that is the case an
RM-44 rezoning may not be necessary. All throughout the process all parties
have again agreed that the parking lot is needed for the area and I would plea for
the council to find a different solution than going with a higher density use.
Thank you.
Ed Ruppenkamp/All parties are represented because of the ordinances and the zoning so
it seems to be working contrary to the purpose for which was intended.
Norton/But we need to go back to the drawing board (can't hear).
Ed Ruppenkamp/Well
Thornberry/Have you spoken with Bob Downer about this at all?
Ed Ruppenkamp/No no I've not.
Thomberry/You might want to, see if you can work something out with the neighbors,
with Oaknoll, to see how we can get this parking, they need the parking, how are
we going to get it? That's what we need to work out.
Ed Ruppenkamp/Well
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 33
Ed Ruppenkamp/From what I understand were legally precluded, you have to go one
way or the other, that' s what they kept telling us at the planning and zoning
commission.
Kubby/Right, it's a system issue, and they might help us in finding ways to change our
system to allow this to happen the way everyone wants it to happen but we have
to change here.
Norton/But were not going to solve it tonight.
Thornberry/No, and this is just a public heating and we've got some time to work on it
and were going to have to but I'd like I'd like to see them get the parking.
Ed Ruppenkamp/Yea.
????/Yea, you've stopped in the middle (can't hear) several people talking
(Several people talking)
Thornberry/Yea, and I haven't been able to deliver flowers, I haven't been able to find a
place to park.
Ed Ruppenkamp/You stop to visit my grandmother and during the day the streets are full
and then this was during the construction process and you had all the contractors
there working. Well, OK the contractors are done if people can park in the lots
hopefully there's some off street parking so more than one person can stop and
visit at a time. If it's her birthday and you want half a dozen people to show up
there's no way to park and it's what we do pull into the yard and plop on the
grass, I don't really think that' s appropriate. Probably get stuck trying to do that
this time of year if you.
Thornberry/So, I can see I can see why your arguing for their parking lot
Ed Ruppenkamp/Precisely, plus if they don't have the parking lot, maybe they'll park on
George Street.
Thornberry/That's right.
Ed Ruppenkamp/Their gonna go cruising through the back yard, we do not need to have
people traipsing through my grandmothers backyard. I think the parking lot does
serve a purpose for all the neighbors, it's just how do we get there.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6c Page 34
Thornberry/Right. OK. Thank you. Any other discussion now before we wake up Ernie?
Karr/Can we have a motion to accept correspondence?
Norton/So Moved.
Vanderhoef/Second.
Thornberry/It's been moved and seconded, all in favor.
???/Let's take a break.
Thornberry/Any other discussion before we. OK. Thank you very much we'll be taking
about a 5 minute break to find Ernie.
Dilkes/Did you?
Thomberry/Oh, I'm sorry. Public hearing is now closed.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6e Page 35
Item No. 6e. Consider an ordinance to vacate street right-of-way located east of
North Market Square Park, and south of Horace-Mall School. (VAC98-
0006) (Second consideration)
Lehman/This one was has been recommended for extradited consideration.
Thornberry/OK. This first and second.
O'Donnell/Second and third
Lehman/Second and third
Thornberry/I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered in both non
per passage???? of two council meetings prior to the meeting of which is to be
finally passed be suspended that the second consideration will both be waived and
that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time.
Vanderhoef/Second
Lehman/Moved by Thomberry, second by Vanderhoef. Discussion.
Kubby/I'll be voting no because there's not a specific reason or purpose in speeding up
the public process.
Lehman/Other discussion. Roll call. Motion carded.
Thornberry/I moved that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry, second by O'Donnell. Discussion. Roll call. Motion
carded.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6f Page 36
Item No. 6f. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Village Green Park
XVI, a 30.85 acre, 2-1ot residential subdivision with two outlots located on
Wellington Drive. (SUB98-0029)
Norton/Moved adoption of resolution.
Lehman/Moved by Norton, second by Thornberry. Discussion.
Norton/Well I just want to ask is is did we ask, somebody asked last night and I was
wondering if anyone answered, is the storm water business under control, have
they put those local drainage around structures out there up to now, that working?
Karin Franklin/Now is the question are they putting them up or are they working?
Norton/Well there' s there's a requirement up there that there be some local drainage
around structures and I wanted to know has that been done in some of the regions
already out there?
Franklin/It has been done in Parts of Village Green and in parts of Whispering
Meadows.
Norton/With success I take it.
Franklin/As far as I know but I can't speak to that specifically we were going to give you
a report from public works.
Atkins/To the best of my knowledge, Whispering Meadows has worked satisfactorily I
just don't have that report for you because it was checked annually over the last
couple of years.
Thornberry/(can't hear) if it hadn't been snowing.
???/I don't.
Norton/And there's no problem with the road out to Scott, here on this one.
Kubby/If we allow a lot of these and we find that over time like ten years later, just really
not working, do we have any kind of liability? I guess that should be asked (can't
hear)
Dilkes/I'm sorry.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#6f Page 37
Kubby/If we should allow this drainage system around the basements in a lot of different
areas around town and we find that they worked the first year, five years, but five
or seven years down the road they don't continue to work over time are we liable
in any way because we've allowed them and it's a specifically mentioned thing
with them, all these documents?
Dilkes/Because you approved it?
Kubby/Yea.
Dilkes/Likely no.
Kubby/Thank you.
Lehman/Public Discussion. Roll call. Motion carded.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#8 Page 38
ITEM NO. 8. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SUMMIT
STREET BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT [PROJECT NO.
BRM-3715(13)--8N-52], ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY
TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR
RECEIPT OF BIDS.
Lehman/This is a public hearing. Hearing is open. Public hearing is closed.
8b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROV1NG
Thornberry/Moved adoption to resolution.
Norton/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry, second by Norton. Discussion.
Norton/It's maybe starting this spring I take it as soon as construction season.
Denny Gannon/Yes.
Lehman/It's big, estimated cost is at a million 2.
Norton/Yes, it starts this spring and can you give us just a indication ofwhat's gonna
happen and the detour.
Gannon/Yes, it'll, the bid letting???? is February the 16th by the DOT in Ames and were
looking at a possible starting date of probably early April late March. And it
could continue on until probably middle of November.
Norton/How long do you expect the road to be the Summit Street to be closed?
Gannon/The street the bridge will be closed almost immediately but the remember the
project goes from
Norton/Yes.
Gannon/Sheridan down to Kirkwood and we don't want to close the road in front of the
houses until we work on the road.
Norton/Yea, but the bridge itself will be closed right a way.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#8 Page 39
Gannon/Right a way, yea.
Norton/And the detour's Dodge Dodge Street? What else?
Gannon/Yea, I've got those here I need to look at those real quick here let's see.
Norton/It wouldn't? (somebody coughed same time) be Dodge and Bowery (can't hear)?
Gannon/Yes, it'll be like from the north it'd be back up to Bowery and down Dodge to
Kirkwood.
Thomberry/This is $590,000 will be funded by water revenue bonds.
Lehman/No.
/ No.
(Several people speaking).
Norton/No next one.
Gannon/No 8.
Thornberry/This is construction cost is $1,246,000. And funded by $729,000 of federal
aid and $517,000 of Road Use Tax.
Norton/Right.
Lehman/And GO bonds.
Thornberry/Gee, I wonder what happens if they go over $ (can't hear).
(can't hear several people talking)
Thornberry/Well we'll come to that bridge when we come to it.
Lehman/Come to that bridge, thank you Dean. Further discussion. All in favor.
Karr/A resolution.
Lehman/Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#9 Page 40
ITEM NO. 9. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SAND PIT PUMP
STATION - LOWER TERMINUS PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT
OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY
CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING
TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
Lehman/Estimated cost of this is $590,000. Public heating is open. Public hearing is
closed.
Norton/Move adoption to resolution.
Vanderhoef/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Norton, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Roll call.
Kubby/This brings up something that Dee Norton is usually the one to bring up is that,
for probably two years we've requesting to make sure that we understand the big
picture of all the water projects and all the sewer projects, the timing, the added
projects, the costs, and we haven't had that, and I think it's really important that
that's been requested multiple times that we make time to have that because
otherwise it may seem piecemeal and most of it's not but there's some add-ons
that have created some budgetary changes and maybe some scheduling changes
that do feel piecemeal and I need the bigger picture to review all that and to
understand the future.
Norton/I do too, I thought some of the data that we just got from Steve connected with
our budget formation is gonna as I looked at it today is gonna facilitate putting
some of those numbers together. For example, we have the Iowa River Power
Dam on here tonight too and I know the pattern of change there so I but I do think
it' s imp ortant it' s just a matter o f getting staff time to get it to gether I gue s s i sn' t
it Steve?
Atkins/We'll have it together. Through capitol project.
Kubby/It's just that it's the two major public health things that generational projects and
we should be on top of it.
Lehman/Yea, I think.
Kubby/I personally don't feel totally incompetent and need that assistance.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#9 Page 41
Atkins/As you know the project the projects are carved up into pieces and we also will
occasionally will combine the pieces. You will notice, for example, on a project
that we deferred tonight, the Foster Road road improvements also had a water
component to it.
Kubby/I need that all wrapped up in a big package.
Atkins/So that piece. OK. We hear you.
Champion/In a big package.
Norton/As I am so I think it's important because there's at least some people on council
who never had the drill on the whole thing and the scale of it and the scope of it
and it effects as we look at budgeting and capitol improvements this loom is
rather rather large and that the scheme of things even though it's largely revenue
it's not all together not revenue bonds, so, I hope we could get that, I'd be willing
to help Steve, I'm ready.
Kubby/Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#10 Page 42
1TEM 10. CONDITIONAL CONVEYANCE OF VACATED PORTIONS OF THE
OLD JOHNSON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ADJOINING ALLEY
LOCATED EAST OF NORTH MARKET SQUARE PARK, AND SOUTH
OF HORACE MANN SCHOOL, TO THE IOWA CITY SCHOOL
DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROVIDING A NEARBY PUBLIC
PARK TO THE STUDENTS OF HORACE MANN SCHOOL, FOR A
PUBLIC PURPOSE AND WITHOUT COMPENSATION.
Lehman/Public hearing is open. Public hearing is closed.
Norton/Move adoption to resolution.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Norton, Second by O'Donnell. Discussion.
Vanderhoef/I think it's just something we should note that that even though this is being
conveyed to the school district the city is retaining their rights for easement for
water, sewer, and those kinds of activities in this property.
Lehman/Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 43
ITEM NO. 11 SECTION 14, CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE A, BUILDING CODE, BY
ADOPTING VOLUMES 1, 2, AND 3 OF THE 1997 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS, AND PROVIDING FOR
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THEREOF; TO PROVIDE FOR THE
PROTECTION OF THE HEALTH, WELFARE, AND SAFETY OF THE
CITIZENS OF IOWA CITY, IOWA
Lehman/Public discussion.
Charles Hawtrey/Mr. Mayor, I was privileged to obtain just before this the ordinance and
there are things that I do not understand sir.
Karr/For the record, may I have your name please.
Charles Hawtrey/Oh yes, Charles Hawtrey, 715 Summit, historic district Summit Street.
Karr/Thank you.
Charles Hawtrey/OK. I need to know whether item 12 reapplication of siding and
windows in group are division 3, group U occupancies apply to single family
dwellings and Summit Street.
Atkins/Tim's in the audience.
Lehman/Yea, Tim.
Tim/Would you like me to come up?
Lehman/Please. And he may have a couple questions which you could help us with.
Tim Hennes/I'm Tim Hennes, Senior Building inspector and yes the R1 occupancy is
single family and duplexes, and the U occupancy is accessory buildings. So yes it
would it would require a building permit.
Hawtrey/Does this building permit have implications in terms of the kind of window that
a person would put into the space which is the same size and shape as the
windows that are already there?
Henries/The requirement to get a building permit would kick it into the historic
preservation or the historic commission review for and they would review that I,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 44
they would issue a certificate of appropriateness before we would issue the
building permit.
Lehman/I think the question is though if you intentionally replace the windows windows
with that are of the same nature as the ones he's taking out requires a permit in
Norton/In the historic district.
Hennes/Yes.
Lehman/In the historic district.
Hennes/Yes.
Norton/Yea.
Lehman/Would there be, and this is maybe a question for (can't hear) not him. Would
there be any grounds whatsoever for denying a permit for replacing windows with
the same window?
Hennes/I guess I would defer to the historic commission but I would.
Dilkes/Tim let me, I think the answer to your question sir is yes because as Tim said the
building permit, the application for a building permit is what triggers the
historical preservation commissions review and their they would have to issue a
certificate of appropriateness you know determining that it was appropriate for the
historic district.
Hawtrey/I guess my concern is living in a 100 year old house or maybe it's only 98 years
old I'm not sure since the land grant for the house was granted in 1898 and the
cabinetry on the inside of the building was built in 1902, there is obviously a
period of time where the house was being created in the perception of what a
grand house should be in 1900' s. And my concern is that the windows which are
in this house are very nice except that their drafty and the glass no longer fits the
oak flames in some of them and there' s wood wrought?? and wavy glass which
would be all appropriate for 1900 but would of course be inappropriate in 1999
and so my concem is is the historic preservation or other or any other agency
going to affect the a modern window being placed in the space?
Dilkes/They would not deny your right to replace the windows but they would have the
right to look at the design and style of those windows and to determine whether it
was appropriate for the historic nature of your house.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 45
Kubby/So if your replacing the same thing with modern windows that had the same
sh???, if it's kind, we can't, because it's not our prorice??? we can't say of course
they would approve that but the kinds of things they would look for, what kind of
changes would be made to how the house looks and if it didn't have large changes
the atmosphere and the lines in the house they tend to say OK.
Hawtrey/Well, Karen, I have to tell you that I happen to be in a possession of a picture of
the house in 1907 and we would very much like to replace the balustrades and
make it look like 1907 because that's the only thing we know. However, the
back porch was in fact a back porch and there was no sun room over it in 1907
and there are windows in that space that are part of my concern and so historic
preservation if one were a purist would be to say "Well which is the appearance of
the house, the appearance of the picture or is it the appearance that one would gain
by placing the same windows, shape and size in the space and yet conform to say
more modern heat requirements and that sort of thing." So that's my concern.
Lehman/(can't hear) That it would trigger you going for that process.
Hawtrey/But I could not, would it deny me the fight to change the facility or let's be
ridiculous, let's say yea, somebody has a great love for wavy glass of 1900 nature
and require me to put wavy double hung glass in there.
Norton/I don't think so. I think they would work for you.
Champion/They would probably buy your glass.
Norton/They would (can't hear) you to try to to try to help assure that it's reasonably that
it's reasonably consistent with the historic character of the neighborhood. I'm
sure that, now as Karen says we can't promise how they would proceed and you
would always have the recourse of coming to us if that were if their decision were
too erroneous for your but I think they would certainly go along recognizing that
all of these older homes have to have that kind of upgrading periodically, and I
think if you were changing to a totally different style of windows they might want
to raise a question.
Hawtrey/I would agree with that if I were wanting to change it, I don't want to change it
I want to preserve it.
????Several people making a short comment.
Thornberry/I think that you've got a point in that, what is your recourse if the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 46
Hawtrey/Yes sir.
Thornberry/If the historic preservation committee does not like your proposal change.
What is your recourse, and I don't know what the recourse is so.
Dilkes/City Council.
????/We do.
Dilkes/Appeal to city council, you went through that once remember.
(Several people talking???)
????/We have a
Norton/It doesn't go to adjustments it comes right here.
Lehman/A very limited basis upon which we can change.
Dilkes/It's an arbitrary and capricious standard that's right.
Lehman/And follow following the policies.
Thornberry/I remember that.
Lehman/That's right.
Kubby/We have a couple historic preservation members who may want to comment, if
not feel free.
Norton/You want to comment.
Michaelanne Widness/We were just waiting our turn.
Norton/OK good.
Widness/We were trying to speak for you and here you were.
O'Donnell/Here you are.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 47
Michaelanne Widness/My name is Michaelanne Widness, still Michaelanne Widness,
and Mike Gunn and I are here representing the historic preservation commission.
Let me begin by saying that the historic preservation commission unanimously
supports the adoption of the uniform building code and specifically endorses a
provision that grants the authority to the historic preservation to make decisions
conceming siding and windows. Without having the authority to deal with new
siding and replacement windows the decision-making process becomes very
complicated and this was made very clear when Brad Houser appealed the
certificate of appropriateness over the siding, the new siding on his house on
Summit Street. Many of you, perhaps most of you expressed incredulity that the
commission would be able to deny Mr. Houser the ability to put up siding, new
siding, vinyl siding or aluminum, but his next door neighbor who was replacing
the siding would be allowed to do whatever he chose to do. This is the sort of
thing that makes our decision-making process look very arbitrary and capricious
to people who are not informed about the limits of our authority. And so we
believe that this is really in the best interest of preservation of historic resources to
be able to have this kind of authority. Let me also say in the process of talking to
people and Mr. Houser was appealing the certificate I spoke to a number of
individuals including the mayor of Keokuk, and Keokuk has a very fledgling
preservation program but he even he was surprised that we would not be able to
prevent someone from replacing siding, perhaps wood siding with vinyl or
aluminum so this is certainly not an uncommon provision in most of the
ordinances and we think it's that this is really long overdue. To address Dr.
Hawtrey's concerns, I would just like to point out that in the ten years the
commission with owners of historic properties there has been one, exactly one
instance in which we could not reach a satisfactory compromise and that was the
problem with Mr. Houser and since that decision as you all know, that has been
reversed and he is proceeding with on a very this is sort of an experimental thing,
that he's doing but he is installing the fiber cement board, the material that was
discussed. That we have, he brought additional information about to the
commission and we, most of us agreed that because this was being used in other
historic districts districts around the country on a very limited experimental basis
that we also should at least consider alternatives to redwood siding. The same
would be true for windows, I and the concern with windows is that you preserve
the appearance while trying to bring a house into the 20th century. Many of the
people who work on the commission either live in old houses or have lived in old
houses and so they are certainly aware of the problems and the pitfalls of 19th
century plumbing and siding and windows and all of this stuff, they are very
sensitive to the concerns ofhomeowners today and we really do try very hard to
work with everyone so that we can come up with something that we can all live
with and at the same time we'll protect the historic property. So, I'm not sure if
that really aligns you of all of your concerns, but I personally believe that this is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 48
something you should lose sleep over. I wanted to go one step further and say
that the having the authority to deal with new siding and windows would
represent a first stack in the tightening of the procedures and guidelines that we
have to work with when we make our decisions. We, you all discussed the
vagueness that seems to be inherent in what we are using and we on commission
agree and so Mike Gunn is here he has made a very preliminary attempt to work
towards more stringent, I shouldn't say stringent, more specific kinds of things to
look at in our decision making and I thought he like to just take a minute or two
to tell you what we'll be discussing on Thursday night.
Elizabeth Nolan/My name is Elizabeth Nolan, most people call me Betty. I live at 513
South Summit in the Summit Street historical preservational area. This house that
I live in has been our family home for over 57 years, god willing I'll be there for 9
or 10 more. At the present time my brothers and sisters and I are trustees of this
property since the death of my our mother last year. The concern that I have, and
I speak only for myself, is the language being added to the building code relating
to the windows and exempting all other citizens of the city of Iowa City from
having to get a work permit for replacement of windows and adding a terrible
(can't understand) I think. The language of the amendment, to the amendment,
that I think should be stricken is found in section 106.2b, this language is
unnecessary, it's discriminatory against a class ofhomeowners, and if this is
adopted it will unfairly burden these homeowners, myself particularly, you can
tell I'm speaking from the heart. Rather than as a representative of anybody else.
But it will unduly restrictive to us, the purpose of the building code is to protect
the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the city. Under section 14.4c8 of
the historical section of the city code the city building officials already have the
power to remedy dangerous conditions in historical districts. I feel that by
removing the exemption from obtaining a working permit for the repair of
windows not only is it unconscionable burden but it is it is unrealistic. Anybody
should not be surprised to know if you want to fix a broken window you have to
take the whole thing out, rehab it, reglazed or have it restructured in the frame,
add the frakum(sp.) put it back. Previously the both the building inspectors and
the historical commission have said that replacement didn't really cover re or
repair wasn't necessarily covered in the term replacement. But you have some
language in section 12 which I find disturbing, and I speak from experience the
language that is used is I think is very vague. And it is down in section 106.2 and
the heading to Item 12 and it is disturbing because it looks like it was prepared in
haste. Item 11 deals with the reapplication of shingles and roof sheeting, fine, no
problem with that. But Item 12 deals with reapplication of siding and windows.
Now how do you reapply a window? I think it's vague, I think it's disturbing and
I hope that you give further consideration to this particular word before you adopt
it into the code. On that other part of the code I have no problem. But I certainly
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 49
do urge you to strike the Section 12B because in the house that I live in, there are
more than 61 windows, they don't all break at the same time, we've never tried to
get storm windows for the whole building and if this language is put into building
code it will mean that every time that a window which is old and brittle, cracks
and it and somebody wants to repair it, me or whoever might be there that it will
require first to march down to the historic preservation commission and then
many visits of building inspectors not to mention delays in obtaining a contractor
or craftsman to fix the window. Or to be able to get the materials to fix the
window. In all there will probably be no structural change, no arderation?? that
would be noticeable even from the street probably. And there nothing would be
done to change the character of the architectural structure. The last thing I want to
bring to your attention is that the letter that we received, that was sent to my house
came over the holidays, I did not have an opportunity to really do much
background preparation on this and I apologize for that. I hope my presentation
isn't too rambling. But I do want to call your attention to the fact that in the
comment that you have before you it says that the historical preservation
commission does approve this proposed amendment. In the letter that I have it
says that the recommendation to the approval or the approval recommendation is
probably because the commission" the commission is currently preparing to
update its general design guidelines including provisions pertaining to siding and
windows." Well I believe this is a little presumptive to put the language in, put it
making the homeowners and the historical districts get work permits before we
are able to know what is going to be required by the historical preservation
commission as to whether or not their former rule which was if you didn't alter
the opening for the window, you would get something like a certificate of non-
material affect. Now, with 61 windows and $25.00 a work permit just to find out
what their going to do, I think this is something that I I felt I must come and talk
to you about tonight. I hope you strike the language that has been added to the
amendment that would not exempt the people in the historical preservation district
from the necessity of obtaining work permit when everybody else is exempt. It
isn't fair and I would just say we'll have lived in this historical preservation
district for the length that it has been in existence Iowa City, it's been a very
workable thing and my particular street there are houses of all kinds shapes, all
kinds of facades, all kinds of architectural characteristics. It's been a happy place
to live and I hope you don't make it so heavily burdened that it won't be happy
anymore.
Lehman/Thank you.
Kubby/Eleanor, would this apply if the window was broken and you need to replace the
glass in the window, that does not make sense?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 50
Dilkes/That's not how I would interpret it but I.
??????/No.
Dilkes/I...I...I...
Kubby/I think that that here is a good question but the answer is it would not apply when
your replacing a.
Nolan/I'm sorry I I don't hear very well.
Kubby/This you would not need to get a building permit to replace the glass in your
window in the case of a broken window. That would not, this.
Champion/Or to repair it.
Nolan/That's uncertain, that's uncertain.
Kubby/Well our attorney.
Nolan/Well I have talked to the building commission people today and to the historic
people and they say that that repairs have not been considered part of the necessity
for getting their consent for a replacement. But on the other hand what your
dealing with here is an exemption for everybody when you are making a repair
whatever kind, whatever reapplication is to windows, everybody else is gonna be
exempt except us.
Kubby/Well those are two separate issues, your concerned about the repair of the pane
that's broken, it is not a concern because that's not how this is implemented or
written.
Champion/Or even the wood, even the (can't hear)
Nolan/That has been the rule, but that's been on a sort of case by case basis also.
Norton/This was (can't hear).
Nolan/There's nothing to that effect at the present time in the code that I've been able to
find I although I have not spent a great deal of time.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 51
Kubby/Well I guess I'm trying to tell you our attomey, our inspector in the back and our
historic preservation folks here have all three here have all 3 said that is not what
will happen if we vote for this change.
Thornberry/Let me ask this.
Nolan/
Might I might I also then add that in windows, in these older houses when you
take them out, I know in our house they've been patched with tin at the bottom,
the glass in the older windows drifts, and it puts an extra burden and pressure on
the sill, the sash, the frame, all of that. When these windows are taken out, 9
times out of 10 they require some part of the frame to be replaced with new
material. Now it may be more than half the window, it may be one side, it usually
is the bottom part. This is not a visible from the street at all, its very difficult to
get wood material that matches wood sashes that of houses that were built in the
9 1880's and what wood is available you use the best thing possible. I think that
because every time you take a window to get it replace, to get part of it fixed just
to even put in new glass, you will find that when this kind of an ordinance is in
effect everybody runs scared. So whatever craftsman you get and he says I need
a new piece of wood on the bottom, new piece of wood, that means I have to go
get a permit work permit. $25.00 right there.
(several people saying no)
Kubby/No what were.
Nolan/From my experience that has happened I have had the siding on the front of our
house replaced because the painters tried to paint and they found the wood had
rotted underneath part of the soffits. The attention that or I didn't know about
until the painters told me as soon as they told me, I tried to get a contractor it took
them quite a while to line up a date where he could come and even inspect the
thing. This put the painters off their schedule. The this is a continuing problem
with old houses. It's not that your restoring a whole district or trying to change
materially other than just replace what you have but it's its a matter that becomes
just terribly expensive and it really it's unfair.
Kubby/But (can't hear) in that instance it sounds like it's because of some, that no matter
where you lived you needed a permit, cause you didn't have to go through
historic preservation to have that siding repaired. That that's a (can't hear)
Nolan/What I'm telling you is when you get a contractor that works with restoration
there first be, everybody wants to comply with the law, their first idea is let's get
this cleared whether we have to the building officials, the historical preservation
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 52
co officials, you have a broken window how many weeks are you going to be
sitting there? You have to put a board, a piece ofplywood up to get in order to
keep.
Lehman/Mrs. Nolan, let I'd like to have the building inspector address this.
Nolan/Thank you. I'm trying to just answer the questions.
Lehman/No no, I appreciate that but I really believe, I've got a question for him that I
think may answer some of your questions.
Nolan/Thank you, I appreciate your attention.
Lehman/Well I think were very concerned about this.
Nolan/I do too.
Lehman/But and my question is do we have to have a building permit for repair work,
and were talking she' s talking about repairing an old window even if you have to
literally rebuild the entire window that does not require a permit, is that correct?
Tim Hennes/That is correct.
Lehman/So, she could rebuild every window in her house without a permit. No
regulations whatsoever.
Hennes/Repair.
Nolan/That's not what this is going to say now.
Lehman/I think it does, it says replacement and were your talking repair.
Nolan/It doesn't say replacement, it's doesn't say replacement. It says reapplication,
everybody else gets to reapply their windows, people in historical district, in the
historic preservation district will not get that exemption.
Lehman/What does reapplication mean?
Norton/It should say replacement.
Hennes/To me, I guess, it would mean the installation of a new window, reapplying a
new window, we could, I guess we could amend the language.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 53
Lehman/I mean is the word reapplication intended to be replacement?
Hennes/Replacement only.
Lehman/That is the word that is intended to be or that's the meaning that is intended.
Hennes/Yes.
Norton/Well why don't we add that.
(several people talking)
?????/add it.
Nolan/This is a copy I got from the city clerk today.
Norton/Let' s put that word in there then Ernie.
Lehman/Let' s put that word in.
Hennes/Makes sense.
Lehman/To clarify it.
Kubby/So it would take a motion to
Norton/A reapplication, I would make a motion.
Kubby/Well after the public (can't hear)
????/this one right here.
(people talking)
?????/Reapplication.
Norton/Or the replacement of windows.
Thornberry/No what she's saying is this, that if the window, she takes the window, the
window' s broken and she takes it down says this window can't be put back in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 54
because it's the wood's all rotted and the windows broken. Now, if she says give
me a new window
Lehman/Rebuild it.
Thornberry/What do you mean rebuild it, you got to have all new wood and new glass,
that's not rebuilding, that's a total rebuild.
Lehman/That's a total that's a total rebuild.
Thornberry/That's a total rebuild I guess. Your getting a new window. Can she do that
without going through the preservation commission?
Hennes/Yes, because your still not replacing the whole window.
Thornberry/She is replacing the whole window.
Champion/No.
Hennes/Your replacing the sash.
Thornberry/OK.
Norton/She' s not (can't hear)
Lehman/All right.
Lehman/Can we change that word?
Hennes/Yes.
Lehman/Thank you. I think that really clarifies.
Norton/If any of the design (can't hear)
Hennes/It's a very big point.
Norton/Reapplication of siding and somehow they should have added the word or
replacement of windows. Could we go reapplication of siding and installation of
new windows.
Lehman/That's perfect
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 55
Champion/Yes, that' s perfect.
Vanderhoef/Sounds good.
Lehman/That was a motion made by Norton, and seconded by.
??????/After a board of discussion.?????
Norton/Oh we can't were in the hearing. I'm sorry.
Lehman/OK.
Thornberry/Of course if you don't live in a historic preservation area you don't have to
get permission to do anything.
Lehman/All fight, all right, all right I think that, I think that we've addressed what your
concerned about and I think your concem is valid, obviously, with that many
windows, if you have to have a permit.
Kubby/My guess is that historic preservation is (can't hear)
Nolan/I'm concerned that where there is a repair necessitated in a window in a historical
district that the homeowners be treated the same way as everybody else.
Norton/Yea.
Kubby/We understand.
(several people talking)
?????/You know that repairs will be more repairs.
?????/Repairs will be the same.
Norton/Replacement is different.
Lehman/Replacement is different but repairs are covered.
Kubby/Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 56
Nolan/If the replacement change or alter the outside appearance or something like that
I'd go along, I'd don't, I don't fight that.
(several people talking)
Norton/That's the intention.
Lehman/OK. Thank you.
Thornberry/Very good. Do we need more clarification? A good catch.
Michael Gunn/My name is Michael Gunn, I'm on the preservation commission, I live at
1011 Sheridan Avenue, that's in the Summit Street historic district. Just to add
one more confirmation that about windows, I don't think that anyone on the
preservation commission read that alteration to the building code with the idea
that every time someone repairs an existing window that there would be any
involvement by the preservation commission certainly that's not our interest the
secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation call for the repair of windows
whenever possible that' s just fine. The issue maybe toward replacement windows
is a little more, is a little trickier on the historic properties in the districts were
obligated to follow the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation. The first
priority is to repair existing windows if that proves to be impossible substitutions
can be made as long as they achieve the same appearance in the exterior. If
someone wanted to pull out double hung windows and put in casement windows
and change the trim I think they would find objections with the preservation
commission for that. But if the effort is successful in maintaining the appearance
from the exterior of the house so that it a double hung will still look like an old
double hung even if it is a new sash, or even a whole new window unit that
would, in all likelihood be acceptable to the preservation commission. The issue
of siding there is a varying inconsistency that your aware of and that if someone
would bring a project to the preservation commission and require, that requires a
building permit, we would in all likelihood if it were a historic structure we would
not allow siding vinyl siding to be applied and to cover the historic property. If
someone was doing only siding at the present time there would .... (end of tape)
go ahead and do it. The secretary of interior standards would not accept vinyl
siding wrap in historic properties. If we can if we can have a review of siding
then we can implement our guidelines consistently throughout the district which
we cannot do at the present time. In our current discussion at the preservation
commission we are trying to begin to separate the properties that might come
under our review, properties that are contributing historic properties, we would
look to use the secretary of interiors standards faithfully and preserve the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 57
appearance of these buildings. A lot of additions we look at are additions in the
rear, garages, outbuildings, recently infill, these are not historic properties, they
don't exist. For those properties if we can free those from the secretary of interior
standards and develop guidelines district by district we can we think can come up
with something that is more flexible in a lot of areas than we presently have, and
at the same time for historic properties try to be more faithful to the secretary of
interior standards and we have been able to when we try to involve everything in
the same in the same guidelines. So that is the direction we're headed.
Champion/That would be really a good direction, that that I'm really glad to hear that.
Kubby/Is there any discussion about treating people differently within a historic district?
Champion/(can't hear)
Kubby/I know, but I'm saying that that could be a problem and to get a balance???
Mike Gunn/People. Properties differently yes, every historic district that has been
named so far has contributing structures,
Kubby/right.
Gunn/Noncontributing structures. Our interest should be that is the preservation
commission interest should be, that is the preservation commission interest should
be in preserving historic properties as accurately and faithfully as we can. Other
things can be built in the district as long as there done under reasonable guidelines
they will not detract from the character of the historic district. We I think are
headed towards the direction of being more flexible in with properties that are not
contributing structures. So, yes, there will be probably eventually each district
will have it's own set of guidelines that clarify and define the particular district
and when we do that we can develop design criteria that everybody can be aware
of before the design process starts. Some of our problem is people design
something, they come in, they like it, and then they find it doesn't work and we
have to, they have to backtrack and redesign, so our effort is to get more detailed
not to become more stringent but to get more on paper that will tell what to design
and what to expect rather than to be surprised and upset and to feel sort of you
know to be blind sided by criteria that they just weren't aware of. So yes, there
will be some differences between properties but not that where in the district it
doesn't matter if it's a certain type of property then it will fall under certain
guideline.
Kubby/It won't be arbitrary?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 58
Gunn/Right.
Vanderhoef/I would like to say at this point how much I appreciate you going back and
looking at the siding issue and getting more information. I think this is a sign of
your flexibility and how hard you are working to work with the new construction
and the old construction and I appreciate it.
Gunn/Thank you. Thanks a lot.
Lehman/Thank you. Any other public discussion?
John Beasley/Yes, thank you John Beasley, 602 N. 1st Avenue, I'm here in my, I don't
want to say in professional capacity, I'm here as Chuck's son-in-law, and the
windows issue has me particularly interested because in the 10 or so years I've
been married to his daughter I've not yet been asked to come over and wash those
windows on Summit Street but I'm starting to think that my life of luxury is
ending and I may be over there soon so I have a vested interest in this issue.
Chuck and I have been somewhat educating ourself on the fly this evening as
Chuck had notice of the meeting tonight and I don't believe his packet of
materials contained the ordinance and Ms. Karr was gracious enough to make us
a copy of the ordinance and we tumed it left and fight and still couldn't figure out
what it said, so the putting aside all the language of the ordinance let me tell you
what our concerns are and then maybe we can work it that way. We're concerned
about the situation where your taking out a window and replacing it with a 1999
state of the art window, your not changing the size of the hole, your just filling it
with a new window. Your taking a 100 year old window out and putting in the
new window. We're not talking about the situation where your taking out the 100
year old window and putting in a window twice the size, or half the size or a circle
or a diamond shape, your putting in relatively the same size and shape window
and I as understood Tim' s comments was that if Chuck Hawtrey is going to take
out his 100 year old window that he has to get on a ladder 60 feet on the outside to
wash it and at 63 years of age he'd rather wash it on the inside which requires a
state of the art window. He's going to have to apply for a building permit, to the
city of Iowa City, which is gonna trigger a review of the particular window he
wants to install by the historic preservation commission and then they will pow
wow about this particular window and get a thumbs up or thumbs down and if the
thumbs down comes out of that group, Mr. Hermess' group will say no thanks
Chuck, no building permit for you, you've got to have your 100 year old
windows. And you have to wash them on the outside, that's my understanding of
the process and as I heard something about your, this bodies group review of that
would be whether that decision was arbitrary and arbitrary and capricious, which
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#I1 Page 59
iS a very difficult standard I think for a person who is a disagrees with the
particular result from the historic preservation society. Now this is this is what
I'm learning this evening. Although I was interested on the Summit Street issue
with regard to the brick house I couldn't persuade my mother-in-law to put me in
that phrase so I'm taking my shot now. The gentleman who described the
standards in the green shirt, and I can't read his signature, but said something that
concerned me and I hope I heard it heard him accurately that there's a department
secretary of interior standards that has a priority on how your going to evaluate
these types of situations and what I heard him to say is the first priority is to see if
you can repair the 100 year old window and then if that's not feasible then we get
into the issue of the replacement window. What that means to me is that if you
pass this ordinance as drafted the historic preservation commission is going to
have the all but absolute authority to tell Dr. Charles Hawtrey on Summit Street,
Chuck you can't put in a 1990's state of the art Anderson window so you don't
have to stand on that ladder 60 feet above the ground on the outside and wash it.
The gentleman also indicated that they need to tease out if I heard him correctly
some specifics regarding design standards and maybe what I heard and it may be
me falling from son-in-law into my professional capacity as attorney they need to
get a little more on writing so people have a better understanding of what to
expect with regard to this ordinance. And again if I if that I misunderstood I
apologize. That to me sounds like we might be getting the cart before the horse, I
want to make sure at 9:00 this evening I've got that right and our concern is your
putting too much power and authority at this point in time in a group, the
commission, to tell people exactly what kind of window they'll have without
anymore substantive standards and design standards so we can know what to
expect.
Champion/John, I don't think they were referring to just the window situation, they were
referring to the standards that are used for new construction or changes to houses
in historic districts or businesses, that's not something that' s just black and white.
And the standards of the interior have been there for years and years and years and
that' s a common document that's used.
Beasley/But it's
Champion/(can't hear) inclusive it just gives general guidelines.
Beasley/Right, but as your as your ordinance is written now correct me if I'm wrong the
historic preservation society if this is adopted would be able to say in again
whenever people argue in front of you they always argue the extremes. But
Chuck Hawtrey you cannot put in a 1999 state of the art Marvin window into your
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 60
house even though it's the same size, and it's a double-hung window which
matches what it looks like now, they could say that.
Champion/That would be (can't hear)
(several people talking, can't hear)
Thornberry/No.
Beasley/No no I understand that I understand that I've been assured that I won't lose
sleep over this issue and if I keep talking I may or may not get past my 10:00 bed
time but hypothetically that could occur.
Norton/In principle we are, in principle you are correct, but without some kind of
guidelines like that there is no such thing as a historic preservation John. Is it is
not something that is being imposed on a some kind of ugly motive, it's being
imposed, it's being considered by this commission, by this council. That we think
it's to the benefit of this community to maintain historic areas.
Beasley/We understand that, and were not suggesting that the historic preservation is a
bad idea, were just trying to understand if there's any guidelines in place once you
adopt this ordinance
??????/Yes.
Beasley/that says to the commission if a person comes into you with an application that
they want to replace the same size window and it's a double hung window that
they have to approve that certificate of approval. And that's the question.
Kubby/There are guidelines, there are guidelines now and those guidelines might be get
more refined distinguishing between contributing and noncontributing structures
within historic preservation districts. But there are guidelines now.
Beasley/OK let me let me ask the question this way and again like I said we've been
educating ourself on the fly this evening, is if Chuck Hawtrey wants to replace his
100 year old windows with a Anderson window, double-hung window, state of
the art OK is does will the historic preservation commission if you adopt this
ordinance have the authority to deny him that building permit or the certificate of
approval which?
Norton/If it would look basically the same outside, no problem.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 61
Lehman/But wait, I want to hear the commission say that.
?????/That'swhat, that's
Lehman/I guess it, (can't hear) answer him the question if your gonna replace the
window with what appears to be the identical window that's state of the art 1999
it's a double hung same size same appearance, is there any reason in the world
that could be denied?
Michaelanne Widness/I would like to see the window but it sound to me like
Dilkes/You'll have to come to the mic.
Beasley/And I before they I would like to hear an answer to your question, yes or no.
Lehman/I think it's a legitimate question.
Champion/I think it's a great question.
Mike Gunn/Mike Gunn again, the answer is under certain under certain circumstances it
could be denied and they would be in my opinion, and it's my opinion only, I'm
not speaking for the whole commission on this one, but in my opinion if it were a
particularly historically significant building that was on the national register and
the windows were of a particular nature that could not be replaced then I think the
commission should say that those windows can be repaired, this is how they
should be repaired, and in this particular case it is significant enough to deny
ripping the windows out. In many other cases, and most cases a deteriorated
double-hung window in an old home should be able to be replaced with a new
double hung window that looks the same from the outside without a problem.
So, I think it is not a clear cut yes or no.
Lehman/Well I guess what I think I hear what your saying that is if I want to replace my
window, the old one can be repaired, we'll take that for granted, we can repair the
old one, I don't want to repair it, I want to replace it with a new triple glazed 1999
state of the art window, it's the same size, same configuration, you have the
authority to tell me that I cannot replace that window I have to repair the old one.
Gunn/I think in the I mean I I think that's illegal, opinion, if your asking my opinion on
whether or not
Thornberry/No it's not.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 62
Gunn/It' s
Dilkes/I don't think it's an illegal opinion,
Gunn/No no.
Dilkes/I mean, ultimately it is
Gunn/We have the authority to do that right.
Dilkes/It's whether the standards that the historic preservation commission applies would
allow that.
Kubby/So really the answer is yes, it could be denied. And it would be under only very
specific conditions that you would be denied.
Gunn/I don't think the commission would deny it.
Lehman/I don't think so either.
Gunn/I don't think
(Several people talking)
Kubby/That's saying legally and theoretically your answer is yes and we need to be
honest about that and give you an answer to your question.
Dilkes/In fact, it wouldn't be appropriate for a member of the historic preservation
commission to stand up here and say not knowing the house, not knowing the
window, not knowing the situation I can guarantee you that we would approve it.
I mean that wouldn't be appropriate.
Lehman/No, but Eleanor at the same time if your were talking about replacing a window
with what appears to be a very similar or identical window and you refused to let
them do that that would obviously be an arbitrary decision
Thomberry/Capricious Yea.
Lehman/And that and that respect it would be a violation of their own rule.
(can't hear, several people talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 63
Kubby/If the window look was the same outside the history has been, that certificate of
appropriateness has been approved, is that helpful.
Beasley/And I.
Dilkes/It's the it's the appearance from the exterior that the commission focuses on.
Beasley/I understand, and I am trying to take this out of the realm of practicality and
what' s theoretically possible, but what I what I hear them saying is that the way
this ordinance if adopted is drafted at this particular time the answer could be if
Chuck wants to replace the same size double hung window with a 1999 state of
the art double hung window that looks identical theoretically they could say yes,
you can't do it. That's the answer.
????/OK.
Beasley/And there' s no written guidelines as I understand that that help a person argue
one case or another on that.
Vanderhoef/OK what does the council have in overview of the guidelines of the historic
preservation?
Lehman/We don't, we don't, none.
Thomberry/Arbitrary capricious.
Vanderhoef/This is, this is you know if there are if there in the process right now of
writing guidelines and changing them and working on flexibility and being more
specific to specific areas, I think John's got a real real good question, of what are
the guidelines for the Summit Street historic area. And until we have those are.
????/There are
Kubby/There are, their the inter secretary of interiors standards.
Vanderhoef/at this point
Champion/But they could deny anything.
Vanderhoef/But their talking about changing the guidelines and this is a problem.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 64
Dilkes/Their talking about providing as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong, their
talking about providing more specificity to the guidelines that they currently
operate under. I don't think their not going to not quit using the secretary of
Interiors guidelines, their just going to provide more local specificity.
Norton/But, we could play hypotheticals here all night John, if there if there guidelines at
the moment without going into the gory???? details saying it would look
reasonably the same from the outside it's a go, and that seems to me a perfectly
(can't hear) reason of guideline, now that (can't hear).
Beasley/Now Dee I don't want this to be construed on television as a threat but if these
windows don't get changed I'm over there on a ladder I'm gonna come looking
for you (can't hear, laughing)
Norton/I'm sure you will.
Thornberry/But the answer to your question John, it's yes, it can be denied.
Beasley/And the other the other. And that was my question, the other question the other
question I have is if Chuck were today to take out the old windows and put in the
1999 Anderson double hung would he have to get a building permit?
Lehman/Today,
Kubby/Yea.
Lehman/Not today, tomorrow.
Norton/Tomorrow.
Lehman/A same size window he would not, changing sizing would not today, with this
he will have to.
Norton/With this he will have to yes.
Lehman/But he also had to politically if we were at a situation where we were arbitrarily
(can't hear)
Lehman/refusing to allow something that occurred that appear to be the same thing we
can always change the ordinance. I cannot believe that now this is making
something consistent that we had a real problem with a couple months ago
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 65
because of the inconsistencies on another situation. And I think that, and I know
that it's not written down and it whatever. But I can't believe that the historic
preservation commission is going to be, their going to be interested in the exterior
of the home, probably no more so than the homeowner is. And I just, if I didn't
feel that this was a appropriate sort of thing to do in a historic district I wouldn't
be interested at all, it has, it would correct a problem that we saw a couple of
months ago that was intolerable. I'm a little tried??? I don't it's a bad rule, I think
it's a good rule, and I think that folks who live in historic districts this is very
compatible with that their trying to maintain and I do agree with the (can't
understand) who work earlier who we need to take the order to, I think it'll work.
Beasley/OK.
Lehman/I hear what your saying and I know what your saying. I don't disagree with
you, I think from a practical standpoint the situation you fear just plain won't
happen.
Beasley/Then I shifted colors and went from practical speaking to theoretical speaking to
illustrate our concern about your particular proposed amendment.
Champion/But the fact that you live on Summit Street or another historic district in town
and you alter your house in any way they have the right to deny it in every
situation it just isn't windows, it could be your front porch, a you know a
whatever, I mean that's their job, that's part of their job, is to see that when things
are changed the structures are historic district are they appropriate, so, yes, they
would have the fight to deny it, they would have the fight to deny anything that
you took to them.
Beasley/OK. I feel like the song by the Romantics, should I stay or should I go, half of
you I made a go and the other half keep making comments that I should respond
to so I think I'll go.
Champion/Go home and go to bed.
Kubby/Thank you.
Beasley/Thank you.
Lehman/Thank you John, I think you did point out some things that you know that are
concerns of us.
Beasley/And Norton I will deliver on that issue.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 66
Lehman/All right (can't hear, people laughing)
Norton/I'll have to come over and wash the windows.
Vanderhoef/Good luck John.
Michaelanne Widness/Could I just make one comment and that is, I think what Eleanor
said is really to the point, no matter how specific we make our procedures and
guidelines the answer to a question like the one that was posed was, it depends,
were gonna have to see the house, were gonna have to see the window, were
gonna have to see the neighborhood I mean you just can't right, you can't tighten
them up so much that you can point to 4AB, and said oh yes were going to accept
this because this meets our guidelines, it just won't work.
Kubby/We don't want it to.
Lehman/We hear you.
Widness/OK. But I will stand on a record often years and hundreds of decisions and we
have a lot of satisfied customers.
Thornberry/One last question for you, do you have the authority to deny color of paint
for a house?
Widness/No no, painting does not come under the purview of the commission.
Thornberry/Oh, that's gonna be next.
Lehman/We'll even think????
Widness/I don't think so.
Champion/It is in Charleston.
Lehman/OK. Further discussion.
Mark Hall/My name is Mark Hall and live at 1733 Brown Deer Road in Coralville, and
I'm past president now of the Home builders Association of Iowa City. The
Home builders Association thoroughly endorse the adoption of the building code
and those amendments. We would like to go on record thanking this council, the
past council and the city manager for addressing affordability issues with the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 67
building codes. And I would also like to, since I was here two months ago, thank
the board of appeals, especially Robert Carlson and guess he's not here tonight
and Tim Hennes for accommodating very fast way in the foundation issue. The
city staff does a great job as far as providing safe and compliant housing and
enforcing that. A home builder also have to make it safe, make it compliant, and
also make it affordable and I appreciate the council's action that they've taken and
having staff review these situations, and I hope this continues in the future.
Thank you.
Lehman/Thank you.
Karr/Motion to accept correspondence.
Thomberry/So moved.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry.
Vanderhoef/Second.
Lehman/Second by Vanderhoef. Motion carded.
Lehman/Public discussion is over, do we have a motion?
Thomberry/So moved.
Lehman/Moved by Thomberry.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Second by O'Donnell. First consideration of the ordinance. Any discussion by
council.
Kubby/I'd like to make a motion to amend language in Section A12A to add the words
"replacement of" so that it would now read "reapplication of siding and
replacement of windows" etc.
Vanderhoef/Second.
O'Donnell/No.
Lehman/We have a motion at second to.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 68
Dilkes/Can I just know, I just want to make sure that Tim is complete
Lehman/Tim is writing.
Dilkes/Tim is completely comfortable with that because it wouldn't be a substitutive
change that we couldn't make before your second reading.
Kubby/And that the historic preservation folks
Dilkes/All right.
Kubby/don't have a problem with it either.
Dilkes/I think that's what it means.
Lehman/I think that's right. Any discussion to the amendments? Do you we need a roll
call on amendments?
Karr/No, not an amendment.
Lehman/All in favor of the amendment. (All ayes) Amendment carried. Any other
discussion on the resolution?
Thornberry/You know I was going to vote against this for the windows and the siding, it
started to get more and more and more restrictive but I don't think I think that's
appropriate in those neighborhoods, the only thing that I disagree with in that
whole thing and I'll say it and I've always said it, that there's some houses within
the district that didn't want to be in the district, and they can't do what they want
to do because their in that district but I guess it's a too bad cause your there.
Because your in it whether you want to or not and you have no you can't get out
of it, and I feel sorry for those people. And if anybody has a problem with the
historic commission in getting windows, whatever things done, I hope they don't
hesitate to come to the council because it would be arbitrary and capricious as far
as I'm concemed.
(several people talking)
Kubby/(can't hear) it's illegal definite.
Lehman/As far as I'm concerned I'm for the roll call.
O'Donnell/I know Eleanor.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#11 Page 69
Dilkes/He's joking. OK.
Lehman/Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#16 Page 70
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 14,
CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE D, MECHANICAL CODE, BY ADOPTING THE
1997 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE PUBLISHED
BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS,
AND PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THEREOF; TO
PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE HEALTH, WELFARE,
AND SAFETY OF THE CITIZENS OF IOWA CITY, IOWA. (FIRST
CONSIDERATION).
Vanderhoef/Moved first consideration.
Thornberry/Second
Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, second by Thomberry. We have assured the health and
safety of the people in this community more than anybody should have to be
assured in one night.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
# 18 Page 71
ITEM NO. 18. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A REVISED
SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION
SERVICES AND PROGRAMS, EXCLUDING THE POTTER'S STUDIO.
Thornberry/Moved adoption of resolution.
Vanderhoef/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry, second by Vanderhoef. Discussion.
Thornberry/I don't remember but there's an increase of fees of what 21 out of 70 some.
Steve Atkins/21 out of also 90.
Lehman/Yea, so it's rather modest.
Norton/And pretty modest and (can't hear) increases with that.
Kubby/And a lot of the pattern is that a lot of youth activities programming will stay the
same fee, at least for another year.
Lehman/Roll Call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#19 Page 72
ITEM 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES AND CHARGES
FOR THE POTTER'S STUDIO IN THE ROBERT A. LEE COMMUNITY
RECREATION CENTER.
Norton/Move adoption.
O'Dormell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Norton, second by O'Donnell. Discussion.
Kubby/I'll be abstaining as I'm a user of that studio.
Lehman/Roll call. Motion carries with Kubby abstaining.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#20 Page 73
ITEM 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
REVISED CHAPTER 28E AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
IOWA CITY AND THE CITY OF CORALVILLE REGARDING
CERTAIN OBLIGATIONS INVOLVING THE IOWA RIVER POWER
DAM RENOVATION PROJECT.
Thornberry/Moved adoption of resolution.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Thornberry, second by Thornberry.
Norton/When I just add a question to what. I'd like to get a run down, what is the total
here this is the Coralville share, is 20, what is it $204,000. Is there anybody here
that can (can't hear)?
Dilkes/Yes, let me get it in front of me, cause I think that' s the right number though.
Norton/I was just curious what the total cost was of this project, I had.
Kubby/Chuck knew there was a reason he was here.
Charles Schmadeke/Total cost is $1.1 million. I believe Coralville's chair share is
$125,000 which would be through a grant.
Norton/Well a hundred, it says a 150 came from (can't hear).
Schmadeke/Right.
Norton/And the hundred, but their total is 204.
Dilkes/Their total is 204, and 150 is a grant.
Schmadeke/Right.
Thornberry/Does that include the cost of the land acquisition Chuck?
Schmadeke/No, it does not.
Norton/Has that changed from our original I never quite understood how we divided this
between us and Coralville I was that was that about where it was originally, the
general breakdown.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#20 Page 74
Schmadeke/It's changed by $54,000 because of additional design changes that Coralville
requested.
Norton/On their side. I see. Well it (can't hear).
Schmadeke/It's the railing all the way across the bridge and the lights on the bridge.
Norton/Now the last (can't hear). What about liability, is that altogether ours?
Schmadeke/It's ours, on the Iowa City portion, there will be a ramp on the west side, that
would be Coralville's responsibility, from the bridge down to the grade of the
parking lot.
Norton/Is that spelled out in the...
Schmadeke/In the agreement
Norton/... in the agreement?
Schmadeke/Yes.
Norton/That detail about liability I guess.
Dilkes/No, I don't think that it's a question of ownership whose gonna be owing what.
Norton/Oh I see, it's a simple ownership so it goes with that.
Dilkes/Generally, yes.
Thomberry/Would it be appropriate to know how much you think this land acquisition is
gonna cost? If were responsible for it and it says that Iowa City is responsible for
the property acquisition and acknowledgment by both parties.
Schmadeke/Yea, we've were getting appraisals probably later this week and we'll have
those costs.
Thomberry/So it will be somewhat in excess of 1.1 ?
Schmadeke/Right.
Thornberry/I also understand that it's necessary for the water treatment plant above.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#20 Page 75
Schmadeke/That's right, we have to maimain the pool level.
Thomberry/Yea.
Norton/Where does the work stand on there, what is the situation, are we just starting?
Schmadeke/Well were in the process of acquiring necessary easements and right of way.
Norton/When do you figure that will get under way, this summer?
Schmadeke/Hopefully this summer, yes.
Thornberry/Is there any further discussion? Thank you. Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#21 Page 76
ITEM 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL
FUNDING FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION SERVICES BY ACSG, INC.
IN CONNECTION WITH THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN PROJECT.
Champion/You could apply.
Lehman/Do we have a motion7
Norton/Move adoption.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Norton, second by O'Donnell. Discussion.
Norton/Reluctantly I should say.
7777/Pardon.
Lehman/I think we should explain that we had an increase in the funding for the
acquisition of property for the airport master plan of $285,000 part of this with
addition to the contract part was From difficulties that were unanticipated with the
original contract so were being asked to approve a an increase in the contract
amount of $285,000 which, to my understanding, is substantially less than was
originally requested by ACSG. Discussion.
Thornberry/Well we also, we also should say that 90 percent is eligible for
reimbursement so that's
Champion/That's important.
Thornberry/That's very important.
Norton/Well I mean, not only that but we've already heard presumably From the FAA
that these kind of cha, these kind of changes in the cost are not unanticipated in
these cases where your dealing with.
Thornberry/Well they didn't say unanticipated, they said not unheard of.
Norton/Or not unheard of, I'll buy that.
Thornberry/This company had a contract with the city to do specific work for a specific
amount of money. Their not quite finished with the product or their project but
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#21 Page 77
now they want an increase of 60 percent of the original contract price, $285,000
some of that was like a change order to a contract that the airport commission
approved of. The rest of it the vast majority of it, all but $50,000 or so is because
they say the projects taking longer than they thought it was going to take when
they first bid the project. They either bid it too low or their too slow. I don't
think that I will be voting to give them the additional $260,000 or whatever their
asking for, $285,000 total because I think they should adhere to the contract that
they agreed to with the city. Now, their going to explain to us of boulder problem
that construction companies sometimes hit.
(can't hear)
Thornberry/I'm not, maybe they will you know.
Thornberry/Maybe they won't even have an opportunity but I just think that they ought
to they ought to, we ought to pay what we agreed to, they ought to accept what
they bid, that's fair, it's taking.
Norton/That's enough
Thornberry/Taking enough responsibility for your own bids.
Lehman/Other discussion. I would, I guess I'd like to say that it has been discussed by
the airport commission along with city staff folks and apparently it's a situation
that is although not perhaps common not something that is unheard of, it has
apparently has the blessing of the FAA and they are going to be paying 90 percent
of the bill obviously we're not experts in property acquisition or the difficulty of
associating with it, I really have some, a real personal difficulties with that kind of
an increase in a contract but after having this been worked over by the FAA, the
airport commission, working with city staff, and their all recommending that we
approve this increase in funding, I think I'm gonna have to probably support.
Other discussion. Roll call. Motion carries with Kubby and Thomberry voting
No.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 78
ITEM NO. 22. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE IOWA CITY
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD STANDARD OPERATING
PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES.
Lehman/Do we have a motion.
Vanderhoef/Moved.
O'Donnell/Second.
Lehman/Moved by Vanderhoef, second by Mike. Discussion.
John Watson/I'm still John Watson, still vice chair of the Police Citizens Review Board,
and the board has asked me to read a statement on their behalf. Yesterday the
Police Citizens Review Board asked that the city council defer making several
significant changes to the boards standard operating procedures. We ask that
decisions about changes to those procedures be deferred only until the PCRB and
the city council had had held an already scheduled joint meeting on February 11.
By informal vote of 4-3 the council declined and is going to I assume tonight
grant this deferral. Part of the reason expressed for this decision is that council is
deferring to the judgment of the city attorney that there is an urgent need for the
board to have procedures. When the council appointed the PCRB in late 1997, no
set of operating procedures was provided. Rather, the board was charged with
drafting it's own. Because there was no precedent for the operation of a PCRB in
Iowa, and because there was a (can't hear) expectation that the PCRB should
begin it's work at once. We determined that our procedures would have to evolve
as a natural outcome of the experience we would gain as we dealt with citizen
complaints and executed the other functions that the ordinance specifies. Thus,
we were faced with a challenge of simultaneously doing our work and
determining how best to do it. Five diverse individuals had to coalless???? to
become a working group very quickly, we all had to become grounded in the
ordinance and in the relevant operations and functions of the police department.
We attended the citizen police academy as a group for 12 weeks, we learned about
relevant legal matters, we discussed at length how to deal with sensitive issues
and how to protect the interence interest and rights of a variety of parties with
competing interest. We leamed about mediation, established written procedures
for the PCRB mediation process and identified a group of appropriately
experienced mediators willing to serve in this capacity. We developed standard
content for a variety of office correspondence. We worked hard to develop
efficient, consistent, productive procedures for reviewing the chiefs reports on
complaints. We exhaustibly examined hundreds of pages of complaint related
information and held long discussions leading to our decisions on individual
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 79
complaints. Occasionally we conducted our own additional investigations in the
complaint related matters. We established the protocol for preparing our reports
in a consistent way and have collectible devoted many hours to the preparation of
each report. One matter of consensus early on was that the ordinance stipulates
we may have access to them, we did not wish to know the names of officers who
are the subject of complaints. We have not sought this information nor do we
release it. In this latter regard we feel it's important to correct a continuing
misperception. The PCRB has not released or reviewed the identity of any
officer. The draft to standard operating procedures that was submitted on October
6 reflects our experience of the last 18 months. During this time the board has
received 27 reports of complaints containing over 60 allegations, of these the
board sustained 3 allegations, 2 of which were affirmations or agreements with
the chief, the chief's own findings. In developing the procedures we have used
we have used to do our work we have relied on many resources including the
advise of the city clerk, the advise of the board's council, our own research and
the activities of similar boards nationwide, reports and presentations by experts,
discussions with the chief and other city personnel, feedback from the city
attomey's office and communications with and from city council members and a
variety of citizens. We estimated that we, we estimated that we have collectively
devoted thousands of hours of unpaid professional legal work on behalf of the city
including hundreds to develop to the development of policies and procedures. We
have not failed to respond in a timely way to any request made to us by city staff.
In short we have taken our responsibilities very seriously. From our perspective,
it is grossly inaccurate to state or imply that the city, that the police citizens
review board has from the start been operating on an ad hoc basis. Without any
standard policies and procedures and that therefore an urgent situation exists that
demands immediate action by the council. On December 10, we requested a joint
meeting with the council to review the SOP and other matters, we suggested
several dates in mid-January for the meeting. Because of the council' s heavy
schedule February 11 was set for our joint meeting. At this point we are asking,
all we are asking that the city council meet with us before it makes changes to our
standard operating procedures. In particular, changes which may diminish the
rights of the complainant and may inhibit the flow of information to the board
information that we feel is essential for us to carry out our duties and
responsibilities. So.
Champion/Thank you.
Kubby/With that I would move to defer this item until February 23.
Thornberry/I was under the impression that we give them several dates to meet and they
said they couldn't meet on any of them. Is that not correct?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 80
Lehman/Well, that's not relevant here.
Thornberry/Well when he says that hey, we've been waiting, been willing to meet by due
to our heavy schedule we haven't been able to meet with them, I don't believe
that's accurate. But any ways that's neither here nor there.
Kubby/I move to defer this item until February 23rd.
Champion/I' 11 second it.
Norton/Well I'll want to speak to that a minute. I certainly last night supported the idea
of deferring, and thought we could certainly operate in the interim with what we
have, the question is what is the interim, what is the length of the interim whether
we can actually solve this in our discussion with them on the 1 lth in a couple of
hours I guess and in discussion before that can we resolve the issues and in talking
with the city attorney it seems to me that may not be possible to get that
accomplished therefore we might go on several months without a formally
adoptive set of procedures
Tape 99-9
Norton/And I kind of go along with city attorney in the assumption from her and the rest
of my colleagues here that we are going to take a hard look at this thing and were
going to listen carefully to the boards concerns because I think they have worked
hard and have done a tremendous job so.
Kubby/But Dee I would remind you that there are currently some standard operating
procedures they have not been approved of by this council but they are in use and
have been in use and are being consistently lived by the PCRB and those what
would, are what would be in place of and guide them in their proceedings
whenever the date is that we would adopt them. I think that it seems very
inappropriate, I understand the need to have them approved and so, you know in a
logistical way I understand the point and so I am weighing that the need to have
the approved sanction by us, the standard operating procedures with the need to
make sure that we don't approve some without the discussion. The process
involved here people who have taken a lot of time out of their lives to serve the
community, that have been doing, I believe an excellent job given the rules that
they are living under to give them the respect to be able to talk with us about the
disagreements they have with what is proposed by out attorney's office with what
they would like us to do and for me I think that it's much more important to wait
and to have that discussion before we approve anything and I know that people
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 81
say well we can change things and we do change things all the time but the, and I
don't mean this in a negative way, but the power that comes with adopting
something is great. And I think it's a bigger hump to change what we put in
place than it is decide what we put in place in the formalist of sense. It's already
there informally, maybe that's not even the fight terminology, it hasn't been
approved by us but is used consistently by the board and so I would strongly urge
you to pong back this way to (can't hear).
Norton/Well my concem is that we may be in some kind of limbo and stumble into a
problem that were not prope~y covered. But we don't have a form of adoption.
Kubby/Well maybe we can ask the board how they feel. Do you feel in limbo? I mean
you have operating procedures that will be your guide until we work through the
issues that are of disagreement. Is their maybe someone who could say out loud
to your answer.
Watson/I guess I'm going to try to speak on behalf of the board, no, we don't feel in
limbo, we have procedures, we're very comfortable with, we've worked them out,
their practical, they work. They need changes, they need refinement and some of
those are coming and we agree with many of the changes that are being suggested
their improvements. There are a couple that we think weaken the process and
weaken the board, and weaken the purpose, I mean that would detract from the
purpose of the ordinance and for what it was established. And I guess I would
harp back to that of why the ordinance was established, it was established, it was
established to give citizens a forum and avenue to, that's independent from the
police department to voice their complaints and have them heard. We think that
that' s an important role in this community and any community that people have
that right and that forum and we think two of the changes weaken that process.
Kubby/Now we did make one change that the city attorney suggested that we do because
it was a constitutional issue and we did go ahead and do that before meeting the
board and making that change and I was fine with that because it was a
constitutional issue, but these others are a matter of judgment and care and how
things are done and I think that the (can't hear) whole situation.
Thornberry/Now Karen, that' s the second time that you've said "out of respect" and
because you disagree with somebody does not mean you don't respect them. I
respect this group a great deal. However, we being advised by the city attorney
and to disagree with them on the time period to put these standard operating
procedures in place is all this is about. It's not respect, it's a disagreement.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 82
Kubby/Well I guess for, I guess, I just feel like its, besides the issue of process it feels
like a slap in the face to me so that's for my language, and you disagree with that
and that's fine, that's for my language.
Thornberry/Deeply, I don't agree with that at all. I think that on the other, I have a great
deal of confidence in the city attomey and staff. Were being advised of that.
Kubby/I don't think it's Eleanor doing the slapping, I think it's us doing the slapping.
Thornberry/Well, but what are you doing to the city attorney? I mean were being
advised and your disagreeing with her. Is that a lack of respect? I don't think so,
it's a disagreement. So.
Champion/I would like to see it deferred for different reasons. I would like to have the
discussion with the board before I make a decision to implement guidelines and
then to work from and since they have been operating and obviously doing a very
good job. And we made the important constitutional change I would just like to
talk to them first before I decide how their going to do business. I also don't feel
upset if everyone else wants to put the rules in place now because I think your all
willing to change your mind. I, that's one reason why I'm not adamant about this
I think that all of you would be willing to change your mind if you saw
something different. But I would just like to discuss it with them first that's all.
Lehman/All in favor for the motion to defer.
Kubby/I.
Champion/I.
Lehman/Opposed. (5) The motion defeated. Further discussion on the resolution as
proposed.
Kubby/Well then lets get into the details.
Thornberry/Moved adoption to resolution.
??/Second.
Karr/We already have it on the board.
Lehman/Oh already have it on the board with a.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 83
Kubby/So, I want to talk about some specifics and maybe propose some changes to what
is before us. And talk about what these changes are.
Lehman/Well Karen, before your start, if we agree and I believe that we do, that this will
be a topic for discussion with the PCRB, wouldn't changes to this proposal be
more appropriately made while those discussions are made with them than now. I
mean your proposing that we change them without any input from them.
Kubby/I can't vote for this, if I disagree with it so I want to make changes to it so that I
agree with it so I can vote for it. I mean what were doing and voting on this is
making changes to what is there, what is there is status quo. And by voting for
this were changing the status quo, so if your OK with some changes, why aren't
you OK with some other changes?
Norton/I'm going to vote for, because I'm simply going to go along with the city
attorney temporarily until we get into the details of this in the next few weeks.
That's where I'm at.
Thornberry/And I look forward to sitting down and talking with this group.
Kubby/That's fine, I won't propose any changes, but I will be voting no then because I
don't agree with this and I will not vote for something that I disagree with. Even
with the process.
(Several people talking)
Thornberry/But you understand my vote.
Norton/I should vote against it too.
Kubby/I hear what your saying, I don't understand it.
Thornberry/Well, freedom wise and being bold (can't hear).
Lehman/Well, I believe that much of this Eleanor, is going to need explanation to us as
council folks as well. I've read your recommendation and you were involved at
the time the ordinance was written for the PCRB, you've been aboard and you
were assistant to the city attorney at that point, is that not correct?
Eleanor/I was not much involved in the drafting of this ordinance. I was an assistant at
the time.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#22 Page 84
Lehman/No, but you are (can't hear) familiar with the process. And there are some
explaining I think that I need to know more about. But because of your
involvement and because of your position in advising this council I accept your
recommendation as being appropriate. I also feel as I think the council does we
are very interested in discussing this with the PCRB and understanding why they
disagree and I think an opportunity for you at that point to explain to them and us
at the same time why your proposing what your proposing. I will accept your
proposal, I think it is appropriate as an advisor to the city council that we accept
the recommendation of our legal council.
Eleanor/Can I just clarify one thing, I think? Obviously my position at the SOP's need
to be put in place has been pretty clear. I think I've consistently recommended
and advised you not to delay those SOP's until after the joint meeting cause I
think a lot of issues will be discussed that will extend that time period for getting
the SOP's in place. The SOP's have been the subject of a lot of activity since
they were originally recommended by the board in October. My original
comments were sent to you in November. I talked prior to that time with Doug
Russell, their attorney, I sent him a copy of that memo and I suggested that
someone from the board be at your November meeting. The SOP's were deferred
until December 15 to allow comment by the board. There after the PCRB
directed their legal council to discuss the outstanding issues with me. I met with
Doug Russell on December 10 and agreed to recommend deferral of the SOP' s
again until January 12th to allow us time to narrow the areas of disagreement. On
December 23rd after the boards December 15 minutes asking for a deferral until
the joint meeting I quickly informed Doug that that was not my recommendation.
After Christmas I was informed that with regard to the issues previously discussed
there was only one remaining disagreement. But, because of RJ's memo
regarding the new numbering system the PCRB just desired to mend its pre, one
of the previously recommended provisions. I think this illustrates the difficulty
of deferring the SOP's until all issues that impact this board have been resolved.
This is a new board whose operations raises many issues, it raises many issues
from their perspective, but it raises even more from mine. There will be issues
discussed in many of the months to come. Some of which will require changes to
the SOP's and for all those reasons I suggest that you put them in place and
amend them as necessary.
Lehman/Roll Call.
Champion/I am going to vote yes even though I'm (can't hear) because I want to
support the council on this issue.
Lehman/Motion carries. Kubby voting No.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#23 Page 85
ITEM NO. 23. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SALES TAX
POLICY.
Lehman/There's been a small change in that.
Atkins/I have one comment.
Lehman/Would you give us your comment please?
Arkins/It's a matter of on item 3.
Karr/Excuse me, could we put it on the floor first for discussion.
Lehman/Oh, I'm sorry. Your right. Do we have a motion? Moved by Thornberry,
second by Norton. Discussion.
Arkins/Item No. 3 is a 10% of the sales tax revenue for the library and community
events center. You have in front of you the 3rd paragraph. I thought there was
some redundancy, so if you'll note beginning with the word "upon payment of the
expenses" do you see that? Third paragraph.
Lehman/Just a minute, I need to change pages.
Kubby/369.
Vanderhoef/Let's get it.
Norton/Let's get it up.
Thornberry/368
Kubby/Excuse me.
????/369
Champion/I'm a lot faster than.
Kubby/I don't see it.
Champion/On time payment of the expenses.
Thornberry/(can't hear)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#23 Page 86
Kubby/Just cut up that whole phrase, is that what your saying.
Atkins/No, no, I just want to say, it's very small, but I found redundancy in there. Here's
how I would have that read. "Upon payment of the expenses, strike as identify,
for operating the library and the operational subsidy of the events center, any
additional moneys by the 10% sales tax contribution, strike to the operation of
maintenance of these facilities, can be directed toward, strike creation of reserves
operations to depreciation for later expenses as well as to assist in financing, as
well as to assist. That is all striked, financing the community activity. The
redundancy was maintenance and creation of reserve, we say that earlier.
Thornberry/To simplify that.
Norton/Try to type that up.
Thornberry/I know I do that, and I put up. I know I did that.
Kubby/I gotta, I got to get something I can mark on.
Atkins/Oh yea.
Norton/I would move adoption to Steve (can't hear) do we have to do that? Do we need
a motion?
Karr/If your going to amend it, it's on the floor as presented, if you wish to amend it you
need another motion with a voice.
Norton/I would like to move to amend it as Steve has suggested to and to delete some of
the words in that paragraph to simplify the wording of that paragraph again to
(can't hear).
Atkins/It was a little wordy and I thought it was redundant.
Lehman/Moved by Norton.
Thornberry/Yea, I'll second it.
Lehman/Second by Thornberry. Further discussion.
Kubby/I need a repeat or something,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#23 Page 87
Champion/I do too.
Kubby/And I want to give Eleanor a minute to mark her paper up.
Atkins/I've given it to Eleanor so she can.
Dilkes/(can't hear)
Vanderhoef/All right, will you go through it again?
Norton/Are you gonna read it once more?
Kubby/And the only thing I need to know is that it doesn't change the meaning of
anything?
Atkins/It does not, It does not change the meaning. I typed it up.
Thornberry/No, it does not.
Karr/Do you want to go through it again?
Dilkes/Yes, please.
Karr/How about if I just tell you what's deleted. Do you want to do it that way or do you
want me to read the whole thing?
Dilkes/Read the whole thing.
Norton/Read the new words, yea.
Karr/That's not the.. go ahead.
Dilkes/Should I read the sentence as amended?
Lehman/Yes, please.
Vanderhoef/Yes, please.
Dilkes/Upon payment of the expenses for operating the library and for the operational
subsidy of the event center, any additional moneys generated by the 10 % sales
tax contribution can be directed toward financing of community activities and
events such as local festivals.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#23 Page 88
Lehman/That's a lot cleaner.
Vanderhoef/Thank you Steve.
Atkins/That's what I said.
Lehman/That's what he said. OK. Further discussion.
???/I said it better.
Lehman/Roll call.
Karr/Was that, I'm sorry was the motion was all ayes to amend?
Dilkes/Yea, Norton and Thornberry to amend.
Thornberry/Yea, were doing that now.
Karr/That's not a roll call.
Lehman/All in favor of amending. Oppose. (All ayes) Amendment passes.
Kubby/Oh, wait wait wait. I needed to say something because I'm not for this tax but
I'm OK with this policy that if the tax pass that I think for the most part I don't
like it being used for water at all. I highly object to that and I think that's an
insane public policy but the other stuff, the other 75% is OK with me and because
of that I will vote for the policy without giving any credence to the tax.
Thornberry/Without being declared legally insane, I think it should be a whole lot more
percentage for the water so.
O'Donnell/I do too.
Lehman/All fight hold it, Roll call.
Kubby/Sorry, I apologize.
Lehman/Before we get this, before we get this all, before we get this watered down.
Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 89
ITEM 27. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Kubby/Well I was silent last time but I'm not gonna be tonight.
Lehman/OK.
Kubby/I'll try to make it as brief as possible. We got a memo from the Riverfront and
Natural Areas Commission via Courtney Daniels the chair about the flood plain
development policy.
Norton/Yea.
Kubby/Is this on the work program for planning and zoning, does anyone know?
Atkins/I don't know that for sure, but that was sort of the intention.
Kubby/Will this automatically go to them?
Atkins/I (can't hear) with that idea. That makes sense.
Kubby/I would like us to give direction that this issue go to Planning and Zoning.
Vanderhoef/I would presume it would.
Norton/Yea, I support (can't hear).
Vanderhoef/And I support that idea.
Kubby/All right, are there four people who will agree?
Norton/You got 4 to get it to the P & Z.
Kubby/OK, well I just want to make sure the process is clear.
Atkins/(can't hear) how to handle it.
Norton/They will decide where it goes on their work schedule I take it.
Atkins/Yea.
Kubby/Yea, and if we disagree with that then we can just talk to them about it. But just
as long as it get there is the big thing for me. Oh, I wanted to make a few
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 90
comments about the process used in putting the new City High tennis court lights
up, in that, I know that we have tried really hard to have good public process that
when we do something that' s gonna affect the neighborhood, were not always
great at it but were struggling at it and I think we need to make sure that our
struggle with this kind of citizen control and citizen input extends in projects
where we are a minor player as well as the only or major player including when
we work with the school district. And I know I've been at numerous meetings at
least 3 that I can recall in my tenure at City High specifically where neighbors
have tried to express concerns about noise and well it's been mostly noise and late
night activity at the school and that that has changed over time as amplification
has become a greater part of the status quo of sporting events and fun events at the
school and how it impacts the neighborhood and I guess I'm thinking that maybe
we should send a set of our good neighbor policies to every principal in the school
district as well as the administrative offices to make sure they have those
guidelines and can use them and make any changes at school.
Norton/Why don't we discuss the next time that were meeting with the school board
tomorrow, and we have our sessions, we should discuss that with the school
board.
Kubby/Well it's not on the agenda.
Vanderhoef/Well, maybe it could be.
Lehman/Well, it could be. Obviously the school district is functional in North Liberty,
Coralville, Tiffin, whatever, so it is a topic that would be appropriate for all of us.
Kubby/Especially, because we, the schools are such the center of many neighborhoods
that it's really important that there's good communication with citizens about
major changes like light and noise. I guess.
Norton/Karen, are you alluding to the letter we got from Ron Vogel as well as your
comments? About noise.
Kubby/Well I mean, I had it marked in my thing but then read Ron's note and so it gave
me more impotence to say something and I just think it's we try really hard,
we're not 100% but I think the school district needs to get on board with this kind
of notification as well.
Dilkes/I've got that letter while were on the topic from Mr. Vogel and Sarah's taking a
look at it and we will respond to it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 91
Norton/I didn't quite understand what it implied by zoning changes.
Dilkes/I don't, I really don't, I don't think he's talking about a zoning issue, but we'll
respond to it.
Kubby/Thank you. I wanted to make sure the public knew too that we had talked a while
back about adding mixed paper and magazines to the curbside recycling program
and doing it fairly soon. But because of some logistical problems with making
sure we have enough room on the trucks for these different categories of
recycleables that it may be the Fall of 99 instead of this spring that we do that.
So look forward to that and in the meantime take your mixed office paper and
magazines to City Carton. It's easier now cause the lights there, a lot easier. Yea.
I wanted to annotmce that the Free Medical Clinic is having a big fund raiser at
the Mill on Sunday, January 17 and Greg Brown is going to be playing, and
Jennifer Danielson, and Bo Ramsey, and two other people I can't remember off
the top of my head so I apologize to those two artists. A $15.00 minimum
donation, tickets can be had at the Mill.
I also wanted to remind people that were doing a major reassessment project this
year and that you will get a knock on your door from someone who identifies
themselves as from the city assessors office, you can ask them for an ID and they
should have one signed by a man named Dan Hudson, who is the city assessor.
And we haven't done this in 15 years and so many people may not remember that
this happens every once in a while but if you let them in they will not track into
your house. They've been directed to take their shoes off so that your house
doesn't get all snowy and muddy. What their looking for is do you have a
finished basement or not, how many bedrooms do you have, how many
bathrooms do you have and what other kind of immunities like fireplaces, for
example. And so they will use that information to update their records and decide
on the reassessment value of your property. So, there hasn't, there's been articles
in the newspaper, not a lot of people have seen them, were going to put an
announcement in the utility bill but I wanted to make that reminder here so if a
stranger knocks on your door and says their with the assessors that they are
probably with the assessors. Feel free to ask for the ID. And I have a couple
things on my computer but I can't get my computer to go to the page where I
want.
Thornberry/While your looking for those Karen. I have a comment or two on the
assessors project, if I may.
Kubby/Go for it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 92
Thornberry/OK. I would suggest, and it's only a suggestion that the assessors office or
someone or the city let somebody know what areas of town their going to be in
before they go to that area. We can, if we can do with the leaf pickup, we should
be able to do it with somebody going to somebody's door and if we can, if we can
target like the northeast or the southeast or central or whatever in a given period
of time people should expect the assessor in those areas at that time. I, my wife
would not let the assessor in when he came, she was home alone. And she didn't
know him from Adam, and shouldn't have I suppose. She just knew it wasn't
Ernie.
Norton/(can't hear ) either.
Thomberry/So, I think that if we could let these people, the people know about the areas
or the blocks of the neighborhoods at what particular time then it 's not just a
blanket city wide thing, their going to be there sometime, well that isn't.
Atkins/As you know, that's beyond our responsibility, mine in particular to supervise
that activity, and I'I1 certainly communicate with Dan your concerns. We have
conference board next,
Karr/You have it the 251h, coming up.
Atkins/The 251h, I think you have a perfect forum to tell Dan how you want things done,
then your sitting in an official capacity as a conference board and you can direct
his activities anyway you want.
Kubby/And he needs to be opened to those suggestions, and he actually suggested the
utility bill and there is room and so, I think that's a great idea.
Thornberry/But I had, I had some calls, in fact that wasn't my idea. I've got to admit, it
was a constituent that called me and she said that the person had come twice.
Once her daughter was sick and another time she wasn't dressed and he's gonna
have to come back a 3rd time and this is a big waste of time for the assessors
office so if they could narrow it down to neighborhoods or areas of town it would
be appreciated.
Champion/I don't think, how will they ever get it done with everybody working now, it
would be impossible.
Thornberry/Yea, that's right, that's very difficult.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 93
Champion/You'd think they'd want an appointment.
Thornberry/Yea, just about. But if they would do that I think they would be a little more
successful.
Atkins/OK.
Kubby/Actually I just have 2 more things and I hope their really short. One is there was
an item in the Public Art Advisory Committee about the question about whether
money would be carried over to the next year, and I remember our discussion
being that they, we don't want to encourage them to spend it all if they want to,
kind of want to save up their money for a big project, that that money would carry
over so if people have the same remembrance as I do we should make sure that
they know that. Although they make decisions about that extra $25,000.
O'Donnell/That' s how I recall it.
Norton/That' s explicitly in the plan that they would accumulate it and (can't hear).
O'Donnell/Absolutely.
Kubby/Everyone sticking their heads, can we get that message to them via Karen.
????/That would be great.
Norton/That should be in the enabling legislation somewhere in the history of.
Lehman/Probably watching the council meeting on TV, yea, they probably are.
O'Donnell/Their game's over.
Kubby/And the last one really quick which everyone or most people here are involved in
and that's Bowl for Kids sake.
Lehman/Yes.
Kubby/We got at least 2 teams from council members up here. Bowl for Kids sake is to
help raise money locally and all the money will stay local for Big Brothers/Big
Sisters and you can start your own team, you need 5 people. You each are
suppose to raise $60.00 for a team of $360.00. If anyone wants to start their own
team they can call Big Brothers/Big Sisters. If anyone wants to pledge call me,
I'll be happy to take it over the phone.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 94
Norton/Or any of us. Or any of us.
Kubby/Or any of you. It doesn't matter who you pledge cause it's all going to a good
cause.
Norton/If I'm bowling for kids, I want to announce, and I've already signed us up folks,
were scheduled, that is us.
Vanderhoef/What time?
Norton/3:45 if you wanted, 3:45 at Colonial Lanes.
Thomberry/Who all did you sign Dee?
Vanderhoef/Save the day together.
Norton/No, it's February 271h, Saturday, the 271h.
Thornberry/You signed all of us.
Norton/Yea I'm putting all of us down there but I only have to put down 5 but all of you
can pledge, I've got the forms, I'll bring em to you.
Thornberry/OK.
Norton/And I'll give it a name.
Champion/3:45 did you say?
Lehman/Right.
Thornberry/Maybe we ought to do what we did last year.
Norton/I (can't hear) last time at 3:45. At Colonial.
Kubby/Is it still pols and dolls?
Norton/Yea, pols and dolls, that was the name, Pols and dolls, is that, do you want a new
name?
Thornberry/You got something better?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 95
Norton/I haven't put the formally in, I was gonna put pols and dolls in less I hear
anybody object.
Champion/How do you spell that?
Thornberry/POLS
Norton/POLS, politicians, pols.
Kubby/Isn't the other team named the people (can't hear).
Norton/You've got your head (can't hear) Cormie.
Thornberry/The People's Republic.
Kubby/No, but we could change it to that. It's called, the other team is the peoples
choice and its gender balanced and it's made of public officials from various
levels of government, school boards, the county supervisors, state legislatures,
city council, and were not very diverse politically but that's OK cause I'm the
team captain and I can ask whoever I want to be on my team. Were adverse in
every other way, geographically and gender wise.
Norton/But were the council and spouses that are interested, spouses that are interested,
all of us. So.
Thornberry/Yea. Yea.
Kubby/Fun event and raises good money for a great agency.
Lehman/OK.
Kubby/That's all I had. Thank you.
Chan~pion/Your welcome. Nothing
Lehman/Mike?
O'Donnell/Well I've, we've just, Connie and I have just completed our first year on the
council
Champion/Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 96
O'Donnell/And I want to thank all the city staff, our city manager, my fellow council
members this is been a tremendous learning experience for me. I think were all
aware of what a, how fortunate we are to live in Iowa City and I believe were all
committed to making it better so I just wanted to thank everybody.
Champion/That's very nice.
O'Donnell/Your welcome.
Champion/They haven't even yelled at me one time.
Thornberry/I can't say that.
Lehman/Mr. Thornberry.
Thornberry/I've got a couple of things, first and foremost, the you may be weeks away
from owning your dream home, I saw the ad in the, the city council has approved
a new affordable home ownership program that is now available through the
housing authority and it's available to any family who has resided in Johnson
county for at least one year prior to the application. You do not need to be a
public housing tenant to apply, so tell your friends, family, coworkers, your
spouse, and go down and apply and get a new house. It says, everything you've
always wanted in a great west side neighborhood, brand new 3-bedrooms, 1 full
and one half bath, 2 car garage.
Lehman/Hey, I think you have to qualify. Not everybody can (can't hear).
Thornberry/You have to qualify, and the qualifications are, a 3-person family, $25,000 -
$38,600, 4-person family $26,800 - $42,900 and so on. So, please apply, their
available.
Atkins/If anybody would like, we could arrange to get you a tour of those, just by
checking with Doug, we've got the key in to the place. So.
Thornberry/We've gone through one of those.
Atkins/Give me a call, give Doug a call and we'll get you out there.
Lehman/Thanks.
Thornberry/Where do you apply, the Iowa City Housing Authority, 23 S. Gilbert St.,
from 8:00 am to 3:00 PM Monday through Friday. The phone number is 356-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 97
Lehman/Do you have a fax number or e-mail address?
Thornberry/5400. Right that number down. 356-5400. I sold cars at one time.
(Several people talking, can't hear)
Thornberry/The last thing I sold the lot.
Norton/But you buy used cars.
Thornberry/(can't hear) we buy a car. This has been a milestone in my life, this, end of
the year, on the 31st of December, 1998, I spent my last day at Burger King and
I've been doing this type of business for 27 years and I sold my restaurant on the
comer of Boyrum and Highland on the first of January of this year. I sold Maxies
Lounge several years ago and the downtown Burger King several years ago so my
wife and I are now going to spend some time traveling and I will be spending a lot
more time in the offices of the city with my eyes on, Yes, I'm going to be full
time.
Norton/Coming Trouble.
????/At least you have a warrant????(cant hear)
Thornberry/Thank you and if you've got any problems with the Burger King, don't call
me.
Kubby/So now you can have people call you between 11:00 and 1:00.
Thornberry/Pardon me.
Kubby/We can now have people call you between 11:00 and 1:00.
Thomberry/Call me anytime.
Lehman/You can have office hours.
Thornberry/I've got office hours. My answering machine is on all the time. I'll answer
it.
Vanderhoef/Happy retirement.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 98
Thornberry/Thank you.
777/I'm happy for you Dean.
Thornberry/I don't know what I'm gonna do in my next career but I'm looking forward
to it.
Norton/It scares me to think of you retired Dean.
Thornberry/Well, I may be going into.
O'Donnell/It scares you what about, what about Steve?
Lehman/Go ahead Dee.
Vanderhoef/I have nothing tonight.
Norton/I just have two quick ones. In addition to my comments about the bowl for kids
sake, I, we need to get in the system the response to this question, about estab ....
initiating a survey downtown of other structures in the CBD that might have
historic significance.
Atkins/I think that will come up with the budget.
Lehman/That will be Thursday.
Norton/Oh, that'll be connected with the budget all right.
Atkins/My understanding Dee is Thursday part of their presentation their going to make
of an official recommendation to you.
Norton/All right. Does anybody have a comment about the state cigarette policy, I know
we got a letter that kind of protested it, our mild approach to that.
Kubby/I talked to Graham Dameran cause I noticed that as well and asked what is
response to our response was and he said that he wanted to meet with the coalition
and the county attorney and someone from the policy department before they
made any recommendation and that they would be sure and get back to us.
Dilkes/On that issue Dee, Andy has a meeting scheduled with Pat White now, to talk
about that, and he's, he's really the one who'd be prosecuting those, so, sort of, he
has a lot to say about that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 99
Norton/OK. That's all I have.
Lehman/The only comment I have was how well I believe Steve your folks handled the
snow removal and much the staff I think appreciates those folks who had their
driveways plowed just 2 and 3 times and were kind enough to not complain and
shovel them back out, and some of us had our sidewalks plowed shut a couple
times and you know you'd be very thankful for the kind of folk that we have in
Iowa City who are willing to put up with some of those necessary inconveniences
that, again, our complements to your folks.
Vanderhoef/Here. Here.
Atkins/Overwhelming, majorities not the proper word, just the overwhelming number of
folks have really been cooperative. And the only comment that I would make,
that there are folks that occasionally call and make very unreasonable demands of
us, and we have to be quite candid, and very honestly, we simply cannot
guarantee that it's going to be removed exactly to their satisfaction given the fact
that we have about 400 curb piles and street and all the other things we do, but I
think that our folks did a very commendable job.
Lehman/Absolutely.
Kubby/Yea, we haven't had that kind of snow in a long time.
Lehman/Yea, they did a great job.
Thornberry/Do they have to have a different blade on a truck to do cul de sacs that they
do to do streets?
Atkins/No, it's the same blade, the difficulty is that a cul de sac is longer and
unfortunately that deposits more snow than in driveways and obviously along the
curve when your making that turn. Our folks are encouraged to follow the traffic
rules and regulations, in theory you could go the opposite direction and push it
toward the middle of the street. The only difficulty is we receive complaints
about it piled in the middle of the street and then folks want it trucked away, and
boy when we start trucking snow that's when the expense goes right through the
roof.
Thornberry/I had some calls they did the sweet out there but they didn't do the cul de sac
and they explained they needed a smaller truck or something.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299
#27 Page 100
Atkins/Often, Yea, often the tuming radius, particularly on some of the older ones its a
little more difficult and we miss things, occasionally we miss it, you got to give
us a call.
Thornberry/Well it was on a Sunday.
Champion/(Can't hear)
Kubby/And the hard thing is the snow like we had when it kept drifting and we kept
having to redo the arterial streets that sometimes those smaller residential streets
and cul de sacs end up lowest on the priority list and so, it took, although every
street, including our residential streets were done by 9:00 PM Sunday.
Thornberry/No, oh, 9:00 PM.
Atkins/Yea.
Thornberry/I don't know what time he called me, he must have been one of the last ones
that he didn't have a cul de sac done, he couldn't, they couldn't, nobody could get
out of that cul de sac to get to work, I guess, it was cul de sac up a hill so they
couldn't.
Atkins/What street was it?
Thornberry/I'll tell yea, I'll talk to you about it later.
Norton/Don't we have a date, I thought we were going to set up some calendar work, is it
all.
Lehman/Yea, were gonna do that as soon as Eleanor has the time to tell us that she has
nothing for us.
Dilkes/I have nothing for you.
Lehman/OK. Now.
Kubby/Moved to adjourn.
Vanderhoef/Moved to adjoum.
Lehman/Moved to adjoum, but were going to stick around. Second, all in favor of
adjourning. Meeting is adjourned.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of January 12, 1999.
F011299