Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-01-18 TranscriptionCouncil Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 1 January 18, 2000 Council Work Session 5:00 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Kanner (arrived 3:09), Pfab (arrived 3:35); 5 present Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Dilkes, Franklin, Davidson, Schmadeke, Fosse, Newman, Hennes, Scott, Boothroy, Elias, Hartsen, Grosvenor, Fowler, Nasby, Logsden Tapes: 00-6 Side 2, 00-7 Both Sides Planning & Zoning Items Franklin/The first three items are to consider setting public hearings for February 1 st. The very first one is on the South Central District Plan which we will mail to you Friday when it will be hot off the press so that you'll have a little bit more time than normal to take a look at it. A. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 1 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. B. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 1 ON 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) Franklin/The second item is a rezoning from CN-1 to CO-1 of 2.5 acres on the west side of First Avenue. This is the Mercy Hospital issue. Lehman/Before we have the public hearing, I don't know what protocol says, it would seem to me that there have been enough questions about this that we need to have a (can't hear) conference with Planning & Zoning Commission. Is that appropriate? Franklin/Your conference with the Planning and Zoning Commission should be predicated on a inclination of a majority of the City Council to vote differently from the Commission which in this case would be to vote in favor of this rezoning. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 2 Lehman/Which would occur after the public heating? Franklin/Yes. Lehman/All fight fine, go ahead. Vanderhoef/So we would have that meeting when? Lehman/We decided (can't hear). Franklin/Yea, what we would try to do is schedule it at the same time as you were going to have your first consideration so it's not to hold this up at all. Lehman/Right. Franklin/But you would have your public heating schedule for February 1 st, your next meeting then would be February 15 and you would have at that work session on the 14th hopefully, a meeting with Planning & Zoning Commission or their representatives to discuss the issue. You then can proceed with your first consideration or not and then your second consideration would be your first meeting in March. Lehman/OK. Vanderhoef/I guess I have a little problem with all of this business in that I would like a discussion about. Karr/Excuse me. Vanderhoef/I don't have my (can't hear) sorry. Karr/No. Vanderhoef/Sorry about that. I'd like to talk about CN-1 in general without looking at a specific project and. Franklin/Well that discussion is something that the Planning & Zoning Commission has indicated a desire to do also and so that we would be having that kind of discussion exactly when it happens is not clear at this point. We'll not to get into too much detail and complication but you know we're doing this development code review, one of the possibilities in that development code review is to look at This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 3 our commercial zones and exactly how we have them configured and if they, there may be some arguments for simplifying our commercial zoning and that would be part of that development code review which is to take place over the next two years. I don't think we're going to resolve the issue of the neighborhood commercial in any expedite way and that right now you have before you a request from an applicant to look at a rezoning and that's the decision now is to whether to look at rezoning in this particular spot. They have certain time requirements, that is the applicant has certain time requirements to have a decision made and I don't think the resolution of the CN-1 can occur within that time frame. Vanderhoef/How soon do you think CN-1 in of itself could be discussed? Franklin/I think it's something that, well you can certainly make it a higher priority, as it stands now it would be something that we do over this next year as we do the development code review. Vanderhoef/But if we requested that one to be pulled out without discussing all of the commercial that might not be a real good way of approaching this whole thing and I understand that. But for me that' s where I want to go before I start making decisions on changing CN-1 or rezonings. Wilburn/We also have a staff recommendation prior to that meeting and after. Lehman/Right. Wilburn/I'm, you know, as another factor. Vanderhoef/So we have a split right now we have P & Z that says deny. Franklin/Right. Vanderhoef/And we've got a staff that says this could work and recommend and I want to keep the projects separate from the zoning of the whole picture of CN-l's. Lehman/Well this obviously is something we'll have to address after the public hearing if there's a majority of Council who feel we may not agree with P & Z we request a meeting with P & Z. Franklin/Yea I mean I think it's premature for you now to express a conclusion. Lehman/I agree. We will make that decision after the public hearing. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 4 Franklin/OK. And I mean the whole issue of the CN-1 as a separate item obviously you can bring that up at anytime and direct us to work on it. Champion/Well we're not going to do that now. Lehman/No. Champion/That should be done as a whole. Lehman/And that's another issue. Champion/Right. Franklin/That's right, I think so. Lehman/Right. O'Donnell/But when is the next meeting planned? Franklin/The next meeting planned for? O'Donnell/with Planning & Zoning. Lehman/We don't have a meeting planned with Planning & Zoning. O'Donnell/But when is their meeting? When are they going to have the public hearing? Lehman/We are. Champion/We are having it. Franklin/Yea your public heating is scheduled for February 1 st and so I see the next possible time for a joint meeting is February 14 trying to bring schedules ofP & Z and the Council together. Lehman/Right. O'Donnell/That was my question when we are going to have the joint meeting. Vanderhoef/The 14th. Lehman/OK. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 5 C. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 1 ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY (OSA- 8) CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY ACCESS ONTO FOSTER ROAD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 500 FOSTER ROAD (REZ99-0016) Franklin/The third setting of the public hearing then is for a sensitive areas overlay conditional zoning agreement revision and this is in relation to the driveway access question for Bud and Betty Louis on Foster Road. D. PUBLIC HEARING ON 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 IT'S EASTERN TERMINUS. (REZ99-0011 ) Franklin/OK the fouah item, Item D is an actual public hearing for tonight, not tomorrow tonight. And this is on Windsor Ridge Paa 15. Location maps up here, basically it is the extension of Coua Street out that we did as a capitol project to here and the developer continued it on to where it will eventually intersect with Arlington. This is built to here, the developer had come to the Planning & Zoning Commission some time ago to get this rezoned to RM-12, at that time it was conditionally zoned for RM-12. The condition being that a development plan would be reviewed and approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council at such time as development were to occur. So that's the spot that we're at right, get over here, that we're at fight now and that is to look at the specific development plan. This development plan was to be done in a context of the comprehensive plan principles and the Noaheast District Plan which calls for a diversity of housing in neighborhoods as they are built up. And try to remember this in the context of what's around it. Primarily what we have in this area to the south and the existing Windsor Ridge is detached single family housing with some townhouses and multifamily south of Coua Street. However the primary land use south of Coua Street is single family and as this proceeds to the noah this density will thin out to and could be duplexes or single family detached, there's also a piece of ground to the east of here which is going to be paa of this developed neighborhood also. As you think about this you should be referring This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 6 back to your Northeast District Plans and the illustrations there that show the possibilities of how this area can develop. What we're looking at here are four 12-plexes that are these four buildings here and the remainder are townhouses in groupings of sixes and four's and then this is another type of townhouse in a different design and I have the design of the various buildings if your interested in that to. For the new Council Members this is what's called a plan development, it's, the zoning is OPDH, Overlay Planned Development Housing, which is just like totally backwards to confuse you but that' s the way the terminology is used. Wilburn/Thanks Karen. Franklin/And then the 12 on the end indicates the underlying density so what we have to do here because this is zoned RM-12 is we have to stay within the underlying density. The density of this project right here which is in the RM-12 zoning and what will be OPDH-12 as soon as this plan is adopted is 8.5 dwelling units per acre, so we're well within that underlying zoning. This has gone through the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Commission has recommended it 7-0 after working with the developer on a number of issues here but everything is satisfactory at this time. In the staff report you probably noted that there was some discussion about a trail, that trail is provided down along here and would connect with Court Street. Are there any questions? Do you want to see the building elevations? Pfab/No. Vanderhoef/I've got a couple questions. Franklin/OK. Vanderhoef/Number 1, will there ever be parking on Court Street in front of this development? Franklin/Not on Court Street, but there will be on Camden. In fact we have designed this as a collector dimension from here to here with 31 feet of paving to allow for that parking on Camden Road anticipating that that's going to happen with this density of development. As this road progresses north it will narrow to 28 feet at this point and you'll be getting the subdivision plat on this in a couple weeks and then it will be discontinuous as it proceeds up to Lower West Branch Road. But there will be not be parking on Court Street, Court is an arterial. Vanderhoef/Is there any provision for parking in from of the building style A on either side that face Court Street? I see sidewalks apparently from Court Street. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 7 Franklin/In the back, the driveway here for this building comes back in here and this is where the parking would be and there is the possibility I suppose of some parking along in here although there's extra parking spaces as you can see on this internal drive. For this building here the entrance is here and there' s parking back here as well as in the building itself. Vanderhoef/OK. My concern on those that face Court Street that apparently just have sidewalks that go out to the front sidewalk and that' s where the front door is and from what I saw at least on one style of the building from the rear view is that the only entrance into that property then would be through the garage into the living quarters, so for a guest situation there's no way to provide parking for guests that can come to your front door without walking around the entire mass of the building. Franklin/That' s right, from what I'm reading on these. The front door is in the front. Vanderhoef/Yea. Franklin/And the garage door is in the back, unless you walk around. Vanderhoef/One style has a at least another door back there but some of them are only garage door entrances so without a front drive that allows all deliveries, all guests and so forth to those buildings there's no way to get there. Lehman/Well I think this is probably something that should be discussed at the public hearing which we're going to have later tonight. However, I don't know whether that varies a great deal from Mormon Trek Village. Vanderhoef/Well (can't hear) some of that because of that problem. Franklin/It doesn't vary from a number of buildings in town. Lehman/And that seems to work fairly well. Okay. Franklin/Which is not to say it's not an issue. Lehman/OK. Champion/Well I think it's an issue for the people who are going to live there. Lehman/(can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 8 Champion/It's not an issue for me. Vanderhoef/It's a design issue is what it is. Champion/Right. Vanderhoef/And promoting it is not (can't hear) I'd like some way to get (can't hear) the street and to the front door. Franklin/I didn't hear the end of that comment if it was something I needed to hear. Lehman/Well it will come up tonight at the public heating. Franklin/OK. Is there anything else on Windsor Ridge? E. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDNANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-5) TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (OSA-5) AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THREE FOg-UNIT BUILDINGS ON A 2.72 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF ROHRET ROAD, WEST OF HIGHWAY 218. (REZ99-0012) Franklin/OK the next item is public heating on rezoning from RS-5 to OSA-5 for 3 four unit buildings on 2.7 acres on Rohret Road. This is a project that has had some discussion in the past, we looked at it, some of you may remember. Champion/Is this an ABC thing, no? Franklin/No that was Windsor Ridge the ABC thing. Here we've got Duck Creek Drive and Rohret Road, 218 so does everybody know where this is? Lehman/Right, has P & Z passed on this? O'Donnell/5-1 it looks like. Franklin/Yes, 5-1, Ehrhardt voting no. Lehman/Why do I not have that in my? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 9 Franklin/You do. O'Donnell/You've got it here. Franklin/It's another one that you don't have. O'Donnell/Where you on E? Franklin/It's Item F that you don't have. Lehman/I'm sorry, right, thank you, thank you, sorry. Franklin/So yes they have voted to approve this with one member, Pam Ehrhardt voting no. And the staff recommendation is in favor of this, this is at a density of 4.32 dwelling units per acre, again for the new members this is a planned development and we're staying within the base RS-5 density but the density is transferred within the project to the clustered units of having 3 buildings with 4 units in each building. The reason that this has a OSA which is an overlay sensitive areas has to do with the critical slopes that are along the back of this property and the parking area and one of the garages the comer of it encroached into those critical slopes and that requires it to be the sensitive areas overlay. That's basically just another consideration for you to look it, the process is the same and that is one of rezoning. I guess I'll take any questions on this one. These, the units that are proposed for here are the same units, the same type of units that are on the comer of Benton Street and Mormon Trek Boulevard. The Willow Brook Condominiums. Lehman/Right. Vanderhoef/Did I read this correctly that we're going to have to bring water and sewer down to this development from Rohret Road. Franklin/Rohret Road' s right there. It's just to, into, there's nothing unusual about it. Vanderhoef/I thought the way I read it there was something that we as a city were going to have to extend to get down to where they would tap in. Franklin/No. Vanderhoef/OK then I misread it. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 10 Wilburn/How many times had this come up before P & Z is this essentially the same project that has? Franklin/This is the, well, it's about the 2 V2 because one other time there was a development project that was proposed here that was rejected by the Planning & Zoning Commission by a different developer. And that was to put along here and along here some townhouses, I think there were 11 to 12 units with that project development. Wilburn/Some complaints that I had heard from some of the neighbors out there was in prior, the prior proposal, it was a density concem. Was that the nature of the disagreement by the P & Z before or can you tell us what happened? Franklin/The prior rejection I think was based upon two issues, one was the lack of open or play space for the children that were anticipated to live in the development that was proposed. This was a development proposal by the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship, it was intended to house families, so the likelihood of there being children was a concern of the neighborhood. How strong that was with the Planning & Zoning Commission I think that was probably a lesser concern. The greater concern was the fact that there was townhouses along this boundary. This is a single family house here which is on a rather peculiar shape lot and that this triangle comes down here and this lot would have been in front of the from door of the townhouses there. And the objection was based upon the transition that was being made between this development here and the development that was proposed here that it was too abrupt. What the commission suggested be done is that this be changed to a duplex, the number of units diminished I think by a couple, or maybe just one, and then have the townhouses along here. Wilburn/OK. Franklin/The developers did not feel that they could do that financially and that was to get the transition from single family duplex to townhouse. It came back then by that same developer in a pattern of detached single family basically the townhouse pattern but all of them detached similar to what is being built on, I can't remember the name of the street in Walden Hills, down by Willow Creek, off of Emily. Vanderhoef/(can't hear). Franklin/Pardon me. Vanderhoef/(can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 11 Franklin/Maybe yea, I don't know. That never actually got to the Planning & Zoning Commission for consideration, it went out to a neighborhood meeting was again met with some objection and was withdrawn and then this is the next one we got. Wilburn/OK and had this been to a neighborhood meeting or? Franklin/This one? Wilburn/This one (can't hear). Franklin/There are still objections to development of this property as you can see from the materials in your packet. Wilburn/Right, are the nature of those related to density or? Franklin/They seem to be related to density as well as again this notion of transition. Wilburn/Thank you. Franklin/I believe there is a preference on the part of the people who live on Duck Creek Drive that this property be developed for detached single family houses like what is on Duck Creek Drive. Wilburn/What' s there yea, OK, thank you. Franklin/Anything else? F. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDNANCE 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) Franklin/OK the next item is a public hearing on an ordinance changing the zoning designation from PRM, the planned high density multifamily residential to OSA- PRM and this is a project that is close to downtown, it's on Dubuque Street. Basically there is a rooming house, apartment house here, a vet's office here and then the old Lepic Kroeger office building on the comer there. The issue here and up is east, Dubuque Street is here. The issue here is the encroachment of the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 12 building and the development on the lot that has protected slopes, protected slopes are defined as slopes that are 40 percent or more. In this case what we have are altered protective slopes and that these slopes were created by fill in this area, they are not natural to the area. The code allows development within altered protected slopes as long as the development is properly engineered but it still needs to go through the sensitive areas overlay process which is similar to a rezoning process. Basically this is the outline of the building, the OSA is also looking at a reduction in the front yard requirements in that this building will basically be almost up to the property line, .99 feet for the porch, six feet back for the building. Which is very similar to the frontages that you see along this street face here and the drive will come in from Dubuque and go down into parking which is underneath the building and that is the front of the building with the porch coming out. And then the access to the side units is along this porch on the side. Any questions about this one? Vanderhoef/How big are these apartments? Number of bedrooms and so forth. Franklin/You know, let's see if I can tell from this. There's five units in the building but in terms of number of bedrooms, there's two spaces required per unit so that would have to be either a two or three bedroom apartment. Vanderhoef/There are two parking places per unit? Franklin/Yea. Vanderhoef/OK, so then what would their requirement be for parking off property parking payment? Franklin/If they're required to have ten spaces they would pay for five and they would have to have at least five on the site if this is their. Oh I'm sorry. This is unclear to me Dee because it says 60 spaces are on site. O'Donnell/How many? Franklin/60 percent of the spaces are on site. There are six spaces that are shown so there, yea OK, so that's 10 spaces that are required which is two per unit yea. Vanderhoef/Say that again I didn't follow it. Franklin/OK. There's 10 spaces that are required for the project, since it's two spaces per unit, I've got to surmise that it's either a two bedroom or three bedroom units, that' s what it would have to be. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 13 Vanderhoef/And there' s only six spaces under, six under. Franklin/Six of the 10 are under and they have to provide at least 50 percent on site OK, and then they have to pay for 50 percent and the parking facility impact fee. Kanner/Karin do we know what the fill is in the slope? Franklin/Not for sure it's fill that's been there for years, I mean like maybe 50 years. So it could be, I mean I'm sure there's some construction rubble in there but what they have to do is they have to have it engineered to ensure that' s it stable for the area in which they are going to encroach into that slope. See this is the building line here, so their not actually getting into the 40 percent slopes here with the building but this would be a construction line which that starts to encroach into it. And so what they have to do is they have to submit engineering reports that show that you can do that without jeopardizing the stability of the slope in here. And that part of the engineering review but I can't tell you exactly what's in the dirt. Kanner/Can we get some kind of report, I mean if there's anything toxic there from the folks that are doing the engineering report? Franklin/What we require by code is that it be stable in terms of the engineering of it, it doesn't address toxicity issues. I don't know, I'll have to check and see what the report would exactly consist of. Lehman/Karen, I just have a question here. Franklin/Yea. Lehman/This is, unless I'm missing something, this is a hearing changing the zoning designation from high density to sensitive overlay zone, if they comply with all of the regulations of our sensitive overlay zone it's just a matter of whether or not we think that's an appropriate use of that property, is that correct? Franklin/That's right yea, yea. Lehman/I mean issues of parking and size of units and whatever aren't really relevant it's just a matter of whether or not. Franklin/That' s right because what they have fight now is PRM zoning which allows that density and whatever to occur. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 14 Lehman/Well our question is whether or not we want to go to a Sensitive Overlay zone and if they can comply with that zone is a matter of engineering. Franklin/Right. Lehman/All fight. O'Donnell/Well done. Franklin/I'll check on that toxicity question but I don't know that I'll be able to get it for you before 7:00 tonight. Kanner/OK. Franklin/OK but this tonight is a public hearing and your first consideration is not until February 1st. Wilburn/Karin I'm sorry that, the Rohret Road project, was that a sensitive overlay because of the slope as well, I was thinking of something else. Franklin/Yes, the slope's near the highway there. Wilburn/Right OK, thank you. G. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLAT OF SCOTT BOULEVARD EAST, PART 4, A 7.36-ACRE, 15-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH ONE OUTLOT LOCATED AT SCOTT PARK DRIVE AND HUMMINGBIRD LANE. (SUB99-0027) Franklin/OK, and then the last item, we're done with the other ones. The last item is a resolution approving a final plat of Scott Boulevard East, Part 4, and we have a request to defer that from the collective attorneys. Lehman/To February 1 st or indefinite? Franklin/Yes, two weeks, or whatever that is your next meeting. Vanderhoef/That is February lst? Lehman/Right, I think so. All right, thank you Karin. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 15 Kanner/What' s the reason for the defemng? Franklin/Just getting together on the legal papers, get it, I mean it's no particular issue, it's just getting them done. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 16 Agenda Items Atkins/Ernie while your looking I have two items I want to bring to your attention. Lehman/Yes. 1 .) ITEM NO. 7. PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON THE ADOPTION OF THE 1999 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE. Atkins/One is that our folks are in the audience from the electrical code if you wish to ask them any questions before tonight, before you have a chance to answer that. 2.) ITEM NO. 9. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE IOWA CITY LANDFILL RECYCLING CENTER PROJECT, PHASE 2, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. Atkins/Item no. 9 is our Landfill Recycling Center, we will continue to recommend that you proceed with the project but we felt it was important that we give you some what of an updated some information that we learned over the last oh few days or so. It appears that a number of the major haulers in town are planning to leave the landfill and haul their waste to Illinois. As you recall we had this issue a year plus ago. We believe the circumstances could end up being ultimately rather dramatic. We currently have about 75,000 tons, if it were to happen as there is the potential our tonnage would be halved and the bottom line is that the landfill operations then would have to be dramatically altered, we just simply would not have the income stream to support what we're doing right now. There are those that are wildly cheering the fact that Iowa Waste is now going to Illinois, there are others that would disagree with that and I can understand why, we create our waste, we have an obligation to take care of it ourselves. But the bottom line is that we have sufficient capitol in our reserve for the landfill to finance the recycling center, we will continue to encourage you to proceed with that. But right now we simply do not know what kind of waste stream as far as volume is going to be available to us at the land fill. A couple of you may recall a number of years the Supreme Court decided that we did not have the ability to control that waste stream, the comprehensive planning process that goes through ECICOG, if the DNR continues to improve transfer stations and doesn't charge fees we'll never be able to compete with those numbers. And of course our wages that we pay is substantial, we believe are substantially higher than those that they pay in Illinois. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 17 I just wanted you to heads up, we're going to have to get to work on a new budget and we'll present that at sometime in the future but for the time being we may have some difficulties ahead, we may have to rethink our whole strategy without how we run our landfill. Champion/Steve will we be able to afford that construction cost for that? Atkins/Yes, we believe we can, what ultimately would happen Connie is that we have a projection on our landfill David (can't hear) headed 25-30 years we had projected under our policy we adopted a year ago. Obviously if the tonnage declines dramatically and assuming they don't do a lot of changes in the rules the Iowa City Landfill could be there for several generations. But the bottom line is that we have, we wouldn't have the sufficient income stream to run it, the hours we run it, the programs that we sponsor, and that's all the kinds of things that we're going to have to think about. So we believe the capitol investment remains worthwhile. The methane, the $1.5 million dollars you have no choice in that, regardless of your tonnage you have to do that one. So we're not real sure where we're going to go with this thing. Champion/If we're going to build it. Atkins/Yea. Champion/They won't come. Are we going to be able to staff it? Atkins/See that's, that' s kind of the difficult, I believe we can staff the recycling center because of the variety of proj ects and programs that we currently finance through our own residential refuse program. But so you understand we take in about 75,000 tons of landfill, the city residential refuse program is only about 8,000, the other 90 percent comes from other cities, business and industry and is substantially provided by private haulers. And if the private haulers decide that they can get a better deal in Illinois they are going to go to Illinois. I don't really know what else to tell you because I don't have any answers for you. We continue to believe that the land fill is a regional asset and again our policies have been to make it available to folks but we will have to change strategy. You know there are just so many things that we can't do to compete with Illinois. Champion/Right, and the Illinois landfills. Atkins/Are privately too by the way. Champion/There's no, so there's no control. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 18 O'Donnell/Their far less restricting. Champion/You can dump anything in there. Atkins/They have restrictions on what they can and can not put in their land fill as do we. But they are strictly out for volume. For example here in Iowa we pay $3.75 a ton to the state as a state garbage tax. You know when you pay those kinds of numbers on your, and there' s no indication the state is going to change that. Now we do get to recoup some of that money but the bottom line on that item, because that' s well over $200,000 a year that we provide to the state for enforcement of landfill rules and regulations. Yea I'm smiling about it too, it's an unfortunate circumstance. Champion/Maybe our legislature committee that meets with the legislatures could talk a little bit about this. Atkins/Well I just wanted to give you a heads up, there's going to be a lot more work and we have nothing official from those folks in the commercial hauling industry other than we did experience it from one hauler as you know and the others are getting in line. Now they've said lower the rates, well with the wage rates we pay and other circumstances, I just don't that's possible. We lowered it $10.00 a ton, almost 25 percent just a year ago. Champion/Thanks for giving us heads up. Kanner/At the current rates Steve the landfill's expected to last about 35-40 years? Atkins/Everything, everything being equal Steve right now I would say 30 years plus given at 75,000 tons, the land we have available, all the plans we have in place, that comprehensive policy you adopted. If you have that, that means that land' s going to last that much longer. But we still, remember it's a highly regulated industry whereby the state is ultimately going to decide whether we get a license to run a landfill or not and what the rules and regulations are going to be. Kanner/And how much is the property worth that we purchase for the next land fill, purchase a couple parcels of that? Atkins/I don't know the value of that property. The most recent one we purchased for cover, that is we're using the soil for cover purposes. David would you make a note and see the last couple land purchases what we paid for that and we'll get that for you I just don't recall. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 19 Lehman/This one kind of wait and see. Atkins/Yea it is really wait and see, the whole landfill, the state had the best of intentions I believe in the comprehensive planning process for landfills but if they're going to approve a transfer station which allows these folks to take it, drop it off and ship it out of state. And it's a transfer point not a variable point in fact, they don't have to pay any of the same fees that we have to pay so we're certainly not competitive from that perspective. Lehman/OK. Atkins/Again the electrical code folks are here if you have some questions. Lehman/I do, are there any big surprises in the electrical code? I read through the packet and I'm no electrician but we pass things and they show up you know like big surprises in the building community and say what in the world were you doing, didn't you know? And we have to say no we didn't know what we were doing so tell us what we're doing. Atkins/Excuse me Ernie, Tim and Pat as you come to the mic would you please introduce make sure the Council members know who you are. Tim Henries/I'm Tim Hennes with the Building and Inspection Division and this is Pat Hansen with the same division. No, the majority of the amendments for clarification of the electrical code, Pat is more familiar with the actual layout of the code, the previous codes, evidently this cycle there was some major changes in the formatting of the code itself. We've had several not public meetings but the Board of Appeals is definitely a public meeting for input. Pat is sought input from all the electricians or most of the electricians and we just public discussion is not required. But one more opportunity to have some. Lehman/But they're basically satisfied with it? Hennes/Yea. Hansen/Yea. Lehman/That means the electrical outlet that you made me put under the counter in my kitchen now are you going to make me take it out because I see it's no longer allowed? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 20 Hansen/Actually we didn't, it's not that we're not, you can still put it there we're just not going to require it as a code. Lehman/Oh I see, I see. Atkins/So you did read it. Vanderhoef/Yes we did. Lehman/No I just don't want surprises because we hear every once in a while something that we passed as part of the code and there's no way in the world that we're going to read through this and understand it all. Champion/I understood every word of it. O'Donnell/So did I. Lehman/Why didn't you guys talk to them before the meeting then? No as long as the as the construction folks and our own department is comfortable with it I don't have a problem with it. If there's questions from the other Council people fine but I just don't like you know surprises six months from now that your. Hermes/This has been in the works for probably a year, 8 months to a year so we could communicate anybody that's needs to be so. Vanderhoef/Are there any things that are creating a large increase in costs to building? Hansen/No actually in the overall aspect of everything we've changed, it's actually going to reduce in some areas. The initial cost on a commercial construction maybe a little bit elevated at that time but over a long period of time, any retrofitting, any remodeling or change of use, that type of construction will be reduced and also. Vanderhoef/Good. Pfab/Were there any objections to the code as you were putting it together and if so by whom? Hansen/No, actually I mean all the feedback we did get back was positive for the most part. Pfab/There was no negative at all? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 21 Hansen/Not that I'm aware of. Pfab/It's wonderful isn't it? Kanner/I have a few questions, first I think it looks good, it's ensuring the safety of the residents of Iowa City and I think that' s a good thing and I want to thank staff and the Board of Appeals for looking into this. But just for some clarity of understanding, for instance the regulations for how long you have to apprentice from an apprentice to a journey person up to a master has been increased. Also the regulation now states that a master electrician has to be in house with a company. Could you talk a little bit about that, what in terms of cost, what will that mean in terms of safety, what does that mean and how do they balance? Hansen/Basically it was under recommendation by the Board of Appeals and the staff during our research that the idea of the master electrician is the one that's running the company, he's the one supervising the work and he's ultimately responsible for the work that needs to be done. On a safety issue it's great, I mean it's the way it was intended to be used in the first place. As far as elevating the cost, it shouldn't elevate the cost whatsoever because most most contractors do abide by this but we would like to make sure that doesn't happen is some of the work being done unsupervised by people who are not qualified under a master level. Kanner/I know the County doesn't have the same standards that we do and that' s something they're talking about but the, what about surrounding cities like Coralville and Solon do they have this strict standard as us? Hansen/No. Coralville basically follows suit with Iowa City as far as certifications and qualifications for their master and journeyman electricians. Kanner/But I'm talking in general with the code. Hansen/With the code itself?. Kanner/Yea. Hansen/Coralville and North Liberty basically follow suit with Iowa City for the most part. Hennes/That' s pretty much across the boards with all the codes, the home building code, the electrical code and so on. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 22 Kanner/Has that been like that for a while? Hennes/With Iowa City and Coralville I believe so to my knowledge, for the most part yes. It may be a different version We're proposing the 99 National Electrical Code I don't know what their under, they may be under the 99 already, they may still be under the 96 or the 93. What version their under I don't know but try to keep up with the most recent version. Kanner/And another thing I was looking at that a little bit of concern about the right of entry into a place by the building inspector, if a tenants living there and I think we have to be careful about when someone can go in without authorization. Could you explain what the authorization is if the tenant doesn't give the OK to come in? Hansen/The authorization basically and the right of entry is what we're looking at is under severe life safety issues, such as a fire or the panel itself is burning up or there might be some electrical issues that create a serious situation at that point in time. I believe that' s that' s what the right of entry is basically toward that, meeting the intent of that at that point in time. Kanner/I don't know ifI saw life threatening in the wording there. Hansen/That part I don't really think we really adjusted that, that was actually in the code prior to this, it's been, actually it was adopted in the 96 code the right of entry. The only part to that that we made any changes to was the condemning of services or condemning electrical systems due to life safety issues but the right of entry basically has been in state for quite a while. Hennes/We get a lot of calls from electricians come up that are permitted to do some work, hey can you come out and take a look at this service and it's obviously a dangerous situation and this just offers us some support to condemn the service. Hansen/Usually in situations of this it's an electrician that's been hired to do the work, they've gone out there, they've found some serious work that's been done without permits or without inspections and they just want some guidance in what they need to do at that time. I've had some of them where they've actually turned down a job because of the state that the electrical system' s been in and just because they just don't want to put their names on it. So what we're trying to do is try to cover that as much as we possibly can. Lehman/Thank you. Other agenda items. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 23 3.) ITEM NO. 11. CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 3, RUNDELL ADOPTION, CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 2,995 SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GRANT STREET AND COURT STREET, TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WILLIAM G. FLANAGAN AND ELIZABETH ROSE. Vanderhoef/Item #11. I have some concern about how we're setting the price. Lehman/I think we should, it's a public hearing, I think we should discuss that at the public hearing, I share your concems, we've talked about this, but I think we should make those concerns known at the public meeting because I think they are valid and they should be recorded at the public meeting. Vanderhoef/OK. Lehman/Other Agenda Items. 4). ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE A TENTATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE POLICE LABOR RELATIONS ORGANIZATION OF IOWA CITY. Kanner/Number 12, approving the agreement. I had a question about there was an item in the negotiations about reimbursing for tuition and I was wondering if you could tell me some of the discussion that went on about that. Are we requiring certain minimal educational degrees? Dale Helling/We are for, are you talking about the police department? Kanner/The police department yea, this is the agreement between the police and. Helling/There are certain educational requirements for eligibility for promotion. Kanner/And what did the police union ask for as far as tuition reimbursements? Helling/They asked for originally, I believe their initial proposal... (END OF TAPE 00-6 SIDE 2) Helling/Expenses, books and so forth, this is off the top of my head, I don't recall it that the city pay tuition exactly but I think those things for courses relating to each work or degrees say baccalaureate degree or whatever and then they were also This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 24 asking for pay I believe for having achieve certain levels of education. I'd have to go back and get the initial proposal. They were sent out back in December I believe. But anyway there was both education pay and tuition reimbursement that was part of their initial proposals. Kanner/Was there any sense that this is something that at the next contract we would give consideration to, you know maybe it's something we couldn't afford right at this time but it's maybe a good thing and that maybe next time. It appears to be on the surface to be a good thing, you know obviously we can't afford to pay everything that' s asked for but we want well educated police officers and this seems to fit in with that. Helling/Well I think your getting into what would be collective bargaining strategies, that probably should be discussed in a closed session. During the bargaining course of bargaining, this is a 3-year agreement and we did not address or make any commitments or anything for the next bargaining which will occur in 3 years whether or not that will be a priority for union at that time remains to be seen. But I think in terms of collective bargaining strategy that' s something that if you want to discuss those things then we should discuss them in executive session, that's been the practice for obvious reasons. Champion/It sounds like a good settlement and it's nice to have a 3-year contract. Lehman/Yea. Helling/And I apologize that you didn't get the tentative agreement until this afternoon but we have 10 days to ratify and we just reached this agreement last Tuesday night so it's very difficult to get this put together and everything and have it for you by Friday in your packet. I've tried to outline on here so you'd know what's new benefits, or increased benefits and what are just language changes. Wilburn/Council has certain guidelines by state law where we're suppose to that regulates our behavior related to collective bargaining rights that not correct? Helling/Right, basically if you name a bargaining agent then that' s who's suppose to be bargaining with. Lehman/Other agenda items. 5). Wilburn/I'd like to (can't hear) consent agenda, I'd like to modify related to the description of Council activities on our January 4 session. It's on page 4 of that document, page 26 of our Laserfiche packet about my our council time about my This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 25 comment, the summary says I guess it's for Marian I should have gotten it to you sooner. It said that I reminded all members, all council members why each was elected. I think my comments were more accurately reflect my comments it was, I asked each Council Member to consider why each was elected, and I didn't remind them why we were all elected, it was just a different kind of connotation for historical purposes so, there's no objection to that. (All talking) Vanderhoef/I didn't hear what you said. Pfab/I remember exactly that' s what you said. We know one person read the minutes. Lehman/OK. Wilburn/Just to clarify it in case anybody remembers something too. 6). Kanner/I had a question general about minute taking. The second set of minutes that go into more detail, for instance I brought up the issue of the Mayor discussing some of his points of view of being Mayor and what he expected from the Council and that was not included in the minutes and I was wondering if that could be included in the minutes and that kind of discussion because I felt that was important that questioning and that give and take there. So maybe I could just hear you know what goes into the minutes and what do we leave out. Karr/Primarily the complete description of activities are twofold, they are direction generated so it's the action Council took and typically the discussion would be summarized in a statement of individual council members express their opinion or something of that nature. Detailed transcription' s are kept, they are transcribed and they are part of the permanent record so we do not take time to summarize, the only distinction being made is Council time and at that time we do go into each of the items separately. Lehman/So what your saying is it's part of the permanent record but what we get is more of a summary. OK. Does that address? Kanner/Well I guess I would just like to see that at least it was mentioned that the discussion took place that that kind of discussion took place because this isn't something that usually happens my understanding when selection of Mayor and this was a little different and I would like the record to reflect that. Champion/It is reflected in the permanent record. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 26 Kanner/Yea but in the transcript later, but most people don't see that. Lehman/That was the same as two years ago. O'Donnell/We have asked the Mayor to do that before. Kanner/OK. O'Donnell/I'm not sure I remember what you said. Lehman/Thank you. Champion/I don't think you're doing it. Lehman/All right. Champion/OK you can bring that up now. O'Donnell/(can't hear). Lehman/No other agenda items we need to move along if we're going to be through by. I'm sorry Dee. 7). CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO PRESCRIBE A PROCEDURE TO WAIVE THE APPRAISAL IN CASES INVOLVING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WITH A LOW FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT MAY ENTAIL CONDEMNATION. Vanderhoef/I've got one question. On Council page 313 and we're talking about the definitions of property and the appraisal and the compensation estimate and then there' s the low fair market value and the second half of that the legislated $5.00 per lineal foot of lengthen residential driveway. I don't know what that means. Pfab/What page was that again? Lehman/313. Vanderhoef/313 and. Karr/Is this referring to Item 11 again Dee? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 27 Vanderhoef/19. Karr/19. Vanderhoef/Consider a resolution to prescribe a procedure to waive the appraisal, which I think is a good. Dilkes/Yea that's taken from the DOT standard as to when you can get a compensation estimate as opposed to an appraisal and that's a legislative standard I think it means something that's enacted by statute and required. Vanderhoef/Overall I like it but I just didn't understand what they meant by legislated $5.00 per lineal foot etc. etc. there. Dilkes/Legislated just means part of the state code that's, it's required by state law. Vanderhoef/Right but the lengthen residential driveway, the first part of that is real clear about the fair market value of $10,000 or less, exclusive of these other payments and then it's this other piece and I don't understand where that goes into play. Kanner/Yea I'm glad, I didn't understand that either. Dilkes/I'll look, I frankly don't have specific information on it, I can check into for you and let you know. It's not something we encounter very often but. ENGLERT THEATER LIPDATE ( 1P 1 OF 1 / 14) Lehman/Moving along. Englert Theater updates, whose going to? Atkins/Emie if I could just take a minute. Lehman/Please do. Atkins/You have a copy of the letter I directed to Mr. Pohl on January 12, on that day we were unable to contact him by telephone, the press that evening was able to contact and I think the next day Karin you spoke with spoke with him. Hopefully that letter articulated what your position was and at least identified what I thought were the sort of variety of issues that you had put on the table. As of this moment we have not received any follow-up contact from Mr. Pohl unless Karin's shaking your head "no" also. So we are pretty much where we are as the letter that I prepared in your behalf. I do think Emie that there are some folks in the audience This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 28 that represents Citizens Group involved in this and what your plans are to conduct that I'll defer to you but I don't, again I don't know anymore than what I did on that day. Lehman/Is there someone from the Citizens Group who would like to represent their cause and tell us what's transpired since a week ago Tuesday? Tom. Tom Gelman/Tom Gelman I think you're all familiar with me. I'm a relatively recent recruit, it's some what of an outsider to this group and I don't want to take credit where credit is not due. There are other people like Daryl Woodson whose passing out papers and others who have been actively involved in this. I've been peripheral involved but I'm very, very supportive and they asked me if I would be willing to be spokesperson and try to responsive to your inquiries connection with this informal meeting. I'm more than happy to do that, a letter is being distributed to you under my signature which I wish I had written, it is a wonderful letter and I agree wholeheartedly with everything in it and in fact I'm proud to have my name on it. But that letter was the hard work of many of the other people on the committee as well. One of the things you'll see on that letter is a listing of the people who have been more actively involved than I in this group and it's a very wonderful representation of broad cross section of community citizens who are very serious about this project and very dedicated to the project and want to see it work. I think we're principally here to answer your questions, I know you have questions and I think has become an area a subject that' s been interesting to the press and certainly to the community more appropriately for all the right reasons, I think it's of interest to the community. And I think it's an area that' s going to require a lot of leadership on the Council. And we would hope that the Council's prepared to exercise that leadership in a very positive way for our community. With that I really don't have anything specific to say but I'd really prefer to be responsive to your inquiries or have other members of the group respond to your questions. O'Donnell/Ern, I had a question. We learned at our last meeting that you can not show a movie in this building anymore? Has there been any follow-up on that and has that put a big kink on that in the group's stand on the theater. Gelman/Let me tell you where that's at and where that may go and the ultimate result is unknown. In the original arrangement between the seller and the original buyer here there was a proposed deed restriction that would in fact limit the use limit the facilities use in the future to not showing movies. It's more specific than that you need to see the exact language but it essentially would limit showing movies, satellite broadcasts, videos. That would be inconsistent with the types of uses that the local groups interest in now using the facility would like to, they would like to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 29 do of things that are unrelated to that but upon occasion under the right circumstance in a non competitive way they would like to show movies occasionally, maybe show satellite broadcasts going into the future and videos and the like. It doesn't make this a prohibit, it doesn't prohibit this from going forward but one issue that we that we were originally going to ask Pohl to deal with for us but that got sidestepped with the city's potential involvement was to see whether the seller would be willing to modify the proposed language in any reasonable way that would be still be protective of their competitive interest but be a little more lenient in terms of connections and use this used for a nonprofit community type center. The outcome of those discussions are unknown to me. I think they are ongoing and they are tinknown. That would be the preferred way to do it would be to ask for some reasonable accommodations and see if it could be negotiated now and I would encourage the city ifthere's any room to do that to the extent that the city has the capacity to negotiate to try to do that. If that' s not successful then I think there would always be an opportunity but not necessarily to discuss with the owner subsequently the possibility of any relaxation of that covenant in the future. And that' s much less certain than trying to negotiate it now and would much less favorable plan. That would then, if that were the case then it would be an issue of whether the owner would be willing to relax the covenant or not if they are not willing to change then we are restricted and will be restricted and that would limit part of the programming that could be displayed in the facility, it would not be ideal, it would not be preferred but it would still I think be manageable and the facility could still be a very functionable and appropriate facility and still be a community center but with a few less types of activities. O'Donnell/I know many of my comments Tom are from people who wanted to see this used by the entire community including the yotmg and this was Saturday matinees for the kids and bring back kids movies and truly functional for the whole community and that was a concem for a lot of people who have spoken to me (can't hear). Gelman/Yea, I think it's a concern for the group too and if we can't do movies then we'll have to have Saturday puppet shows or Saturday other activities. O'Donnell/OK. Gelman/The altemative performance like that to fill that void. Champion/Would it be proper for even Neil to approach them, the Coalition approach them about what the limit could be? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 30 Gelman/Oh I think it would be proper and appropriate at some point but at different stages you have to approach them differently and the issues are a little bit different. So right now it's an issue of a buyer and seller and they've already negotiated an arrangement as I understand it and it depends whether there' s any room for renegotiation or reconsideration and I really don't know we just haven't been involved in that part of arrangement. Wilburn/Tom has, I've, has Mr. Pohl indicated if the city doesn't go through go through with this has he indicated that he's withdrawing the offer to the group? I've read in the papers but I without any direct communication has he indicated to the Coalition that if the city does not purchase it that the offer to still be the private fundraising to come up with is the original figure of 1 million or something like? Gelman/You know I have no idea, I really have no answer to that question. Wilburn/OK. Gelman/You know there' s was this arrangement where by where there was going to be a potential option agreement which would give a period of time which would raise additional funds to purchase which the option would be to exercise or not exercise. And when the discussion shifted then to the possibility of the city's purchase those discussions ceased and we really don't know. Wilburn/You know, I'm you know, congratulations to the speed to which you raise the funds and I appreciate having the letter. I'm not sure if your aware you know the first we had kind of heard about it was when Ernie brought it up at our last work session and we were just getting, we hadn't heard budget presentations from some of the city staff and so one of the concerns that I had had was giving a yes or no to the project. I understand it's pretty early to have thrown together a business plan but to see something because frequently non profits come to the city for funding and they have to go through hearings and submit budgets and you know appropriately so I hope you can appreciate thank you for coming up with this so that I can add that to my thoughts in trying to decide this. Also I had mentioned budget time without having heard from Mr. Pohl and you haven't heard from Mr. Pohl about certain things it's kind of awkward in trying to make budget decisions without having an opportunity for city staff to you know take a look at the building and see, see what kind of shape it's in in the event that the city would, in the event that you wouldn't be able to come up with all of the funds that the city would own the building and knowing where to go with that so I hope you all can appreciate you know that part of it from our perspective so. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 31 Gelman/Let me just if I have a moment to comment. My feeling is I look at things very pragmatically and I look at the upside and the downside and this project everybody seems to be looking or some people seem to be looking at the downside which is totally, there really is no downside I see here and I'll explain here in a second. Wilbum/OK. Gelman/And it's all upside, it's all potential here, it's all an opportunity for some visionary leadership but I think we're going to miss unless this council really becomes and takes on that challenge. The downside here is the city ends up with the building that doesn't have a clear use for a non profit organization that' s a community center. And if the building has to be put back on the market and if the building probably would have a continuing use restriction not to be a bar, because I think we've already heard that we don't want to have that building used as a bar, I mean I think that's a public sentiment, so that's the downside that the city loses several hundred thousand dollars because they can't recoup their cost to buy this building. But even with that downside which I think is the worst case scenario, you still preserve that building for the community and you still preserve it for a use which the community feels is a better use than another bar and restaurant. That's the worst case scenario I believe and there would be some cost in the interim. On the other hand, the upside here is incredible. The upside here is you provide an opportunity to facilitate a badly needed and potentially incredibly utilized community center and that's the upside and then you could just go on and on and on about the potential that upside would bring to the community. And it's a very simple issue, you know we tend to think of all the reasons why something won't work and in this instance we have everything going for it. We have the right type of community interest, we have the right type of community support, we have the right type of people volunteering their time and more importantly putting their money where their mouth is in favor of a very very potential viable project. If this project doesn't work in Iowa City it won't work in any community in the United States. I mean look who we are and we enjoy and what we go do and what we see and how we interact in this community, if it's not going to work here it won't work anywhere. And we know it will work here so you know we can go on and on and on and be conservative and tentative about whether this project would work and what it might cost the city but what is really cost the city? Not very much, not very much. And the upside here is absolutely phenomenal, we have a downtown that is dismal at best and we all realize that, there are serious problems. We spent already 20 million dollars downtown in terms of city improvements or about that much or little less or little bit more. I'm talking about Iowa Avenue, I'm talking about the parking ramp, I'm talking about the plaza renovations and other expenditures downtown and we have not added one new attraction, one new This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 32 reason for anybody to go downtown. And I think it's time to be thoughtful about spending some money, taking some risks, offering some leadership about the opportunity to add a new attraction downtown. Lehman/Tom. I hate to interrupt you but. Gelman/That's fine, and actually Emie I'm through so that was it. Lehman/No you're not. I think that the city has spent a tremendous amount downtown, you know we've spent, you mentioned 20 million but on streetscape and whatever we've probably spent 5 or 6 million dollars. I think there's a tremendous commitment on the part of the city to provide an environment where nice things can occur not that this isn't one of those nice things because I think it certainly is. But we as a Council have to decide what is the city's role. Do we want to own a theater building? And I don't know, I can't speak for the rest of the Council personally "no" I don't want to own a theater building and there are a lot of questions that I have and I think the rest of the Council has and I certainly appreciate the letter but in order for my personal feeling is if we are to proceed with this and not that I disagree with anything you've said except I think there's a sizable number of folks in this community who would not look with favor on us purchasing a building, taking it off the tax roll, and having another public owned building downtown. I'm willing to take chance if I have some reasonable assurances that the Coalition is putting together a plan of action that will work one bit in competence in visions to costs of operating the building, how they're going to recoup those costs, something with renovation, what kind of money they'd like to raise, where they expect to get that money, so much from the business sector, so much from private. I mean I think we need to see something to sink our teeth in and an official request not just, just visiting back and forth as we're doing right now. I think there needs to be an official request and I think we have to have a certain level of comfort that the support within the community will justify the support on the part of the city. And I think that' s a, you know we're in this hand and glove, if the community would like to the city to participate I think we're saying yea we're willing to but we want to participate with us like we did on ScanIon Gymnasium, on the soccer fields and I think there will be many many other projects. I mean that' s my perspective but I do think we need we need some of that information. Gelman/And that's all very fair Emie with just one exception. Lehman/OK. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 33 Gelman/But that' s all very fair. The only thing that' s been driving this are time constraints. Lehman/No I know that. Gelman/That neither the city nor this group has imposed. Lehman/You're fight. Gelman/And it's been very difficult to do it quite in the right sequence and so we're in the set of circumstances that we really are getting maybe somewhat out of sequence but we're doing it because the time pressure is dictated. Lehman/And I think we know that and I think we probably be, obviously I think we're understanding of that. Gelman/Yea because everything you asked for is legitimate and the group is in the process of doing and have done some of it already, have made big strides in fact in a very short period of time to do a lot of that. But it's just not all there yet because of the unrealistic time frame in which this has all risen and is continuing to progress forward. Lehman/Well my understanding is that Mr. Pohl is going to close on this property on the 241h of January. Is that date correct, does anybody know that? O'Donnell/That's what we were told. Lehman/I believe that's correct. I also understand from what you told us Steve that in the absence of a special meeting the soonest the Council could act on this would be the first of February. Atkins/We would need a resolution of some sort authorizing the purchase. Lehman/That' s correct, but that is basically a two-week period to put together as much as we can. Gelman/Yea and I think the group's committed to put together as much as they reasonably can within that two week period. You know for example you can not get your tax exempt status in two weeks. Lehman/No no I'm well aware of that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 34 Gelman/You can barely prepare an application in two weeks let alone get status. So I mean there's, so they'll put together as much as they reasonably can but I think it's, this is a volunteer group and everybody works and does other things and they're doing the best they can and we'll (can't hear). Wilburn/And I appreciate the passion and I would love the vision I'm just saying because of some of the stuff you just rambled off part of my leadership also is maintaining a responsibility for a lot of the other projects that we've got on the table that people are in some cases just as passionate about and so but we'll be open and look and concerned. Larry Eckholt/My name is Larry Eckholt and I've been involved in this. This is probably going to come out the wrong way but as far as I'm concerned the Coalition officially did not bring this to the City Council. Lehman/That's correct. Eckholt/My plan was, I mean our plan was that after we had raised or at least gotten pledges of a significant amount of money that we would come back to you at the earliest mid to late February and say this is what we've done so far and that we would then as you asked for maybe make a formal proposal as to what the city's involvement would be. Frankly the two weeks waiting to find out whether you are or aren't could be a very I mean a serious downtime for us because look what we've done in the first two weeks we have this project. This last week we, are starting the filing for a not for profit corporation for the state incorporated entity that would do this, as Tom said it would take several months to get our 501C through with the IRS. We have decided that because of the probably either with the city involved or not at some level this is going to require more fundraising than we thought, we are prepared to hire a fund raiser, not have an adjunct fund raiser for the city doing it or all volunteer' s of the community theater's proposal has $20,000 ear marked for a fund raiser to be hired to do this campaign and in the time frame $20,0000 would be a very reasonable amount of money for a fleelance or a some firm to take this on as a project that we could get done in 6-9 months. We had a contact, a person that lives in Iowa City, Tom Fesenmeyer the operating director of the Paramount Theater, Five Seasons Center. We invited him to a meeting on Saturday, it turns out there's a whole new operation for that facility as well as the Adler in Davenport, there' s a group out of Ames that used to run the director of the president of this use to be the director of the Hilton Center and Stephens. He's now started his own business that goes in and runs these kinds of operations, you contract with this organization called Compass Facilities Management, and they provide the staff and the organization that runs it. Whether that' s the case that would, Steve is going to come to Iowa City and talk This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 35 a plan that could be for instance for the first 18 months that they would operate it and then turn it over to the organization once it's up and running. So there are other models to look at, it isn't just Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney saying let's put on a show you know in our new little theater that mom will make the curtains for. But there's plenty of professional expertise both in this community as well as in the state of Iowa that runs these kinds of facilities for cities, for not for profit organizations, we know these people, we respect them, we've worked with them, I have with Steve and Tom both. We have an engineering firm in Coralville that's stepped forward and said they would do a structural analysis of the building free. We have an architect on our side, we've got an excellent not for profit lawyer working with us. I mean these are the people that put these kinds of things together and the community supports it. I never asked a single person in Iowa City for a dime for this, everybody called me, from $5,000, $10,000 dollars down to $5.00. That's the kind of project we're talking about. And I think that it's time for us, I mean we have spent a lot of time as individual volunteers putting together as much as we can waiting for something to happen. It took a while to get the Pohl agreement together, then it was sort of slide, we can't afford to keep taking little diversionary actions here, we have to start actually doing it and we're ready to do it. Lehman/Larry aren't things that the Council's interested in heating from you the same things you'll have to do anyway? Eckholt/Yea. Lehman/So I mean we're not asking you to anything any different than you would have for anyway. Eckholt/Except that it's a big, I think it is a big difference between whether we're. Lehman/Time frame. Eckholt/Time frame, the best thing about the city getting involved is that we would have probably 3 more months to work this thing out. Lehman/Well until you get together our request is almost impossible to come together with the kind of information that we need and the time frame that we're asking. Eckholt/Right, that's why my feeling is we'll came back and ask you for the money that we think the city should put into this thing and let us keep getting the work done that has to get done to make this thing you know more than just a talk show. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 36 Pfab/What agreements, hard agreements do you have with Pohl at this point? Eckholt/We have a letter and. Gelman/There's nothing signed. Eckholt/There's nothing signed because the day, when we were, the Monday that we were going to do it, to a complete surpfise to me was the day that this first, that was a week ago yesterday where the city' s involvement became became imper. We were getting phone calls from reporters and I had no clue as to what that latest turn of events was. We were suppose to have that option agreement together last Monday, and we hand him a check for $50,000 and go from there. We've had to wait a week you know while this is going on. Daryl Woodson/Daryl Woodson, yea I might be able to address that. We were scheduled to sign the option and transfer the check that Monday morning and I called the Pohl's attorney to find out what time and he goes there's been a delay in the closing and there's some other things going on and then we found out from a reporter about the potential of the city involvement in the purchase and the change in the deal. We had a press conference, news conference scheduled for that afternoon and a reception for Mr. Pohl and those those were canceled at the last minute. We found out about this probably after you did so, the deal has been changing on a regular basis and that makes it even a little bit more difficult to you know figure out where we're going. Pfab/I think that's the biggest problem I have what do we have? What are we working with? And who are we working with? Kanner/So you haven't been in contact with Mr. Pohl since last week? Woodson/No we haven't. Kanner/But no one has been in contact with the mysterious Mr. Pohl in a week. Woodson/We're sort of operating under the assumption that if the city determines that they don't wish to participate at this point that you know he will go ahead with the purchase option that we had negotiated that is on the side, but whether or not that's the case we don't know. Gelman/There is a significant difference though, this is a, this is a (can't hear) my pragmatic side again. Our deal was to have the fight to exercise an option for a period of six months for a purchase price of a million and fifty thousand dollars This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 37 and the city' s negotiations are to buy it from Mr. Pohl for the price that he is buying it I believe. (Can't hear). Gelman/200 to 300 thousand dollar difference so that saves $300,000 in this nonprofit project that would be a wonderful savings. So you can understand Irvin why we, you know have to step aside because the deal with the city was starting to discuss. I don't know whether it's to the level of negotiation or not at least discussed, it was a much better deal for all concemed. Pfab/I agree with it if, but we have nothing that we can look at except you know a rosy scenario. Gelman/Yea, I think what we're doing here is. Pfab/And I'm not saying your wrong but I think if there's if there is a working relationship between you and the person who has the contract to buy it is it couldn't some of that be put in writing? Option 1, Option 2, no option. Dilkes/I think there' s been a. Franklin/The difficulty is that none of us are in the driver' s seat fight now, Mr. Pohl is, Mr. Pohl is negotiating with Central States and fight now the building is owned by Central States, we can't talk to Central States because they have a contract with Pohl. That is suppose to be settled next Monday, and then it will be up to Mr. Pohl still whether he wants to negotiate with the City or he wants to negotiate with the coalition. I think we have all done whatever we can do, we have sent the letter to Mr. Pohl indicating our interest indicating our concern about the restriction, and that we want to talk with him further about the City' s involvement. The Coalition has done everything that they can in terms of telling Mr. Pohl they are interested in the building whether it's through the City or directly through him. So it's kind of, it's in his lap, we can't do much more at this point, the Coalition can continue to do their work as they have been and we'll wait and hear from Mr. Pohl next week I hope. Pfab/Sure, fight but he's part of the community, he's involved with this, he has an agreement signed we are told to purchase that so he has a legal position in that. Franklin/Yes. Pfab/But he doesn't want to talk to us. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 38 Franklin/Not at the moment. Pfab/Nobody that I see and I have difficulty understanding that. Franklin/He doesn't probably want to talk to all of us is probably part of it because you know when you talk to us there are a lot of us. Pfab/Well could maybe we designate one spokesperson and then? Franklin/I think that we have but at this point he's got to do his deal with Central States. All we can do is wait and hear from him, we can force him to play. Pfab/Yea, he has all the cards. Franklin/Yea and I mean he has put out some overtures to the City, we have responded to them now we're waiting for him to come back to us. Pfab/Is there anything in writing? Franklin/Our letter to him. Dilkes/Look at it this way if you own your house and you're not ready to sell it yet. Pfab/Right. Dilkes/The best a person who wants to buy it can do is tell you they're interested. Pfab/Right. Dilkes/They can't make you go beyond that until you're ready to do that. Pfab/Right. Dilkes/And that's the position we're in. Pfab/But at this point we're in negotiations with something we don't know what he wants to do. Franklin/No, we just have to wait. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 39 Lehman/And I think in all fairness, Mr. Pohl does not own the building nor will he own the building until the 241h of this month. Pfab/But he has a legal document says he's going to buy it. O'Donnell/That he has to perform it. Pfab/That he has to perform and so do the other people. Kanner/And somewhat that I hear from Irvin is that so he makes a decision on the 241h and then he comes around and tells us you have a week to turn around, I think that's not fair. Lehman/Which he can do. Kanner/He can, yea he can do whatever he wants. But we can also say that we want a certain number of weeks. Lehman/Right. Kanner/Because there' s a lot of things we still need to look at. Lehman/And he can say yes or no to that that' s fight. Pfab/And he may never sell to us. Lehman/That's right. Woodson/I just want to say one thing. Pfab/And I'm not saying a derogative to it but I he doesn't, he's under no obligation. Woodson/On Mr. Pohl's behalf he has been working with us you know every step of the way, his indication has been that he would like to see this project done and would like to see the building in the hands of a nonprofit organization or whatever to run as a community center. This is what he would like to see, he's been trying to accommodate us at every step. When it was obvious we couldn't raise a substantial down payment on the building and execute a contract by the end of year then the agreement for the purchase option was reached. And this other possibility came to the floor which would be a better deal for the group and you know it wouldn't probably be a too bad a deal for him because he wouldn't have to sit on the building for a while. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 40 Pfab/Well that was the whole point. Woodson/He's very cooperative I think he wants to see it done and I think he will be. Pfab/Thank you for those kind words. Lehman/I have one question and then we're going to kind of move along because I think obviously we don't know anything else. Is the, does the Coalition intend to exercise their option should the city not become involved in this? Woodson/Yes that is our intention yes. Lehman/And that is, that is an option that' s out there as far as my understanding at this point is that is an option that is a viable option that if the city (can't hear). Woodson/That is our understanding too. Lehman/OK. Gelman/Just for clarification, the Coalition would intend to recommence the discussions with Mr. Pohl about a similar arrangement that we were talking about before. There is no signed option agreement, there' s no option to be exercised. Lehman/I thought there was an offer. Gelman/We prepared, we presented, but it never got signed because the discussions got sidetracked. Lehman/There is no option to buy. Gelman/There is no specific, so if the city stops ceases it's discussion with Mr. Pohl then we will recommence our discussions and try to work towards an option agreement, there is not $750,000 or a million 50 to by now. Lehman/OK. Gelman/So where the Council, the Council's decision I think is going to be, whether, the Council's going to be given an opportunity to preserve an opportunity. Champion/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 41 Lehman/OK. Pfab/And what we perceive it at this point is an opportunity. Champion/Oh it is an opportunity. Pfab/OK. I mean in a sense, but I don't see. Champion/It will happen. Pfab/Thank you. Lehman/OK. Champion/They will come to this one. Lehman/I guess. Kanner/And Emie just to clarify. Lehman/Yes. Kanner/Who contacted you with this information about our option to purchase, Mr. Pohl? Lehman/I talked to Dick Summerwill, I have not talked to Mr. Pohl for probably 3 or 4 weeks but I think we should probably make an effort for on the part of the city for one of us to contact Mr. Pohl sometime in the next week. Champion/Well Ernie you should or Karin. Lehman/And I'd be happy to do that I know we've tried. Atkins/I thought the letter was pretty straightforward. Champion/It was. Lehman/Well that's true. O'Donnell/I think Ernie (can't hear). Atkins/Waiting to hear, I mean read the letter. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 42 Champion/I think your letter was good you're fight. Lehman/The ball is in his court fight now. Kanner/Summerwill's his lawyer? Lehman/Mr. Summerwill is President of Iowa State Bank. Kanner/OK. Lehman/And he's been working with the Coalition, his interest is in seeing that the building gets through and acquired by a citizens group so he's been active working on it. Champion/I just want to add a little bit since I didn't have any agenda items about this. I think this is one of the things that if the Council decides to do this and there was consensus that we would. If it comes to us that we can buy this building for $700,000 it provides a tremendous savings to the Coalition to help purchase this building and I think some of this, we're going to have to do on blind faith. Does that sound unreasonable? Kanner/Sounds a little unreasonable. Pfab/Yes it does. Lehman/(can't hear) be that it would be blind faith. Thank you folks, keep in touch. Near Southside Transportation Center (Item #20 - CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAILING AND PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMMENCE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT THE NEAR SOUTHSIDE TRANSPORTATION CENTER PROJECT AND TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY FOR THE PROJECT; AND SETTING DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR MARCH 7.) Jeff Davidson/This will be Jeff and Joe actually. On your agenda this evening, Item 20 is the notice that the state now requires to notify persons of a possibility for acquisition of property for a city project and this is for the Near Southside Transportation Center, this is a project that's moved along very quickly in the last couple of months, and I've had individual discussions with a number of you and you know about how rapidly it is moving so we thought what we'd do this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 43 evening since we anticipated there would be a few questions this evening about the item that' s on the agenda is just give you a brief run through of sort of the genesis of the project and then Joe will actually go into what some of the details of what we're proposing will be. Do want to you know, of course I think most of you are aware by now that we in October or November received information from the Federal Transit Administration that a grant application that we have had pending for about three years somewhat to our surprise had been approved for the initial year of funding which is 1 V2 million dollars which we will match with the approximately $400,000, 80/20 type of match for the specifically for this first year is design preliminary concept type design and then property acquisition for the project. Senator Grassley stood approximately fight there last week and told us that the federal govemment's policy is they don't fund just the first year of these that basically because we have gotten the first year funded the second and third years which would be the balance of the $9.6 million dollar federal grant should be forthcoming and of course that would be for the actual construction of the facility. You know we have, we have the facility to use somewhat as a model although Joe will go into the specific differences, the tower place facility. We are talking about something that scale wise is similar to that although some of the uses would be different and once again Joe will go into that in a minute. But that did give us a little bit of a heads up in actually preparing for something that we had anticipated would probably two, three, four probably realistically 3-5 years out instead it's something we'll have under construction within a year or two. We've discussed this with you a couple of times since we received FTA's notification and you have indicated that you are still supportive of the project and wish to proceed and that is what we're doing so. One thing that I have indicated to a number of you is that in spite of the fact that this is (can't hear) so quickly this is a part of a planning effort which actually began in 1992 with the adoption of this document right here, the Near Southside Redevelopment plan by the City Council and this was something that the City Council at that time, and Ms. Kubby was the last member of the Council that was still around that was part of that group. Basically directed the planning department to take a look at that near southside area because of a number of reasons. One was, there was some imperative scene as that was the only direction that downtown could grow and there were some redevelopment things happening on Burlington Street and some concern that that access to going further south was going to be cut off unless we began planning for the potential expansion of downtown, I think between that area between Court Street and Burlington Street. Another thing that was happening at that time was because of the the way the zoning ordinance was structured at that time there was some relatively low quality development projects that were occurring in the area and that was a concern and there was some interest expressed in getting the zoning ordinance changed so that the quality of those projects could be enhanced. The other thing that was creating some pressure at This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 44 the time were some redevelopment pressures in the northside and Court Hill areas east of down, east of where we are fight now and some desire to preserve those areas. Preserve the scale of those areas, preserve the existing structures in those areas and a way to do that would be to focus the more higher density type development in this area south of Burlington Street so we did, excuse me, complete the plan and have it adopted by the City Council in 1992. In 1995 then we had, the 1992 plan pretty much laid out what would be done and in 1995 we had a design plan prepared with the help of Gould Evans Associates of Kansas City, basically as to what it would look like. To give people a little more specific feel for it, this poster was prepared at that time I think most of you have seen this. This is the 20 block area that's identified as the near southside, the river, Madison Street here, the railroad tracks, Gilbert Street and Burlington Street, thank you Vanna. And I think, I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about the elements of the plan because I think most of you are fairly familiar with them. The area between Court and Burlington is identified as an area of high density, residential development and also commercial and office type development and this is specifically seen as something that can support downtown, create a residential base in that area for that would be supportive of downtown. Establish some office and commercial type uses as well that can help support downtown. The area to the south end of Court Street is more medium and still relatively high but also some moderate density residential development as well. Two very significant zoning changes were made, establishing the PRM zone and the CB-5, this being the CB-5 zone, and then within the area here the PRM zone replacing or becoming the highest density residential zone. There were some incentives put in the zoning ordinance at that time to create the more higher quality development with the masom'y finishes and a little more detail in the facade of these buildings, placement of doors and windows. And I think from some of the projects that have occurred since that time we can all see that they've worked very successful, successfully the Breese Bell project, Clark's project on Burlington Street, Kevin Kidwell's project those are all things that have been done under these new zoning changes that have been basically worked just the way we had hoped that they would work. There are also a lot of existing structures, the federal building, the County Courthouse, historic structures such as the railroad depot, which the plan calls for them not to be redeveloped, to remain as is and as to fit the new development in with those. A significant aspect of the CB-5 zone was a creation of a parking impact fee which you've. (END OF 00-7 SIDE 1) Davidson/Thinking a project that did have that, thanks Karen, a project that did have the impact fee paid. This is something that we think has been a win win situation and the private development. You know the CB-5 zone established that's similar to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 45 the CB-10 zone, the City would have a role in providing parking and that's for the density of development that we want to have occur. We don't want large expanses of open parking lots which is otherwise what developers have to provide typically. We want to have structured parking, we want to have parking under buildings and not visible and so to create a situation where that was easier for developers essentially in a nut shell for residential development you have to provide a half on site and pay an impact fee for the other half. The impact fee per space is much less expensive than providing building the additional parking on the site if your physically able to do so which a lot of times your not physically able to do so because the lots are so small. So that is something we, excuse me, we have collected a number of impact fees and the fees that we have that are ready to be used would be used to help with our local match on the proposed transportation center project. Any questions about the plan and sort of what's called for in the plan? You know a lot of the traditional neighborhood type connects which I think your familiar with in the peninsula planning that we've done are also called for here. A walkable type situation where owning an automobile is optional, if you own one we are going to try and provide for that but we also want to have a mix of uses in the area so you don't have to own an automobile, bicycle travel and pedestrian travel is emphasized in the area, the ability of transit to circulate through the neighborhood as well, so truly a multi- modal type of situation. Now with respect to the development of the transportation center project the city providing parking in the area is called for in the plan and we had sort of a two-phased approach of providing two separate structures a Phase I somewhat immediately and Phase II down the road a little bit. We had actually begun planning for the Phase I structure many of you remembering us negotiating with St. Pat's, we had identified a site, their former school parking lot, which is now a parking lot used to be where the school was. We had begun work with them, we got kind of in the middle of that and the negotiations were not going well with the parish and the City Council at that time decided to make sort of a shift in philosophy and go to the noahside of the Central Business District, that lead to the Tower Place Facility being planned ahead of the initial southside facility. As I mentioned earlier, we had figured that this next facility would be 3-5 years out because of the grant we're able to accelerate it but this is something that has been planned for a number of years. Now when the federal money became available that gave us the opportunity to expand this to something that can really enhance the neighborhood more than just a parking facility would. Obviously parking is an important element of this facility, Joe is going to go into what some of those additional things are that can really enhance the neighborhood. We're also trying to stay with the model that we are under the impression you want us to stay with of not having stand alone parking facilities that are sort of these big monolithic things sitting in the middle of the central business district using more the tower place model of having commercial space This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 46 incorporated into it, having something that looks more like a downtown building than a parking structure. This is the model that we are following, now obviously the item on your agenda tonight is to begin acquiring the property for this project and mention to you that our initial site for this that we had been looking at was the St. Pat' s school/parking lot. When that fell through we had a couple of other sites in the near southside identified, obviously we need at least a half a block for this thing so selecting a site isn't as easy as finding one particular business, finding out that they would be willing to work with us. It's several pieces of property, anywhere we go it will be several pieces of property and because there is no existing single half block of property standing there completely ready for redevelopment, there are obviously displacement type issues and people that are going to be affected regardless of where this thing is located. In previous discussions with you we did identify block 102 as being a very prime opportunity for this continuation of downtown south of Burlington Street but that really is the block we need to focus on as you go up and down Burlington Street so that is the block we have been focusing on. We do have another location and that's the federal building parking lot but that is seen as the Phase II location. We just feel at the current timing we're trying to construct something and Joe will go into this a little bit that will both complement downtown as well as the near southside and we feel block 102 is the block to do that on. The federal building parking lot is simply too far from downtown right now and quite frankly to far from a lot of the intense near southside uses that are generating a need for parking so we see that as one that 5 or 10 years from now we'll be focusing on, the Fed's will work with us when we get to the point of wanting to do that but we don't think that's the opportune location right now. So within block 102 then we obviously have four different opportunities to work with a half block on that block, and we have taken a good hard look at all of those opportunities. Karin and I have spoke with every property owner and many of the tenants of the people who own property and our tenants on that block. And tried to get a handle on what the property owners intend to do with their property, what their possibilities for redevelopment are, trying to see if, get a handle of, knowing full well they are going to be, or would have the potential to be disrupted on the project if they are interested in working with us to try and reestablish themselves on in on the block as possibly as part of our project. Similar to what we did with the Cottage Bakery when we acquired that property, we would love to be able to do more things like that. Kanner/When you acquired what Jeff?. Davidson/Pardon me? Kanner/I'm sorry what property? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 47 Davidson/In the Tower Place facility Steven we're relocated, we purchased the old Cottage Bakery property. Kanner/Oh I just didn't hear you. Davidson/Temporary relocation and then she'll be relocating back in. Just real quickly our recommendation to you is the east half of the block and that' s after a lot of consideration. Our factors for recommending that have to do with several things, the north half of the block is one we didn't spend a lot of time with for a couple of reasons, I think your, most of you are aware the Phase I of the Hieronymus Square property, those people developing that project are very interested in our project and believe it may make some of their financing come together to establish that Phase I which is the comer of Clinton and Burlington come together. We also really were not interested in using the entire north half because of some concerns with access points, relocating the bus station is one of the things we hope to do with this and also possibly some other uses that would create a need to go in and out of the facility at a couple of points and being along Burlington Street you know how we try and restrict access having the entire face of our building along Burlington Street really would not be good for that sort of thing so we do not believe the noah half of the block is one that we should land on. The west half of the block was looked at and our feeling about that is that based on our discussion's with the property owners representing the west half of the block the greatest potential for immediate redevelopment, and remember this all related to it being a redevelopment area is for the west half of the block. That we believe there are property owners who will move relatively quickly if our project were to occur to redevelop the remaining that west half of the block. The south half of the block is one that would work for us however it would disrupt by far the largest amount of existing business are on the south half of the block and so that is also a consideration. There' s also a visibility question of being that far away from Burlington Street and the rest of the Central Business District, Joe's management of this facility will attempt to make it benefit both downtown and the near southside and being completely removed from Burlington Street makes that a little more difficult. For our commercial spaces Joe will talk a little bit more about these, the visibility on Burlington Street for some of those uses is a positive aspect. We also have not totally ruled out the possibility of, at some point, not now, now we know we're not going to do it but at some point there being an overpass across Burlington Street that would tie in with City Plaza and having a location that is adjacent to Burlington Street allows us to do much more easily. I think you aware we own the parking lot right across the street next to the Mill Restaurant and obviously we have the air rights through there and could tie something into City Plaza at some point in the future to really make the connection between the near southside and Burlington and City Plaza a little This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 48 better. We also feel like the east half of the block is very favorable with respect to locating the bus station in a location that is maybe a little bit less visible and a less visible end of the facility would be the Court Street end because it does not require the kind of visibility that some of the commercial uses do that we would prefer to have at the other end. So why don't you let Joe briefly run through what the facility will consist of and if you have any questions or want to discuss why we've landed on the location we have we can get into those. Joe Fowler/Basically what we've done in our initial planning for this facility is look at the guidelines that the federal govemment's used in livable communities projects and our goal would be to build a multi-modal facility that' s going to attract more than one form of transportation to give people options to get vehicles downtown, parked off the street and then put people in other mode' s of transportation. The uses that we have identified for this building so far are the inner city buses, the cab company, a child care facility, bicycle parking, retail and office space, and then the parking element. The Iowa City and Cambuses would not use this as a staging area but they would serve this building on various sides to be available for transportation from this building to the downtown and throughout the community. Iowa City rims buses both on Court Street and Burlington Street and then Cambus has their Pentacrest shuttle bus which goes down Court Street and then serves the entire Pentacrest from here. The inner city buses have expressed interest for several years in relocating and relocating into a facility like this. Iowa City currently owns the union bus depot building, when we negotiated our last contract with them they wanted to be involved in any planning in the future that we did for this type of facility. Ron when he was talking the project up with the people in Washington dealt with the Greyhound people and they expressed interest so we know that the inner city buses are interested in moving into this facility. The cab company has contacted us, they feel that they've outgrown the space that their in that they need to move into a bigger space, this would be the yellow cab company that's currently in the bus depot and they want to move into this facility, they're ready to look and find a bigger place but if this facility is available they're willing to wait and go in there. Child care Jeff has had conversations with people that have contract operations in the Iowa City that have already expressed interest that they would like to come in and manage a child care facility here. Looked at different bicycle parking configuration's, people always go back to the bicycle lockers, there are some new bicycle racks out now that I think are probably preferable to the lockers that allow a person to lock their helmet and their possession's in a metal case that's attached to their bike so I think we can come up with some bicycle lockers that are bicycle type lockers that are usable to everyone. You wouldn't have to rent one for a month, you could come down and you know anybody could stop and use it it would be accessible to anyone other than contracting out a box to someone for a long period of time. The retail office This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 49 space we really haven't broken down yet exactly how much space would be in that, that would be in our planning stage, I would assume it would be along the same level as Tower Place which is 27,000 square feet so that would be probably our goal at this point. One of the big advantages to people that use our bus system would be a child care facility in this building. Right now if you need to get your child to day care and you ride a bus quite often that involves getting on a bus at your home, going downtown, transferring to another bus going out to a daycare, trying to catch that bus on it's way back into town and then either working in the central business district or having to catch another bus to go to your destination. By being able to tie the child care downtown element to the transit with the buses going by, with the flee shuttle going by, with the Cambus going by, we think we really would be able to open a lot of opportunities to people for child care. One of the things that will have to be looked at in the future is the financing of the facility, and I don't mean paying off the bonds but what would happen to the revenue after the bond's were paid. And excess revenue during the time the bond's are being paid because this is being funded 80 % with federal transit moneys, all money that' s generated from this project would have to go into the transit system so by leasing parking places, by leasing or selling commercial or retail space the money that's generated by this facility would go into the transit system for use there. Lehman/We have no idea what this is going to look like? Fowler/No we don't. Lehman/Do have any idea what it's going to look like? Fowler/Not yet. Lehman/But we're being asked to approve to move forward with purchasing property for a building that we have no clue what it's going to look it, how big it's going to be, I mean I'm just I'm making a statement, I'm not making a complaint but. Fowler/Right, fight now we're asking to proceed with acquiring the property following that we will bring a preliminary design to the Council. Before the preliminary design is even drawn there will be a series of meetings like we had with the Tower Place where we meet with community people, we have the design people meet with community people, we have them meet with in this case being close to the Post Office be the federal officials, the County Courthouse and Councilors and receive the community input before the design goes forward. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 50 Lehman/Do we have concept though, is it one level commercial, two level commercial, is it a five story building, a two story building, a three story building, I mean do we have any any concept at all of what this building is going to look like or size? Fowler/I think it would look very much like Tower Place as far as size goes. Lehman/OK that tells me something. O'Donnell/Do we know a number of parking spots Joe? Fowler/No. O'Donnell/I think the important thing for us to know is that we only have to come up with 20 percent of the money, it's 80 percent done. Lehman/Federal. O'Donnell/And that's a pretty important figure. Pfab/I see your child care being as a really interlocking point here but is child care can that be done without any green space? Fowler/Des Moines currently has a facility with child care in it and I think it's going to be very important on the design team to be able to come up with child care for this facility if you go to University Hospital, you know they've got a child, they've got playgrounds without a green space. Champion/Yes, that's right. Fowler/And I think the design team, I think that' s a challenge for them. O'Donnell/Got one downtown. Pfab/The reason I bring that up I understand that' s one of the problems that is it First Christian Church is having to move that property because for a child care integrated facility there they say they can't get a green space. Davidson/Yea we're, we have already been in contact with the person that licenses daycare's in Johnson County, the Johnson County Health Department and that person is going to work with us during the design phase to make sure all the details of what has to be in the facility are in there as it's being designed. We This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 51 have a great opportunity that we can design this from the ground up and make it be exactly the way it needs to be. Pfab/I agree but so what your saying, it is possible to put a large child care facility in this location. Champion/Oh sure. Davidson/Absolutely. Pfab/OK. Davidson/The one that Joe just alluded to the Des Moines, if your ever in Des Moines fight south of, Interstate 280 between I believe it's 6th and 7th Streets or 5th and 6th Streets, Des Moines has a facility similar to this and our understanding is their day care aspect was leased out before it even opened. So we're hoping to get the same kind of interest. Champion/Well there are whole blocks in Chicago or New York City without green space and they certainly have schools and preschools, it's play area I'm sure that you need and. Davidson/Yea you know whatever the requirements are we'll make sure that we comply with them as the things being designed. Champion/It could be really fun to work with that. Pfab/That's all. Thank you. Kanner/I've got a couple questions. Lehman/Sure go ahead. Kanner/Has there been talk with Greyhound about kicking in some money to help build this? Davidson/Well it would be our understanding Steven that the would have to lease the facility similar to the way they do now so there would be a revenue stream from the bus companies that would flow to the city. Kanner/Is there any thought to asking them to kick into some initial money? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 52 Davidson/Well I think the thought is the federal grant from the federal transit administration is what is supporting the construction of the facility. I suppose it would be possible for us to at least inquire as to whether they would be willing to help with the city' s 20 percent, but at the very least that 20 percent would be paid back so to speak through lease payments after the thing is built. Kanner/Did the Electronics Store, do you know why they left, was it because of the incoming parking ramp? Davidson/The were a tenant in that building Steven and they have also significantly down sized that operation I believe it's now a cell phone store in Coralville, same people run it. Kanner/Yea they left from here to go to Coralville and has there been talk with the apartment residents on Dubuque which are mostly senior citizens just up to I guess to the south, south east. Davidson/There has not been, there has not been yet Steven but they would be one of the groups specifically identified to talk to during this concept design phase that Joe just referred to. Everybody in the area and certainly including the existing tenants on the block both that would be displaced and affected by the project and also the ones that would be just next to it. Kanner/And why does St. Pat's not want to sell us that space? Lehman/Nobody knows that. Davidson/Yea we tried really hard and I think there were some intemal parish issues that we were just never able to get beyond. Kanner/Do we know if they're thinking of building something there in the future, they want to hold it for a building? Davidson/I don't think we really know for sure. Kanner/We don't know. Lehman/I'm not sure that they know. O'Donnell/They don't know. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 53 Lehman/No seriously I don't think they really do, but there are some real problems with parking there. Vanderhoef/One of the things that I was curious about you mentioned retail space and then later on said something about commercial space. As I sort of recall and think ofwhat's down in there fight now there are some services in the way of professionals and so forth and if it's all going to be lease space versus condo'd space like our tower facility I don't know how that's going to work. I'm curious. Davidson/We're trying to leave our options open at this point, in our discussions with the people down there who would possibly be dislocated and then relocated back into our facility. Some people are interested in owning space and we would like to try and accommodate them, some people are interested in leasing space and we would like to accommodate them so we're trying to leave that wide open for the time being. Vanderhoef/OK that was what was missing for me, I thought you were going to try and lease everything to create this income stream for transit. Davidson/As Joe indicated there are some real advantages to leasing the space. Vanderhoef/Right. Davidson/However, we still have the option of selling the space. Vanderhoef/The condo'd space, OK. Davidson/If that' s what a property owner would decide. Lehman/But if we sell the space the tax revenue would still go into the transportation system. Davidson/The local match that we would have to refund yes. Lehman/Whether you sell or lease there still will be an income stream going into transit. Vanderhoef/Until it's paid off or? Lehman/Oh forever. Champion/Forever. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 54 Vanderhoef/Tax (can't hear). Lehman/Oh absolutely. Pfab/Is there any height limitation in that area to build? Davidson/Well this would presumably be publicly zoned property when we were finished, the discussion's that we've had with design firms Irvin we want something that is at least in scale if not absolutely compliant with the underlying CB-5 zone that is. Pfab/So is there a height limitation? Davidson/The floor area ratio that's permitted is five basically something that occupied the entire lot five stories tall or (can't hear). Pfab/What about a half?. Davidson/(Can't hear) limitations and things like that. Pfab/So a half a block is 2 and a half?. Davidson/No the entire half block five stories tall. Pfab/OK. Davidson/There are some height limitations as well but we'll try and get something that fits in, I mean that's the (can't hear). Pfab/So there is a way of using high density use of it. Champion/(can't hear). Davidson/Oh absolutely and of course we've told the potential design firms that Phase I of the Hieronymus Square project we feel is something that could happen very shortly so we would want to try and make sure we had something as compatible with our facility. Kanner/Jeff, I like the ideas you presented in the southside design plan. I'm uncomfortable though with putting more parking spaces downtown and I think it comes at the expense of transit and I think money later on won't help that problem now. How many spots would we need just to service the businesses in the transit This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 55 bus depot there if we just built it for that purpose, parking spots for that instead of anticipation of other people using that parking spot coming in to park for longer term perhaps? Davidson/As Joe indicated earlier one of the things that parking element of this structure we want to be able to do similar to what we're doing at Tower Space to serve the commercial entities. Everyone of the commercial entities that we've talked to about potentially locating there want to make sure they have parking and we have the ability when we're designing this thing to try and have that provided as conveniently as possible within the facility. I mean we would like the idea of you being able to drive into the facility and park interior like right next to the dentist office or lawyers office or whatever happen to be there (can't hear). Until we know exactly how much square footage we're going to have in these types of uses and what the uses will be we can't really hang a number on how much parking we would need just for those uses. Lehman/We also have the parking impact fees. Champion/Right. Lehman/That we charge down there that we have to provide parking for. Davidson/Right, I mean part of the philosophy here is that city will provide parking for the near southside. Lehman/Right. Davidson/And the parking impact fees that have been paid in by the Clark project, by the Breese Bell project, by the Kroeger project that' s under construction, the notion is that those people can then come to the city and we will have parking available. Kanner/I heard the figure maybe in the paper 300 spaces, is what we're looking at around that figure? Davidson/We have been using that as a low number that probably, what are we saying 3- 57 Fowler/3-6. Davidson/300-600 depending on high we decide to go, and depending on what the other uses are so it would be a significant facility along that same scale as Tower Place. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WSOll800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 56 Champion/OK. Davidson/Any questions about the item that' s on the agenda tonight? Champion/Looks good. Lehman/No. Thank you. PENINSULA PROJECT Karin Franklin/You know there's no particular rush on this so you've got an update memo why don't I just spend a few moments with you on the 31 st. Lehman/All fight. Champion/Terrific. O'Donnell/That would be great. Thank you. Lehman/By the way good going, we've got some action, that's great. APPOINTMENTS Lehman/Appointments, appointments, we have two, I think there are two applications for the Art Advisory Committee? Wilburn/Yes. Champion/Yes. Wilburn/I'd like to ask people to give consideration to Mr. Hansen, both of them are working artists with some significant experience, one with a little bit more. But this appointment' s for a community representative and not you know the art, may not be prior consideration so I think that Mr. Hansen would offer the perspective of both the University employee I know that he was also a student here in town, did his undergraduate here and he's expressed a desire to give back to the community. The other gentleman has well expressed the same interest does have some local opportunities to my understanding was in some type of Cedar Rapids organization. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 57 O'Donnell/I'll second Mr. Hansen. Champion/It was a tough choice, they're both pretty good. Wilburn/Yea they're both real. Lehman/All fight do we? Vanderhoef/Offer something different each of them. Lehman/Steven do you have? Kanner/Yea I think they're both good folks I would like to speak on behalf of the other applicant, Stephen Perkins, I think that he's been here for 10 years, I've talked to him, he's got some exciting ideas and I think he would be a good asset. I haven't been able to talk yet to the other applicant, I don't know if I'll have that opporttmity. I think it's a win win situation to be able to have these two applicants. Wilburn/And Mr. Hansen has been here for he didn't count his student experience with he was a student for four years so in total he's been here for six years. Moved away and came back so. O'Donnell/I'm happy with him. Lehman/What's your pleasure folks? O'Donnell/Hansen sounded very good to me too. Vanderhoef/I liked them both. Champion/I liked them both too. Lehman/We only can appoint one. Vanderhoef/Thank you. Lehman/Which one? O'Donnell/We have four for Hansen. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800 Council Work Session January 18, 2000 Page 58 Lehman/How many would vote for Hansen? And how many for Perkins? Well I guess we're going to go with Hansen. And the Riverfront Natural Areas Commission we're going to reappoint Kevin Kacena. We don't have applications for any of the others. Now we can do Council time now, we have a Council meeting in one hour and 48 minutes. Champion/Hour and a half, let's wait. O'Donnell/Why don't we do it then? Lelunan/We can do it then. What's your pleasure? Champion/I move we adjoum this work session. Lehman/Well we don't need a motion, we'll adjoum until 7:00 regular council. Champion/I'm just trying to get it rolling that's all. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 18, 2000. WS011800