HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-11-22 TranscriptionNovember 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 1
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session 6:30 PM
Council: Lehman, Champion, Kubby, Thornberry, Norton, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef.
Staff: Atkins, Franklin, Schmadeke, Fowler, Helling, Karr, Davidson, Elias, O'Niel
Winstead, Kopping, Schoon, Nasby, Trueblood.
Tapes: 99-109 Side 1, Side 2 and 99-110, Side 1
Lehman: Planning and Zoning items. Karin.
Review Zoning Items 99-109 Side 1
a. Consider a resolution approving a preliminary plat of Hollywood Manor, Parts 7
and 8, an 11.67-acre, 42-1ot residential subdivision located west of Sycamore Street
at Wetherby Drive. (SUB99-0022).
Franklin: Okay. This should be quick. We have a new preliminary plat, which is
Hollywood Manor Parts 7 and 8. This is recommended by the
commission and by the staff. There is one issue that I would like to point
out to you because you may hear about it tomorrow night. Just so that you
are ready. In this area fight up here- we have had drainage problems in
that neighborhood for some time with the drainage from this property
affecting some of these lots in here. With this road being extended and
there is a catch uh- what is that called Chuck? One of those catch things
that catches the storm water.
Lehman: Pond.
Franklin: No, it is not a pond.
Norton: It is inlet.
Franklin: It is inlet. Thank you.
Lehman: Intake, all fight.
Franklin: Intake, yeah. That will be built into the storm system. Some of that water
will be pulled off and go into the storm water detention system of this
particular subdivision, the storm sewer system of this subdivision, and
then down to the South Sycamore drainage project that we are doing.
Lehman: Are you trying to tell us that the water concerns have been addressed?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcfiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 2
Franklin: They have been addressed. Probably not completely because there is still
this property which is undeveloped and does not have any storm sewer
system. But the problem that is there will be diminished.
Kubby: Paul Andersen in the P&Z minutes said that what was planned was a
swale that would collect water in the back yard and storm sewer was going
to direct it to the storm sewer system. So, I am concerned that people will
think that there is not a problem but when it rains their backyard, it is
planned that their yards would fill with water. And what happens when
we allow that to take place is that even if the first owners of that property
understand that is what takes place subsequent owners don't get that
information and then five years later people come to the City to ask for a
public sponsored project to rectify the situation. So that is why I am
asking "Why are we accepting a storm water system that would cause
collection of storm water in people's back yards?".
Franklin: As I understand that system, and Larry Schnittjer is here, that the swale is
not intended to hold water as a detention basin would which is when we
most frequently get those kinds of calls. It is when there actually a basin
in somebody' s back yard where the water sits as opposed to flows through
and that this will be a circumstance in which that water will flow through
into the storm sewer system. That doesn't necessarily address the issue
that you are raising Karen because in some circumstances if there is any
water at all during a storm people will be concerned about it.
Kubby: Am I reading too much into Paul's words or that the manner in which the
minutes were taken that said "the swale that would collect water in the
backyard"? Is that different than flows through?
Franklin: I think you are. I think it is a matter of collecting it in this place that it
then flows through. I mean, otherwise it would be a detention basin.
Kubby: Well, I guess question then for the, for MMS, would be: "What kind of
rain would make it go from flowing through to collecting in the
backyard?" I mean, if it is a one-inch rain it seems like a concem.
Vanderhoef: But, I thought they put it in terms of the five year... ?
Norton: They did that, yeah.
Franklin: Uh-huh. I mean, a 100 year, obviously, it is going to be a big one.
Kubby: But what does that kind of relate into? Into- I mean-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 3
Vanderhoef: How much rain?
Kubby: If once every five years- well, I live in a hundred year flood plain and I
have been flooded three out of the last six years.
Franklin: Uh-huh.
Kubby: So I want to know what kind of rain and what kind of an amount of time
are we talking?
Norton: I thought (can't hear) raised a very good question. She said it (can't hear)
hoped- in other words there was a lot of vagueness in what was promised
and we have had that over Pepperwoods remember? Where we had a
place where it drained but it would back up in those yards there heavy
duty and it couldn't go out fast enough trough those outlets or inlets,
whichever. So that it still would back up in the yards and cause a lot of
trouble and they were after us to try to fix it too, remember?
Kubby: Right. I just want to make sure we have a system that doesn't facilitate the
neighborhood organizing and coming to us wanting a public works project
when now is the time really to design it in a way that works the best it can.
Maybe we are there but I just want to raise that.
Franklin: Did you want to say something Larry? I mean, one of the things we have
to remember about this particular area is that this is an area that is very flat
that has a high water table. And as long as people live there, there will be
some water problems. This is an existing water problem that is not a
consequence of development. It is coming offof undeveloped land. With
the storm sewer system it will be better. Will it be perfect? No, it won't
be perfect and I think that that is clear from the statements that we made at
the Planning and Zoning Commission too. It is not going to totally fix it.
Vanderhoefi Do you anticipate then, as the rest of the development takes place south of
those on Russell, that that will help the new storm water system that goes
in that area [and] will help take more of that water away quicker?
Franklin: It should because it will have a storm sewer system. It will go to the
south. Some of it will go to the South Sycamore Drainage Project. But I
don't think we should ever have the expectation that there is not going to
be some problems with water in this area because it has a very high water
table. And that is the nature of the land.
Vanderhoef: What is our responsibility then in making that clear on an abstract or
anything else?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 4
Franklin: What is our responsibility?
(several talking)
Dilkes: That is not a title issue. But if it is addressed in an abstract. I think in
looking in these maps, I have got these minutes opened now, and it looks
to me that the problem already exists.
Franklin: Yes. Right.
Dilkes: I mean, they aren't creating a swale that this water that isn't already there
will collect. It looks to me like you have to read these minutes in context
and that the water is already pooling there.
Franklin: I think that was clear to you, was is not Karen?
Norton: That is not altogether clear though because you are adding roofs and
driveways and things and a lot of the land is already- whatever absorbing
it could do it could do. So I am not sure that we are not...
Franklin: The engineering evaluation both from our office and from MMS's office
has been that this system that is being put in will not make it worse, it will
make it somewhat better but it will not totally fix it.
Kubby: That is helpful clarification.
Norton: What is the property to the- what is status of that property to the west?
This relates to not only the drainage question but to that road question. It
is kind of- is that a cul-de-sac that I see before me?
Franklin: This will be at some point a cul-de-sac as will this when this property right
here develops. And that is not going to develop right now. It is owned by
an individual who does not live there, I don't believe, any longer. But the
property is undeveloped and what you are seeing is a concept of how it
could develop in the future.
Norton: But what is the- that side- I haven't really reviewed the South District Plan
and I should have but, that eastem boundary of Wetherby Park. Is that
going to be in backyards eventually?
Franklin: It would be in backyards and then there is the provision that there is a
walkway that is provided through this cul-de-sac to the park.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 5
Norton: No option to have, you know, I hate parks in backyards. I think it is a bad
principle.
Lehman: Why?
Norton: Well, because they are not available to people just going by. Most good
parks have visibility from the sides like Mercer Park or College Green or
any park you want to name- City Park. A park that is tucked in the
backyard, and there are some in Cedar Rapids too- we've got some, Court
Hill. [They are] tucked in people's backyards and they have wonderful
times but nobody else benefits from it.
Vanderhoef: There is very little public access frontage.
Franklin: When Wetherby Drive comes down, the idea is that it will come down and
go to the west. One of the options in that proceeding to the west is that it
would be a single loaded road along Wetherby Park. You will not have, I
mean for this entire park the only other way for it to be designed would be
to have single loaded roads around the park or not develop around the
park.
Norton: Single loaded, right. There you go.
Franklin: But I think a compromise situation [is] here in that you do have Taylor
which comes down to a parking lot and the improvements that we are
doing in Wetherby Park plus the walkway that will come in, and we will
have walkways from the other side, and the road along the southern
boundary. That that is-
Lehman: Pretty busy.
Franklin: I would say an acceptable way to integrate the park into a neighborhood.
Norton: It maybe acceptable to- but it does not strike me as ideal. For example
let's have this little Willow Creek park, for example. With Teg Drive
single loaded on one side and you have that access to the park for
everybody near, whether they are going in or just going by. Consider the
west side of that park, [there is] difficult access off of, I don't know, Burry
or all the rest of those little streets that kind of dead end. It is kind of
ungapots over there. Just trying to get out.
Franklin: But we also have the problem on Teg Drive of kids crossing Teg Drive
and the traffic on Teg Drive and the kids getting to the park. So, I think
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 6
whether you have the road there or you have backyards you have
ungapots. Whatever that is.
Lehman: I want to see the translation of that in the minutes.
Franklin: I do too.
Norton: It is a good word.
Franklin: Are we done?
Norton: It means messy. Un-ga-pots.
Franklin: Anything else with that? Okay, the Windsor Ridge plats b-f- I am going
to ask you to defer that again to December 7th.
Lehman: B through F?
Franklin: B through F.
b. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Windsor Ridge, Part Ten, a 19.40
acre 32-1ot residential subdivision with three outlots located at the north
terminus of Arlington Drive.
c. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Windsor Ridge, Part Eleven, a
12.58 acre, 37-1ot residential subdivision with two outlots located at the north
terminus of Arlington Drive.
d. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Windsor Ridge, Part Twelve, a
16.30 acre, one-lot residential subdivision with two outlots located at the north
terminus of Arlington Drive.
e. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Windsor Ridge, Part Thirteen, a
6.61 acre, one-lot residential subdivision with one outlot located at the northeast
corner of Huntington Drive and Barrington Road.
f. Consider a resolution approving a final plat of Windsor Ridge, Part Fourteen, a
7.35 acre, one-lot commercial subdivision located at the southwest corner of Taft
Avenue and Court Street extended.
Kubby: So, um, we haven't seen any more information about-
Franklin: The sensitive areas.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 7
Kubby: Yeah. Do you have that?
Franklin: I have that. Julie and- Julie Tallman and Scott Kugler went out and
viewed the area because they had reviewed the site plan. The sensitive
areas site plan. And, in fact, there was a problem as you pointed out
Karen. I guess to put it in the best possible light there was a lack of
communication between the developer and the grading contractor. And
this is something that we are going to consider as a staff in terms of how
we can set up a system that will ensure that that communication happens.
And one of the ways may be to require that any buffer areas are going to
need to be staked, any trees that are going to be protected need to be
fenced prior to the grating beginning. There were some discussions with
the developer and the grating contractor on this particular project. The
problem is being addressed and is being solved through removal of some
of the dead trees that were there and establishing the buffer area. There is
a sensitive areas site plan that was approved around this pond area,
because that was one of the questions that was raised last time. As to how
we could approve in a stream corridor a sensitive areas site plan in which
there was a pond in the middle of the stream. We can under the sensitive
areas ordinance approve such ponds if they will serve a storm water
detention function. This is not a required storm water detention basin but
it is a function that it will serve in that it will hold some of the water as it
traveling through this branch of Ralston Creek. As part of the approval,
there is a requirement that there is certain prairie grasses and vegetation,
and I have the plan here if you wish to see it, that will be planted around
this pond to not only have the storm water detention function but also have
the habitat and the natural prairie kind of function that will occur around
this pond. The developers have been instructed that any permits that they
may need to get from DNR they will need to get prior to construction of
the pond itself. And that is a matter of them compiling with state law. We
did not require that they have those permits prior to our approving the
grading plan. But I guess the point of this is, is that the pond is something
that fits within the sensitive areas ordinance according to our evaluation
with these extra requirements. The execution of it was not what should
have happened and we need to set up a system whereby this doesn't
happen again. And whether that is through adding some regulatory
measure to the ordinance or trying to set up an administrative system in
which that communication between the developer and the contractor is
insured, we haven't landed on that yet. But certainly if there is any
ordinance change it will come before you.
Kubby: So one of the questions that still remains in my mind is: How do we
understand what the effects of this change to this waterway will be
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 8
upstream or downstream? In terms of: Is this a good environmental
decision on the part of the City, which is part of the reason for the
environmental- the natural or the sensitive areas ordinance? It is to protect
our sensitive areas. It may enhance some aspect of storm water detention
and cleansing but what are the other effects of disrupting or changing that
waterway?
Franklin: In terms of the actual flow?
Kubby: Yeah-maybe it is positive way. Is that something that I understand is the
permeating process going to be and will we evaluate that or not? I don't- I
guess I...
Franklin: If DNR has jurisdiction, and I think that is still a question as to the extent
of their jurisdiction because of where it is in the watershed. This is pretty
far up in the water shed. If they have jurisdiction that would be the aspect
that they would be addressing. Because their concem has to do with the
flow of streams. I mean, secondarily when they get into those permeating
process, does it have anything to do with either water quality or habitat?
That the regulations that I am familiar with, with the DNR, has to do with
the-
Kubby: More about water rights kind of stuff?.
Franklin: Right.
Kubby: So let's say that they do not have jurisdiction.
Franklin: Uh-huh.
Kubby: How do we then evaluate that this is an overall positive for that waterway
and not just a positive for that one development?
Franklin: Well, the water flows through- it is ajudgement and I will admit that it is
not ajudgement done with a great deal of expertise. I mean, we do not
have naturalists on staff. There is a culvert that is part of the whole system
both at the east end of the pond and at the west end of the pond which
allows the stream to flow through. It is through the grading that there is
some diversion of the water and presumably those culverts are narrower
than the natural stream such that you are going to have some holding back
at least on the downstream side to enable you to- otherwise you would
never get a pond. That is just common sense. So, there has got to be some
variation then in that downstream flow, one would think, from that. Even
if it is only for the period of time that it takes to constrict that flow to get
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 9
into the culvert to form the pond, but the water will flow through. There is
not a total damming or stoppage.
Champion: I think Karen's point is valid because what happens to the stream
downstream from the pond? At a time like this when we haven't had any
rain for, whenever.
Franklin: Well, it is times like this when we haven't had any rain that there won't be
any water in the pond and there won't be any water upstream and
downstream there won't be for some- when you are this high and in the
reach of the stream.
Kubby: But there are little pockets of water- like in the creek by my house it is
pretty dry but there are little pockets of water and there is still life going
on there. That is what is sustaining that, some of that aquatic life in this
down time and if that is less, then what happens?
Franklin: Putting a pond there has got to change it.
Kubby: What was that?
Franklin: Putting a pond there has got to change it.
Vanderhoef: And will the pond become-
Franklin: It will be different.
Vanderhoef: -part of the City' s responsibility or does it stay with the..?
Franklin: No. It stays with the developer. The Home Owner's Association.
Kubby: I guess the question becomes more important for me because they are not
an essential part of the- they can do their storm water detention according
to our ordinance without this pond. Right?
Franklin: Yes.
Kubby: So, that-
Norton: What is the point of the pond?
Franklin: An amenity.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 10
Kubby: That makes me want a question this more. We are not sure what the
effects are. To just understand it better before we approve it. And if we
approve these plats does that automatically- that doesn't say anything one
way or another about this administrative approval fight?
Franklin: Right, fight. Yeah.
Lehman: Would it be appropriate for us to have-
Franklin: I think you need the designer of the pond.
Lehman: Well, no. I guess one of the questions- why do we have a pond? I mean, I
think that is something that they could tell us when we have that at our
next meeting when we discuss these items.
Norton: Yeah. Why not?
Franklin: Uh-huh.
Kubby: I mean, I think some of it was feedback from the neighbors that, I think,
the developer was trying to make some accommodations. People said "To
pull the neighborhood together there was a pond on the east side- or on the
south side and so you are changing some of the zoning but can we keep
some continuity by having a pond on this other side?" and the developer
was trying to make that accommodation. But, is that worth the kind of
environmental negative for habitats downstream?
Franklin: So, do you want the developer to come and talk about this or do you want
some science with this?
Vanderhoef: I would like some science with this.
Kubby: Yeah.
Norton: Right.
Franklin: Or both.
Vanderhoef: The rest of the question that I have then is: As long as this is staying in the
purview of the owner or developer or-
Franklin: Or Home Owner's Association.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 11
Vanderhoef: Or Home Owner's Association and so forth, then I am presuming that
since we are high up we are going to be getting some silting and who is
going to take care of the pond over the long haul as far as dredging it if it
needs dredging and cleaning the grates and doing all of those kinds of
things? And, whether that is an expense that the condominium group
understands too.
Kubby: Big money.
Franklin: Well, at this point what we have made very clear is that this is not a piece
of property that the City wants to take care of.
Kubby: But it is a water way that affects property up and down and-
Vanderhoef: Okay- so the people downstream from us, who have nothing to say about
that pond- Karen is fight in that if it affects the water through their pond or
their stream area they are going to come back to City Council and say we
have got to open this up and we will have nothing to say about it which is
fine. So maybe we are creating a hazard rather than a positive.
Lehman: Well, if once the pond is full- the flow of water will be exactly the same as
if there were not a pond. Is that not correct? Yeah? The out-flow would
equal the in-flow. So the only difference- is that correct?
Kubby: The pond is going to change levels because of weather conditions.
Norton: It is going to get higher yeah.
Lehman: Well, when it is really dry it will tend to go down [and] at the same time
the down stream portion won't be any drier than it would have normally
been anyway.
Vanderhoef: Down stream it will become drier quicker.
Franklin: Potentially. I mean, because you have got to have some constraint or it
wouldn't make the pond. Well, how about if we get the developer and
somebody who knows what they are talking about besides me?
(Several talking)
Lehman: Okay.
Franklin: Okay. We will do that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 12
Lehman: Thank you.
Kubby: Thanks for that conversation.
Review Agenda Items 99-109 Side 1
Lehman: Review agenda items.
Atkins: I have three for you Ernie.
Lehman: Yes.
Atkins: Number one: we have received our bond rating for the upcoming parking
revenue bonds. From the bond anticipation notes we were rated at A
which is the best you can get so that is behind us. Secondly, you have a
heating coming up on the Wastewater Plant. Keeping with your practice I
have asked Chuck and/or Dave tomorrow evening to do an introduction.
You know, five or ten minutes on what the project is all about so they will
be prepared tomorrow night to do that for you.
Norton: Steve, will that include that- will that declaim the status of the north plant
too that is- the north plant that is basically to be shut down and the other
one takes up?
Atkins: That will be covered then tomorrow evening for you too.
Norton: And will it mention the P&G contributions?
Atkins: Yes we will do that too. Were P&G notified? We will take care of both
of those.
Norton: P&G contributions to the expansion of the south plant.
Arkins: Yes, their financial obligations on the cent- that is fine.
Norton: I think there is a good deal of some people that, you know, have never
seen that south plant. They think that is brand-new. They will be very
surprised-
Arkins: It is.
Norton: Well it is new, it certainly hasn't been seen by a lot of folks.
Atkins: As long as you remember that the south plant is 10 years old now.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 13
Norton: I know, but-
Lehman: It started in '94, didn't it? Operations?
Atkins: '90. I am sorry it is old Ernie.
Lehman: It is not very old, but go ahead.
Vanderhoef: It has never been completed- it just keeps going.
Atkins: The third item is just a matter of information. We have on the consent
calendar re-bidding the Chauncey Swan Fountain. And, over the last
couple of months or so, remember we bid it and we only got the one bid
and we thought it was high and we would go out this winter in the
anticipation of a good spring bid? I'll bring to your attention I have had a
couple of folks mention to me in passing "Why not take the Guthienz
sculpture and take it out to the Water plant as opposed to doing it here?".
Karen and then Public Arts Committee are working on public art and a
fountain out at the new Water plant. But I wanted to let you know that
there is thought that taking that sculpture and putting it out there as
opposed to across the street-
(several talking)
Vanderhoef: Well it appears, the minutes are talking about having two out at the Water
plant.
Norton: In different places.
Vanderhoef: A large one and a small one more at the entrance. So-
Kubby: Does- I feel uncomfortable approving something that will cost around
$85,000 or whatever the estimate was- it is in that range- to move and
change the sculpture a block. To take it from downtown to Chauncey
Swan and if they were going to do that they would cut the steps off and
redesign it so it was safer. Why didn't we just do that in place? And
change the water re-circulation system and not spend all of that money?
Atkins: ...if there is interest in not doing the Chauncey Swan fountain I think then
you should remove that, vote that down and I will communicate with the
Public Arts Advisory that you would prefer incorporating that sculpture
that got #### into a sculpture out there. I just really need to know what
your opinion is on that because tomorrow night-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 14
Norton: Consistent with what they are thinking? I mean,-
Atkins: I don't think it is out of the question. It is really very much what your
interest is.
Vanderhoef: Chauncey Swan park is a very attractive park the way it is. I like the grass
area there- it isn't a huge amount there and the gardens are gorgeous.
Kubby: Or adding something, some public art, that does not take so much physical
space.
Vanderhoef: I would like to see the fountain go out- and look at it out at the plant.
Atkins: Again, ...preservation of the Guthienz somewhere.
Champion: Right. That is absolutely important.
Lehman: I will give the minority report. I think it is neat, it has been downtown
forever, I can see it staying downtown, [and] I think it would be lovely to
have across from the Civic Center. And that is the minority report.
Thornberry: I agree.
O'Donnell: I think there is a lot of attachment to this fountain-
Lehman: But it will also be in place to be seen a lot more people than it is going to
be sitting out at the water plant.
Kubby: Well, and I don't mind us looking at: what are the pros and cons of each of
those options? What are the costs?
Norton: It will cost money either way.
Lehman: Well, at least the public will get more of an opportunity to enjoy it- where
more people are.
O'Donnell: So what is the deal?
Atkins: Well, the question, that is tomorrow night- since there is obviously divided
opinion amongst the Council members- is you probably will want to pull it
off and vote on it separately. If you were to vote it down that would stop
that project. But I would like some direction if you want to preserve the
Guthienz which I am assuming is generally your thinking, and if you wish
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 15
it to be preserved out at the Water plant site or some sort of a fountain or
sculpture out there I think you ### on that too.
Norton: I hate to dam it in out there. I'd say leave it at- it is a matter of money and
it is a matter of where that carry is going with what they have planned out
there. I'd like it downtown too but I could stand it out there if this is just
clearly too expensive. But it costs to move it in any case.
Atkins: Well the Guthienz sculpture- I am trying to be gentle- is a bunch of tubes
fight now just stored away and it needs to be incorporated into a fountain
or something such as that to preserve the character of that-
Norton: Whether you do it here or out there it is going to cost.
Atkins: Whether you do it here or out there it is still going to be some sort of a
fountain. My question to you is if you don't want it here there is another
option. It was brought to my attention [and] it has some merit. You don't
have to decide tonight but tomorrow night you have to.
Norton: Can we pull this thing off then tomorrow night?
Atkins: I can say pull it from the agenda that if we will not bid it for across the
street and if you wish to send it to the Public Arts Advisory Committee
then just give me a heads up and I will do that.
Kubby: Because we can always put it up for bid at that location if that is what we
end up deciding to do.
Vanderhoef: Let them look at it and see-
Norton: Let them consider it. I would go along with that.
Champion: Was the plan though to keep that fountain interactive?
Atkins: The fountain planned across the street, if we built it, is that the sculpture
itself will still have the cascading water except the ponding is like 6 inches
out of the ground and not 3 or 4 feet in the air with the intent of- it would
allow the little ones to go in and out of the water and is a lot safer.
Champion: With water I would like to keep it down here. I would like to keep it
where people can-
Norton: Because you don't wash your feet fight?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcfiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 16
Vanderhoef: And the- for people to do that also because of the park and the trail
possibilities out on the Water plant site, that will still be a possibility for-
Lehman: But not nearly the number of people.
Norton: Yeah- let's hear from the committee.
Vanderhoef: Off of the trail possibly.
Atkins: Tomorrow night you have to decide that.
Lehman: No, I think we are deciding now that we would like to send it to the Public
Art Committee and see what they think and then-
Dilkes: We can just delete it from the consent calendar then.
Lehman: Is that what I am heating? That is what we are heating.
Atkins: ...you sent it to the committee so they can incorporate it and we bring it
back with their recommendations and/or what else-
Champion: Not see if they can..
Lehman: It is not an up or down issue it is just saying let them look at it and get
their opinion.
Champion: If they think it would better be served at Chauncey Swan or the Water
plant.
Atkins: That is all I have.
Lehman: Any other agenda items?
Karr: Mr. Mayor? I have one. We added an, and in front of you this evening, is
a resolution setting the formal regular meeting schedule starting January
18. The first and third Tuesday.
Lehman: That is under consent calendar fight?
Karr: That is correct. And we just thought rather than wait until December 7th
we would like to nail this down because it does have implications for other
work sessions and budget scheduling.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 17
Norton: I have one question Ernie about the- this is the one that environment- the
Highway 1 project. Do we do the- the contract work that we are talking
about is just for the environmental assessment of the pans from Interstate
80 into Govemor?
Davidson: That is correct.
Norton: Somebody else has to do an assessment on the rest of it. You keep
referring to the corridor but somebody has to do the other pans I take it?
Davidson: Yeah, I assume you are referring to the Kalona and Iowa City part and the
Iowa City to Mount Vernon part. Yeah- that will be done by the Iowa
Department of Transportation.
Norton: So we are not in charge of that in any sense?
Davidson: No, we are not.
Norton: Okay.
Vanderhoef: So the figure quoted here is only for our corridor?
Davidson: Our corridor.
Kubby: A lot of money.
Davidson: We actually talked them down a little if it is any consolation, yeah.
Vanderhoef: I hate to ask where it started.
Davidson: It was about $125,000 and we talked them down.
Kubby: Is that because of all of the paper work?
Davidson: Yeah. What they are doing is following the process established by NEPA
which is the Federal Environmental Protection Law and is what is required
by Iowa DOT and by the Federal Highway Administration. Essentially to
hopefully get our hands on the 5 million dollars that they are willing to
contribute to the project later we have to invest this up front.
Kubby: So how does it affect their evaluation because we have already done some
work along that corridor?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 18
Davidson: Yeah. The preliminary work that we have done hasn't been anything very
substantial but we will use that work- basically hand it over to the
consultant and they will then incorporate it. I guess Karen, maybe a way
to characterize it is, it is things that the consultant then- we won't have to
pay the consultant to do- we will just be able to turn it over to them.
Norton: The whole right-of-way question and so forth is up to us anyhow isn't it?
The exact delineation of the right-of-way?
Davidson: Um, yes, to a degree. We will not- we have to have concurrence with
Iowa DOT-
Norton: ...that department put in.
Davidson: Right. For throughout this process. I mean, this is- because it is a state
highway it is a corridor that you as a Council will not have the sole
authority on. You will have some authofity but we will also have to get
concurrence from Iowa DOT. I will say that in our discussions with the
DOT I believe they are sensitive to our local issues that we have here.
You know, their concem is moving traffic and our concern is much
broader than that and I think they are sensitive to that and will work with
US.
Kubby: So when you say it won't have a large impact- as I recall, you know, there
was a lot of grating on the side, a lot of soil erosion that happened...
Davidson: What won't have a large impact Karen?
Kubby: Huh?
Davidson: You said something won't have a large impact?
Kubby: Well, I thought you had said that there wasn't a large impact from the
work that you did and in terms of environmentally there was some impact-
Davisdon: Oh, I am sorry. I was confused. I thought that you meant some of the
preliminary design work that we have been doing. I am sorry. No, we
have obviously with the Captain Irish Project done a substantial amount of
work out there. The analysis of the environmental impact of the corridor
Karen will go from fight-of-way line to fight-of-way line. Certainly not
just the road. It will include the entire right-of-way that would be
disrupted and I believe, Chuck correct me ifI am wrong, but I believe the
entire area that was needed for grating easements when the project was
initially put in is owned by the state. It is part of the fight-of-way of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcfiption of the Iowa City cotmcil meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 19
corridor. That is why it buries quite a bit- because of the steep ditches and
that. But that is state's policy.
Kubby: So that incorporated that past environmental work? That grating, that
destruction of the trees, and the- is that incorporated into this?
Davidson: I don't know. I don't know. You know, the instructions that we gave the
consultant in preparing this contract was: fulfill what is required. Don't
go beyond that. But go to that point. We don't want to have to come
back, you know, a year into the project and do something because it
wasn't done initially. And that is what they have put together for us.
Lehman: Other agenda items?
Norton: One last question.
Lehman: Yes.
Norton: Who is going to explain all of the details about the Iowa Avenue Project?
There is about six items on there. Who is going to- is somebody doing to
explain what-
Kubby: The finances Dee?
Norton: The financing then? To clarify what we are doing. I am just making sure
that people know what we are up to.
Atkins: Some sort of summary of what we are going to do with this 12 million
dollars?
Norton: Yeah- some of it is condominiumized so that has to be handled differently.
Atkins: I will prepare that tomorrow.
Norton: I don't know how #### it needs to be but I- it could be pretty confusing to
the-
Atkins: I guess not to make it confusing. I will prepare it for tomorrow night.
Champion: I had three things. One was that I appreciate the list of reportable crimes
in the noah part of Iowa City but I still don't know how to compare that
with what goes on in the rest of the town. And that is what I think we
need to see if there is a problem there.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 2o
Atkins: That was the district that was drawn based upon some of our- we can- if
you would like to wait maybe until the end of the calendar year we can do
something on a City-wide basis. Would that be okay?
Champion: Yeah. We are almost there. That would be fine.
Atkins: Okay.
Champion: Not just for me. Are other people interested in that?
Norton: I would like to think the number- yes, the number of noise disputes must
be- or noise complaints- must be different there. And I was, when you
talked about the burglaries and so forth, the question is that unusual? It
strikes you as kind of substantial.
Champion: Yeah, I thought it was a lot but maybe it...
Norton: I would be interested in seeing, and I hate to have them go to too much
work, but they may collect this stuff anyhow.
Atkins: I think they- when I asked the chief about it they had to do a little
massaging of the data but I don't think it was anything out of the ordinary.
Norton: Yeah- it is in their computer system.
Atkins: Yeah, it is in the machine somewhere. A comparison sort of #### through
out the city with the end of year report. It is a little more complex but I
think we can put that together for you.
Champion: I'd be more interested in areas of town that are within walking distance-
not necessarily the whole City. I mean-
Atkins: Within walking distance of?.
Champion: You know, of downtown. Neighborhoods within the perimeters of
downtown where I think you have more of the noise business and...
Atkins: Why don't I talk to RJ tomorrow and see what we have got. The next
Council meeting I will come back and tell you what is something that we
might be able to structure.
(several talking)
Vanderhoef: I want the distinctions between theft and robbery and ....
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 21
Champion: Oh, no.
Vanderhoef: I don't understand...
Lehman: Why don't we talk about that during Council time? We have got folks
waiting here to work on the agenda items.
Kubby: One last comment on that really quick is that that was one of the purposes
of having the 10 districts in town is so that we could have those
boundaries and compare district to district based on those district plans
and the boundaries within those plans so eventually we will be able to
plug it in according to those boundary districts.
Champion: I will wait until Council time to ...
Angle Parking on Clinton Street 99-109 Side 1
Lehman: Angle parking on Clinton Street.
Atkins: Jeff will cover that Ernie. This may be a quick item.
(several talking)
Lehman: Before Jeff gets his charts and whatever- okay go ahead. Obviously we
got in our packet some information from Madison who would request that
we remove some more trees to add some parking spaces. We talked about
this when we first talked about the parking and my sense of the Council
was that we were not going to remove anymore trees.
Champion: Except those fir trees.
Lehman: Right and those are-
Thornberry: Those are gone.
Lehman: But are we still- do we want to re-evaluate that parking?
Champion: No.
O'Donnell: Ernie, I don't think so- we have got a parking mall attached to the hip with
this-
Lehman: I don't have any interest in taking out any trees.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 22
O'Donnell: I am not interested in cutting them down either.
Kubby: No.
Lehman: All fight. And then the other part of that was the angle parking along the
block of Clinton Street where the Airliner is and I think because of the
mechanical difficulties involved with putting that in we end up with no
more parking spaces than we have now-
Davidson: Actually there is one less.
Lehman: And the recommendation is to leave it the way it is.
Kubby: Why spend any money... ?
Lehman: Do we all concur?
(several talking)
Lehman: Tell Dee to come back in. I appreciate all of the effort you put in that.
Senior Center Walkway
Atkins: Ernie, the next item up on the Senior Center Walkway, Joe and Linda will
be here to make a presentation. I understood Council's interest was that
there was a request possible for CDBG funding and a couple of other
issues. I will have Joe and Linda just sort of walk you through what the
project looks like and give you the revised budget. Beyond that I wasn't
real sure what Council wanted to decide tonight, if anything.
Lehman: We will find out.
Fowler: Let's see ifI can figure out how to work this.
Lehman: You just made my bright lights go out on my glasses.
Atkins: While he's setting up you ought to wait about 30 seconds so ....
Lehman: That was quick Dee.
Fowler: I have got one more button to find.
Norton: That is good.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City cotmcil meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 23
Fowler: All fight.
Lehman: Here. You'll notice that-
Fowler: From the beginning of this project it has been a discussion item to have a
walkway.
Kubby:
Lehman: There is something in my coffee I think.
Vanderhoef: You are just wishful thinking.
Fowler: It is not a real good-. There has been discussion about whether the Iowa
Avenue Parking facility and the Senior Center should be linked with a
skywalk- is one of the things that came up in the initial meetings that were
held with the public by the architect and the design team. And, we have
had preliminary figures up to this point and we have been given a couple
of different numbers and now we have a firm number. The profit on that-
I am doing good here tonight, okay- the problem that we have encountered
so far is that the third level of parking where the skywalk would be does
not line up with any of the levels at the Senior Center. To put a skywalk
connected without any kind of- of a lift or an elevator device would
require the sky walk to cross the alley a minimum of three times. To get
the grade you would have to go over, make a turn, go back, make a turn,
and then go back over to Senior Center. So, there had to be some type of
lift device in there. Thank you. The initial plan that we were presented
with called for a lift fight in this area and it would be a lift very similar to
down on the exterior of the building. A couple that I can think of are like
on the outside of St. Pat's and AUR apartments- their office over on
Market Street. And we didn't find that to be an acceptable solution
because we felt that the volume of people that were traveling through
there- a lift like that would not be able to accommodate them and Linda
had some problems with the building security at that point. So, we
requested that they develop a plan with an elevator. And the advantage of
the elevator was that instead of going to one floor we had access to the
mezzanine level, the first level and then people could enter the building in
the alley way- they could go in and take the elevator and go up to the first
level instead of using the lift that was- or the ramp that is currently there.
We started off, our initial estimates for this walkway were $150,000 with
the lift in the middle. We went to a $250,000 estimate with an elevator.
We now have a final estimate which includes limestone in the exterior to
match the facility, glass-backed elevators for secufity and our final
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcfiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 24
estimate figure is $358,000. In addition to the exterior changes this would
require a change in the interior space on what is called Space 2b in the
Iowa Avenue Ramp which would be the commercial space above The
Cottage space. And that would require splitting that space so that a
hallway and a walkway could go through it from the elevator to the
skywalk.
Champion: How are you going to maintain security in that narrow hallway? That is
going a long...
Fowler: It would basically be the same as walking through any other office
hallway. I mean, it is- the doors right here would be able to be locked and
closed in the evenings or when the center wasn't open, but. So, let me let
Linda speak to the issues that she has here.
Thornberry: Joe, a question.
Fowler: Yes.
Thornberry: That $350,000, does that include the money spent for the building itself
for the different doors? In other words-
Lehman: Changes in the ramp.
Thornberry: No, not in the ramp but in the Senior Center.
Fowler: Yes, that would include all changes that would take place in the Senior
Center as far as putting the doors in there and any lobby changes.
Lehman: And the changes in the second floor of the parking facility?
Fowler: Yes.
Thornberry: So that is total- that is total money. No other monies to be spent on it
other than $350,0007
Fowler: Right.
Lehman: $358,000.
Thornberry: $358,000.
Fowler: Yes, that is, um-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 25
Thornberry: How far is it? About 20 feet?
Fowler: Um, I think it is 40. I talked with Kevin Monson several times and told
them we wanted this to be an accurate estimate that we wouldn't have any
problems with in the future. I mean, you know like, they have a fee in
here of printing for printing the plans for distribution for bidding of
$10,000. They said they don't want to error and be low, they want to
make sure that these are numbers that we can be comfortable with. One of
things that they pointed out was that the cost can be cut $40,000 by
dropping the lime stone veneer so that- but then you lose the connection
between the stair tower and the building. Another way to save money
would be to remove the glass-backed elevators but we feel the glass-
backed elevators- I personally feel- the glass-backed elevators are very
important to security and to a level of comfort while you are in there. So,
there are things that we could do that would lower this cost but I think
they would take away from the product that we have right now.
Norton: How much square footage is lost in this 2b area that- it would have all
been one unit, I take it, if you didn't chop the hallway out of there?
Although some previous plans it seemed to me there was a hallway of
some kind earlier. I don't where.
Fowler: There were previous plans- there were some previous plans that showed
that, um-
Norton: When the Senior Center was thinking about it.
Fowler: And it also had to do with exiting that we have been able to address some
issues and get them resolved.
Norton: So you are losing square feet there?
Fowler: That I don't know.
Lehman: Joe, was that going to- this is, am I assuming correctly- this is the second
level of what will be the Cottage Bakery?
Fowler: Yes, there would be the main level, then the mezzanine, and this would be
the level above that.
Lehman: Is this the face the Cottage Bakery would otherwise have gotten?
Fowler: No.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 26
Lehman: Okay.
Norton: This is still commercial-
Fowler: Right. This is space that is for sale or lease.
Lehman: Okay. So- but is there anything factored in there for the loss of what that
space would have been worth if we could have sold it?
Fowler: No.
Lehman: So there is no-
Kubby: Decided to lease it not sell it.
Champion: Right.
Lehman: Well, okay- lease or sell but I mean there is no factor in there for the
value?
Fowler: We haven't reduced the square- the value of it on the square footage that is
coming out, no.
Norton: It is only ##~:# by the amount of the corridor fight?
Fowler: Right.
Norton: That is the opportunity cost.
Champion: Would this-
Thornberry: Well, including a wall I would image...
Champion: Would this work if the dreams came true and the Senior Center moved
into that space would this interfere with usability of that space from a
~### standpoint?
(changed tape sides)
Kopping: Basically all I wanted to do [is] sort of affirm what Joe had said about the
issue of the lift and installing the lift versus the elevator which is a rather
item. The lift would not be a very safe mechanism for some people, like
people using a walker or a cane to navigate that five-foot difference and
they would not be able to use the stairs. So, there would be an
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 27
accessibility issue. But also there is the security issue. We need to have a
way with the skywalk that we can lock off the mezzanine on weekends.
The Senior Center has staff and participants and volunteers on the
mezzanine level Monday- Friday during our normal operating hours but
on Saturday and Sunday the center is only open for senior dining and that
group only uses the first floor and the ground floor. The problem that we
have if we bring people in through the mezzanine is that we have a couple
of different office setups there that are out in the open with computers and
printers and lots of files. We have a copy machine, we have our large
computer printer and scanner we use for the desktop publishing and we
also have a big open library. And then, not very securely, but in locked
none-the-less areas we have another office that is fully equipped with
computer and such and one of our major storage closets and another
library. We have had problems with things disappearing or being
damaged in the absence of people being around and sometimes even when
people are around. So it didn't, doesn't seem like a very good idea to have
an area open with no staff there. So the elevator would provide us with a
mechanism whereby we could divert people from that floor on Saturday
and Sunday and take them right down to the ground floor where the need
to be. And, on the other hand, when there are people of there it would
open it up for participants and such to come in.
Kubby: People wouldn't have to- people would be able to go right into the lobby
from the elevator? The downstairs lobby?
Kopping: They have to go in through a little corridor.
Norton: Through that door behind your office?
Kopping: That is right. This is right.
Kubby: One of the things that I'm starting to think about, and I don't mean this in
a derogatory way because we are trying to fit this in after the facility was
built- which I know that there was some talk about this before the architect
designed things and it would have been most ideal to - and maybe there
were site constraints and topographical issues, but to be able design this so
it was a little smoother ability to have a skywalk either now in or in the
future. But, in doing it this way, the facility has not even been ~nalized
and we are cobbling it together. And it - I don't know, I just- it feels like
it is very- is going to be a long route to get that distance. And I am not -
maybe there is no choice at this point but it feels like we have a spanking
new facility being designed for- being built and we're having to do this
kind of complicated thing.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 28
Norton: There has never been any very good way to connect on to that building.
Vanderhoef: That is the problem.
Norton: Even if you started from scratch- apart from the problem of grade down
there for Ecumenical Towers- it is just #### buildings you have to
approach from that side. It is, overall, back entrances that we are going in
basically.
Kopping: The noah lot entrance, which is the entrance on north side here, was
probably our most heavily used entrance because it was right next to the
parking area. It is still going to be next to the parking area and I suspect if
it is accessible people will use it.
Vanderhoef: And won't that take...
Lehman: Will that entrance remain the same after this construction is over with?
Kopping: It is my understanding that the ramp that is there fight now will be
consumed by this structure here.
Lehman: No, no. Aside from this structure - if we didn't have this structure would
the entrance remain the same as it is now?
Kopping: Yes.
Lehman: Okay. So, accessibility would be the same as, well- the accessibility from
the ramp without the walkway would be the same as it is currently from
the lot?
Kopping: No.
Kubby: So, instead of coming from the alley across, people would come from Linn
Street.
Lehman: And walk-
Vanderhoef: And walk through the alley to get to the ramp and then come back up the
ramp.
Kopping: I think there are some ve~ legitimate concerns about accessibility and
safety. To reach a handicap exit from that Linn Street exit that is in-
planned for the ramp- people will either have to go down and over to
Washington Street or go through the alley. And there is some concern
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 29
related to, especially in the winter months, with people going over the
alley- that alley is frequently used for delivery trucks and such and with
ice and snow accumulations just dropping offof the trucks it is going to be
hard to maintain.
Lehman: But that part won't-
Vanderhoef: Would it be possible to turn the ramp the other direction? You know, the
ramp comes from the east headed up west. What happens if we start the
ramp at the sidewalk and go up to the back door? Just turn the ramp
around so that they aren't truly ever walking in the alley?
Kopping: So that they cross the alley at the sidewalk and then take a left and go up
the ramp?
Vanderhoef.' Then go up the ramp and come to the door? It shortens the distance. My
concern all along has been the distance from the front door of the parking
ramp where it is warm and a place to sit down all the way around to the
south side if you cannot navigate steps. That is a long ways and no place
to stop and rest. And, the additional problem of ice and snow that happens
while you're there even.
Kopping: That certainly is something that, you know, we could check out. I would
be concerned about the grade. There are limitations about how - what the
rate of elevation can be for the distance.
O'Donnell: I don't think you could do it. That ramp would have to be so long.
Norton: I am getting confused-
O'Donnell: I don't look at this as-
Norton: It looks to me that if you face forward this entrance- there wouldn't be any
ramp under the new thing. That you would just come down Linn Street
and go in the doors and then take the- either the elevator would take you
either to the first floor or- you would have to go in a ways, wouldn't you,
to get to the first floor- would you not? Up a little bit? After you've been
in these doors?
Kopping: After you go in the doors here you would have to go up to get to the first
floor. You would have to take the elevator to get to the first floor.
Norton: You take the elevator up to the first floor and then up to the mezzanine
and that is it, right?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 3o
Kopping: Right.
Norton: Those are your options.
Champion: Well, I don't know, you know - it is a lot of money but I really think it is-
Vanderhoef: Important.
Champion: It is important to be there.
Vanderhoef: I do too.
Norton: It is a strain, but what are you going to do?
O'Donnell: It is making the center more accessible. And I think that that is our pitch.
It is safer.
Norton: And it is a ramp- it strengthens the ramp too because one of its purposes
was the importance to the Senior Center.
Lehman: Will there be any difference in the construction of the parking facility if
the walkway is added at a later date?
Fowler: We need to let them know fairly soon on the walkway because they will
change one beam fight in this area. We could have them go ahead and
change that beam now and then put the veneer on if you wanted to look at
it later. Or put that beam- change that beam now and then not have to
make the decision-
Lehman: It that a major-
Kubby: Well, I thought that before we made that policy decision that we wanted
the option to be able to add this skywalk in the future so we wanted it built
in a way that it wouldn't be major reconstruction later on? I thought that
was already part of what we had?
(several talking)
Vanderhoef: But, there is still the idea that it would take another and various other
things to make the walkway from the center of the parking ramp and take
it offof the lease space on the second floor if we don't put it in now.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcfiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 31
Fowler: Right, if we didn't put it in now we would have difficulty if we would
lease the space to someone else to come back in and say we are going to
put in a hallway.
Kubby: well, yeah.
Vanderhoef: Right. Okay. And there is certainly, I would presume, savings in
incorporating it into the building now versus later.
Norton: Let's get it in there.
Champion: I think we need to put it in there.
Vanderhoef: I think we have got to put it in now.
Norton: I agree.
Vanderhoef: I am sorry°
Champion: But how are we going to pay for it? That is the next question.
Norton: We have got to worry about the money now.
Lehman: Let me ask you Joe- is the entrance, using the parking ramp, will it be
more convenient and safe for people using the Senior Center to park in
that ramp and use the sidewalk to get to the ramp than it is now to park in
the outside lot and walk across the alley?
Thomberry: There is more to that question than just that though Emie. You are saying
it is either this or nothing? Aren't there any other options other than an
elevator and a walkway for $358,000 for 40 feet? Are there any other
options?
Fowler: We have had the option of crossing the alley 3 times.
Thornberry: No, no. All right that is~
Fowler: We have had the option of a lift in the middle so that you can change
grades.
Thornberry: I am still having trouble with the fact that Ecumenical Towers can get into
there but the Senior Center can't. By walking across the alley. Now, I
support- yeah, they can.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 32
Champion: They really can?
Thornberry: And there is a door for them but they won't let the seniors use it for one
reason or another. And there can't be a door tight beside it for one reason
or another. I still am unsure about that. I would like to have the seniors
have covered- a covered walkway across, not necessarily elevated. If they
can walk between the Senior Center and that ramp and go- theoretically if
it wasn't for Ecumenical Towers having a door in there the Senior Center
people could have a covered surfaced walk- I mean, you could walk from
the Senior Center across the alley with some coveting over it and walk
into a door and get into the parking ramp. Is that correct?
Fowler: Yes, but the difficulty you have is that you'd come in- if you came in a
door there you are going to come tight into the comer where vehicle that
enters that ramp is going to come in, going to make a turn, and go to park.
And then you are going to have- you are going to have an increased
mixture of pedestrian traffic which we are trying to avoid of coming in
that door and trying to walk up those ramps as people are coming in
speeding through the ramp to find a parking place. Okay- driving through
the ramp.
Thornberry: But Ecumenical Towers- the people from Ecumenical Towers are braving
that scenario, is that correct?
Fowler: No, they come in and go immediately down. They don't go into the ramp
at all- they don't go into the public driving area at all.
Thornberry: Where do they go? Do they fall in that big hole?
Norton: They have got a separate-
Fowler: They have an elevator that takes them to the lower level.
Norton: They have a separate elevator.
Thornberry: Why can't that elevator that is going to be put in there also go up?
Champion: It does go up.
Fowler: No, it doesn't.
Champion: It only goes down?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transctiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 33
Thomberry: Yeah, it is a one-way elevator. I am just saying- if- why in the world- I
just am having trouble with this- why can't the people from the Senior
Center use that elevator and not only have it go down but have it go up?
And both people- both facilities use one elevator?
Kubby: There is a legal reason in there with the feds and the agreement and with-
Norton: Isn't that elevator way too far east?
Dilkes: No, I don't think that is- I don't think there is a legal- I don't think that
addresses Dean's question. I just wanted to make it clear- the elevator
does go up and down. Between the first and the lower level for
Ecumenical.
Lehman: It isn't one way.
Fowler: It doesn't go up farther.
Dilkes: No, it doesn't go up farther than- fight. Right.
Norton: But isn't this quite a ways east of where you want to be?
Fowler: No- it is. Well, it is basically it [is] almost in the same position. It is a
little bit further east than this walkway would be. It is right behind the
commercial property.
Lehman: Is that close?
Thornberry: Right over there and if we are doing that why are we spending another
$358,000 for another elevator?
Fowler: We are required-
Champion: But that is a different problem.
Fowler: We are required in our-
Thornberry: Different people I suppose.
Fowler: -in our negotiations that we have had with HUD to provide them with a
separate secure entrance for them only.
Dilkes: Yeah, I am sorry. That is what- I just talked to Jeff- that is what you were
alluding to Karen is that Ecumenical required- or our agreement with
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 34
Ecumenical- requires that they have a secured entrance that only they get
into and out of.
O'Donnell: This just really makes this whole thing more accessible and usable. We
want- there is a safety factor. That alley is terrible at best walking down
there in the wintertime with the ice and the snow.
Lehman: Well that is true except that that alley has been used with great success
ever since we started the Senior Center. And now, at least the cars are
going to be parked where it is dry.
O'Donnell: But the alley is still going to be wet.
Lehman: Has it been a problem in the past?
O'Donnell: Well, I don't know if it has. I can't answer that. But I imagine it has been
and that alley is very slick.
Thomberry: If it is that slippery they shouldn't be driving.
Norman: It is still a less direct route. They are going to have to go to the west over
to the end of the-
O'Donnell: You have to get people to the Senior Center.
Lehman: I know Mike.
Thomberry: $358,000 before for 40 feet with an elevator fight next to it doesn't make a
whole lot of sense.
O'Donnell: That is a lot money but, you know, it is a safety issue and we-
Champion: I think it is a user-friendly issue.
Kubby: I don't think you have...
O'Donnell: And a user-friendly issue.
Vanderhoef: It makes it accessible for a lot of folks that it wouldn't be accessible.
O'Donnell: The whole point is we are doing this to make this accessible. We have
specifically not sold that at all for the new parking ramp. We have left
room for future expansion and I think it just is- this is one of the reasons
why it is part of the parking ramp.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 35
Norton: Do we have some kind of a joint plan for trying to finance this thing? I
mean, -
Vanderho ef: You mean with the county?
Norton: Well, I don't know whether the county, yeah the county will surely put in
20% fight?
O'Donnell: There you go.
Norton: But there was other talk of separate fund raising and so forth. I don't
know, this is one of those-
Vanderhoef: And this could be a possibility Dee. You know, this is why I brought it up
the other night that we are now into the funding, shortly into the funding
cycle for our community block grant monies and this is a very appropriate
use of the money, or some of the money. And, maybe some of the money
from this funding cycle and some from the next funding cycle so that there
is still some flexibility for our other needs in the community- it certainly
isn't going to be taking all of it- but it could be a challenge dollars of some
fund raising on some that kind of activity.
Kopping: The commission feels very strongly about the skywalk and they have
expressed an interest repeatedly in doing fund-raising to support the
construction of the skywalk. We are looking into different grants, [and]
community block development grants also. There are possibilities through
Heritage Area Agency and if we did fund it, part of it, or what ever
through our operational budget the county does reimburse 20 percent of
the operational budget each year. So-.
Lehman: Before, I guess personally, I would like to see us move forward. I guess I
would like to see us construct the ramp in a fashion that this can be added.
But until we know how we are going to pay for it and how it would be put
in - I guess I would just as soon get those things in order before we decide
to proceed with that.
Norton: But we have to get a plan to finance it, that is for sure.
Lehman: Yeah, I think you have to do that.
Kubby: I have a concern- well, I don't know how to get around it. This concem
that if Council wants to do something that fits within the City Steps, or if it
would qualify for CDBG monies that when Council says yes-" vie for
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 36
these monies" it sends a message for priority to the recommending body.
Although they still have to go through their own evaluation process and
evaluate it through City Steps, but it does get more power than other
applications and if we were to do that I would suggest that we say that we
won't find it acceptable unless there is some matching component of
private fund-raising, whether that is through grants or through fund-raising
from the community. That that should be part of the proposal that goes to
HCDC.
Norton: I agree with that. I certainly think that trying to get the money, or part of
it from sources like Heritage Agency or others because there is a good
deal of spending, after all they are talking about society tuming senior
rapidly.
Vanderhoef: Here we are.
Norton: Here we are, right. They are putting money into it-
Lehman: But wouldn't it be appropriate to get some of those things lined up before
we proceed?
Norton: I think we have to. Assuming we can get the features built-in that will
accommodate the thing-
Lehman: We have to put in a beam to accommodate the connection to the parking
ramp. Other than that- I mean, we can build the facility so we can add
that.
Norton: What about that second floor room that has to have the corridor?
Champion: But if you are going to add it it's going to be more expensive. Why
wouldn't you just incorporate it?
Lehman: I can't imagine that you're going to talk very much more expense.
Fowler: The beam is there, they just need to alter the way they pour it so that they
can make the connections.
Lehman: Yeah. So, I mean, that is reasonably minor. You have to have the wall
anyway so that cost is the same as if you do it-
Norton: Doesn't have the hallway wall.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 37
Fowler: In the interior- decision wouldn't have to be made until spring as far as
finish-out of the area goes unless somebody came to us between now and
then with an offer for the price.
Norton: Or cutting doors or whatever that kind of issue would be.
Lehman: Well, leasing the space. If someone is interested in that space and wants
to lease it we would have to decide at that point do or don't.
Norton: But there is extra doors to add on that wall and so forth. I think Karen is
right, we did say that that ought to be - that was the original agreement
that-
Vanderhoef: Absolutely.
Norton: - for this possibility.
Thomberry: Other than tell them to move the beam-
Lehman: Well, I think-
Kubby: If people want to bite the CDBG monies now is the time.
Vanderhoef: This is it.
Kubby: It is like getting on the edge of late for putting a proposal together.
Lehman: I don't think that it is appropriate to apply for CDBG monies until we have
got a done deal. Until we have got something put in place.
Vanderhoef: Well, which comes first?
Lehman: The funding comes first. First the decision you are going to do it.
Vanderhoef: And if you have ~ome funding coming in one form from CDIZIG monies
and we put it together with some requests for matching I think that is real
appropriate. Then we need to see how it breaks out and how it ranks with
the rest of the proposals that are coming in this year. Until we apply we
never know.
Norton: It is going to be hard for them to turn that down.
Champion: Well, I think we should plan on doing it and we should just tell that Senior
Center Commission who loves it "It helps by the way to finance it".
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 38
Miller: We would love to.
Champion: Okay. Great.
Kubby: Terry, you have to speak in the mic. or up by the podium.
Miller: I am Terry Miller. I believe that the community block grants, unless there
is a decision to actually build the walkway, they won't say that they will
give funding. So, I believe that there has to be a decision that says "yes,
we are going to move forward with this" and the real question then is: how
do we fund it? Not: are we going to do it? That question is already
answered.
Champion: That is how I feel. Let's do it. How are we going to fund it?
Lehman: Well.
Champion: Dee, do you feel that way too?
Vanderhoef: I am with that one.
Kubby: I think it can't be that definite because-
Lehman: I agree.
Kubby: -if people- if we say that we want to go with this plan for now and even if
people want to apply for CDBG monies with the matching condition,
maybe even a certain percent, we might want to say that if we don't get
CDBG money that doesn't mean automatically, I don't believe, or I don't
think we should set it up that way, that we will find a way or that we will
attempt to find another way to do it but not necessarily that it will be a
bond issue or it will be a- the City will pay for it. I think it should be re-
evaluated at that point in its is not recommended for CDBG. But again,
you know, it has got that power of our - that we can change the
recommendations from ####. It is that priority.
Vanderhoef: And there is another funding cycle a year from now and like I said, I see
the possibilities of some funding possibly from both cycles and not take
such a large amount from each one therefore still leaving that flexibility
for our other CDBG projects.
Norton: You know, this is going to come up in connection with another item
tonight- we have got 18 different ways to spend money. And, we are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 39
going to take a hard look- you guys are going to have to take a hard look
right after the first of the year sooner rather than later as to how you can
deal with some of these bumps that we are looking at. Some of them you
may not be able to. We've got-
Honohan: I need to speak please.
Norton: Okay. Get in there.
Honohan: I just can't let this argument go this long without saying you can stop the
project. You have stopped projects when the bids come in too high. But
if we don't get the commitment we don't get the community grant block.
So, we are going to have to have that first. If we don't get the money then
you can stop the project like you have done in the past when bids come in
too high. But we need the commitment. And I think the Senior Center
needs the skywalk.
Lehman: Okay. How many are willing to make a commitment at this point?
Vanderhoef: I am in.
Norton: I will do it.
O'Donnell: There is four.
Lehman: We have got four.
Atkins: Emie, I need to understand what you have decided.
Lehman: I am not really sure.
(several talking)
Lehman: What did you decide Dee?
Atkins: Let me take a run at it so I understand. Are you suggesting the four, the
Council majority, that we incorporate into the upcoming Capital Plan
which will be passed on- I guess Council Elect has to be listening to this
because this is a new expense- that you want it in the Capital Plan?
Secondly, that Joe has authorization to make those minor modifications to
the parking structure virtually immediately? I mean, that beam or
whatever it is. He has got the go ahead to do that?
Lehman: I think that is a "go" regardless.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 40
Atkins: Okay. Thirdly, do you wish to have us prepare a CDBG application for
funding for this structure?
Champion: Yes.
Atkins: Or at least a portion of it?
Champion: Yes.
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Lehman: No. I don't think it is appropriate for us to make that application. Let the-
you mean, the City itself?.
Atkins: The City itself.
Kubby: We do make applications to ourselves for-
Lehman: I would rather see the Senior Center Commission make the application.
Vanderhoef: Well, that is the City.
Kubby: We do make°
Atkins: The Senior Center Commission is the City.
Kubby: But it is at our direction and that is what makes the difference. But there
is authority to do that.
Atkins: All right. Do you wish the Senior Center Commission to submit a CDBG
application for this walkway?
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Champion: Yes.
Atkins: Okay. That is all I need then, thank you.
Norton: And any other sources they can think of.
(several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 41
Kubby: Under the condition that there is some matching money. Within that- the
proposal needs to say that.
O'Donnell: I need a break.
Fowler: I have one more question.
Lehman: Yes.
Fowler: The design fees to do this project were included in the cost. It was
$225,000 for the walkway. The design fees were $23,000. Do you want
to go ahead and authorize the design of it at this time?
Lehman: Oh man, I hate to get far down this road until we know what we are doing.
Fowler: Okay, I didn't know with the funding if you wanted to go ahead with this.
Lehman: ...got some warm and fuzzy feelings about doing something that we don't
have the- you know we don't have the...
Champion: That is included in the price of the proposal- I mean of the..?
Fowler: Right, yes.
Vanderhoef:
Champion: Ask them to do it when we have some money in hand.
Atkins: But as Jay pointed out you can't submit a CDBG application. If you are
going have matching money I need to submit it for something. Some
number.
Lehman: Joe gave it to you. $358,000.
Atkins: Well that is the total cost of the project.
Lehman: Right.
Atkins: And you then you are assuming that your Housing and Community
Development Commission will either prove it all or whittle it down or do
something?
Lehman: Yep. Yep.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 42
Atkins: Okay.
Thornberry: That is $358,000.
Champion: I don't think-
Kubby: It should be at least $100,000 in private matching funds. Less than a third
of this project within that application.
NoRon: We need to pick a number.
Champion: Or from other agencies.
Kubby: Right. That would be included in that outside funding.
Champion: Other funding possibilities. That ought to be reasonable.
Vanderhoef: How much?
Norton: $100,000.
Champion: Is that unreasonable?
Vanderhoef: No, I don't think so.
Champion: Okay.
Kubby: This is like down the road next spring, well it is actually ###, CIP and
budget stuff. We are going to star when we think about big capital
projects and in doing a library bond issue and where we are at in our
bonding capacity and in our self-imposed limits and in property tax
increases. If we say "yes" to this with capital money we have to say "no"
to some things that are already on the list- Melrose and Mormon Trek, or
Mormon Trek is isn't even on that list. What are people going to be
willing to say "no" to during that process? That is going to be your all
problem but people are going to have to say "no" to something. To
streets, to other facilities, to other, you know, is there going to be any
reduction in the fire house so that it is not as nice? What is going to be
said no to? So that is just a question, rhetorical question that you all are
going to take action on.
(several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 43
Atkins: Is this $100,000 something so it is a $260,000 CDBG grant and $100,000
in other fimding? Is that what you said?
Champion: Yes.
Atkins: Okay.
(7)
Kubby: No.
Norton: You are not talking- $256,000 from the CDBG?
Atkins: I guess you are. That is what you said.
Kubby: No, it could be some bond and some CDBG. I am not really prepared to
like create a budget for us.
(Several talking)
Lehman: Well, I think we are spending money that we have no idea where it is
coming from.
Atkins: You want a CDBG application. You need to put in a realistic number to
your commission to tell them that is how much money you want. Now, if
you are not prepared to do it now, you are going to have to be prepared to
do it pretty soon.
Norton: I think it is not realistic to ask for all $250,000. I mean, if they can raise
$100,000 some way and try to put all $250,000 on CDBG it would just be
unrealistic.
Kubby: Maybe it is $100,000 private, $100,000 CDBG and the rest comes from
other city financing that you all can figure out where it is from if you want
to make that commitment.
Atkins: I just want to remind you that you have a $200,000 dollar commitment of
new money for the City Park for Riverside Festival Theatre. We have got
$360,000 of new money, new debt for this. We are approaching $600,000
in new expense-
Kubby: With Mormon Trek not being on the list.
Lehman: That is fight.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 44
Atkins: With Mormon Trek and a number of other..
Norton: We understand that, but that- you have got to put those- you've got to look
at all of them I agree with you. That is why I say you need this early.
Atkins: You as a Council adopted a 4 year $40 million plat.
Champion: But it is only a plat- it can be changed.
Atkins: I understand that Connie but my point is that the new Council members
Elect need to listen to this because clearly something else will have to go.
Champion: Of course.
Atkins: If you are going to stay with that policy.
Lehman: You say of course and that is right except what? You know, we are sitting
here spending...
Champion: I am not going through the list right now.
Lehman: No, no. I know. But it would be more appropriate when we are decided
to do this to look at the list and say, and obviously we don't have the time
or we don't feel we have the time, to sit down and do it in an orderly
fashion saying "Okay, this project can wait till the following year".
Instead, we are saying "Go with it, we will figure out later". We are
jumping and we will see where we will land later.
Kubby: I mean, it seems like a more- another approach to this would be to say this
is another item that many people in the community think is an important
thing and to put it in the hopper during your CIP discussion to look at all
of the projects at once to look at what all of the community needs and
create priorities and have discussion and persuade each other.
Champion: Karen, if we- we need to. I mean, I think what you are saying is right.
Nobody can argue with what you are saying but I think if there is any
possibility of getting those funds we need to commit ourselves to this now.
We always have a prerogative if we can't find the money not to do it. We
always have that prerogative.
Kubby: Except, you do in a theoretical sense, but once you have said "yes" here
tonight it is very difficult politically especially on issues such as this,
senior services and accessibility issues to then retract your decision.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 45
Champion: Well, I won't retract my decision once they ### can't find the money. But
this is something I think is foolish not to do this now.
Vanderhoef: The additional cost that happens later is the reason I will go ahead with it
now.
Thornberry: ...other things that...it is your decision...
Norton: Nothing has to be done now. It doesn't have to be done now or in the
next- does it have to be started or committed in 2000 or can it- I mean, we
are talking about putting in the proper infrastructure but maybe the
implementation of this should be put off a year while we get our wits
together about financing.
Lehman:
Vanderhoef: ...and it actually comes out in the financing in probably 2001 or 2002.
Norton: Yeah, but wouldn't that leave us time between now and then, rather than
rush the judgement here because we have got other things coming even
tonight.
Kubby: If that is the case with the scheduling then we shouldn't be applying for 01
CDBG monies.
Norton: Not this year.
Kubby: That is not fair to those other projects. You are not supposed to hold that
money over unless there has been a delay, so if the actual ....
Vanderhoef: And there is design monies needed in the first year and build monies-
Kubby: Well then you should have applied for the design monies...
Norton: Well, let's figure- we never talked about doing this right off the bat folks.
I think we've got to be careful.
Lehman: Well, are you saying-
Thornberry: If they could move that beam over there like you say and not have to move
a beam to do it a year from now that is what should be done.
Kubby: Yeah.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 46
Thornberry: I mean you shouldn't move that beam- if it shouldn't be there, if you want
to do this a year or two or three from now. But, make it ready to go and
wait till budget session. Wait till budget time to see what you are not
going to do-
Norton: Where this jumps out.
Thornberry: That is right.
Champion: The problem that I have with that is this ramp is going to be built. And it
is going to one day open. And I think it is a disservice to the Senior
Center if we are going to do this kind of a connection not to have it open
at the same time and to make- I think it is a real plus for the Senior Center
to have this ramp. I think it will increase the use of the Senior Center by
citizens because parking and accessibility have been a terrible problem.
And their tax money is also paying for this ramp. And I think it is just
foolish not to do it right, between doing it halfway. It wouldn't be fight
later. It never is.
Miller: Well, an abundance of parking does no good if there is no access to it.
Champion: Right.
7: What is that?
Miller: An abundance of parking does the seniors no good if there is not easy
access to it.
Norton: Well, you have the same access you have now.
Champion: No.
Miller: No, that is not true.
Norton: It is not?
Miller: No.
Norton: You have to come up and down stairs and walk across. It seems you have
to walk now.
Thornberry: What you are saying is that you don't have connected covered parking
now?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 47
Norton: Right.
Thomb erry: Is that what you are saying?
Miller: Like when there was still the parking area which is not there anymore.
Thornberry: That is right. Yeah.
Miller: Yeah. When there was that area to park which isn't there anymore. Now
they are parking- the seniors will park at Chauncey Swan.
Thornberry: Yeah. No, I- before the construction started.
Lehman: Unless one of the four people changes their mind we proceed.
Norton: I want to be careful here because I think we have got- I would like to get
more understanding of the money. I don't know whether we need to go
forward fight now. I was willing to defer myself.
Lehman: Well, now we are down to three who want to move forward right now.
Norton: Three and three and one.
Honohan: Does it make any difference that the handicap parking in the ramp-
Dilkes: You will have to come to the mic Jay. You have to come to the mic.
Honohan: I always forget the mic. Does it make any difference that the handicap
parking is going to be on the third floor as presently planned?
Lehman: Is that fight next to an elevator?
Honohan: Yeah, but they will have to go from there and then around the front.
Kubby: It is up to you Dee Norton, to decide.
Norton: It is up to Ernie too.
Lehman: No it's not because I don't think that we should proceed with it until we
have a little better plan than this. I don't think that we know exactly what
we are doing here.
Atkins: Ernie, am I supposed to prepare a CDBG application?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 48
Lehman: We are trying-
Kubby: We are trying to figure that out.
Lehman: Mr. Norton is trying to decide.
Atkins: Thank you, okay.
Norton: Well, we can always stop it I guess. I will go- I will stay where I was.
Lehman: Yes, you are supposed to proceed. We are going to take five minutes.
Thornberry: Dee, are you sure?
Englert Theatre Update
Lehman: Okay, Karin. You are going to do an update on Englert Theatre.
Franklin: Okay. Basically this is just to let you know that there is a group of people
in town, which you have probably already heard about in the newspapers,
that is approaching the family who has a purchase agreement for the
purchase of the Englert Theatre to see about acquiring the theater for a
community space that would be basically operated by a nonprofit
organization. And, as part of the acquisition of this property, obviously it
is going to take a little bit of money and is going to take some fund-raising
and I think that you should all expect, as we are talking about money, that
there will be a request that will come to the City Council to participate in
the acquisition of this property for the benefit of the community.
Lehman: Can we get CDBG on that?
Franklin: Oh sure. If we can put some homeless people in it.
Lehman: Yeah, it is a possibility.
Franklin: At this point I had hoped that we might have some numbers to talk about
tonight. We don't have numbers to talk about tonight and so this is kind
of a heads up to you. I think the group would appreciate some indication
from the Council if there is an interest on the part of the City in
participating in this. I have been part of their meetings. I obviously
cannot speak for you as to whether you would be interested in this are not.
And I guess if anybody wants pipe up with their feelings about it. So pipe.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 49
Champion: I can't make a decision about that until I know what we are talking about
and what the possibilities are.
Franklin: Sure.
Champion: It is just talking off the wall and I tend to try not to do that.
Lehman: We just spent $358,000 for something we didn't know anything about.
Norton: We haven't spent $358,000 yet.
Champion: We did know about it.
Franklin: Well, there is an understanding that you don't have the details of this now
and then to do have to consider this in the context of all of your other
Capital projects. And I guess it is more a matter of whether- if there is
some sympathy for this.
Norton: Well, can time be bought for that purpose? You know, since I am
spending money loosely tonight I am ready, but can we- is there time to
consider this more carefully?
Franklin: Oh, certainly.
Norton: To hold the property-
Franklin: And the concept is one of a challenge grant kind of concept in which the
City would say that there is a certain amount of money that the City would
potentially be willing to put in but not until the private sector dollar for
was raised would the public sector dollar be put in. And the discussion so
far has always been about capital and not operating.
Lehman: Karin, I think it would be very difficult for Council not to respond
positively to a really strong effort on the part of the community both from
an emotional sort of support and a financial support. But I do believe,
from my perspective, there would have to be a substantial financial
support from the community to show their interest before I would be
interested in the City pardoning it.
Kubby: Yeah, and this is an issue that really has big effects for many populations
of people and that is one reason why I would be interested in hearing
whatever the next step is. That is what my interest is.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 50
Vanderhoef: How, I guess for me, to see how this could be self-funding operationally is
my biggest question.
Franklin: Well, just as you asked Arts Iowa City to come up with a business plan,
obviously this kind of thing, I think, that that would be appropriate in this
case also. That there is some kind of business plan as to how this would
play out.
Vanderhoef: That is my biggest concern. Capital is always important but to put Capital
dollars into something that may disappear in a year or two because the
plan can't become self-supporting, and then the next step always seems to
me is that they will come back to us and ask for some general fund dollars.
And those are not available at all in my estimation in this point in time.
Franklin: Emie, a Councilor Elect would like to ask-
Lehman: Yes.
Kanner: Karin, I guess what I would like to see from you or from the group that is
proposing is comparison of other cities that have supported these kinds of
projects. Of similar sizes perhaps. I know these purchases of theatres by
nonprofit groups has happened all over and I was wondering if we could
get some of that. And then the other thing maybe from the group that is
putting the business plan together is to ask questions of how will it attract
seniors perhaps. You know, and how we could work with maybe the
Senior Center and organizations- city organizations like that.
Vanderhoef: Who the users of this facility would be.
Kanner: Yeah, and how we would attract seniors and low-income folks beyond
other folks.
Norton: And school groups.
Kanner: And school groups.
Champion: The senior band could perform.
Lehman: Thank you Steve. All right Karin, I think there is interest in pursuing it
definitely. But I think there is more questions than there are answers right
now.
Franklin: Okay. Thanks.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 51
Norton: Am I to understand that building under no circumstances could be used to
show film?
Franklin: No, it is for first run films. I think, I thought a 3 Stooges Festival would
be appropriate.
Norton: Yeah. That would be okay.
Vanderhoef: Not 77
Champion: Foreign films.
Norton: In others words it is not all-
Franklin: No, it is just so that it doesn't compete with the films that Central States
shows. That was one of the-
Norton: Okay. Fine. Will you check out Palo Alto because I did hear the story
that Palo Alto had a theatre of this sort downtown. I don't know whether
it was more than film, it may be just film but I now understand it is a
bookstore.
Lehman: All right, proceed with it Karin.
Woodson: So far we have found about 25 or 30 facilities that mostly are actually
smaller sized than this and we are getting information on their operating
budgets and their, you know, what their costs are for on-going.
Lehman: And that is the sort of thing we will look at when we come back.
Franklin: Darryl Woodson.
Woodson: Darryl Woodson, I am sorry.
Lehman: Okay. Thanks Karin.
Norton: Thank you.
City. Steps
Lehman: City Steps.
Nasby: It is almost appropriate we are having a CDBG discussion at City Steps
time this evening. In your Council packet there was a fairly brief memo
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 52
from me outlining some of the changes in City Steps and just for your and
the public's information: City Steps is our five year plan for housing, jobs
and services for low-income persons and it is basically the allocation of
CDBG and home funds. We had four public meetings scattered through
out the community, had pretty good participation, had a lot of good ideas,
and I know that there were a number of the Councilors and Councilors
Elect there. The comments in their raw form and the tenants list are in the
back of the City Steps document that you have received. At this time if
you have any question I'd be happy to answer them.
Kubby: I think I will save mine for the public hearing so that they are not
repetitive and boring.
Nasby: Okay. I mean, is there anything that we need to do research on?
Kubby: No.
Nasby: Okay. I just wanted to make sure.
Norton: Is housing choice for #### in section 87
Nasby: Housing choice for #### is section 8, yes. Right. They rolled them
together and had a new name.
Lehman: Thank you.
Nasby: Okay. Thank you.
Oakland Cemetery/Hickory Hill Park
Lehman: Oakland Cemetery.
Atkins: While Terry is stepping to the microphone Ernie, the Council have asked
that this item be placed on the agenda. What I would like Terry to do first
thing is explain to you what we believe to be the current policy and then
sort of take it from there.
Kubby: I thought that we had directed that this go to Parks and Rec because we
knew it had to go there anyway before we could make a decision?
Atkins: Yes you did. But at the last meeting you said bring it back to you. That is
what I understood, that is why I put it back on.
Kubby: It will just have to go back to Parks and Rec.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 53
Lehman: Well, I guess I don't know quite why- well, go ahead Terry and then we
will get back into that issue.
Trueblood: Want it where I can see it too. There we go. I thought first- well first of
all, let me start by saying that as you recall, and we have been dealing with
this issue for several years, and it was decided last year that we should
proceed with expansion of Oakland Cemetery over into what had been
used as Hickory Hill Park for many years. You had originally directed us
to come back with three conceptual plans, one of which to be what was
called a thirty year plan. [To] have enough burial spaces to last us for 30
years. Another one was a 10 acre plan. What we could do with 10 acres
out of this 40 acres of Galoucher property. And the third one was what
kind of plan would it be if we were to utilize as many acres as possible
within the 40 acres? And when the consultant came back they basically
said there is not that much difference between the 10 acre plan and the 40
acre plan because the, in their opinion, you wouldn't use much more than
10 acres to develop the cemetery. During the process of all of this, you
know, was discussed at one point, after the go ahead to do phase one- a
five phase plan was presented to us and it was discussed at one point
whether or not the remaining acreage should be dedicated park land. The-
I was directed to find out from the family heirs how they felt about that.
And while they felt strongly that the cemetery should be expanded into the
park property they also had no problem with it being utilized as park land.
However, they expressed the opinion that they did not feel that it should
be dedicated park land. And so that is where we left it at that time, but
also left it that at some future date you might want to consider some
formal action to dedicate the remaining acreage as park land. To give you
a little perspective I brought this drawing which was, it is a couple of
years old, of the conceptual trails plan which has not been implemented,
but, in Hickory Hill park- so this, the outline of what has been utilized as
park land basically goes all the way up around there out to First Avenue
and back around. This dotted gray area right there represents the 40 acres
of Galoucher property that was purchased for cemetery land back in 1919
or somewhere pre- 1920' s anyway.
Norton: You said purchased for cemetery land?
Lehman: That is right.
(changed tapes)
Atkins: .... but in the resolution of the Council it was that way.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 54
Trueblood: So anyway, Oakland Cemetery sits over on this side of the picture. This, I
am sure you will recall seeing, this was the phased plan that was put
together by the consultants and then what you directed us to do, about last
April, was phase 1 or area 1. Basically this light green area right in
through here. That takes up about 3 or 4 acres of property that has been
used as park property, keeping in mind that this portion fight down here
was already in what I call "Cemetery proper". It was that gully in the
southeast comer of the cemetery that was mowed but was too steep of a
slope for burials. So basically, from a point right here on up around here,
is the area that is being developed now and is nearing completion. At that
time through our budgeting process it was just determined that we would
go ahead with phase one as you may recall. And, we had talked at that
time in numbers that just doing phase one would allow us expansion in
terms of years. We had talked of 50 plus years of burial spaces in terms of
sales. That is not quite as high now, you'll recall in the budgeting process
we eliminated the mausoleum as a cost-saving measure. And so that
reduced the burial life- which is a contradiction in terms I realize.
Lehman: I hope so.
Trueblood: By about 5 ½ - 6 years. And then as development proceeded or plans
proceeded, you know, and as our cemetery crew got more involved there
were some areas that needed spaced out a little bit and whatever. But we
are still talking 45 years or so of lot sale life within the cemetery. So,
basically the question as I understand it is just whether or not to dedicate
the remaining acreage as park land as opposed to just simply having it
continued as designated for park use. This, by the way there is- there has
been talk I know of 4 acres here and another 6 acres here and so forth-
those numbers may not be exact so I would just caution you about that.
As a matter-of-fact to scale this out this right down in here is- it is about
the area that wasn't cemetery- it is a little over 11 acres and this is about
1.3 acres. So are really talking maybe 12 ½ acres total. As a possibility
for all phases. You will recall that it also was discussed that, you know,
we- Pardon me?
Champion: 12 acres?
Treeblood: About 12 acres. Give or take, yeah. Including that portion that was
already cemetery there. So, now keeping in mind that you had also
indicated at the time that, you know, we are looking 40, 45, 50 years down
the road, you know, we may never see phase 2 implemented. And, so that
is for somebody to decide 40 years from now. But, in the meantime, as I
understand the question, would be whether or not to set this aside, if you
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 55
will, for cemetery use. It is already set aside for that but whether or not to
dedicate the remaining 28, 30 acres along there as parkland.
Lehman: Terry, did we set stones at the perimeter of this? My understanding was
that we were going to set-
Trueblood: We still plan to do that.
Lehman: Okay. As part of that master plan there would be- the area would be
delineated definitely so that we would that portion that was part of the
master plan. And that will be done you say?
Trueblood: That is correct.
O'Donnell: Terry, how many acres are dedicated to Hickory Hill park right now?
Trueblood: Dedicated park land we have about 58 acres.
O'Donnell: Okay.
Champion: And does that include that kind ofwastewater thing?
Trueblood: No.
Champion: That is the other 20?
Trueblood: No, there is another 90 acres that is storm water management area that is
utilized as park land. See, the total- up until this small project here
started- the total being used as park land was about 190 acres. But, 90 of
that was storm water management, 40 of it was cemetery.
O'Donnell: See, that is exactly what I was talking about several weeks back. This is
all designated park use. I am talking [about] reaching some sort of a
compromise and respecting the wishes of the Galoucher heirs by
dedicating 30 acres of this to the park right now, right? Designating the
rest of this as park use, for park use, and it is going to last 50 years. And
who knows what is going to happen in 50 years?
Norton: I will go with that one.
O'Donnell: I mean-
Lehman: Anybody got a problem with that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 56
Champion: No.
Thornberry: And it is delineated by those stones that we were talking about.
Norton: ...designate 6 and the 4 is done.
O'Donnell: So that even- it is a wonderful compromise.
Thornberry: Where that property was. What it was for.
Champion: Right.
Kubby: I think that we need more process than a conversation at an informal to say
"Yes we are going to do that". I think we have an obligation to first go to
the Park and Recreations commission and say this is what Council- a
majority of Council- is thinking about. What do you say? And then
because it has been such a hot topic from many perspectives I think it
owes kind of a public discussion during a regular meeting, not a public
hearing, but a public discussion just to say this is the proposal and we need
to have public input about whether this is, you know, seen as a
compromise or something you feel about it.
Lehman: I guess my only thought is that we voted, as I recall, 7-0 to do the master
plan. That included the area that we see right up there. I don't know, we
didn't change the designation of the portion of this property that was for
cemetery use but I think it was pretty obvious, at least it was to me, that
this was as far as this Council or hopefully any Council would ever go into
that area and this was the extent of that that cemetery would ever go.
Champion: Do you think there will be...?
(several talking)
?: How many acres are we discussing?
Lehman: 10.
O'Donnell: That is what I thought too.
Lehman: Yeah, I think it is.
Norton: We need to vote on a master plan to go with the master plan- not a vote to
see that 6 beyond the 4 which we did act on, to see that actually
developed. See the plan in case that turned out. In other words, in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 57
principle one could go back now and dedicate all of the remaining 36
acres. I would be willing to go along with dedicating 30 and designating
6.
O'Donnell: We have another option. Let's leave it like it is and leave it all designated
and-
Norton: I would rather see some of it dedicated.
O'Donnell: I would too.
Norton: But I would rather see all 36 dedicated personally but I would be willing
to go designated and dedicated- 6. But whether we should do it now or
whether we should wait- I thought people pretty well understood this
already Karen.
Champion: Right.
Vanderhoef: I did too.
O'Donnell: I did too.
Vanderhoef: And the family though still would prefer we didn't dedicate it.
Trueblood: Well, I assume that is what they still prefer.
Kubby: But if you think that they-.
O'Donnell: Are we legally bound to that?
Kubby: I am sorry Mike.
O'Donnell: We aren't legally bound to that?
Vanderhoef: No.
Norton: No.
Vanderhoef: Either way, and as long as it being used as park land, whether that is
dedicated or not dedicated, I don't know that it makes a whole lot of
difference.
Lehman: Is there any interest in doing anything?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 58
Champion: Yes. I am interested in- dedicating-
Norton: Dedicating 30.
Champion: All of the rest the land to Hickory Hill park.
O'Donnell: Not all of it.
Lehman: All of it outside of these areas.
Champion: Right, because was-
Vanderhoef: The master plan.
Champion: In 50 years somebody else will make that decision about that.
Norton: Designate 6.
O'Donnell: Or in 50 years somebody will make the decision about what happens to us.
Dilkes: No.
Lehman: All right. Is that what we want to do?
Dilkes: Can I just interject for a minute?
Lehman: Yes.
Dilkes: Dee is correct in- my opinion is that there is no legal impediment to you
dedicating it as Hickory- as park. And secondly, you need to understand
that a dedication is not a permanent thing. That that can be changed by
future Council with- there is one exception if there is property damage as a
result of reliance on the use. And I don't know what arguments might be
made there but it is certainly something that can be changed.
O'Donnell: But we were told from the inception of this that only 10 acres would ever
be suitable for cemetery ground. The rest would was ravines and hilly and
why not just- I can't imagine a future Council wanting to change this. But
at least this gives us some direction on it.
Norton: I would go with it but I can imagine a future Council could even go
beyond the 4 acres that-
O'Donnell: Then they can have it in 50 years.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 59
Norton: They could do it but we could express our sentiment that-
O'Donnell: If I looked at this in 40 years Dee, and these trees are more mature, then I
am going to have more of a difficult time using it for cemetery expansion.
Lehman: You are going to be really old.
Norton: I would like to see us express our-
Lehman: Do we want to designate- dedicate- the 29 or 320 acres to park land and
designate the remaining 67
Kubby: Not without some kind of process through our commission system that is
in charge of-
Norton: You mean check with the commission?
Lehman: We can check with them but I think has been pretty well hatching out very
nicely.
Kubby: Well, I think that there is a lot more- there are different feelings that aren't
being expressed because- I think that we owe a public discussion on this
issue.
Champion: Well I don't...
Kubby: Because so many people have had strong feelings on many sides of this.
Lehman: I agree Karen but that public discussion took place very very thoroughly 2
years ago.
Champion: Right.
Lehman: We talked about this when we decided to do this master plan as opposed to
the whole thing or a portion of it. There was a lot of public discussion. I
don't know why we would rehash it all out.
Champion: I don't think we need to rehash it.
Thornberry: Is that when we went over to the Rec Center and had that big meeting over
there with the combined Rec, you know?
Trueblood: That your start of it, yeah.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 60
Norton: That was before we had the master plan in front of us, yeah.
Thomberry: Right. And if we are taking 3 acres now and there were another 8 acres of
the 10 that were in this plan, fight? I felt we went over that pretty well
too.
Lehman: I don't have any problem with Parks and Rec looking at it. But do we
want to proceed?
Champion: Yes.
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Kubby: No.
Lehman: All fight. Where do we go? Send it to Parks and Recs.?
Atkins: It is your call.
Lehman: It is the intention of the Council to, at this point, pending I suppose the
recommendation of Park and Rec, to dedicate that portion of the property
not included in the master plan for, to- as park land?
Champion: Correct.
Lehman: And to-
Atkins: Excuse me- just before you finish that thought. Do you wish to have a
recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission?
Kubby: Yes.
Champion: Yes, but we want to tell them what we are thinking about and then they
call-
Atkins: Then you need- what you are going to do then is you are going to
characterize what you all think and send that to the commission?
Champion: Uh-huh.
Lehman: For their-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 61
Arkins: I would think that after they finish their recommendation you would
actually want to adopt this policy be resolution or motion or something.
Dilkes: A dedication-
Atkins:
Dilkes: I am sorry- a dedication is a formal- by the site of act you have to do it-
O'Donnell: I don't believe that anybody sitting here wants the cemetery to expand
beyond these boundaries.
Thornberry: Even though our previous Council bought the land and designated it as
such. So what we are doing is- what we are contemplating doing is
overwriting previous Cotmcil's wishes that the property be purchased for
cemetery land, all 40 acres. And what we are doing now is saying "well,
we don't think we want- we need all 40 acres. All we need is 10 acres".
Norton: At the most.
Lehman: Right.
Thomberry: And so what we are doing is then dedicating the other 30 acres for park
land?
O'Donnell: I am not saying that at all. I am saying that we have been told by the
experts that only 10 acres or approximately are ever going to be acceptable
for cemetery usage. And I want it clear that I don't want this expanded- I
believe that we have to set the boundary. This is the park, this is
cemetery. Use of cemetery- you have 6 acres here you can use for the
next 30 or 50 years.
Thornberry: No, Mike I agree with you. I am just saying- you are saying the reason
why, I am just saying on the big picture what we intend to do is-
Lehman: Contrary to another Council.
Thornberry: Contrary to a previous Council for one reason or another.
Norton: So that is all fight.
Champion: Well I certainly hope that in 20 years somebody looks at what decisions
we make and said we are changing those.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 62
(several talking)
Vanderhoef: What I see in the big picture is that if we dedicate it, then Parks and
Recreation can go ahead and plan their park, trail or whatever they chose
to do as park and they won't impeding on "land" that is still-
Champion:
Norton: What would be the timing if this goes back to P&Z or we ask them to
review this? If it goes back to Park and Rec? How long is it going to be
before we get it back?
Trueblood: They meet on the second Wednesday. I think it is the 10th of December.
Lehman: It will be January or February.
Norton: So this is our last chance to-
Lehman: Terry, let me ask you this: has the fact that this park property then - the
fact that it was purchased for cemetery land umpteen years ago ever had
any effect on the way that the Parks and Recreation commission treated
this property?
Trueblood: No.
Lehman: I didn't think so. So it has nothing to do with the way that improvements
would be made to the property? In fact, those improvements would have
been made any ways. Because it was - it has been used as park land.
Trueblood: I would say that is correct, yes.
Vanderhoef: The only thing that I see in the future is for them to incorporate it into the
whole plan of the park. And they are getting ready to do a large park
assessment and plan as I understand it. Is that right?
Norton: It was formally designated in 1965.
Thomb erry: What I would probably rather do, and I agree that it won't be used as
cemetery land and it can't be because of the undulations of the land and
this and that. And I have no problem with that. What I would like to do
though is designate that other, the rest of the 10 acres- we have used three
or whatever of the 10- the other 6/7 whatever is left of that 10 acres and
designate that as now, as cemetery land.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 63
Champion: It is.
Vanderhoef: It is. It already is.
Thornberry: That is what we are doing?
Kubby: That is what Mike suggested.
Thomberry: And- it is not designated it is just available.
Kubby: And it is cemetery.
Thornberry: To designate that as cemetery land or I mean plat it whatever- just put the
stones there or whatever to make sure that everybody knows that this is
cemetery land. The rest of- the other part of-
O'Donnell: That they can use it for the next 50 years.
Dilkes: I think that-
Thornberry: Then designate the rest of it as park land.
Norton: Dedicate it.
Thomberry: I am not sure about dedicating due to the fact that it was purchased
originally for cemetery land and just designate it as park land. Why not?
O'Donnell: Because there is no permanency there.
Norton: That is fight. Better to dedicate it.
Kubby: But legally there is no permanency either way.
Lehman: No permanency period.
Kubby: But it creates a-
O'Donnell: ...established kinds of trails and so forth. I think it gives Parks and Rec
something to work with. They know that cemetery will not expand
beyond this point.
Lehman: Is this the thing we are trying to say: that it's the intention of this Council
to see to it that cemetery never expands beyond the section that has been
included in the master plan?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 64
O'Donnell: I don't think it is feasible.
Lehman: Is that our intention?
Vanderhoef: That is it.
Lehman: Then why don't we say that and dedicate the battles for the ...
(several talking)
Lehman: Get it to P&Z.
Dolezal: Why don't you dedicate both ?
Kubby: I think that there are a lot of people in the community who would like to
have more dedicated as park land.
Champion: That would be 50 years from now. Or 30 years from now, or...
O'Donnell: They can do that in 50 years.
Lehman: I think it would be fair to send it back to the Parks and Recreation
commission. I believe the majority of the Council would indicate that the
area covered by the master plan is intended at some point in time to be
used as cemetery property. Any thing outside of that is not to be- let them
debate it and come back to us.
Trueblood: There is just one thing that I think- only one thing that I am not clear on.
Is your intention to formally dedicate both? This portion as cemetery and
the remainder as park land?
Lehman: That would be my preference.
Champion: I don't care about-
Dilkes: I am confused too because I have heard two different things. I have heard-
I have heard dedicate the remainder of this area as cemetery and dedicate
the rest as park land. And then I have heard designate the rest as park land
and designate the rest of this area as park land which merely means it can
be used as park land.
Norton: That is my advice. Yes, and that should be understood.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 65
Dilkes: But those are two very different things.
Champion: What you just said.
Dilkes: You want the first or the-
O'Donnell: That is what I said earlier.
Dilkes: -last.
Lehman: That is tight, that is what you said.
O'Donnell: And I think that is reaching a very equitable compromise. It lets Parks and
Rec at least know where they stand and we have room for expansion. If
we ever do it will be 50 years down the road and who knows.
Norton: So dedicate and designate, tight?
Lehman: All tight. Dedicate and designate. Karen?
Kubby: I still want to see if there are people interested in- when this comes back
from Parks and Rec depending on what their recommendation is and the
continued conversation if it gets to a resolution that we hold a public
discussion.
Lehman: If it is on the agenda it will be available for public discussion.
Kubby: Right, but that is different than advertising that there will be a public
discussion.
Champion: There is always public discussion.
Norton: You mean you want to schedule a public heating?
Vanderho ef: A public hearing at the time the resolution-
Kubby: It is not officially a public heating but we usually tend to call those things
to say that we know there is community interest in this- it is not legally a
public hearing but we are deciding to hold a public discussion. We have
done that on multiple issues.
Norton: Public discussion, yeah.
O'Donnell: We have done that on this. Two years ago.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transctiption of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 66
Kubby: To say that this is a very specific resolution and that there are people out
there, I am telling you right now on many sides, who will have something
to say. I mean, you might- I mean, and people's views change over time
too.
Norton: Including ours.
Kubby: When you have a specific proposal in front of you.
Norton: Well, if it is going back to Parks and tell them our sentiment and ask them
to review this and come back to us it is going to be after Christmas before
this is here, fight? And that is when you can decide whether to set up a
public hearing or a public discussion if you wish.
Lehman: Right. Take it back to them.
? Do you know what we want?
Kubby: I think that should be a goal next year- to somehow figure out- because
this is really becoming recurrent that staff is unsure about what we have
decided.
Lehman: No, I think that is right Karen but I think, at least from my perspective, I
thought this was something that we really pretty well decided 2 years ago.
I don't know what the-
Thornberry: Yeah, we did. We discussed it very thoroughly.
Appointments to Board and Commissions
Lehman: Appointment to Boards and Commissions.
Norton: Just a minute now Ernie. Let me get my notes.
Lehman: All right. Getting in a hurry here-
Norton: Just a second.
Kubby: In your pile there are three more-
Lehman: Yes.
Norton: Has everybody read the new ones?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 67
Vanderhoef: No, I have not read all of the new ones.
Lehman: The Board of Adjustment, there is one applicant.
Norton: I like that. That Dieter?
Lehman: Keitel. Dennis Keitel.
Norton: What is his name? Keitel?
Lehman: Do we have a second to his-?
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Second. Do we all go along with that?
Kubby: Yeah. As long as he understands that there would be any potential on that
particular issue he would have to sacrifice-
Norton: I want to say on that one that I hate to see Carlson step down. He has been
such a rock in that Board of Adjustments let me tell you.
Lehman: Okay. Board of Appeals we have to re-
Kubby: Oh no, he stepped down because of a conflict.
Lehman: Board of Appeals we will re-advertise. Human Rights Commission- there
are several applicants.
Vanderhoef: And I haven't read the 2 new ones.
Thornberry: Human Rights- ##~ I talked to and what she said was right. She talked to
Dean Thomberry about this commission and he told me what a great
learning experience it would be. This gal is super. She was- she is
working her way out of a very difficult situation. She is a single parent.
And she has got a- well, you can read her application.
Norton: Right. We read it. We have got people on there that are coming- higher
terms that ought to be re-appointed according to my thought.
Kubby: I think that all three people- if they had served maybe two full terms but
then you want to look at new folks.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 68
Thomberry: This is getting a person that hasn't applied to anything before trying to get
into the mainstream.
Norton: Well, we-
Thomberry: I am just saying she 's giving it a shot-
O'Donnell: Are you nominating her?
Thornberry: I am. I definitely am not nominating her. She is really working her-
Karr: I am sorry- who was it Dean?
Champion: Tammy Spies.
Thornberry: Tammy Spies.
Karr: Thank you.
Champion: Karen, since I don't have my computer on refresh me about the people
who are already on.
Kubby: There is three vacancies. One is Jan Warren who has served one full term.
Do you need information about her?
Lehman: She has re-applied.
Champion: No, I just-
Kubby: And she is re-applying. Charles Major who has served an unexpired term
and Mettie Thomopulos who has served an unexpired term.
Champion: I think the two people who are filling unexpired terms should get back on.
Kubby: Jan Warren has been a very productive and consistently active member of
the commission and I just- not to- it is not saying anything against other
applicants but Jan has worked hard and it would be a loss for the
commission I think.
Champion: And she is the one who has been on for one term?
Vanderhoef: The one with one term, yeah.
Champion: I think I have to go with those two.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 69
Norton: You could appoint Jan Warren and Charlie and re-appoint Charlie at the
#### if you want to get #### on then Mettie would maybe not be re-
appointed even though she is on the commission 2 years. I don't know.
Thomberry: I am just saying giving a person an opportunity to- who is really working
her way out of a situation that is really- she has now got a house instead of
an apartment.
Norton: That may or may not be-
Champion: ...for two terms then I would be perfectly willing not to re-appoint them
but I think 2 terms is the minimum that you should appointed.
Vanderhoef: I agree with that Connie. And I would like to invite some of these other
folks who have applied for this commission to look at some of our other
commissions because there certainly can be an offer in other places.
Champion: She sounds like an ideal person-
Norton: There would be more tumover here too Dean. I mean, I'd tell everybody
that you talk to that there is going to be plenty of opportunities both here
and other places. It is more tumover than you think. If we re-appoint all
of them, but- you think we need to re-appoint the ones?
Kubby: We have a whole bunch coming up too, actually. HCDC and some other-
I can't remember what they all are.
Vanderhoef: HCDC would be another spot for this lady.
Lehman: What is your pleasure folks?
Norton: I'd go with Jan Warren-
Thornberry: I'd like to give Tammy a shot, I really would. I think we deserve to give
some of these people a-
Norton: Do you just want to do one at a time Dean? Or get a package together?
Lehman: Well, okay. How about start-
Thornberry: She is the only one that I know-
Kubby: There are these three people-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 70
O'Donnell: Dean already nominated Tammy...
Lehman: All right we have got 2 peoples for Spies. Is there a third who would want
to go with Spies? All fight.
Kubby: I nominate Jan, Charlie and Mettie.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Are there four people who want to go with that? Okay. That one is done.
Parks and Recreation Commission.
Vanderhoef: Allen Stroh should be re-appointed.
Norton: Allen Stroh should certainly be re-appointed. He has been a rock on that.
And what, Moxley?
Lehman: Moxley. I would- Moxley and Stroh, is that?
Vanderhoef: Dennis was appointed up there in Board of Adjustments so we only have
the two.
Kubby: That sounds good.
Norton: That is right.
Lehman: All right. Senior Center Commission.
Vanderhoef: I would like to look at Lori Benz and Charity Rowley.
Norton: I' 11 second that.
Champion: I'll second that.
Lehman: All fight. Are there four for those?
Kubby: I don't have any objections to that.
Norton: They are really good. Lori represents the younger ages.
Lehman: All right. Lori and Charity are done. All fight, City Council Information.
Council Time
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 71
Kubby: I just had one thing tonight and that is that- I need to switch places in my
computer- I have my question there. If someone has something else, go
ahead.
Lehman: I have one thing that I am going to bring up tomorrow night because I
think it should be done at the public meeting, but I believe there are a
number of questions relative to the options for the Library that staff has
had an opportunity to look at and will have a better opportunity by the first
meeting in December. If at all possible I would like for this Council, with
the concurrence of the new Council which have all agreed, that either of
those options is acceptable. I would like us to give the Library Board an
indication of which of those two options that we prefer so that their
architect can proceed with their work. I think it is important at the same
time to indicate this is not an endorsement or anything else- it is just
saying that of these two options this is the one that we prefer. So, if we
have the answers that we feel we need, at the next Council meeting, I
would like us to...I would like us to give the Library Board an indication
of what direction they should go.
Norton: And we are to give Steve questions then?
Lehman: Whatever questions we have should go to City staff and Steve already has
a number of them.
Norton: I will give you some tomorrow.
Lehman: Yeah. If we are not comfortable at that meeting that is fine.
Champion: I am very comfortable.
Lehman: Okay. Is that okay with everyone?
Vanderhoef: That is fine.
Champion: That is fine.
Lehman: Okay. I am sorry- what do you have Karen?
Kubby: Oh- it was about the PATV stuff. Is the arrangement of monthly
payments- is that the thing they are agreeable too?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 72
Helling: They are agreeable to some periodic disbursement. We haven't talked yet
about specifically what we will put in the agreement but monthly or twice
a month or something like that.
Kubby: Quarterly.
Helling: That allows them to have their money invested earning interest...
Kubby: Okay, so they are not having a problem with a negative reaction to not
having that control?
Helling: Not to my knowledge.
Kubby: Thanks. That is all I have.
Norton: It still looks like some head-knocking is in order in that domain.
Champion: Right.
Norton: Okay. Enough said.
Vanderhoef: I will second it.
Lehman: Anybody else for Council time?
Champion: I have two things but I can't remember what they both were now. But one
was somebody called, and I don't mean that I got a ton of phone calls- one
person called, about the trucks going down on First Avenue and was Scott
Boulevard supposed to be the designated truck route?
Lehman: Yes.
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Norton: Yes.
Champion: Do we have signs up that say that?
Norton: Well it is not there yet.
Champion: Okay.
Atkins: Do you mean down like where the old Hy-Vee used to be that they-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 73
Champion: Yes.
Atkins: That occasionally occurs and perhaps a track will get lost. I don't- I really
think that most of the truckers tend to be really good about sticking to
Scott Boulevard but there is a time of day- and I think is ####- we could
arrange a ### to alert the traffic.
Champion: Okay.
Atkins: ### is a trucking company. You could try that information ....
Vanderhoef: The truck comes into Dragtown and what I am not quite clear about-
whether it then continues down to the Hy-Vee store.
Atkins: My impression is that because Dragtown and Hy-Vee are one in the same
company I suspect that they could drop off at Drugtown and go down to
the Hy-Vee..
Vanderhoef: And originally we had asked them that they [make] deliveries to the new
Hy-Vee store and come off Hwy 6 and come noah on First Avenue up to
the Muscatine Comer and not hit that residential area in between.
Atkins: I think occasionally Drugtown is ....
Champion:
Atkins: If you check that I will give them a call.
Kubby: It is the middle of the night thing my neighbor had this great-
Vanderhoef: I remember that.
Champion: The other thing I had is- can't call me- one phone call about dogs running
loose in Hickory Hill Park. Have we talked about some kind of bike
patrol or something? I mean, I know it is impossible but- to watch that
whole park all of the time.
Kubby: We decided not to do the bike thing because you're not supposed to have
wheeled vehicles in the park and it is hard to have the authority people-
the person in authority on a bike when you are not supposed to have bikes.
Thornberry: So basically if you are in the park you are safe. You can do whatever you
want in that park.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WSl12299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 74
Kubby: They can walk. No, there are police.
Atkins: Connie, I probably got the same call and I am not sure what we can do.
The law is the law and people chose to ignore it and there is not a whole
heck of a lot we can do about that. I mean, I live there and I know they
open the door and the dogs go. I see it all of the time.
Champion: That is right. Okay.
Kubby: But there are police there because I saw a whole bunch of busts in the park
for various things. So there are-
O'Donnell: Saw some what?
Lehman: Busts.
Kubby: Busts.
Lehman: Arrests.
Kubby: Arrests.
O'Donnell: I am not familiar with that lingo. I am the- I am on the Seats Advisory
Committee and I am chair of the riders survey that we are going to be
start- starting the 29th of this month and we are going to run it to the 13th
of December. And if anybody knows any riders or anybody encourage
them to fill out this survey we are handing out because this is how we
make service better and we do want input on this.
Lehman: Insurance that tomorrow night. Really important night. On Tuesday.
Kubby: Can people fill out-?
O'Donnell: That is all I have.
Kubby: Can people fill it out more than once?
O'Donnell: No, no we would like to try and get as many riders as we can to fill this
out once.
Norton: Did anybody respond to the letter from the woman about the noise
downtown? Did anybody respond to that?
Atkins: We have not responded yet.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299
November 22, 1999 Council Work Session Page 75
Norton: I didn't know whether you or Emie or somebody- I didn't know.
Atkins: I have that letter. I have not responded yet.
O'Donnell: Is it noise from an outdoor caf6 or where is it?
Norton: Well, I don't know.
Atkins: Gabe's.
Champion: Gabe's.
Norton: But I was a little concerned- the interpretation of how she was dealt with.
I don't know.
Lehman: Oh.
Atkins:
Norton: We can ....
Thornberry: It seemed reasonable.
O'Donnell: Are we done?
Lehman: I don't know. Karen? Dee? Thanks guys. See you tomorrow night.
Kubby: See you tomorrow at seven.
Lehman: Seven o'clock.
Vanderhoef: All right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting
of November 22, 1999.
WS 112299