Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-15 Transcription#2a Page 1 ITEM NO. 2a. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS Lehman: So ifLindsay, Ben and Christine would come forward please. This is the fun part of the meeting. It is! Of all of the things that we do this is probably enjoyed more by the Council, and I know by the Grandpa Mayor, than anything else that we do. So I would like each of you to give us your name and then read your statement please. Ben Schott: Hi, my name is Ben Schott. I am a sixth grader at Lincoln Elementary. Thank you for this opportunity. I think my teachers chose me to represent Lincoln School because of the things I do. I always try to help. I always participate in class and school activities like safety patrol, (can't hear) which is helping younger kids with computers and other electronics, reading to the kindergarten class, band, student council which manages school and store- uh, school, store in raising the flag. I am honored to be elected from my school and thank you. Lindsay McConnell: Hi, my name is Lindsay McConnell. I am excited to have- I am excited to have been chosen as one of the students to receive this City Council award. I have enjoyed my years at Lincoln and the opportunity to participate in several activities. A few of these include student council, memory book committee, safety patrol, editor of the newsletter and reading to the kindergarten. Taking a leadership role at Lincoln has been a lot of fun and a great experience. I hope I have helped to make a difference. Thank you. Christine Weirich: Hi, my name is Christine Weirich. I think that my fellow peers and I are representing Lincoln Elementary. In our school and community we have been raised to help people and donate things to organizations such as the food drive. I think that we are three of many that have been outstanding student citizens. Thank you. Lehman: We have a plaque for each of you and it says "For outstanding qualities of leadership within Lincoln Elementary, as well as the community, and for sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others we recognize these citizens as outstanding student citizens. Your community is proud of you. Presented by the Iowa City City Council". You know, people on the Council, we think we are really big stuff because we got elected. And that just meant that we had more friends than anybody else. You guys- no, no it is true! You guys got these awards because you earned them. Now guys, we've got to earn our pay tonight too. Thanks a lot. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #3 Page 2 ITEM NO 3. STATE OF THE CITY MESSAGE Lehman: And I don't have the same restrictions that the public does so I can talk for more than five minutes. (reads message) Had a little help on that planning from the DNR and from the feds too. (Reads rest of message) Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #4 Page 3 ITEM NO 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Champion: Move adoption. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Just to point out, there a number of public hearings included in this. One is a public heating for sidewalk cafes for March 7th. A Public Works administration building plans on the 7th of March. Also Dodge Street water main heating, Iowa Avenue Streetscape hearing, Benton Street turn lanes, and a special meeting on the 29th Of- that only happens once every four years- 29th Of this month there is a special hearing for the proposed budget. This will then be passed and certified through the state, which I think is required sometime in the month of March. Is that not correct? 15th of March. So those are the public hearings. Are there any discussions? Vanderhoef: Mr. Mayor, I will be abstaining on this. I have conflict of interest on one item within the consent. Lehman: Okay. Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries, Vanderhoef abstaining. Wilburn: Move we accept the letter from Wetherby Friends and Neighbors as correspondence. Karr: I believe he wants that- to present it tonight as part of a public hearing. Wilbum: Never mind. Karr: You can do it later. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 4 ITEM NO. 5 PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). [UNTIL 8 PM] Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for folks who would like to address the Council on items that do not otherwise appear on the agenda. If you wish to address the Council please sign in with your name and address, state your name, and limit your comments to five minutes or less. Jay Honohan: Back again. Jay Honohan speaking for the Senior Commission. It seems like every time I come to a meeting though the old people are following the young people on the awards. Just a short report and then I want to talk a little bit about the skywalk editorial that was in the Press Citizen. At the meeting today we basically did two major things. We approved the committees for the year 2000 for the commission and we set the schedule for the national accreditation application that we are going to seek and set the committees and the various things we are going to try to accomplish in the next probably 10 months. Turning now to the editorial that I saw in the Press Citizen I feel that the commission and I must respond to some of what we regard as inaccuracies in the editorial. First, they have indicated that the commission and the City Staff and the architect have not explored all the alternatives. I have been working on this since I came on the commission in January of last year. With the excellent cooperation of the City Manager, Joe Fowler, Eleanor Dilkes, and other members of the City Staff and the architect who I bothered constantly we explored as many alternatives as we could come up with. And there was a problem of one type or another with every alternative that we explored. I don't want to go through all the alternatives but I would like to address one that was in the Press Citizen about the mezzanine entrance. Because of the ADA requirements and where the Senior Center grade is and the grade of the parking ramp if we did go straight across to the mezzanine we would have to put in either a lift or a mini elevator. This is the HUD requirement. The ADA requirement. My feeling is the lift and HUD and the ADA don't like lifts, they prefer the elevator, if we are going to build half an elevator why not build the whole thing. And besides, a lot of the cost of the mini elevator to let us get into the mezzanine are similar costs to what the regular elevator would be. If you don't have the elevator or the lift you probably have to go across three times, back and forth, to get to this mezzanine entrance. I don't think that is practical and I don't think anybody else did. Second, the mezzanine is not secure. If we allowed that as an access we would have to remodel the mezzanine, lose space because we have our computers there, we have the library there, we have a lot of things and I hate to say this but the Senior Center like other places in the community- we have some theft there already. And we can't have the public in there, in our opinion, just willy nilly. So we would have to remodel and that might cost $100,000 to $200,000. So we keep coming back to what we are proposing: the skywalk with the elevator. There has This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 5 been some talk about some kind of a joint thing with the Ecumenical Towers. Negotiations regarding the Ecumenical Towers lobby in the ramp- now, I am talking about the lobby in the ramp- they could only be used by Ecumenical Towers residents. They have to be secure. These negotiations that we on, and I am not sure what- if the City Staff was involved in it or not- but these negotiations took approximately a year and this is what they came up with. And there is no way, as I understand it, that we would be allowed to jointly use that facility. It has got to be secure for them. My final concern was that there seems to be some confusion about whether or not we had a commitment from the City Council to do this- to raise the money and to proceed with the application for the Community Development Block Grant. We attended a meeting and we got a 4-3 vote on that commitment and that commitment was my specific question because I stated at the thing, and I wasn't chair then, Terd Miller was, I said "before we can make this CDBG grant application we have to have a commitment from the City Council of Iowa City". And the City Council, albeit on a 4-3 vote, gave us that commitment and we have proceeded since then on that basis. Lastly, Mercy Hospital has a skywalk to get from their ramp to the hospital. The University has a skywalk to get from their ramp to the hospital. Why do they do that? Safety, convenience, and access. And that is exactly the reason that the Senior Center Commission believes the skywalk and the potential that that ramp with the skywalk gives for the Senior Center is well worth $358,000. Frankly, if it was $500,000 1 would be in here saying the same thing. We think the cost is very high but we think the benefit far outweighs $358,000. Thank you. Champion: Thank you. O'Donnell: Thank you Jay. Kanner: I had a question about something you mentioned. Honohan: Yes? Kanner: First, I want to say thanks for coming. I appreciate these reports from the Senior Center and the Senior Center Commission. The accreditation, that looks exciting to me and I have heard about that. Could you just say what it is going to mean in everyday use for people who use the Senior Center? Honohan: Well, probably not an enormous advantage just from the accreditation. It would give us national accreditation. It will possibly, depending on what is available, will give us a better chance at getting funds for various programs. It will help us enhance some of our programs in the Senior Center. But as far as the day to day operation I can't say that there is going to be any blinding light flashing light that would change anything. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 6 It is just like the City Council, the City of Iowa City, belongs to the League of Municipalities. It gives you information, advise, things like that, plus being nationally accredited. I think- obviously, I am very prejudiced but I think we have one of the finest, if not the finest, Senior Center in the state of Iowa. And that we just need to keep trying to make it better. Kanner: Thanks. Lehman: Thank you Jay. Champion: Thank you. Honohan: Thank you. Rosie Wilhelm: My name is Rosie Wilhelm. I live on Rita Lyn Court and I am here to represent the majority of our neighbors who oppose the First Avenue extension. And we strongly oppose it. The reasons why we are opposing it, or the premiere reason, is the safety to the children in that area. I encourage the Council to take off from your work sometime and go there when the kids are going to Southeast Junior High, when they are going to City High, when they are crossing the street to (can't hear), when they are crossing to Regina and see the amount of foot traffic that goes across from the residencies there to the schools. It is extremely thick with foot traffic, bike traffic, everywhere. And there are major concerns about the extension of First Avenue creating more congestion, increased traffic, and as you know, there will probably be an increased volume of speed. The other thing I think you should be aware of is this side of town is absolutely a wonderful residential area. Rita Lyn Court is cul-de-sac and we have a number of retirees on this area. The reason they come to this area is because there is very well paced access right now to drugstores, to dental services, to the bus service. You expand First Avenue, extend that, and you are going to create a huge amotmt of traffic that I think it going to deter individuals from retiring there. In fact, when we bought the house on Rita Lyn we had hoped to retire there. The expansion of this First Avenue will deter us away from there. We have also heard the argument that the expansion of First Avenue will increase the traffic flow to downtown. Actually, what I would vision would be, if this happens, I would probably tend to not go downtown. Get on that highway and zoom out to Coral Ridge or Davenport to shop. So I strongly request that we are no longer a silent group as was written in the paper. We have major concerns about this expansion and I think the primary reason is because of the safety, the increased traffic flow, and what it is going to do to a wonderful residential area. Thank you. Kanner: Rosie, how many people do you represent? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 7 Wilhelm: I did a survey of some of our neighborhood last night. We have about 22 homes on Rita Lyn and I was able to reach about 50% of them. And I encouraged them to write all the City Councilors and I gave them a list of your addresses. So I am hoping that you will get letters. I really regret in many ways that we didn't push this before from the neighborhood standpoint. I think many of us relied on the Hickory Hill group because we are also concerned about the effect to Hickory Hill. But when you look at the ancillary roads and the streets that are connected to Rochester Avenue, Washington, and First Avenue and you look at the type of foot traffic and how wonderful the pace is fight now, I think there is major concerns about putting a big highway through there. And I do understand that there won't be trucks. Is that fight? That will be going through? But, you know, whenever you increase extension like that from one end to the other I think you are going to increase speed. And having worked with brain injured individuals for 17 years I have major concems about accidents that will occur. Kanner: We have a piece of correspondence. I don't know if you call it correspondence. I wanted to move acceptance of this piece that was- did everyone get one of these? Lehman: That was just dropped off by one of the Staff here. That is not correspondence. It is just an example of a flyer that was placed in some of the doors on the east side of town. Kanner: Okay, I would like to move acceptance of this into the record. "How much Traffic, How Fast" a flyer that was passed out in the First Avenue neighborhoods. It says "Guess what is coming to your neighborhood? A lot more traffic on First Avenue". "How Much Traffic? How Fast?". And it was produced and paid for by Jim Walters and it was copied and given to us by Steve Atkins. I would like to move acceptance. Lehman: I think- there is no signature on this. I don't think it is appropriate to accept correspondence that isn't signed. Kanner: Well, we often don't have signed signatures. We get e-mail, Ernie, all the time that aren't signed. We get other pieces that aren't signed. I think this- Lehman: We don't accept e-mail into the records as signed do we? Kanner: What? Lehman: E-mail. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 8 Kanner: We have e-mail that is part of the records. Karr: It has a name and address on it yes. Lehman: Fine. Is there a second to accepting this correspondence? Wilbum: Second. Lehman: Discussion? All in favor? Pfab, Kanner, Wilburn, Champion: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Vanderhoef, O'Donnell, Lehman: Aye. Lehman: Motion carries I think 4-3. Okay. Other public discussion? Dan Coleman: I want to speak to two matters. First I was here two weeks ago when some citizens spoke to their interest as dog owners and wanting their dogs to have a place to be unleashed. And, the assertion was made that dogs in Hickory Hill Park don't have the history of bothering people and I want to be on the record as someone who has often had to fend off dogs in the park. And to make the point that when that circumstance prevails and there are dogs unleashed as a citizen who wants to enjoy the park for recreation and for relaxation when you see a dog approaching that is unleashing you always have to be on your guard. You know, the owner may think they know their dog is a friendly dog and then they find how friendly and maybe that is a little different than what my perspective might be. That said, I agree though that there should be a place where people can exercise their dogs and in thinking about it it seems that the area in the park around the dam where there is the big open field is a very logical destination for that. And my suggestion that I want to put to you this evening is that if in combination with strict enforcement of the leash law elsewhere so that citizens could enjoy the park without a problem that just signage could be placed on the paths to the dam area in letting people know that it is a leash flee zone there and that that is something that dogs and owners could enjoy. The other matter I wanted to speak to I discovered in the paper this morning, this is from page C1 I think it is B1 whatever it is of the Gazette, a little brief that says Council nixs more TV coverage. And yesterday I went to the City's web page to look at the agenda and see what the Council would be discussing this week and of course there was an agenda posted for tonight, there is no agenda for last night. I guess that is an informal meeting so there is no agenda. We don't necessarily know what you are going to be talking about and I'd like to put to you that the very fact of that is such a strong argument in favor of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 9 televising those meetings. And I think the expression in this article, whether accurate or not, but the idea that "well the meetings are already open" is just too cavalier and doesn't take into account the many demands citizens. It is not just a question of convenience whether a citizen watches at home or he comes to the Council meeting but citizens have many demands. You know, a child may have a sporting event or some academic need they need help with or a single parent could be very hard pressed to come to a meeting, or some people work second shift and can't come out at night. And just the fact of it having it be televised means the people- most people have VCRs these days. They can set the VCR, tape the meeting, come and watch it at their leisure and be informed of what you all are talking about, how you are thinking, and what is going into these decisions rather than to wait on the hope that some reporter or editor will write a little brief like this so it will get into the paper. Because, as you know, most of what you discuss, at least in the details, does not get in there at all. And so I hope that if you agree with me that a strong democracy depends on an engaged and an informed citizenry that you will rethink this issue and look more carefully at the potential to really invigorate public involvement with the City through making the Monday night meetings more accessible. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Champion: Steve do we- we don't publish the agenda for the work sessions? There is a formal, I mean it is not a formal agenda, but there is an agenda for the work session. Atkins: I had thought it was. Please keep in mind we are still developing the web page and I can pretty much assure you that the informal will find its way on there. Lehman: It has to be some place because Marian won't let us talk about things that aren't on the agenda. Or Eleanor won't. Dilkes: It is posted I think. The gentlemen was talking about the web page specifically as I understood it. Lehman: But it is posted elsewhere? Atkins: Yeah, but I will check the web page. There is no reason why it shouldn't be on the web page. Lehman: Okay, good. Pfab: I have a question or a comment since we are talking about this. I approached the City Clerk's office and found- and asked when would the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 10 work session be transcribed so if people wanted transcriptions. Well, the law says that the formal session has to be transcribed and made public by, within 9 days. Well, that takes a lot of time so the work session is not transcribed until after 9 days. So, you know, if it was- if the information was available some other way then I wouldn't be so strong on having it televised. Karr: Mr. Mayor? Could I make just a slight correction? Lehman: Yes. Karr: The law require formals to be published within 15 days. There is no law in transcriptions. That is a direction this Council has given Staff to do transcriptions. Based on that publication of 15 days we are done with the transcription in 9 days so that we can use that to finalize our minutes. Pfab: Could we put this into the record? It is something from the Clerk's office and it is in more detail and that doesn't- Marian is correct, that is the way it is. So it just tells the rules of how those things have to be done. I would like to have this put in public record. Vanderhoef: Isn't it already? Champion: It is public record. Lehman: It is a matter of public record I think Irvin. Karr: It is a memo to Council. Pfab: Okay. Lehman: Okay? Other public discussion? John Balmer: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, my name is John Balmer. I reside at 10 Princeton Court. And I appear to you tonight to speak about several issues of import that have been alluded to in the recent publications of the paper and in general conversation. First, I want to thank all of you for your efforts. I know the time expended is great and that is appreciated even though I may vigorously disagree with some of your decisions. I want to very much- I encourage and endorse your recent decision to proceed ahead with the First Avenue and Scott Boulevard extension. I think this is obviously needed. I think there is a silent majority out there that it is needed. You haven't heard from them. You are hearing a lot from those who oppose this and I think to those that say it is going to harm Hickory Hill Park, I think that is not a good argument because all one has to do is look at our great city treasure, that being City This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 11 Park, and see how close Park Road runs adjacent to City Park. I don't think that is harmed City Park in any way, shape or form. I grew up very close to City Park and spent a lot of time there. The 1600 feet that is proposed to be finished for First Avenue, quite truthfully, the property on either side I believe is owned by private property owners and so it is not going to impact Hickory Hill Park to, I don't think, and negligible degree. And I want to thank you for full speed ahead because I think we need both. I think we need Scott Boulevard and First Avenue to be completed. And I thank you for that. Also as it relates to Hickory Hill Park, I am one of those that would advocate strongly for keeping dogs on leashes. I think it is, frankly, a safety issue for others that utilize that park and it just makes good sense quite truthfully. It is not somebody's private preserve to run their dogs freely. And I just would weigh in on a couple of other items relative to that. If I understood your decision as it related to the part of Hickory Hill Park that had been reserved for cemetery use is it now my understanding that you are going back on that issue and have revisited it and now the portion that was supposed to be reserved for future expansion is now going to be permanently off base on that? Lehman: John, I think the word permanent may not be exactly right, but yes the Council is inclined to dedicate anything that is not currently used as cemetery property as park land. Now, the permanency depends perhaps on the inclination of the future Council. Balmer: Okay, but it is being- but it presently is being used as part of the park? Lehman: It has been for years. Balmer: I would just ask that you remember those that came before us and that wished that that be part of the cemetery expansion and make sure their wishes are known also. And lastly, as it relates to televising your informal sessions, I really as a taxpayer don't see any great need for that quite truthfully. I think those are always open to the public. I think that quite truthfully that is a time that you don't make your formal decisions. You need the free flow of exchange that I don't think you would get if you were in a televised setting. It is not that you are going to saying something that might be necessarily off color or the like but by the same token you do wish to have that opportunity I think. So, be it was it may, that is my comments. Thanks very much. Lehman: Thank you John. Don Anciaux: City Council, good day. I also wish to address the First Avenue extension. Lehman: State your name please. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 12 Anciaux: Don Anciaux. I live at 2119 Russell Drive which is the southeast part of town. I would also like to thank Mr. Balmer for an excellent article that was in the Press Citizen last year on why First Avenue should go through. I think that we cannot solely go on the residents of First Avenue. You have to look at the congestion on Noah Dodge, Governor, and other places in the City that need relief. I know as my self I take a mute to school that goes through Goosetown and other places that if First Avenue was available I would just go take it out. When they mentioned the schools that are along the ways- yeah, up on Noah Dodge and also down farther you have people crossing over to go to Longfellow and what-have- you and those streets need some relief also. As far as safety goes we have a Southside Fire Station that can't even get to the north side of town without a detour through Iowa City' s busy streets. And I don't know whoever decided to call Noah Dodge and Governor arterials but they are not arterial in my opinion. Also if you ever have to repair North Dodge or Govemor you have no place for this traffic to go. They would be shut down for any length of time at all. Air quality I have heard mentioned on Noah Dodge and Governor would be improved with less traffic on it and hopefully a First Avenue addition could possibly do this also. The extra gasoline it takes me to get from First Avenue all the way down and then back out to the interstate again is another thing. And you multiply that by a bunch of- a lot of cars going by and you have a significant waste of gasoline and hydrocarbons put into the air. I also think that Rochester would see a significant reduction in traffic on it. And for a lousy 1600 feet I think that that street should be put through as soon as possible. Also, I am completely for the extension of Scott Boulevard through Captain Irish and I would like to see you proceed with those with your greatest haste. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Cam Campbell: I didn't initially plan on talking. My name is Cam Campbell. I just wanted to address the First Avenue issue. As a resident initially at 1104 ½ Bloomington, 918 E Market, and now the northeast part of town I think I have been affected by a number of those roadways. I initially opposed the extension of First Avenue. I am glad that we have had a period of time with which we could discuss the issues of it. I have relinquished myself to the fact that it is going to go through. And I am delighted at least with the discussion it has had. I think it has changed how we design the road. It has had an opportunity for the neighbors in the noaheast part of town to at least have input with City Staff who has been great in terms of- are helping to outline what needs to be done in the noaheast part of town. I am also happy with the fact that Captain Irish, or whatever it is going to be called- Scott Boulevard extension- it is kind of too bad we are going to have 2 names for one road. I hope at some point it may become one road name all the way through. But I am glad that they This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #5 Page 13 are going to be done at the same time. I think it is imperative that they both be done at the same time which it sounds like Council is in agreement of that, at least with the majority. With regards to First Avenue in particular I would hope that there would be some things that are done such as burying the phone lines and the electrical lines that are currently on the west side of First Avenue. I would also hope that there is other opportunities to control traffic with stop signs maybe at the comer of First Avenue and Hickory Trail. That is a steep road and you are going to need to control speeds through there. There is a lot of people, even with the residents that live there right now, who lose mailboxes in the wintertime when we get ice. The ice storm that we had probably 3 or 4 weeks ago is a prime example. I think the City does a great job salting Market Street as it goes down the hill towards the river and I think this area of First Avenue is going to have to be pretty similar with the amount of traffic. I also hope that we have a truck embargo on First Avenue so the trucks do not use that and preferentially go through Scott Boulevard Captain Irish, whatever we are going to call it. But anyway, I just want to thank you, the City, the staff, for all of the things they have done. At least for listening to the neighbors of the northeast part of town. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Champion: Thanks Cam. ITEM NO. 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 14 a.) PUBLIC HEARING ON A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADOPT AND INCORPORATE THE SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF HIGHWAY 218, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 1 AND WEST OF THE IOWA RIVER. Lehman: This is a continuation of a public hearing from the last meeting. The public hearing is open. I would ask JeffDavidson if you explain to the public the minor changes in language that have been proposed since the last public hearing. Davidson: I would be happy to do that Mr. Mayor. There were comments made by Mr. Schuchert at the last meeting regarding the use of the term "neighborhood commercial area" and I think everyone is in agreement that there needs to be some clarification of that term we have proposed and there are several places in the narrative where this will be amended to use the term "mixed use commercial area" and leave that flexible. The intent is that that commercial use would contain a mix of uses but certainly that it not necessarily absolutely be the neighborhood commercial zone which there was a concern about. So that is, excuse me, an amendment that will be made. There was also a question about the current land use map and the labels on that. It does appear that is actually a labeling problem. The location of the label does make it not appear the way it should be, so we will correct that to indicate that there is the highway commercial in the existing county zoning on a portion of Mr. Schuchert's property. There are also some minor sort of typographical type changes. Mr. Mayor, do you want me to review those as well? Lehman: Well, I don't need you to do those but I- also there is one other point I would like you to make. The map shows land use [but] does not show zones. Davidson: That is correct. Lehman: Could you explain the difference so that what we are looking at here does not dictate what will occur there with zoning (can't hear). How does that work? Davidson: Basically it is a matter of the level ofspecificity there. For example, with the commercial designation. We don't want people to assume any- I mean, you're, you're -the annexation and rezoning, subsequent rezoning, that would occur of this property that is currently in the county is according to a legislative process which we follow and it is at that time that a specific zoning designation would be placed on a land use. Lehman: Okay, thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 15 Champion: Are we going to discuss (can't hear)- we talked about the lines, the three lines, on the road. I think we should talk a little bit about those too. Davidson: Anything you'd like for me to review? Champion: Mike, you probably don't have your... Davidson: I do have in a overhead here- if we can, I don't know if it possibly to get it on the machine here? O'Donnell: I think basically what we wanted is the language to remain very loose. Champion: Right. O'Donnell: Between N-I, N-I.1, and N-1.2. Vanderhoef: And also to indicate that we would like the- at the time that this road would be planned that they look at the previous work that we have done in studying all of this and look at what the conditions are at that time and chose the most expedient road that will serve everyone. Davidson: Yes, as hopefully as visible here as the map is a little bit scratchy. This is the intersection of Highway 1 and Mormon Trek. This is Riverside Drive over here. The question has been the alignment of the road through this area. This is the proposed south arterial that would eventually connect Mormon Trek Boulevard with Sycamore Street. We have looked at three alignments. The N-1 alignment here was originally the consultants preferred alignment based on the- I won't go through them again- but I think you are aware that there are a range of factors that were considered. The Planning and Zoning Commission asked us to look at 2 alternatives which have been labeled N-1.1 and N-1.2 just to kind of orient you. This is the Dane property. This is the Williams property. N-I.1 pretty much just about bisects between those two. N-1.2 goes very close to the Williams property. N-1.1 comes quite close to the Dane property here. We have indicated to you that any one of those three is buildable according to our arterial street design standards. We do feel there are some pros and cons and we have pointed those out to you. However you wish to have this road issue represented in the plan if you would indicate that either tonight or at a subsequent meeting we will then incorporate that into the plan. This is not currently in a funded year of your capital improvements program. That would be going out the next four years. It is in the program as something we intent to do. It is in our arterial street plan but it will take the action of City Council to actually put it into a funded year at which time we would construct it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 16 Lehman: Jeff, I sense that- and tell me if this is possible- my sense from listening to the Council is that I am not sure there is any great desire to pinpoint that road in the plan. Is it possible to adopt the comprehensive- this Comprehensive South District Plan- with the road literally- it has not been decided, that it is in a range of location? Davidson: Yeah, in fact I would say Mr. Mayor, that that is quite appropriate. Lehman: I think that is where we are. At least that is where I seem to read the Council. Champion: But things might change before- Lehman: I think that is right and I think we feel uncomfortable with locking into any one of those three. Davidson: Yeah, the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission was that the road should be located somewhere between the N-1 and the N-1.1 alignment. So even they acknowledge this flexibility. I think if Council has another notion of flexibility, if you would just simply indicate what the majority is in favor of, we will then put that information in the plan. Vanderhoef: I personally would like to widen that scope and make it clear that none of the three lines is a for sure road but some place between N-1 and N-1.2 that the road be designed. Champion: That is well put. O'Donnell: I agree with that. Kanner: Jeff?. Could you just talk about the history of where a road- it all came from- from what, where in the Comprehensive Plan that comes from and the history of Councils involvement with that? Davidson: Yeah, the arterial street-planning portion of the Comprehensive Plan is the JCCOG Arterial Street Plan. The federal government provides funding for a lot of our arterial street improvements, however, they do mandate that we have an arterial street planning process that incorporates the whole urbanized area. And I think all of us know that that' s been a very effective process because these arterial streets don't end at municipal boundaries. They go into the adjacent municipality so having the cooperation of all the municipalities, and the county government, and the University at JCCOG is a very appropriate place for that planning to occur. This road is in the JCCOG arterial street plan and it is intended to provide both the community traffic circulation type access that an arterial street provides as This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 17 well as allow for the development of the property adjacent to it. Once again, at which time the property would be annexed and the road would be constructed. The road is one of the three pieces of infrastructure; sewer and water being the other two that are really required for property developed within a city at urban densities. Kanner: So when community members came together over the last couple of years to help plan this district were they given that this road was a given? Is that one of the baselines that they were told? That this is what is part of it? Davidson: Yes, in the district planning processes Steven there is, I guess you put it, baseline information- however you phrased it. But, information that exists currently about the area and the arterial street plan information which would- the level of detail there is just simply that within this area someplace there would eventually be an arterial street. That would have been information provided to them. Kanner: Thank you. Champion: Thanks. Lehman: Okay, we will now hear from the public. I would ask that you limit your comments to five minutes or less. Bart Schuchert: My name is Bart Schuchert. And, quite honestly, with the comments that were just made on some of these language changes that may be made some of what I have put here may or may not change. Lehman: I think some of your comments- Schuchert: I think I have to look at that. But, in any case, I would like to- I don't plan to read through this. I've got some italicized part there and for example on page 3 1 of the draft there is some very specific language in there where our property is basically declared as (reads italicized part of letter). And the bottom line is that you would have to think there is a strong possibility if there were any commercial development that we tried to put through even within the county zoning allowances or guidelines that it would very likely, or could very likely, be opposed by the city as things now read. And like I say, I really don't feel that we should comment until we look at the changes now that there are changes and hopefully will have the opportunity to comment on what changes have been made. Lehman: Some of those changes were precipitated by your conversations two weeks ago. Schuchert: And that's it- not having seen them- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 18 Lehman: No and I understand that. Schuchert: I feel that- I guess I've got a couple of questions. Number one I will talk to whoever to get a copy of the changes. But is this going to be extended or is it going to be voted on tonight? Or what is the status of this? Lehman: Actually it is the wish of Council if Council is satisfied that we've had adequate input we will close the public heating. We are not going to vote on this tonight. And I believe this is a- we have to vote on this 3 times, is that tight Eleanor? Dilkes: No, this is just a resolution. Lehman: Okay, no it is a resolution. But- Wilburn: To adopt the plan and then if someone has comments at the point that it would annexed there would still be- there were zoning changes (can't hear). Lehman: There is always that opportunity for comment. There are many, many opportunities for comment obviously after the plan is adopted. But I also (can't hear) to adopt the plan, it may be in stone but still gives you a pretty good indication. If the Council is comfortable in closing the public heating, I wouldn't have a problem with that. But when it comes up for a vote should that be at the next regular Council meeting or at some subsequent meeting, anyone from the public is always invited to speak when a resolution is on the floor. Schuchert: Prior to the vote? Lehman: Absolutely. Schuchert: All fight. Well, I think at this point in time I would like possibly to point out one other thing. There is talk about the fact that this is really just land use and not zoning, but I think we all know full well that they are fairly synonymous and once a land use is suggested it's maybe not as binding as the word zoning but it is still probably very close to binding. So to say that land use really isn't zoning and vice versa, that is probably true but I think it is still carries a pretty strong meaning. If land use is proposed I think it is going to be very hard to change that at a later time. Champion: We do it all the time. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 19 Schuchert: Yeah, I know. But hopefully it is always in the direction that the fight people want it. Well I can't say that, I don't know. But thank you anyway for what consideration was given from last week. Champion: Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Jane Driscoll: Mr. Mayor, may I approach to distribute copies of my statement? Lehman: Of course. Driscoll: Good evening. (reads letter) Thank you. Champion: Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. State your name for us Jim. Jim Dane: My name is Jim Dane and I just have a brief statement. I will read that rather quickly. First, a correction to Jane Driscoll's statement. Hirasuki Matoma our Japanese farm trainee who she mentioned will be here March and so we are excited about him retuming for the wedding of his daughter. (Reads letter) Any questions? Thank you for your time. Lehman: Thank you Jim. Anyone else who would like to speak to the South Central District Plan? Karr: Could we have a motion to accept the correspondence? Wilbum: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Wilburn, seconded by Vanderhoef to accept correspondence. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Motion carries. Is it the will of the Council to close the public hearing? Vanderhoef: Yes. Champion: Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6 Page 20 Lehman: Public hearing is closed. I think, and Jeff we did talk about this, there has been some language changes before tonight and obviously the final document will reflect indecision on the part of the Council as to the alignment of the road. Wilburn: I made the suggestion yesterday perhaps that we could consider some type of ranking or prioritization but I think Council overall felt that that will close the possibility of changing conditions. Is that fair to say? Lehman: I think that is fair because this could be 10 years away or 20 years away, SO. O'Donnell: 20 (can't hear). Wilbum: I just wanted to let you know we did briefly kind of discuss that. Lehman: But I think we all- I think we are very sensitive to the concerns. There will be an opportunity after the final draft is done for the public to review that and although it will not be considered a public hearing the next time we do consider the resolution the public will obviously be, have, the opportunity to speak. And I don't know when that is exactly but I am sure we will make sure that everybody finds out. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6c Page 21 ITEM NO 6c. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN-1) TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE (CO-l) FOR 2.5 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FIRST AVENUE AT TUDOR DRIVE. (REZ99-0015) (FIRST CONSIDERATION). O'Donnell: Move first consideration. Champion: Second. Lehman: Move by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Just to explain this, this was a item that was given to Planning and Zoning Commission upon the recommendation of City Staff. It was recommended for denial. City Staff apparently reconsidered their recommendation and have now come to the conclusion that they do recommend the change. We- when we disagree with Planning and Zoning they have a policy, and I think maybe it is even required, that we meet with the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss why we will not be voting in accordance with their wishes. It is my understanding that they Planning and Zoning Commission wishes for us to have our first reading tonight and we will meet with them, I think it is 3 weeks from last night? Karr: 6th. Lehman: March 6th. And we will discuss that. If we do in fact pass- if we vote in the affirmative- it will be necessary to have that meeting in which we will have. If we vote in the negative it won't make any difference. Discussion? Champion: Go ahead. Kanner: I am going to be abstaining because I think it is very important before we place even the first vote, realizing that there are 3 opportunities, to talk with Planning and Zoning, reading their minutes of their meetings. I think there is some valid points they make of the interaction of staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission and how that interaction happens. Plus there is some points they make about why this should not happen and I think it is imperative for us to talk with them and try to straighten that out. So I will be abstaining from this vote. O'Donnell: I will be supporting this. There have been some changes made. I believe Planning and Zoning will now endorse it. I had probably 20 letters from the neighborhood and surrounding area and overwhelming amount support for this project. So I will be supporting it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6c Page 22 Champion: I am going to support it too but I do agree with Steven that somewhere the process to me wasn't fight. That when the major changes were made and staff approved it, to me, it should have gone back to Planning and Zoning so they could rethink it instead of this kind of back door approach that we are doing. And when you read through the minutes of Planning and Zoning I can understand why they are disturbed by the whole process. Lehman: Connie, let me- we did receive a report from the City Staff 2 weeks ago last night. And the City Staff apologized to us and I think they have to the Planning and Zoning Commission for what was probably not handled in exactly the manner in which it should have been handled. It is my understanding that it is the desire of the Planning and Zoning Commission that we act on this prior to, and I would agree with you Steven except it is my understanding they want us to go ahead and vote first consideration. Champion: Right. Lehman: And if that is their desire then I certainly would abide by that. Pfab: What is the evidence that is their desire? Champion: (can't hear) Lehman: The staff that works with them on a regular basis has indicated that to us. Champion: There wouldn't be any reason to- for us to meet with them if we all voted Lehman: (can't hear). Pfab: It is just that- it's, I would certainly like to see the process, the timing in the process, change. I always think that if we are going to meet with Planning and Zoning that we should meet with them before we have the first vote. Vanderhoef: From my perspective I agree with the process kind of thing and what Connie was saying. What has been my concem all along was that our Planning and Zoning looked at the application and were looking at what the zoning was to produce out of the neighborhood commercial zoning. And they went straight by the rules that they are given to say that this did not fit the neighborhood commercial. My concern all along has been that a project has been pushed into the middle of what I have been wanting to have happen for quite some time, which is a total discussion with P & Z and Council to review what neighborhood commercial zoning is and whether it is still meeting the needs of the City of Iowa City. And I have been assured by Planning that it was going to happen and then it got put This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6c Page 23 into a much larger review of all of our zoning. So then it got pushed out quite a while in time. I checked recently and I was informed that it appears that this conversation or the whole planning process may be completed in 5 months. I still agree with P & Z that they shouldn't have gone forward with changing the zoning until we had looked at the entire zoning issue. And it has nothing to do with the project that came later. We have two decisions to make. We have to make a decision first whether this is an appropriate zoning change and then after that fact we chose if the zoning change is appropriate, [and] then we can say whether this project is appropriate. So I am real uncomfortable when this happens with the two of them at the same time. I am going to vote for this tonight and I am going to push when we get with the P & Z my concern moved forward, that we talk about it sooner rather than later how neighborhood commercial fits into the entire zoning of Iowa City. Lehman: But that is a "yes" vote? Vanderhoef: I said I vote yes! Lehman: Any other comments? Kanner: Mike, I just wanted to refute what you were saying about how Planning and Zoning already has gotten feedback and they accept the rezoning- O'Donnell: No, no, no- I didn't say that. Kanner: That- what were you saying then? O'Donnell: I said I've received 15 to 20 letters and the response has been overwhelming in favor of it. Kanner: I also heard you say something about Planning and Zoning and from reading the recent Commission meetings, the last one or two after they got this information, this new information, back from Staff about how Staff recommended they still said that the issue is not necessarily about access points, how the parking lots are connected, or how the building is set or landscaped. The issue is zoning and the use of the property. And so I would still say that Planning and Zoning, according to their minutes, had some problems and that is why we ought to hold off voting for this until after we've talked to them. O'Donnell: That is speculative (can't hear) Kanner: Well this is from their minutes. I will show you where it is in their minutes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6c Page 24 O'Donnell: Yeah, but we will discuss this with them on March 6th. Kanner: What? O'Donnell: We will discuss it with them on March 6th. Lehman: All right. But the point- Kanner: But it is in the minutes. O'Donnell: I have read the minutes. Lehman: The point really is that should we decide to pass this tonight? It still takes 2 more readings so whether or not the Planning and Zoning Commission agrees with us or we change our minds whatever- it is not done until it is voted on three times. Pfab: I have one question. Is the second reading of this going to come after the meeting with Planning and Zoning? Lehman: The Planning and Zoning Commission is at a work session 3 weeks from last night and we will probably have second consideration the following night unless we chose to defer it which we can do. Pfab: And there will be no further action on this until after we meet with the Planning and Zoning? Lehman: What further action would you (can't hear) Pfab: Well, there is a second reading. Lehman: No, we will meet with them and then if there is a problem- I am assuming that if we are not satisfied with our meeting with Planning and Zoning we could certainly defer that second reading. If we are satisfied after our meeting with them we can go ahead and have a second reading. Pfab: But my question was there will be no further action until after we meet with Planning and Zoning if we vote to go ahead tonight? Lehman: Right. Vanderhoef: If we don't have a formal meeting (can't hear) Lehman: There will be no action after we vote the second time. It is only at the third meeting that there can be any action really taken. Roll call. Motion carries 6-0 with Kanner abstaining. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6c Page 25 Karr: Can we have a motion to accept correspondence? O'Donnell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Motion carries. Champion: Mr. Mayor, can I just ask a question? Lehman: Sure. Champion: Maybe legal counsel- can you just abstain because you don't want to vote on something? Dilkes: Well, we were just trying to look at Robert's Rules here. I am not certain you can. I mean, I think there may have to be a reason. But we will have to look at it. We couldn't find it immediately as we were looking. Champion: Okay thanks. Lehman: Interesting. Kanner: What was the question Connie? Lehman: The question is whether or not you have, you had a logical basis for abstention and we don't know that, they are going to check it in Robert's rules of order. That was your choice, you did it, they will check it. No big deal. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6d Page 26 ITEM NO 6d. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-12) AND MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY (OPDH-12/11.79 ACRES) AND (OPDH- 8/1.47 ACRES) AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY PLAN FOR WINDSOR RIDGE, PART 15, A PROPOSED 98-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED NORTH OF COURT STREET AT ITS EASTERN TERMINUS. (REZ99-0011) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Champion: (can't hear) read the whole thing. Vanderhoef: I move that the (can't hear) requiring the ordinance must be considered and voted on for passage at 2 council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed, be suspended at the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Seconded by O'Donnell for expedited consideration. Discussion? Kanner: I am sorry Ernie- I am opposed to expedited discussion on almost anything unless it is an emergency and we haven't had any notice from Staff that it is an emergency for anyone else. We had a letter that said they would like to recommend that. I think it is bad policy. I think that the 3 ordinance readings was put in there by the state for good reason that it gives people a chance, no matter how mundane their point may be, to come up between the original reading and the final reading and it gives it that flow. And I could see that sometimes there might be emergencies where we might need to vote in a quicker fashion but for most things I think it is bad policy to do this and to speed things up in'this manner. Lehman: I don't disagree with your philosophy, however one of the biggest criticisms of govemment and I think particularly Iowa City government is how long it takes us to get so many things done. And many times that deals with construction projects and whatever where time is money. Frequently, not frequently, occasionally we are asked to expedite projects. Usually I think those have some pretty good reasons. It is my belief that if there was any objection on the part of our Staff to this being expedited they would have told us so. So in the absence of any objection from the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6d Page27 staff, I have no problem what-so-ever in accommodating someone who is adding to the tax base of the community. Other discussion? Wilburn: The request was for the delay- the December and January meeting? Lehman: Right, because our meetings were not timely. Pfab: Right, in other words, there was other extenuating circumstances on this particular- Lehman: That is why they asked for it. Kanner: I think one of the other criticisms of government is that in the past there have been closed and back room deals and over the last 20 and 30 years there has been a move towards more openness so that our performance of the citizen's duties is done in the light of day. And part of that is the Open Meetings Law. Part of that is having 3 readings of an ordinance. Champion: I call for the vote. We- this discussion can be at a work session. Kmmer: No, I would like to continue. O'Donnell: When you call for the question it's done. Dilkes: It is not debatable. Is there a second? Lehman: Is there a second? Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. O'Donnell: I second it- I will third it. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? All except Kanner: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Kanner: Aye. Lehman: All in favor of the expedited consideration. Roll call? Motion carries. (Kanner voting "nay") Vanderhoef: I move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6d Page 28 O'Donnell: And I second it. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion on the ordinance? Kanner: I would approve it but since it is being expedited I will abstain from this. Lehman: That is okay but there is no reasonable reason for abstaining. That is ridiculous. Go ahead. Dilkes: I think you do have an obligation to vote here. Kanner: Thank you for your advise. Dilkes: And I will research it but that is my- Kanner: Doesn't state code state that one is allowed to abstain? Champion: For a conflict of interest. Lehman: For cause- Dilkes: There is a rule by state code if there is an abstention for a conflict of interest then that vote is not counted for purposes of determining a majority. Otherwise, the majority remains regardless of the reason for the non vote. Kanner: Right, that is true. Dilkes: So, my thinking here, and this is just off the top of my head, is that if you had abstentions by all of you, you wouldn't get a vote. I mean, there has to be an up or a down. So that is my thinking on it and I will have to get back to you legally. Kanner: Thank you. Dilkes: So, where were we? Lehman: Start again. Roll call. Motion carries 6-0 Kanner abstaining. (Mayor reads item #6e) Karr: Mr. Mayor, I am sorry, could we go back and accept correspondence on the last item? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6d Page 29 O'Donnell: Move we accept correspondence. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell. Champion: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Champion to accept correspondence on item d. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #6f Page 30 ITEM NO 6f CONSIDER AN A ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM PLANNED HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (PRM) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY (OSA-PRM) AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY. 28 ACRES LOCATED AT 522 S. DUBUQUE STREET (REZ99-0013) (Second Consideration) O'Donnell: Move second consideration. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell. Pfab: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Irvin Pfab. Discussion. Roll Call. Karr: Just to note for the record they did request expedited action. Lehman: I'm sorry. Wilburn: I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. I move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this... Lehman: Wait. Moved by Wilbum. Champion: Seconded. Lehman: Seconded by Champion for expedited consideration. Discussion. Roll call. Motion carried, Kanner voting "no". Wilburn: I move final adoption at this time. Lehman: Moved by Wilbum. Vanderhoef: Seconded. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoefthat it be finally adopted at this time. Discussion. Roll call. Motion carries, 6/0, Kanner abstaining. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #7 Page 31 ITEM NO 7. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR THE LONGFELLOW / TWAIN PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL PROJECT [STP-E- 3751(616)--8V-521. Lehman: This is a project with an estimated cost of $250,000 and has an 80% state funding with 20% city. Vanderhoef: Move adoption of the resolution. Wilbum: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion? Wilbum: I think this will be great to connect the neighborhoods. It is a nice little pedestrian bicycle route. I think it will be a very good thing. Lehman: And it is a tunnel under a railroad. So it is really a safety issue. Roll call. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8 Page 32 ITEM NO 8. THE CITY'S INTENT TO CONTINUE WITH AND AUTHORIZING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR THE HIGHWAY 6 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. a.) PUBLIC HEARING. Lehman: The public hearing is opened. Jerry Hansen: My name is Jerry Hansen and I am chairman of the Wetherby Friends and Neighbors neighborhood association. (reads letter). Kanner: Jerry, are you speaking on behalf of the Neighborhood Association? Hansen: Yes. And also in my meetings with Broadway and stuffI am pseudo representing them too. But there is members of Grantwood here tonight and the neighborhood and the Broadway Neighborhood Center. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you Jerry. J.P. Claussen: My name is J.P. Claussen and I am a resident of 216 Fairchild Street. But I am not here to talk about my neighborhood. I am here tonight, I guess in going Mr. Mayor with your opening remarks about kind of having a vision of the whole community and not just people who are represented here tonight or even people who voted in the election. I spent a year from August of '98 to August '99 as a lead teacher for the toddlers at the Broadway Street Neighborhood Center. I am a pedestrian in this community. I don't own a car so often I would walk down to the Neighborhood Center. You know, Iowa City has a reputation of being a bike friendly town, a pedestrian friendly town, and if you are downtown walking around in some of the nicer neighborhoods it really is. You know, it is great. Beautiful sidewalks that are kept up. Bridges are kept up. Now, you know, you are going to put the railroad tunnel through for the pedestrian traffic going to school. But I need to reiterate what Jerry was saying about the priorities of the town. And definitely Highway 6, the Broadway Street Neighborhood as far as pedestrian traffic goes doesn't seem to be a priority. Last fall I believe a majority of the Council members tonight were at a candidate's forum at the Broadway Street Neighborhood Center. I don't think any of you all walked there or took a bike. But if you had, you would find crossing that highway is a scary thing. There is no- not even crossing lights to get across. A lot of times traffic will go by there at 50 [or] 60 miles an hour which is not legal, but definitely happens a lot. And trucks zip by. It is hard enough if you are just a single person trying to get across but if you have a family of kids- that is- I mean, it is kind of surprising nothing has happened you know, as of yet as far as accidents go. So I would just like to put in my two cents This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8 Page 33 urging the Council to make crossing Highway 6 safely a priority. You know, we've got a lot of money for these other projects that are in other parts of town that seem to be a priority. But, you know, let's bring the low income folks into that as well. Let's really make sure that they can get across that highway to get to the doctor, to get to Kirkwood, to get to school, safely. And thanks for your time. Lehman: Thank you. Kanner: Steve, have we had any plans drawn up in the past for crossing Highway 6 in that area? Arkins: Looking in the audience- we should let her speak first. Hi Jane. Jane Klitzka: I am Jane Klinza with Grant Wood Neighborhood Association. And yes, 14 years ago we tried to get an overpass at- between Fair Meadows and Sycamore. We didn't succeed. We did get a "walk .... don't walk" light which was greatly appreciated at the time. We needed something for the kids to get across the highway. However, this isn't going to- and we said at that point in time- wouldn't last [and] that we would be back to ask for the overpass. The way our neighborhood is growing on our side of town it is very difficult to get across the highway- any place. The number of cars I have seen run the stoplight- I stop and I wait even after it has turned green before I go because, you know, you always look and there goes a semi or there goes another car. They just don't stop. Yeah, it was 14 years ago. Atkins: That long ago? Klitzka: Yeah, 14 years. Pfab: Might I make a comment? Lehman: Sure. Pfab: I have spent some time at the Broadway Center and I have visited with them and this street is like a no man's land for people trying to get across. And how do they solve it? They have to bus people to get from there to the school, which is idiotic, when those kids, a lot of them, could walk on their own. I mean, I think this thing is- defiantly needs a lot of attention and very soon. Don Anciaux: My name is Don Anciaux, 2119 Russell Drive. I am here as a parent of a child that was hit at the intersection of Sycamore and Highway 6. And believe it or not, we are very glad he had just a broken jaw and (can't hear) thousand dollars worth of damage to the car that ran into him, a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8 Page 34 bicycle and a child that is fully recovered. But, we need to address this safety issue. We need to get something done with it. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Champion: Thank you. Do we- when we have those plans for Highway 6 do we have them down that far? Atkins: Let me try to answer your question and Jane's own point. I didn't realize that it was 14 years ago but it was a long time ago. There were extensive discussions and in fact plans drawn to build an overpass- and help me Jane, you are just nodding- sort of just east of First Avenue. It would come up on the south side of the street near a systems house, pass over, and was to come down near the fire station? Klitzka: Right. And I think we had problems with the house on the other side. Atkins: Yeah, but any way, we had plans drawn and I forget what the price tag was at the time- it was $700,000 or $800,000 to build the thing. There was also discussion about the possibility- please forgive me, this is institutional memory coming from way back- plans to build one at Keokuk. And the difficulty was not being able to fulfill the ADA requirements of where it had to go up, where it has to go down. The ramp had to be so long that it put it well into the bank's parking lot for example at Keokuk. And well into a house across the street. These things can be done. And they can be designed and I suspect we can dig them out of the file. They are somewhere around here. Wilburn: Did they ever- at the time, did they ever look at the possibility of an underpass? Atkins: I don't recall that we ever really talked about that and the only reason I can think of that is one: there would be a little bit of reluctance, I am not so sure of the safety of underpasses. They can get scary at times. Wilburn: We do have underpasses- Atkins: I understand that. Wilburn: I mean, we are doing an underpass. There is one out by the Coral Ridge Mall. Atkins: And- but we did do some studies. One of the concerns was- and I think Jane was right- the IDOT controls the highway. The IDOT agreed to change the lights and the speed controls and things such as that. And that, I think, that was some- of neighborhood satisfaction. But as the density This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8 Page 35 developed on the south side of town, I don't doubt that it is inevitable. There was one issue that- and it was a room fortunately filled with parents when we were talking about this- how can we make the kids use them? And there was some concern of the ability to actually get the kids to use the thing. They are going to find the straight line and sometimes the overpass isn't the instrument to cause it to occur. O'Donnell: We need to put this on a work session because I think it is a- it is a very important priority. Atkins: Let me dig- I need to get into the files. We will have to visit and (can't hear)- Klitzka: Well, I think especially now that they are starting work on Highway 6 and improving everything. Now is the time to start doing something. Champion: It is a good time to address it. Because I think underpasses, if they are wide enough and lit, are not really very dangerous. I mean, I grew up with underpasses in Chicago all over the place. Atkins: Conhie, the concern was that- from a public safety standpoint. That with children passing through there they have to be very well lit, they have to come out somewhere where it is- you understand the circumstances. Lehman: I think we are showing, at least from my perspective and I personally feel, that we are showing that obviously we are very, very interested in this part of town. I mean, I think that this improvement project enjoys the support of the Council. I also think it perhaps is time that we do just (can't hear) resurrect what happened 14 years ago, try to come up with- I mean, I think this is something we have to address. Now whether or not it is bridges or whatever, and I think this is probably something that traffic or public safety or whoever will have to address this thing. Atkins: Let me pull the file. Lehman: But I think the time is probably good to look into it. Hansen: Mr. Mayor? For your information, I had 3 studies with me tonight. I just gave them back to Jeff Davidson. Atkins: Well I am going to ask Jeff for the same studies (can't hear) Hansen: Each and every one of those studies said that this was an extremely unfriendly road for pedestrian traffic. Every one of them. And getting This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8 Page 36 kids to use them is one thing. If they are not there and they can't use them at all then they will use the highway. O'Donnell: Good point Jerry. Pfab: I think also because of the- the tremendous increase in population in that area- I think that that is crying for something to be done about it. Atkins: We will get a summary together for you. We will share it with the folks. And then we will- I will talk with Ernie about getting a schedule for your work session. It shouldn't be too hard to pull all this together. We would like to get those engineering estimates updated because those numbers are not correct. Lehman: But I also think we really should have a little bit of Staff input before we take it at a work session because I think we need to talk about it. Atkins: Oh we will. We will put something together for you. Lehman: Okay. Anyone else care to speak to the public hearing? Champion: Do we want to prolong this public hearing until we've had that work session? Lehman: No, because I don't think that- this is an issue separate from the one that we are talking about as far as improvements to the road itself. But I think it is one that we obviously are going to address. Champion: Okay. Lehman: Public hearing is closed. Do we have a motion to- Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Lehman: Motion to accept correspondence. Champion: So moved. Vanderhoef: So moved. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? All: Aye. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #8b Page 37 ITEM NO 8b.) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DECLARING Lehman: Opposed? Do we have a motion to consider? Champion: Move consideration. Lehman: Move by Champion. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? This is a project, I think, that was very near and dear to Dean Thornberry. This thing came up, I think, about 3 years ago and he mentioned how unattractive Highway 6 was and I think that kind of got the ball rolling and I am really pleased to see us moving forward with it. Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #10 Page 38 ITEM NO 10. CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 3, RUNDELL ADDITION CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 2,995 SQUARE FEER LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GRANT STREET AND COURT STREET, TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WILLIAM G. FLANAGAN AND ELILZABETH ROSE. a.) PUBLIC HEARING. Lehman: This is the continuation of a public hearing from January 18 and February 1st. Public hearing is open. Dilkes: Mr. Mayor let me tell you that pursuant to your direction last night Sarah Holecek, from my office, did speak to Mr. Flanagan. They are going to consider the input that we gave them and then will be talking to us again. So we have told them that you will continue the public hearing indefinitely and defer that resolution. Lehman: Do I hear a motion to continue the public hearing? b) Consider Resolution Authorizing Pfab: So moved. Vanderhoef: So moved. Lehman: Moved by Irvin Pfab, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? The public hearing is deferred indefinitely. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #10b Page 39 ITEM NO 10 b.) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING Dilkcs: Wc continued the public hearing indefinitely, now we have to defer the resolution. Lehman: Oh, I am sorry. Champion: Move to defer. Wilbum: Second. Lehman: Move by Champion, seconded by Wilbum to defer the resolution on item number 10. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Resolution is deferred. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #11 Page 40 ITEM NO 11. CONVEYANCE OF AN APPROXIMATELY 7,720 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL OF THE UNIMPROVED, VACATED PORTION OF THE VIRGINIA DRIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED BETWEEN LOTS 2 AND 14 OF NORTH HILLS SUBDIVISION IMMEDIATELY NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF VIRGINIA DRIVE AND RIDGEWOOD LANE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS PHILIP AND HELEN OLDIS. a.) PUBLIC HEARING Lehman: Public hearing is open. It is continued from February 1st. This property has- Dilkes: This is the one that is entirely encumbered. Lehman: Yeah, it has easements or whatever all over it. The selling price on this- the offer for this is $500 but the property is totally encumbered so my understanding is that this would probably be an appropriate- Dilkes: My recommendation will be that you can proceed with this item. Letunan: Okay. Public hearing is closed. Do we have a resolution? Pfab: So moved. Lehman: Moved by Pfab. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Roll call. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #13 Page 41 ITEM NO. 13. CONVEYANCE OF 1512 DICKINSON LANE. b.) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING. Vanderhoef: Move adoption of the resolution. Champion: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Champion. Discussion? Champion: This is for a green house? Are green houses going to be built on this lot by Moore Construction, correct? Vanderhoef: Yes. Champion: Great idea. Kanner: I am going to vote "no" even though I like the idea of a green house for 2 reasons. One, I think it is important for us to do a bid and see if we can get a lower price. I understand the need that was put before us to get this in the Parade of Homes because of the green aspect of it but I feel overriding is the issue of trying to get the cost down. And I feel that $130,000, what we would sell it to a family, is not something that we should be going for. We should be going for lower priced houses and making those available as dream homes to people in the community. So I will be voting against it for that reason. Vanderhoef: Just for the record I would like to reiterate that even though we are authorizing the building of this house the people who buy it are qualifying for it by a loan. And those dollars will be coming back into the City. These are federal dollars that were used on other housing that we had within the City. We sold those, the federal requirement says that we must reinvest those in low and moderate income housing. And that is what we are doing. And the money still is going to come back again for another opportunity for low income housing. O'Donnell: This is a great, great project. Pfab: I'd call the question. Champion: Second. Lehman: The question is called by Mr. Pfab, seconded by Champion. All in favor? All except Kanner: Aye. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #13 Page 42 Lehman: Opposed? Kanner: Aye. Lehman: Motion carries 6-1. All those in favor- oh, this is a roll call. On the resolution- go ahead. Kanner: I am sorry, what is this? Lehman: The roll call on the resolution. Dilkes: This is the resolution authorizing the conveyance of Dickinson Lane. Kanner: Oh, okay. So we are just doing this again because it is a-? Lehman: We just voted because somebody called the question. Now we are voting on the resolution. Kanner: Oh, then I was in favor of calling the question. I am sorry. I didn't understand that. But I will vote "no" on this. Lehman: Motion carries 6-1. Kanner voting "no". This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #14 Page 43 ITEM NO. 14 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT WITH PAT MOORE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, DBA MOORE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. O'Donnell: Move to adopt. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion. Champion: I just want to point out for the public that this house was originally put up for bid and there was a bid received and then the person who did the bid backed out. And so, Moore Construction has agreed to build the house at the same price the bid came in. So we just didn't throw this at him and say "build it and what is it going to cost us?" Isn't that correct? Lehman: I think that is a good point Connie. And I think the- Pfab: I think the reason the person had to withdraw was a case of bonding- the cost of bonding for an individual person. So I think that is important to know also. Champion: Right. Lehman: And I think you are right Irvin. I think it serves the same function as a bid because we did actually got out and ask. Pfab: I think its- let's move. Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1. Kanner voting "no". This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #16 Page 44 ITEM NO 16. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 2, ENTITLED "HUMAN RIGHTS," CHAPTER 1, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS," SECTION 1, ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS," REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION. (SECOND CONSIDERATION). O'Donnell: Move second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Champion: Does this include the change now that we did the last-? Lehman: Yes. Champion: Okay. Pfab: In other words, we took out the "whimp" clause? Champion: Right. O'Donnell: Let's call the question. Champion: All right. Let's vote. Lehman: Did you call the question? O'Donnell: Yes, I did. Lehman: Is there a second to calling the question? Pfab: Yes. Lehman: Good, so let's get ready to vote. Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Pfab. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #21 Page 45 ITEM NO. 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A REVISED SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES FOR PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES AND PROGRAMS. O'Donnell: Move adoption. Champion: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Discussion? Kanner: I am going to vote "no" on this because I think the increases are too high. I think that 10 to 15% biannual increase in areas like youth football and volleyball are too much. I believe we should go at the rate of inflation for our increases and a 15% increase in the farmer' s market is too much. Already the farmer's market is making a $5000 or more profit for the City and I think it's a jewel and we should consider it an economic development issue and think of how we can support the market more. Not by raising the prices higher for this. And I feel even with the half price option for low-income folks the price is getting out of the reach for low and moderate-income people. And that is why I'll be voting "no". Pfab: I will be voting for it but the only reason is that there are exceptions to the rule for people with low incomes that it won't even be fully half price. It won't be that much. Champion: That is right. Lehman: Other discussion? Vanderhoef: Just for the record, Parks and Recreation Commission has looked over these and does it annually to adjust any fees charged. Many years ago they set a self-imposed guideline that they wanted to support their activities upward towards 45% of the cost of running those programs. The last two years they have not done that as they have scaled back these increases. I think last- the present year that we are in they are bringing in roughly 40% in fees and this year the one budget that we are working on right now and these fees that we are going to be adopting will be in the neighborhood of 41% or a little bit more of the cost of the programs. Lehman: Well, I will support this because I believe that there is probably no one in the City that is more sensitive to fees than the Parks and Recreation Commission themselves. And I am sure that they agonized over these increases. I don't think anybody could probably be more critical of whether or not the public is able to absorb those increases than the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #21 Page 46 commission themselves. And there are provisions available for folks who have difficulty in paying those fees. But I certainly applaud them for their attempts to cover at least 40% of the cost of the program. O'Donnell: Well said. Kanner: Marian, do you recall where the impetus for the increase to 45% came from? I was trying to get information on that. Atkins: It is to the best of my recollection because I believe it precedes me- I remember Terry Trueblood and I were appointed about the same time. One of the issues that Terry inherited as director of Parks and Recreation was that the fee structure, the income and basically everything associated with the recreation program financially was really out of whack. And the Council at that time developed a policy that the fee structure was to pay 45% of the cost of the program. The other 55%, and that is give or take within the whole package of programs was to be financed by local taxes. And that has really remained that way for- Dee is nodding her head, you were on the commission a long time ago- and it has been-. And they have always been really very good. I mean, it has fluctuated a tad bit and again, to their credit, 40% was about as low as they have ever been. And they have always managed to bump it back up. So that has been the general operating policy for it. Kanner: So it was the City Council's initiative and not a (can't hear) Atkins: I am not so sure it was an initiative. I think my predecessor instructed Terry that you've got to fix the financing of the Recreation program. Karr: I think there was a comprehensive fee study done looking at- Atkins: That's right and there was a fee study also. Karr: That was the impetus and that was (can't hear). Atkins: And again, that preceded me. But I know that is something that Terry inherited when he arrived. Champion: We still have really reasonable fees. O'Donnell: Exactly. Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries, you voted "no" Steve? 6-1 Kanner voting "no". This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #22 Page 47 ITEM NO. 22 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE IOWA CITY LANDFILL GAS COLLECTION SYSTEM. Lehman: The engineer's estimate on this project was $1,500,000. We received what appears to be about 6 bids. The lowest bid was from Westmar, Inc for about $923,000. Public works and Engineering recommend the awarding of the project to Westmar. Is there a motion to that effect? O'Donnell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. I love it when they come in low. Champion: I like these kinds of bids. Lehman: Yes. Discussion? Roll call. Good news, now the bad news. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #23 Page 48 ITEM NO 23. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS RECEIVED ON FEBRUARY 8, 2000, FOR THE IOWA CITY LANDFILL RECYCLING CENTER, PHASE 2, AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MARCH 7 ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORMS OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE IOWA CITY LANDFILL RECYCLING CENTER PROJECT, PHASE 2, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF SMD HEARING, AND DIRECTING CITY ENGINEER TO PLACE SAID PLANS ON FILE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. Lehman: There was a bid opening for this project. The lowest bid received was $697,000 out of 5 bids. The estimate was $542,000. Champion: Move rejection. Lehman: That is the recommendation that Connie just made. Is there a second to the rejection? Pfab: So moved. Lehman: Second by Irvin. Atkins: And before you vote Ernie, can I have Chuck come to the microphone for a minute? We talked about what you all talked about last night and how is it we want to do this now so we can keep this project on track? Schmadeke: The setting of the public hearing tonight will be for the building only at the landfill. And then we will come back later with the paving project that we want to pull out of this current bid. And we want to look at some other ways to try to reduce the cost and so we want to take a re-look at the paving project and then come back at a later date with that project. Lehman: Chuck, this will be the third time that we have gone out for bids I believe. Wasn't the first one the one that used oil to heat the facility and it was a very-? Schmadeke: That was just in the planning stage where the estimated cost was too high. Lehman: Oh, okay. And then we changed it to what we just now have gotten too high a bid on. Schmadeke: That is right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #23 Page 49 Lehman: Are we going to change the building? What kind of a building is this? Schmadeke: The building is scaled back quite a bit and I think the estimate on the building is about $400,000. Lehman: What type of construction? Schmadeke: It's- Dan, maybe you can help me on that. Champion: It can't be fancy. Dan Scott: They- yes, the building we have already looked at before. I think we've got a very good design for our building. We've- it's- basically it consists of a steel exterior, a steel roof, steel siding. Lehman: Similar to the Park and Recreation maintenance building? Scott: Fairly similar to that. This building will have structural paneled walls. Lehman: Okay. Scott: But it is a pretty simple building and the bids that we have received reflected that pretty well. Lehman: Okay. Pfab: I have a question. But you are going to separate the building out, which I think is a great idea, but at the same time I hope we are not going to compromise on the building- the needs of the building. Scott: No. Pfab: In other words, we are not going to skimp on that. Atkins: Basically what you all brought up last night was split the bid. Pfab: Yeah. Atkins: Take the building and take the paving and that is what we are agreeing to. We think that makes some sense. Pfab: My understanding is that it is going to be the same building. Atkins: It is the same building. Yeah, that is what you are going to get. O'Donnell: The road is split out. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #23 Page 50 Kanner: Chuck, if we get a favorable bid do you still anticipate it getting built this year? Schmadeke: Yes. Atkins: Yes. Schmadeke: And the paving as well because we will probably be back sometime early spring with the paving project. Champion: We've waited a long time for this building. Lehman: We are working on it. Other discussion? Vanderhoef: Do we need to be specific in our resolution then that it is for the building only? Champion: We don't do that. Lehman: I don't think we do. (can't hear) Dilkes: It is just setting the public hearing on it and then you will vote on the plans and specs which will clearly be just on the building. Lehman: Okay, the motion has been that we reject the bids. Roll call. Motion carries. The bids are rejected. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #24 Page 51 ITEM NO 24. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT 3- SOUTH PLANT IMPROVEMENTS, WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND COLLECTION FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. Lehman: This is a very large project to the south water treatment plant. The engineer's estimate was $24,900,000. We received five bids. The lowest of those bids was $26,574,000. The highest one in excess of $30 million. Three of those bids were very, very close. We have received a recommendation from Public Works and Engineering that we award the project to Story Construction which is the bidder that gave us the $26,574,000 bid. O'Donnell: Move adoption. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. I think this deserves- we don't just want to vote on something that is coming in- I mean, this is an overestimate but I think it is important to point out that in the total scheme of things it wasn't that long ago that we had a bid on a trunk sewer project that had an estimate of $18 million and it came in at about $13 million. Atkins: That is correct. Lehman: But we have been very, very fortunate in having projects occasionally coming in underestimates. It has been infrequent, actually, that we have them over and my guess Steve, and I shouldn't guess- especially on television, my guess is that the total project for that sewer plant is probably under the original estimate at this point. Atkins: That is correct. Lehman: That is amazing because that estimate was- Atkins: $94 million. Lehman: $94 million. I mean, we are 6 years later doing the same project that we anticipated doing and with increased costs and inflation and whatever we are still under what we had estimated back in 1994. So, we've got to feel good about that. Pfab: Was the- you said it was recommended by? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #24 Page 52 Lehman: Public Works and Engineering. Pfab: Public Works. Without any reservation to accept it? Schmadeke: Yes, we feel we have a good contractor on this project. We bid it at a great time of year and I think probably our estimate was just a little low in this case. Pfab: Okay, but no qualms? No second thoughts? Schmadeke: No. Pfab: Okay. That is what I wanted to know. Lehman: Irvin you are new on the Council, but these guys think real close before they- if they tell us it is okay. Pfab: I just wanted to be publicly stated. Lehman: Yeah. O'Donnell: It is a good question. Champion: They are a little neurotic. O'Donnell: These guys (can't hear) Lehman: Okay, roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27a Page 53 ITEM NO 27A. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND MERISTAR CORPORATION REGARDING THE TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF THE ATRIUM AREA OF THE CITY PLAZA HOTEL FOR CONSTRUCTION. Vanderhoef: Move adoption. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? I am sorry, go ahead. Kanner: I just had a question. Is it the whole walkway that is being closed so that people will have to go around to the outside? Lehman: Yes. The walkway through the lobby area. Kanner: And up to 2 months it is stated? Helling: 40 days I think is it. Lehman: 40 days? Helling: Yeah. Pfab: Are you talking 40 working days or 40 calendar days? Helling: 40 calendar days. From February 21 to April 1. Champion: There is that little walk (can't hear) Atkins: The Dubuque Walk (can't hear). Champion: Right. It is not out of the way. Atkins: It is covered, yes. Lehman: This comment says February 21 through March 21. Is that a miss-? Dilkes: No, that was the original request- Lehman: And that has changed? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27a Page 54 Dilkes: And when we drafted the agreement and sent it to them it changed. Lehman: All right. That is fine. So we know what this is- the downtown, formerly Holiday Inn. The area that the public has been able to go through off the Pedestrian walkway will be closed for a period of 40 construction days or approximately 2 months. The area between Bushnell's Turtle, or what used to be Bushnell's, and the hotel will then be the access point. Helling: Yes. Pfab: I would like to make a comment. I think they are doing a terrific job remodeling that. Go on. Champion: They are. Lehman: Yeah, they are spending a lot of money fixing that place up. Kanner: Another quick question. What is the delay- why are the signs still covered? Lehman: You will have to ask them. Kanner: Didn't we approve that? Lehman: We approved them but that- Kanner: They are not waiting for us? Lehman: No, no- we are not holding them up. Atkins: My understanding Emie is that it is a corporate- they answer the phone "City Plaza soon to be the Sheraton". And apparently it had something to do with the franchise agreement. Lehman: It may hinge on their remodeling to reach a certain point. Atkins: Could be. Lehman: I don't know but that is a corporate decision. And I am anxious to get them uncovered too. Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27b Page 55 ITEM NO 27 B. Dilkes: We had put on an additional item which was originally framed as a resolution terminating the agreement for use of the public right-of-way by the owner who is constructing the building at the comer of Court and Linn due to problems with, continuing problems, with blockage of the alley to the distress of the neighboring property owners. There was a meeting, as I understand it this morning between the contractor, the owner, and Jay Honohan one of the neighboring property owners and the attomey who has been representing those property owners. And agreement has been worked out. It has not yet been signed. What I would suggest that you do is entertain a motion to authorize Steve Atkins to sign an addendum to that use of public fight-of-way agreement if it is acceptable to Public Works, the neighboring property owners and the other parties. Lehman: Do we have a motion to that effect? Champion: I move that. O'Donnell: I second it. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Connie, would you repeat your motion? Champion: I move that we let Steve Atkins handle this. Lehman: All right. Champion: You sound like the school board. Lehman: Discussion? I think this would enable Steve to act as our agent and Marian to see to it that this gets traded out and hopefully save us another meeting or discussion of it. Dilkes: I don't want to wait for three weeks to get the agreement signed by the City. I'd like to see it signed before that. Kanner: Will this allow Steve, if they renege on the agreement, to then enforce this resolution as it was written up before? Dilkes: No. Any termination of the agreement would have to come back to you. Lehman: Via special Council meeting if that were necessary. (Changed tapes) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27b Page 56 Kanner: Can we- does anyone on the Council feel we should just hand it to Steve to deal with it in this fashion? Lehman: I think- I said something to Eleanor about that, I think you indicated to me you would prefer that if that is to be done that the Council would do it. Is that correct? Dilkes: My recommendation is that that termination would come back to you. Lehman: Right. Dilkes: That is a fairly- Honohan: The penalty, excuse me, the penalty clause was left in wasn't it Eleanor? Dilkes: Yes. Honohan: Their- excuse me- Jay Honohan again. The proposed agreement which I believe we received a fax- Maureen called me about 5:30 that the Knutsen's signed it. Dilkes: Oh, good. Honohan: It has a penalty clause in it that if they make a violation they have to pay the City $100 for every violation on a continuing basis. Champion: Every hour? Honohan: Every hour. Every violation. Dilkes: I think it is- just a minute. Honohan: Unless they cut that out. We had that (can't hear). Dilkes: No, the penalty provision is in there but I don't know that it is every hour. Just a minute. Honohan: Well, it is every violation really. O'Donnell: (can't hear) Dilkes: Each violation. Honohan: And also they will be allowed to block the alley with their crane but it has to be done before 8:00 in the morning so that they are not interfering with the various businesses. We spent about an hour and I think we worked out This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27b Page 57 a satisfactory agreement that- I think there was maybe misunderstandings by Knutson and Kroeger when the agreement was entered into because apparently Knutsons intended to block the whole alley with the crane from day 1. And that didn't get through to us and it wasn't part of the original agreement. But I think speaking for us, the property owners, I think if they clear out by 8:00 we are satisfied. Lehman: Well, my understanding is that something has been worked out and Steve can sign for the City. And that is the purpose of this resolution. Champion: And I am glad you got it worked out. Honohan: We are hoping we don't have to come- Kanner: Can Steve enforce the fine too if necessary? So it doesn't have to come back to us? Honohan: It, that's- in the agreement it was automatic. Dilkes: It is an automatic penalty for violation upon the filing by anybody who observes the violation of an affidavit with the City Clerk. So that' s a non- issue. The reason I don't think- I think the termination should come back to you is because I think that is a bigger issue. Lehman: Pretty severe. Champion: It is a bigger issue. Dilkes: And I would want you involved anyway so we might as well bring it back to you and let you make the decision. Lehman: One thing about it if we terminate it, we are the ones that is going to take the heat so we just as well be the ones that make the decision. Honohan: One final point in the agreement: it calls for them, this time, to have a supervisor to enforce the agreement to be there all day long. Which, we all know construction workers- they get an inch [and] they will take a mile. And that is what (can't hear) is doing. O'Donnell: Some of them. Honohan: Thank you. Champion: Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #27b Page 58 Atkins: Well folks, as long as I understand, know what the roles are, I am fine with it. Lehman: Okay. Atkins: Okay. Lehman: Any other discussion? Kanner: Get your hard hat. Atkins: I will get my hard hat. Lehman: Okay, is this roll call or just a motion? Dilkes: Just a motion. Lehman: All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Opposed? Motion carded. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #30 Page 59 ITEM NO 30. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. Letunan: There are several appointments that we agreed to last night. I will read them off and we'll entertain a motion to approve them. a.) Airport Commission Lehman: We selected Alan Ellis. b.) Civil Service Commission Lehman: One appointment, Mike Kennedy. c.) Historic Preservation Commission Lehman: The Woodlawn district, Peter Jochimsen. At-large, Michaelanne Widness. Pamela Michaud from College Green. James Enloe from East College District. d.) Human Rights Commission Lehman: Maureen Howe e.) Telecommunications Commission Lehman: Elizabeth McKray and Catherine Weingeist. Do we have a motion to that effect? O'Donnell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Motion carries. Wilburn: Ernie? Lehman: Yes. Wilburn: I have a comment. I just wanted to say there were quite a few I thought very qualified applicants for the commissions and it wasn't an easy thing to look- to decide. I have a question maybe about the process of how- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #30 Page 60 because we received several applications that night. How soon before a work session where we are looking at those appointments are they allowed to submit applications? Because it doesn't seem that we can give them, you know, fair consideration if we are getting them that night. Lehman: It is kind of our choice isn't it? Karr: It is totally up to Council. The direction- Lehman: We have accepted them up till the eve of- till 5:00 1 think almost, the day of the meeting. Karr: That is correct. We are not, yeah, we are not authorized to reject anyone. We submit all applications to you. Wilbum: Okay. Maybe at some point in the near future we could think about that because it doesn't feel fair to me to be handed, you know, (can't hear). Lehman: With no opportunity to call the person and check (can't hear). Wilbum: Or have them contact us. And then the other thing is I- maybe, (can't hear) agenda for the work sessions in consultation with the City Manager, maybe we can move the appointment discussion up a little bit in the work session. Opportunity for- it seemed there were a few people who were waiting to see if they were appointed. Lehman: Oh, you mean at the work session last night? Wilbum: Yeah, at the work- just so they could hear that decision. And also, now last night maybe was a fluke because we had so many items crammed in, but also it seemed at the end of the meeting we were kind of rushed there. It also didn't feel like- so just something to think about. Champion: That is a good point. Lehman: No, no that is fine. If we would prefer to move those appointments to a different spot in the work session that is absolutely at the pleasure of the Council. Wilbum: And I don't know if it necessarily needs to be the first thing but up sooner. Pfab: I would definitely support that. Lehman: How would you like to do that at the same point that we do- Champion: Council time? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #30 Page 61 Lehman: -agenda discussion? Which is before- right after Planning and Zoning and before- O'Donnell: I think that is a good spot for it. Lehman: Can we do that? Champion: Uh-huh. Lehman: We will do it (can't hear). O'Donnell: One question. Atkins: Review agenda items and appointments. That is the new item. Lehman: Appointments, that is correct. That is fine. Atkins: That is fine. O'Donnell: One question Marian. How long do we keep the applications on file? Karr: We have- we allow them, if they would like to be on file, we will keep them on file for up to 60 days. O'Donnell: Okay. Karr: Some people chose not to renew it and indicate that on their application. O'Donnell: Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 62 ITEM NO 31. COUNCIL INFORMATION Champion: Well, I have something that I want to talk about for a few minutes. I don't know if I can do this because it is on the agenda. Can I talk about anything now? Lehman: She'll tell you if you can't. Champion: Okay. Well, you know, I appreciate Jay Honohan coming to the City Council meeting tonight to talk about the editorial at the Press Citizen and I have thought about responding myself to some of the things the paper has published. I mean, I think you have a real problem with our editorial board, they call it, at the paper because it seems- Lehman: Whoever writes them. Champion: Whoever writes them because they not only write about everything negatively, but they really don't have the information that is even correct in their paper's articles over the past couple weeks. That article today was so misleading and so inaccurate. And the article on the Englert a couple of weeks ago was just as inaccurate and misleading. And then after the Council approved the $200,000 there was a really nice article about how the whole county should support this. And I just think as a City newspaper that we need to think about some way to talk to them about how they can help be a leader in the community and not just say bad things about everything that we do or the school board does or somebody else does and then change their mind 2 weeks later. Or at least- at least- I don't really care what they write about me but at least some way to give them accurate information. Does that bother anybody else that their editorials are so inaccurate? Am I wrong? Am I just dreaming? Lehman: No, I think you are fight. Pfab: That was one of my reasons for encouraging that the work sessions to be televised. Champion: Oh, that would have helped. That wouldn't have helped with thing this morning. Pfab: So there is not a vacuum out there. (can't hear). Champion: Well that has been voted against. I am asking if anybody has any suggestions. Like, would it help at all if we had the Mayor meet with them and ask what-. No? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 63 Pfab: That is not a "yes". Lehman: No, no. If you ask me to meet with them I would be happy to do that. Champion: I mean, is there some way- how do they get their- do they, I am sure if they call here that we give them accurate information. And I am sure that they are responding to it. Atkins: They have called one time. One time. Lehman: I don't think that they are very good at verifying. I do not believe that they read their own paper. Champion: No, they don't. They don't. Lehman: I think that is part of the problem. Pfab: Isn't there a firewall in there someplace I hear talking about the editorial? (can't hear) Champion: Well, it bothers me we are trying to get so many things accomplished and then they publish really erroneous editorials that really damage the cause. They can be for it or against it, I am not telling them what stand to take. I am asking them about accuracy. O'Donnell: I think in fairness here, especially on the Englert Theater, it did say it is too expensive first. But then it came back and the way I read it was: since you did it, it should be for the whole county. That is how I read that. But there are some inaccuracies. I don't believe there is anything we can do about that and it does bother me but I don't see how we can control a newspaper. Champion: I don't want to control them. O'Donnell: Well, but criticize them. Pfab: We did just criticize them. Well that takes care of that. O'Donnell: We did it. Lehman: No, and Irvin, we did it on television. That should make you happy. O'Donnell: I hope we said it right. Pfab: (can't hear) could have been a work session. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 64 Champion: Well, I just want them to be- Lehman: This is official. Champion: I am not asking them- I am not telling them what stand to take. I am asking them to please get accurate information. Kanner: We do have news space that we take out ads and perhaps that is an appropriate place where we can direct the Staff to correct what we consider misinformation. Champion: It would take another whole paper. (several talking) Dilkes: I think probably, I think probably- I am sorry, I think if you want to talk about ways to address your relationship with the paper and things you might do we probably want to put it on a work session. Talk about it in more detail. Champion: Maybe we could ask them to come to a work session. Dilkes: Sure. Whatever you want to do. O'Donnell: Let me know the date of that. Lehman: Anything else Connie? Champion: That is it for tonight. Lehman: Irvin, do you have anything? Pfab: Yes. I am really- I am quite concerned as you walk around on the sidewalks after the snow, which one or two we did have, how long it took for some people to get the sidewalks cleaned. And you watch people walking and struggling. I can't believe that there aren't a lot more lawsuits as I just walk around and watch people slipping and falling. I believe the ordinance says that 24 hours after it ceases to snow the sidewalks are supposedly cleaned- completely cleaned. I just wish that was true. I have gone by places 2 and 3 weeks afterwards and it is was still not shoveled. That is pretty bad. I, at this point, I am- if something doesn't- if the community doesn't pick up on this I am really concemed and I would really like to have another look at our sidewalk shoveling ordinance. Bring them up and start putting some teeth in them if there is no other way. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 65 Lehman: Irvin, I think we have teeth in them. They are enforced on a complaint basis. If you walk by and see that sidewalk 3 weeks after a snow and it is not shoveled, and no body complains about it, nothing is probably going to happen. Pfab: Well, is that- is that really- isn't the City more responsible? Lehman: Do we have enough people to check every sidewalk? Pfab: Well, we have people to check if there are parked cars along there. Would- what would be wrong with them if they just look over at the sidewalk and punch their little computer and have it (can't hear). O'Donnell: The metered area is such a small area. Lehman: Yeah. But I do think- O'Donnell: But I do see your point. Lehman: We do- and you are exactly right- we have some people who are very insensitive about doing that but we do, whenever we are called, my understanding is that we do notify those folks and they do have to clean their sidewalks or we will clean it and charge them for it. Pfab: Yeah, but how long is the process by the time you get to that? 24 hours later- Atkins: A couple of days. Pfab: -and then you have to give them 24 more hours. I would say if they are not cleaned they should suffer the consequences. If they start suffering the consequences I think it would change rather quickly. Champion: Go run for sheriff. Lehman: I don't know, but I certainly do share some of your same feelings because it is terrible the way some of them don't get done. Pfab: And I mean, to me it is almost like the broken window syndrome. People drive into town, they see the sidewalks unshoveled [and] they think, well what a bunch of (can' hear). I don't know. Lehman: Good point. Pfab: I will get down off my soapbox now. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 66 Lehman: All right. That is fine. Mike? O'Donnell: Just a couple things. I have had letters again and e-mails which- I am reading my e-mails Marian, I know you'd be happy for me on that- about dogs running loose in Hickory Hill Park. The last time we had a meeting I mentioned it the very next day a cross-country skier was bit by a dog in Hickory Hill Park. I believe that it is part of the responsibility of being a pet owner is exercising your dog. Taking him out and throwing him a stick or bone and having him return it. So I would like to see us set aside some area to let responsible pet owners take their dog out and run him. I don't know if this is in Hickory Hill Park or down in the Peninsula but I think we are behind the times in allowing pet owners this ability. Also, Henry Herwig's father passed away last Friday and I know the Council as well as the Staff offers condolences to Henry and wishes him well- and his family. That is all I have. Lehman: Thank you Mike. Vanderhoef: Nothing, Mr. Mayor. Lehman: Ross? Wilburn: I wanted to- it has come up about the work sessions and I wanted to address and kind of state what I had intended to say last night but I wanted to address it today. I am not trying to be insensitive to the Council members and some members of the public that are wanting to have this done. One of my concerns is that during the work sessions the presence of the camera, whether consciously or subconsciously, it does force a change in behavior. Someone may not ask a question for whatever reasons. And my actual concern is that potentially the opposite effect that, you know, you are wanting information to be out and in front of the public. A concern is that this might have the opposite effect of pushing some decisions, some conversation, behind the public's eye. The second thing that I think about [is] we are a part time deliberative body. This is the- you know, I will see someone on the street or something like that but we really don't have a chance, especially with open meetings, to sit down as one group and to have an informal conversation. What do you think, go ahead Ross, ask the dumb question- that type of thing. And I think, you know, there are other governmental bodies that they see each other more frequently. They have through committee work more intensive times to share this type of conversation information. So, as a new Council member I appreciate having the opportunity to just have the more informal nature. So I guess I will just leave it at that. I am not trying, again, I am- I appreciate what you are trying to do. I am not trying to be cavalier or (can't hear). Okay? And there was a second thing I wanted to say on a different issue. And gosh darn it, I can't remember what it is. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 67 Lehman: Okay. Wilburn: Am I (can't hear) a senior moment already? Vanderhoef: It is a Council moment. Have them all the time. Wilbum: All right. Thank you. O'Donnell: Must be the camera. Lehman: Steven? Kanner: This is about our agendas that are published and, Marian hopefully I will get our conversation right, I asked Madan for instance in item 16 about the sexual orientation revision and we had amended it but it didn't appear in the agenda item as amended. And it didn't appear in our packet again. And Marian said that this is up to Council to direct if we wanted to put that in. And I conveying that correctly? So I would ask that Council direct that if there is something that is amended that we print the amended version in the upcoming and future agenda packets and also our Council packets. And another thing connected to this, I asked if Marian could bring this up and she said she doesn't have a slot. Well, this is me not Marian or anything- but I think like we give the City Attorney and the City Manager could we give the City Clerk a time? I think that she'll give us things that we need to know once in a while but it won't be a great burden. So I bring that to the City Council to see if we could do something like that. Champion: I thought she did have a slot. Pfab: I would support that. Lehman: Well I think that Madan- and I have no problem with officially asking you- but I would like to think that you know us well enough that if you have something to say you would tell us. Because you have interrupted us on occasion for which we are deeply appreciative. O'Donnell: Really correct us. Lehman: Corrected us, there you go. As far as the amendments I have no problems. It might be a good- I don't care to reprint a whole ordinance but if we were to print changes. You know, this was amended to change, these words were stricken, and these words were added- is that a problem? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 68 Karr: No. As for Steven and my conversation there were two issues. One is the item in comment reflecting an amendment and the second one is the practice of not redistributing ordinances- Lehman: No, (can't hear) Karr: So you are asking the first one? Lehman: Only the item. If we changed a word from theirs to ours we show that sentence period. Karr: The item in comment or just- Lehman: Just the item that you've changed. I don't think- obviously we were all here, we are all aware of what the amendment was. But I think in the one he is- particularly in question- I think that is one that most of us would recognize and so would the public immediately that we changed those words. I don't have any problem with including that in the comment section. Karr: In the item in comment but not redistributing the text of the ordinance? Lehman: No, I don't think you have to do that because we already have that. O'Donnell: I don't think so. Champion: We it gets its final printing it is all corrected right? Karr: Yes. Champion: Right. O'Donnell: I think it is extra work for (can't hear). Kanner: Yeah I think it is- I would like to see maybe the whole thing printed again but I would accept just if there is a change that we make sure that that is out there. And mostly for the public because the public relies heavily on this version I would say to a large extent. And I think it is good for them to know that there is a change. Lehman: Of course, now they don't have the original one anyway. Kanner: But they might have heard about it, it was reported- Lehman: But if they heard about it they can see the change and the change would appear in the comments section and would probably be every bit as much This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. #31 Page 69 information as they would have before anyway. Because they don't have the ordinance. They can get it but they wouldn't have it. I have no- I think the amendment changes- sure that is easy to do isn't it? Karr: Uh-huh. Yes. Champion: I think that is a good idea too. Lehman: Okay. O'Donnell: It is not a problem. Lehman: Other comments? Kanner: That is it. Lehman: Steven. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. 32 Page 70 ITEM NO 32. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. a.) City Manager Atkins: Two items. First of all is an announcement which [is] of a meeting you can't go to but I thought I would tell you about it anyway. O'Donnell: Didn't want to go anyway. Atkins: On Tuesday the 29tn at 6:30 we are having a- sort of a little working session on the Snyder Creek Watershed. Remember we've got that big grant to study the 3200 acres of the watershed. And it is out at the new Moose Lodge. It is being sponsored by the City, EPA, DNR, Johnson County Soil and Conservation District. Julie Tallman, who you all know from our staff, is going to be involved (can't hear). And it is really intended- what is a watershed, how do they work, what does it mean to water quality when you live near one? They have got a really pretty good list of speakers, just a couple of hours that I felt a lot of folks in town might be interested. I can get you a brochure if you want to pass it out. The problem is we have a budget hearing that night. Pfab: I would ask, is that being televised? Atkins: I doubt it. Pfab: Okay. Kanner: Can we ask our government channel to see if they have time to do that? Atkins: Can we- to move slots. Oh, wait a minute- they will be here anyway. They will be here for you guys, yeah. Lehman: Public hearing. Atkins: I don't think we ought- I doubt we have enough people for that. O'Donnell: We will have a brochure anyway. Atkins: Anyway, and the second item is as we all know we had kiosks delivered that didn't meet the ADA requirements. There are four parties involved- the City being one of them, the contractor, the designer, and the fabricator. The City' s position was that we asked for the kiosks to meet ADA requirements. The contractor, fabricator, designer were told what we expected. We believe we have resolved the issue that they will be making some adjustments to the foundation which in effect will adjust the height This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. 32 Page 71 of these units. It is done at their expense. Hopefully the work will be resolved in the next four weeks. We just need a break in the weather. But I wanted to let you know that hopefully that one is behind us now. Okay? That is all I got. Champion: Steven, will you be attending that meeting out there? Atkins: What meeting? Lehman: Snyder Watershed. Champion: You know, that watershed one. Atkins: No, I will be here with you. Lehman: Be here with us for the budget meeting. Atkins: I figured you'd want me here with you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000. 32 Page 72 b.) City Clerk Lehman: Marian? Karr: Eleanor? Lehman: I said Marian. Oh yes, there is something. Tell us about the census. Karr: You want me to mention the census. The census is coming up. The forms will be starting to arrive in March. We will start with the rural areas first. The anticipated arrival time in our homes here in Iowa City should be the latter part of March. Mid to latter part of March. And one thing that we do want to stress is that, again, this is a federal requirement for the census. The federal government has an estimate which we, in talking to the Mayor, we found interesting. The estimate in the budget for conducting the census is that if a person, the average household, pays $3 for completing the census- if when they get the census they return the form the average cost per household is $3. If however they do not return the form and there are follow up visits needed the average cost per household increases to $70. So, if you want to save $67 a household you would complete the questionnaire without being asked. And that would make a big difference not only the upfront cost of operating but certainly in the benefits that we would receive here. Lehman: Unbelievable. O'Donnell: That is very good to know that. Lehman: Eleanor, do we have a motion to adjourn? O'Donnell: I abstain. Lehman: No- moved by Vanderhoef. Seconded- Champion: Champion. Lehman: By Champion. All in favor? All: Aye. Lehman: Meeting adjourned. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of February 15, 2000.