Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-01-08 Transcription January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 1 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session 6:30 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Pfab, Kanner Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Dilkes, Franklin, Boothroy, Davidson, Miklo, Fowler, Kopping TAPES: 01-103 BOTH SIDES; 01-104 BOTH SIDES PLANNING AND ZONING A. PUBLIC HEARING ON A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SOUTH DISTRICT PLAN, TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE AREA SOUTH OF NAPOLEON PARK AND WEST OF SOUTH GILBERT STREET FROM MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE TO PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL (APPROXIMATELY 21 ACRES) AND COMMERCIAL (APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES) AND TO DEPICT THE GENERAL LOCATION OF AN EAST-WEST ARTERIAL STREET, WHICH WILL CONNECT GILBERT STREET TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE IOWA RIVER. Karin Franklin/Okay first item is a public hearing on a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan, South District Plan to change the land use designation from multi-family residential and public open space to public institutional and commercial. Oh wait I can use my little arrow thingy. Right in this area here. Lehman/Oh I like that computer that' s cool. Franklin/Isn't this cool? Okay basically this is what is the corporate limit right now and that' s roughly where the arterial street will be coming through but this is what is in the South District Plan right now and that's roughly where the arterial street will be coming through but this is what is in the South District Plan right now. And what has happened is that we purchased the property, let me just go back a minute, the City purchased this property basically in this space right here from Olin Lloyd to put in the public works facility which you all know about. The other thing that occurred is that there was a decision making during the South Central planning process about an arterial street which would come across the Iowa River and that' s basically on the southerly part of this property, again to take you back to the South District Plan it's roughly in here that the arterial street would be coming across the river. And that is the extension of Mormon Trek extended that would come all the way from Highway 1 across Riverside Drive and then across the river. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 2 This is a drawing that shows the Public Works plan for their site, what' s under construction right now is this building right here. So what we're looking at is the land use designation for all of this property because now in the South District Plan it is designated for multi-family residential and public open space. This is the South Central District Plan just to illustrate again this would be the road that would be coming across and crossing the Iowa River and connecting to Gilbert Street. And you can see it here in proximity to the existing corporate limit. So this is the plan that we're changing and the Public Works site, Napoleon Park, Gilbert, the proposed alignment coming across there. Lehman/Wait a minute. Franklin/So I'll just back up to that. So the first item is your public hearing on the change to the comprehensive plan which would basically change the land use designation in this area from multi-family and public open space to public institutional and commercial in this corner here. The reason for looking at commercial in this corner here is because once this Public Works facility is in place this arterial is across which are decisions that have already been made it really changes the character of this side of Gilbert Street and we believe that and the Planning & Zoning Commission has concurred that it is not practical to expect that this is going to be a good location for residential development but we look at some kind of commercial development there. Lehman/Karin when that arterial crosses Gilbert Street does it go straight east? Franklin/No let' s see, let me go back, we had shown on the South District Plan a collector street coming across here, with the arterial coming at this point we will then want to off set that collector from the arterial. The arterial system will come across the river, hit Gilbert Street proceed south on Gilbert and then follow the Sycamore L which will then become whatever we call that road that comes across. Lehman/Okay, all right, okay. B. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE USE DESIGNATION FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (ID- RM) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2) FOR APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF GILBERT STREET AND SOUTH OF NAPOLEON LANE (REZ00-0021). Franklin/So first item is the Comprehensive Plan amendment and then the second item is the public hearing on the rezoning of Mr. Lloyd' s property. Part of the purchase of this piece right here one of our commitments to Mr. Lloyd was that we would consider commercial zoning there, there was no promise made of commercial This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 3 zoning or any specific kind of commercial zoning but that we would consider it when looking at it. And it' s, there seems to be some reasonable to this, what we are suggesting is a rezoning to CC-2 a community commercial designation with a number of conditions that are numerated in the conditional zoning agreement that are in your packet. Any questions. Lehman/Well basically we're really talking about that two acres. Champion/Right. Franklin/We're talking about the comp. plan amendment for the whole thing because of the Public Works site and the arterial street. Lehman/But the Public Works site we've pretty much determined what that' s going to be already. Franklin/As soon as we bought it, it had, we zoned it P because that' s the way the ordinance was set up. Yea there have been a couple decisions made, both the arterial street decision and the Public Works purchase that have led to this change. Lehman/So really the two acres is what we're talking about. Franklin/Right, right. Pfab/I have a question, I'm still very concerned with that road angle there and that just doesn't make any (can't hear). Franklin/Well Irvin this is a, this alignment that we're showing here is a conceptual alignment, we have enough land, let me go back. Well this doesn't show it very well either, we own property to the south here, when this road comes through we will engineer it and align it such that it is a 90 degree T intersection with Gilbert Street. Pfab/Can that be locked in? Franklin/It is locked. Pfab/It doesn't make sense to me at this point to rezone that and build a highway in unless somebody comes with a plan. Franklin/Okay this piece of ground right here, the boundaries of that are fixed. Pfab/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 4 Franklin/What Mr. Lloyd owns. We own everything to the south of that to a point until you get into the Stevens property. There is plenty of room in there to align the arterial property such that it is at a 90 degree intersection with Gilbert Street. Pfab/Now that, is there a way to lock that in that that street will not be developed unless it's a 90 degree intersection? Franklin/That is a matter of course with us intersecting two arterial streets, we would not put it at an angle, there is no reason to, the standard procedure would be to make two arterials at 90 degrees. Pfab/Right. Franklin/It's not something that you have to dictate, I don't know how else to say it. Pfab/Because to me it, here' s my problem. What is the (can't hear) unless there is a zoning, part of (can't hear), that' s history. Franklin/We have been requested by Mr. Lloyd to consider this zoning. Pfab/Well we can consider it and say we'll can consider it when it comes with a plan. Franklin/You can, that is your choice. Lehman/Well we can either say yes or now. Franklin/That' s right and we do not always wait for a plan to rezone property, often you do, often when you have somebody before you for a rezoning they have something very specific in mind but there is nothing which compels you to have a particular plan in mind. Now we have the conditions of the conditional zoning agreement which will apply to any kind of development that happens on this two acres. Pfab/I look at those conditions and they're pretty loose, I mean it looks like you could drive a tank through most of them. Franklin/Only if the (can't hear) was wide enough. Pfab/Pardon. Franklin/I was just being smart. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 5 Pfab/It looks to me like there' s not much control and then of course up here on your current slide you show the angle looks exaggerated. Franklin/This slide is just an overall plan, it's not a specific. Pfab/That just makes it very uncomfortable to even look at that and then I went through the conditions and says basically you maybe have to do some screening, we have to be aware this is an entrance to the City of Iowa City and it leaves, there' s a lot more left out there than there is in it. Franklin/Well what we have included in these conditions are conditions that we have included in a number of other similar kinds of rezoning where there' s not a particular plan in place but there' s going to be commercial development there is the future, issues that speak to sidewalk access, where the parking is, screening, design of the building, all those kinds of things. These are conditions that are very similar that we did in the Scott Six commercial area. Pfab/My problem is what's the rush? Franklin/That' s your choice. Champion/But Irvin the plan of zoning is a plan too, so when we zone it commercial now that tells somebody that it is zoned commercial and then they can come up with an idea to fit that spot, that' s the whole idea of zoning probably that' s not already developed to provide a future. Pfab/Well if a street was there I would say that would make, that would make your argument a lot more compelling but I have difficulty when the, right now the arterial street that's coming through is an idea in somebody's mind. Vanderhoef/What would you? Pfab/Or maybe from an arterial photograph. Vanderhoef/What is it that you want to, what zoning do you want for that property? Pfab/I just, I am uncomfortable that it looks like to me like there is nothing to protect the City from whatever goes in there. Franklin/What is the problem with what might go in there? Pfab/Well I don't know, what can? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 6 Dilkes/Well he's emitled, he's emitled to the uses that are available under that particular zoning and frankly we couldn't do a Conditional Zoning Agreemere that said you put, of these particular uses available within this zoning district you can put only this one, is that? Is that what your suggesting? Pfab/No, no, I think the poim is, right now it's an imermediate zone, it's a transitional zone. Franklin/Imerim Developmere Zoning. Pfab/Right and it's obviously the chances of it ever being residemial as it is presemly intended it's not going to happen, right after you build the City Public Works there and you have, and you bring over an arterial highway, now the other part is that it keeps bothering me is why doesn't that arterial go through? That looks to me like it's an accident waiting to happen if you're going to put an arterial street through, why can't it go directly over to where it's going to bypass? Franklin/Well the alignmere of that arterial was determined after a lot of discussion that relates to what goes on west of it as well as what goes on east of it. If you continue this arterial due east you would bump right into a residential development that already exists and we were trying to hook up with this arterial street down here. And Gilbert is already an arterial. Pfab/That arterial street, that street' s from the imersection of Gilbert and where your arrow is pointing, that to me is just, to call that an arterial street. Franklin/It's not. Pfab/Just really puzzles me. Franklin/Right here. Pfab/No where you're proposing the arterial street' s going to go. Franklin/Here, that' s an arterial right now. Pfab/It looks like a snake trail from the, from a way back perspective, if you're going to move traffic through there at a good rate why can't we straighten that thing out and have two intersections there and at that point a lot of things change. Franklin/This is a discussion that previous Council had when we were looking at the South Central District Plan and at that point there is a not a proposal, but a possibility of it sometime, this is the Sycamore L of bringing that across through This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 7 this area to hook into an intersection with 218. This street was designed to be part of our arterial system within the City and not act as a bypass but to act as part of our network of streets within the City. Mainly to provide access to these properties along here as well as provide a more direct route as opposed to going up Highway 1 and then back down. So if you, if a Council wishes to revisit this alignment question at some point you can certainly do that. Either to bring this straight across here, I would not suggest bringing this straight across at this point because of the residential neighborhoods to the east. Pfab/I understand that this, from what the information that was available to us is that is alignment of this highway is a very recent happening and it was basically done from an aerial photo. Franklin/No. Pfab/An aerial survey. Franklin/No, we hired a consultam who looked at alignmems for this roadway, I think there was something like 14 alternatives that, 16, 20, 28, how many Jeff?. JeffDavidson/Around 40. Franklin/40 alternatives that were considered for the alignments of this road and it looked at it across the river here, I think there was one midpoint and then at the river crossing here. There was extensive work done on that, and discussion by the Council as to what was the preferred alignment. This was the preferred alignment that was chosen that was incorporated then into the South Central District Plan including the jog that you are referring to. I guess I would suggest that if you wish, a majority wishes to reconsider the alignment of this road we put this on another agenda. Lehman/Well I think. Franklin/The question today is the rezoning. Lehman/I don't think we should be confused with this arterial being considered a bypass, I mean if you consider that a bypass then obviously you don't put a 90 degree intersection on a bypass. Franklin/Right. Lehman/But this is an arterial street which is part of our street system not to be confused with a bypass that will be located what a mile south of there, mile and a half. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 8 Franklin/Not that far. Vanderhoef/Half a mile. Franklin/It's about a half a mile. Lehman/So I mean it's. Franklin/And whether we ever build that is a question given the fact that, one of the reasons this alignment was not selected is because it goes through a number of wetland areas, it requires an extensive span across the Iowa River to avoid those wetlands is very costly for what you get out of it. Kanner/Before you go on Irvin, could I ask another question about? Pfab/Go ahead. Kanner/There' s no road there now where south of this 2 acre property correct? Franklin/That's correct. Kanner/So if we rezone it for commercial, can they start doing commercial right away or do they have to wait until the road? Franklin/Sure. And this road is not necessary for this property to develop, Gilbert Street obviously is an improved road and one of the conditions in the Conditional Zoning Agreement is that there would be one access point from either street, one on Gilbert Street, one on this street. That that is all there would ever be so development of this commercial property could take place immediately, I mean it does provide you a commercial opportunity which is one of the things that you have in your economic development strategy, you have two acres then, it's not going to be a huge commercial development but it would be something but that could happen at any time as soon as you rezone it. Kanner/One of the things that I heard from Council and other staff perhaps is that we're talking 5 to 10 years down the road where this road might be coming, I've heard that figure quite a bit. Franklin/It's, yea, I mean I think it's quite a ways off, it's not in your Capital Improvements Program, I don't think this one is even in for unfunded, I can't remember, but this is very expensive and as you get to the other side of the river. Okay this is the area we're talking about right here, basically this ground right here This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 9 is not developable because it's down in the flood plain, it really would be a good idea not to have that developed in fact some of it is in the flood way. This is Mesquaki Park, this is Thatcher Mobile Home Park and so where ever this goes through here, there' s not a lot of development potential along this road. The impetus for you to build this section from Riverside Drive to Gilbert Street is going to depend upon how much traffic you want to get off of this stretch of Highway One/Six. And I think it's going to be a while yet before the cost of building this is going to justify itself by traffic. Lehman/Karin, the real question, this is amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The real question is it is reasonable for the Olin Lloyd property to remain multi-family in that particular location or is it more appropriate that it be designated as a commercial development whether or not any road ever goes in there. Franklin/That's correct. Pfab/It isn't, it isn't multi-family now. Lehman/It is now. Franklin/On the Comprehensive Plan it is. Pfab/But as it's zoned right now. Franklin/No. Pfab/It's not (can't hear). Lehman/No, no, but we're talking about a change to the Comprehensive Plan. Pfab/Well okay. Vanderhoef/And it wouldn't be reasonable. Pfab/In other words my question is what' s broken that needs to be fixed? Vanderhoef/The point is that this is a piece of private property that is being surrounded on two sides by a Public Works and there's going to be an arterial street going along beside it and it wouldn't be an appropriate place for any kind of residential. Pfab/No. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 10 Vanderhoef/No one would choose that. So if your going to develop a piece of property you have to know what whether your going to be able to develop it one way or another way. Franklin/It's planning for the future. Vanderhoef/And this space is already asking to do it in a commercial which fits in my mind at least overall comprehensively that sitting in the corner there with the Public Works area this is a reasonable use of his two acres of land and he's requesting it. So if we rezone it then he can go ahead and develop at whatever time he chooses to redevelop. Pfab/Well I would say whenever he gets ready to develop bring something here we'll take a look at it at that time to change it. Lehman/But he may be ready because he's made an application, our choice is going to be yes we approve the rezoning or no we don't. Pfab/He made an application or is this part of the obligation when we purchased the other land? Lehman/We didn't have an obligation, we had an obligation to consider but not to rezone. Franklin/We have an obligation to consider the zoning. Pfab/So he made the application. Franklin/You can vote, no. Pfab/So he made an application for rezoning? Franklin/We made the application for rezoning on Mr. Lloyd' s behalf which was the agreement when we purchased the property. Pfab/Right, we still have that obligation whether we do it now or at another time. Whatever obligation there was doesn't change over time. Franklin/If you consider it now and then you vote it down I don't know that you have an obligation to reconsider it at some other time. Pfab/Well I am very concerned about where that road is, that arterial as you call it. I could not believe when I went out and looked on the ground where that is, I'm not an engineer but I was really disappointed with the choices where that first choice This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 11 put that road from Mormon Trek over to where ever it was going east. I could not believe that an engineering company or whoever, I don't know ifit's an engineering company. Franklin/Yes. Pfab/Told where it should go, it made no sense to me having not being an engineer but worked on a lot of different road, it just doesn't make any sense and because that doesn't make sense, where is it is going to end up here and what is going to be the alignment I think at that point then I think we should that that' s the time to do something. Lehman/Irvin. Pfab/He doesn't know where the road' s going to come in over. Lehman/If you took the road out of the equation how would you feel about rezoning that property? Pfab/But if he came with a sentence and here I would like to put something. Lehman/No, no, but if the road was out of the equation, how would you feel about the request to rezone that property? Pfab/To me the value of that property is that intersection (can't hear). Lehman/I know but ifthere's no road there and we're not talking a road, we're talking about rezoning two acres. So that it shows on the Comprehensive Plan. Champion/That's all we're talking about. Lehman/In an appropriate fashion rather than residential which is what it shows right now. Pfab/Okay. Lehman/So if there is no road associated with that, which there isn't, I mean there may be at some point in time. Pfab/Right. Lehman/How would you feel about rezoning those two acres if there was no road involved? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 12 Pfab/I am concerned about the conditions, the very vagueness of the conditions that are, that we're rezoning it for because supposedly a multi-family or a residential across the street it's the entrance to Iowa City, the south entrance to Iowa City and it doesn't say very much as to how we, how the city controls what goes there, that's my concern. Lehman/Okay. Champion/Well I think (can't hear). Franklin/Anything else. Lehman/All right we'll talk about it at the public hearing tomorrow night. C. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDNANCE APPROVING A REVISED SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD, AN 82.1 ACRE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONTAINING UP TO 410 DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF FOSTER ROAD. (REZ00-0022) Franklin/The next item is the public hearing on the Peninsula neighborhood. This is the Dover Kohl plan which was adopted in 1998 and then you all adopted the plan development (OPDH-5) which was basically this plan in June of this year. What we're looking at now is the greater detail of the Peninsula development that is the housing types that are going to be there, just getting another step closer to the actual construction. The plan is in six phases which you can see on the drawing I hope. The first phase will be coming in Foster and then it's basically this area right here, that' s the boundary of Phase I. There are a total of 386 dwelling units shown on this overall plan, and if you recall with the ODPH-5 being adopted the maximum is 410, so this is a little bit less than we originally had thought. That may change as development proceeds in these subsequent phases but that will be, each of the phases will come before you as a final plat so you'll know what that' s going to be. Lehman/Is this substantially the same plan as Dover Kohl presented to us? Franklin/Yes it is substantially the same Ernie except for one part. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/This road right here which is Walker Terrace on the plan that we're looking at tonight is on the Dover Kohl plan is a single loaded road, and basically the houses This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 13 were to face out over. The revision is that road has been pulled back and t here are houses on either side, in this area this is all single family, these lots are. The issue there potentially is access to the public space and there are opportunities for access at this point via a trail that is not part of the development project but could be put in at this point just as an aside, because I needed to get to that later, I've got to get my prospective here. Okay this slope that comes around is part of the 82 acres, all the way down to the point at which we get into where the Elks have their golf holes will be dedicated to the city. And that' s been reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Director Terry Trueblood and he finds that to be appropriate. That would then work in with the Peninsula Park that is in the flat part of the Peninsula. All of this area here, this is all single loaded here which gives you certainly adequate public access to get down to the lower peninsula both via trail or there will be a service road here that will go down to our wells. This road will not be used by the public except possibly for school buses to go down for field trips to the Peninsula Park. We have the opportunity to have public access trails all through here if we should choose to. The backs of these lots up to that point is in a conservation easement which basically means Hillside cannot be built upon, it's part of this, say this lot, it's part of that lot but from this point to the rear is in a conservation easement. Lehman/And that' s a responsibility of the lot owner to maintain it. Franklin/That' s the lot owner to maintain it. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/The house would be placed in this area here. Throughout the development there are single family duplex row houses, townhouses, apartments and bungalows. Most of the townhouses and row houses are in this area right here around Emma Harvat Square, I'm sorry Emma Harvat Square there' s apartment houses in these three pieces and then there are also town houses in this area and over here. Right here is a collection of six, 12, 12 bungalows that face what is called McCleary Lane and basically these are very small houses about 900 square feet or less, have one bedroom, they face this open space at the center and are accessed by an alley to the back. Those are the ones that we also have a parking ordinance amendment requesting that there just be one parking space required for each of those because of their size, very comparable to one bedroom apartment. Some of the features the open space of Emma Harvat Square, this open space will be in the first phase as you come in on Foster Road in front of these units which can be live/work units. Let's see Phase I we're expecting, we'll be final platting in March, that's this one, and then Phase II which is this one, that kind of wraps around here, would be final platting in August for construction in 02. That may be a tad bit ambitious but we'll give it a try. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 14 Terry Stamper/(can't hear) Actually we'll begin construction in August of 01. (can't hear). Franklin/For the infrastructure of Phase II will be under construction in August of 01, lots for sale in the spring of 02. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/Let' s see, I guess maybe if I just take questions at this point the conditional zoning agreement states what the variations are, or the ordinance states what the variations are to our zoning. There is a very different kind of code that we're going to have with this which is adopted as part of the conditional zoning agreement. Lehman/Applies only to this project. Franklin/It applies only to this project. The really, the only difference here in terms of procedurally how you're doing this is that the detail and the conditional zoning agreement is much much greater than you have ever seen in a plan development but it is very typical I mean practically always, well always when we do a plan development we have a conditional zone agreement that states variations from the zoning code and then has certain conditions for the zoning in this area, but this is going to have a whole code. One of this differences in this code is how it's set up in that it uses illustrations to demonstrate how the property is to be built, the other thing is that it uses I'm going to skip to this next one, instead of having setbacks like we have 5 foot setbacks, 20 foot setbacks, there is a buildable area on the lot and depending upon the type of house that you are interest in, that buildable area will be defined in this development code. It also illustrates what the different elements are in a very kind of, well the only word I think of is gross, but I don't mean it gross, it's not detailed, it's not just a concept but this is not to indicate that this what the fence is going to look like, or this is what the porch is going to look like but that you have kind of an outline of what the building is going to be and you follow those general outlines as you build. It also indicates what the uses are. Vanderhoef/I had a question about in measurement from the street and height of buildings and so forth, you're measuring to the eaves. Franklin/That's right. Vanderhoef/Which then says to me that you're going to control the appearance and the height of the roof basically by architecture, is that correct? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 15 Franklin/That' s right, right. Yea I mean this, and remember too that in this case which is a little bit unusual the developer is coming to us with all of these restrictions that they're placing on what' s going to be built in the neighborhood that they are building. It is much much different from the role that we are usually in when we're telling the developer we want XYZ restrictions and so it's sometimes a little bit hard to get used to that sort of role reversal that we're in here. Champion/Karin can we go back to the plot, the original plot? Franklin/Yea in fact I've got that after that because I thought there probably would be more questions. Champion/Okay that's the only area along the back side of the Peninsula area that's going to have houses on the both sides of the street, I couldn't quite get that street because I couldn't figure out where the streets where going. Didn't we? Franklin/Okay this is Foster Road which is the main road that comes in. Champion/Oh I meant around the edge. Franklin/Okay right here, there's houses on both sides here, when you get to the very edge of the bluff. Champion/That's what I meant. Franklin/Here it' s on two sides but here where your here on the edge it' s just on one side. Champion/Okay. Franklin/And this is single loaded along the Elks too. Champion/Okay, Okay. Franklin/Along the Elks easement. Champion/Right, okay, okay. Vanderhoef/So the houses will be facing the golf course in all of those areas? Franklin/Yea, it will be facing these two holes here, I mean remember most of the golf course is over here. These, there are a couple of apartment sites here, those in Phase 6. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 16 Champion/Okay, and were the bungalow's met to be privately owned or rented? Franklin/Privately owned, yea. Champion/Okay. Wilburn/The building code for future development, the buildable area, if someone wants to make some sort of an adjustment of build, add into that area that' s buildable, they, will they then come here downstairs just as if you were going to get a building permit and that' s where you find out how? Franklin/There' s two steps when you're going to build in this neighborhood, one is the Architectural Review Board, the Peninsula Neighborhood Architectural Review Board, which when someone wants to buy a lot or they want to modify their home they will go to the Architectural Review Board with their plans and get approval of that by the Architectural Review Board, that will be made up of one city representative, one staff person, in the beginning the developer and the town architect, at some point obviously the developer will be out of it, there will be a homeowner' s association that will have seats on the Architectural Review Board. The next step is then to go to our building department and get the building permit whether it's new construction or add on. But when you look at the buildable space on these lots and there' s accommodation here, I mean this would be your main structure with the porch, this is what they call the side wing which is not always going to be there and then this is your garage parking area which may or may not be consumed by a building. But that' s where you could have a garage with a necessary apartment, you could have just your parking, or just your garage. It need not consume this entire space but it can't go beyond it, you leave some opening here. Now there can be variations to both the covenants and deed restrictions the architectural standards with the approval of the Architectural Review Board, deviations to the code would need to go through the Board of Adjustment just as it would if you wanted a variance or a special exception to our zoning ordinance. So the code becomes part of our zoning ordinance, the covenants and deed restrictions do not, they are more comparable to what you would see in any development where there are covenants and deed restrictions. But they are very important to us because with this project where we are partnering it sets the tone of the neighborhood and it is a critical part of this whole project is those particular deed restrictions. Dilkes/Can I? Lehman/Eleanor. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 17 Dilkes/I wanted to go back to Connie's question on the apartment buildings, are those going to be condominium units such that the units can be separately owned or are those buildings owned? Franklin/It could be either, the apartments and it's likely that this building at this site will be condominiumized, it's not required just as we don't control that sort of thing right now if somebody wants to, we look at the number of, typically when we're in a regulatory role we look at the number of units that are going to be put on a site, whether they're condominiumized or not is usually not something we concern ourselves with. Dilkes/Well and my, I think Connie's point was aimed at whether they're going to be rented or owned and they could be either. Franklin/They could be either there, her question was about the bungalow's and the bungalow's are to be owned. Lehman/Yea but is there, I can't imagine there being a restriction that would prohibit someone from buying one of those bungalow's and renting it. Dilkes/No. Franklin/I don't anticipate that. Lehman/It means a bungalow could also be rental property if someone choose to buy it. Dilkes/I think it (can't hear) it could be either. Champion/Could be either. Franklin/As in any neighborhood. Champion/I think it's important that we have some rental property available here somewhere that' s one of the reasons I was asking the question. Lehman/Market really will dictate whether or not somebody builds and rents. Champion/Yea, right. Franklin/Right, and I mean the opportunities for that are with well, I suppose with almost any of the units except the estate houses it's unlikely. Pfab/So Karin theoretically what you're saying is somebody buy that (can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 18 Franklin/As you could with any subdivision, it's highly unlikely. Pfab/I was thinking this was a lot more concentrated on ownership not necessarily totally. Champion/No. Pfab/But I was under the impression where this was a neighborhood it would basically buy. Franklin/It is, it is, but like any neighborhood in Iowa City you, I can rent my house, I own it but I could rent it to someone if I chose to, all I have to do is get a rental permit. Pfab/So there is, so there is nothing to exclude anybody any of those properties (can't hear)? Franklin/No, we don't do that anywhere. Lehman/I don't know that you could go to Walnut Ridge. Pfab/I was think there was (can't hear) a little different approach so that's, I was disappointed clarification. Clearly it was not a concern one way or another but I just wanted to be sure that I understood it because I was thinking that this had a limited amount, a very limited amount of rental property in it, but that was just my, that was just my thought, I was wrong. Vanderhoef/Okay. Kanner/Karin. Franklin/I think Dee was next. Vanderhoef/On the single load. Franklin/Down here. Vanderhoef/Lots all along there, what' s the frontage size of most of those? They look pretty small. Franklin/Help me guys. Vanderhoef/55 is the max. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 19 Franklin/18 to 55, I would imagine these are 55, yes this whole development is on much smaller lots than we're used to seeing, that' s part of the nature of it. Vanderhoef/So my question is then is there anything that would preclude someone from buying two of the lots because they wanted a certain? Franklin/Yes because these are designated for types of buildings so you could not buy a string of these lots, put them together and build an apartment house, you could not. Pfab/Or a mansion. Franklin/Or a mansion. Vanderhoef/Well I'm thinking more in the terms of a single family dwelling but because of the orientation that they would like to have the house to have the frontage would be too narrow and they would want to have a wide frontage. Lehman/Then they have to (can't hear). Franklin/They have to follow this plan, the plan would have to change for that to happen. Vanderhoef/Okay. Kanner/Well they could buy two lots next to each other and not build on one. Franklin/No, Terry you want to come up and press that, you've got to come up here though. Vanderhoef/Good. I'm anticipating questions from other folks. Terry Stamper/I'm Terry Stamper if you all haven't met me, I'm the developer here. We're not selling lots, we're selling houses and buildings, we're not selling lots, so there' s no opportunity for anybody. The main thing about this, what these codes that Karin showed you, the reason that they're restrictive as they are is because we're trying to deliver the vision that you all put together two years ago. And you deliver that vision by telling people exactly what they can or can't build and which lot has a front porch and which lot has to have two porches because it's on a corner and what the house across the street has to look like and all that, and so it's very prescriptive, it's very controlled and we will sell no lots to anybody, we will sell houses and those houses are controlled by the code and in some cases it's not jus the general code but there' s specific points of the code that this house because This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 20 it's on the corner actually has two fronts and so it must have a wrap around porch. This house because it's here has to have this or that so it's very prescriptive. Kanner/Where does it say that in the (can't hear)? Vanderhoef/Yea. Kanner/That it won't sell just a lot. Stamper/We're not selling lots period. Kanner/But does it say that in the code? Pfab/Why did you change your mind? Stamper/The thing about somebody buying, the thing about selling a lot to somebody is that when you do that is you lose control, and when you lose control you cannot deliver the neighborhood that you promised, and we have a contract to deliver your vision so we're going to do that. The other thing is that the worst thing about the challenge in this is not to leave any holes in it, when your dealing with this kind of very small, very narrow street vision it is the building fronts, it's the buildings facing the street that create the open spaces, the outside room really, the outdoor room and you can't leave any holes in it, the real trick is to build a street complete so we would never, we would never leave an opportunity for someone to leave a hole in the fabric of the neighborhood. Pfab/But is there anything that says that you can or can't okay let' s suppose you, that the economy goes to hell in a hand basket and they decide to build (can't hear) but they'll, I'm out of here. Franklin/We have a provision for that. Pfab/There is a provision. Franklin/We, that' s in our developer' s agreement, I think the thing that controls here in terms of the concerns that I think you guys are expressing is this plan where it says on each lot what type of house it's going to be, whether Terry were to decide to sell them the lot or the building, in terms of what we're concerned about and what is going to happen on that piece of ground, that is prescribed by this plan, this picture and the code book. And if he decides to go to Brazil, he is only buying a phase at a time, that' s why we set it up that way, so first phase as soon as he final plats it, he buys it from us, we are the owner, remember that that we have this role of proprietary interest in this. He performs on phase I and then we'll sell him This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 21 phase II, or in some sequence of events. If he decides if the market goes flat or he skips town, we've still got the land. Stamper/And the code. Franklin/And the code and the plan. Pfab/And the obligation to continue on with it? Franklin/Well. Pfab/Or are these set in one phase? Franklin/You can't force anybody ever to build, you can't make them do it, whenever we approve any subdivision, you can't make somebody build that subdivision because they might go broke. But what you have is you know it's going to happen on that land because it's set by what you've approved and if the market will support it somebody' s going to come and do that or we'll sell it somebody else. Pfab/(can't hear) a lot of speculation. Stamper/No there's no speculation. Franklin/No there' s speculation. Stamper/Here let me address that, when we came to town, you guys went out and created the vision. Pfab/We're not saying you're wrong we just want to know how. Stamper/That' s what I'm going to explain to you, when you create the vision, the hardest, I do this a lot, I work with cities, almost all my projects have been public private partnerships delivering the vision for somebody. And the challenge has always, I mean you have these wonderful pictures, and you say are you going to do this for me and I say of course. Well how do you know that, how do you know that I can deliver, that I will deliver your vision, how can we do that? Well what we said is the way that' s done is by these very restrictive codes and covenants, and the regulating plan which specifies everything, it's pretty much written in stone with some flexibility but it still delivers the vision, the only place I get in trouble here is if I get off the vision and then you guys come in and say wait a minute. So we've done that, we've got to the expense and the time and you have of developing these codes and guidelines and that' s your assurance along with the fact that you control the land. We talked this over a long time ago when we talked about development This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 22 agreement, the question is how from the city' s side how do we protect ourselves from you, I said you give me the land one phase at a time. You have the codes and covenants part of your zoning ordinance so I can't go around them. And then there' s a certain part of good faith but the good faith is I prove it by doing phase I, you guy yea he's doing it, and then there' s phase II yea he's doing it. I get captured by alien' s you have in place everything you need here to continue on with another developer and that was the challenge, that' s what Karin wanted, that's what Bob wanted, that's what the City wanted, that's what we've delivered to you we think in fairly good form and that' s the obligation is to, and I tied my hands but, because, I can do that because that' s all I want to deliver to you, I don't want to deliver anything else, there's nothing hidden, no hidden agenda, I don't mind tying my hands because I'm going to do this regardless. But you have the tools, you have all the tools you need in order to keep me straight and to carry on without me. And the other issue we came here with was we said I think in our interview, our initial interview was that what we really wanted to do here was leave you with a capacity to do this without us, in other words to replace ourselves and that' s part of this whole thing is that, once you've gone this whole program and seen how. (END OF 01-03 SIDE ONE) Stamper/Locally here you won't have to go outside of your community to get developer' s to do it, developer' s local can do it because you'll know as a city, as a community, how to put the deals together. Lehman/Well and I, if I'm not mistaken and correct me Karin if I'm wrong but if this, if the economy were to go south and we have a problem it would require action on the part of the council to change the plan. Franklin/That's right. Lehman/I mean this is the way it has to be developed. Franklin/Right. Lehman/It can not deviate from that without an action from the Council approving that change. Franklin/That's right. Kanner/Well I think I see our (can't hear) see if it's restrictive enough or if we want to make it more restrictive and that' s the questioning I have tonight, I want to ask about some more of these things here if we can continue. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 23 Pfab/I have one simple question and that is the common ground or part (can't hear), are there ways? Franklin/This part. Pfab/That anyone can get to that without trespassing on somebody else' s. Stamper/Lots of places, lots of places. Lehman/Trails. Franklin/Yea there will be opportunity with trails and here there will. Pfab/But I, does a trail ever come up to that street? Franklin/It can come right here, right through this lot. Stamper/We were working on entrance features for that right today. Pfab/I mean it's just something so somebody won't be trespassing on somebody else's. Franklin/There's also this ravine here we can put a trail in. Stamper/We brought in an architect from California, in fact he's at the house right now working on the trail head, what the signature architecture will be for the trail head, really kind of interesting stone columns with a little trellis so you know that you've come to someplace where you can enter the wild spots. And we're looking at that all over the place, wherever we think there' s a trail head, a place where you can enter the wilderness we're going to signify it by some monument so you know where your going. You shouldn't have to walk more than a block and a half to get to the wilderness. Pfab/Well at the same time, (can't hear). Stamper/Absolutely, absolutely. Franklin/Before you start Steven I think Mike had something. Did you? O'Donnell/No Dee asked my question and I'm eternally grateful. Franklin/Oh okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 24 Kanner/I have a few questions but about the Architectural Review Board, you said there's going to be one representative from the City. Franklin/Yes. Kanner/But that's not mandated by what we're approving here so that's at the discretion of the developer' s whether or not that continues, there' s an informal agreement. Am I understanding that right? Franklin/That's in, it's written in the code and deed restrictions. Kanner/It's in the code that we're approving? Franklin/It's in the Architectural Review Standards, it's not in the, well I think the, I can't remember now. Kanner/Right, that's why I'm saying (can't hear) in our conditional agreement. Dilkes/It is referenced in the conditional agreement because I think Karin has approval of the deed restrictions. Franklin/That' s right, that' s right. Lehman/So it is required. Franklin/Any building that' s built here, my position gets to look at it and approve it, the Director of Planning. Kanner/I saw that but, and that might be all we need but I don't think that' s the same thing as the representative your talking about on the regular Review Board. Franklin/I'm just looking at that Steven. Stamper/Even if (can't hear) the language to your satisfaction. Karr/I'm sorry. Lehman/You need to speak into the microphone Terry, we can't pick you up on the recording system. Stamper/I'm sorry, if you don't have language that, currently have language that' s very clear about, it's no problem to change it. Our intention that what we're, going back to something I said a few minutes ago, what we're really trying to do here is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 25 lay down the flamework for future, for the future. Because we think that the future is moving more in this direction than it is in the other. And this one requires a lot of control and a lot of looking at it and so ifthere's no language that mandates somebody from the city to be on that board then we can change that, that's not a problem. Franklin/It is, I think it's a development agreement. Lehman/Eleanor. Pfab/And then after it (can't hear). Franklin/Was that what you were going to say? Pfab/Who' s on the Architectural Review Board? A homeowner. Bob Miklo/Somebody flom Homeowner' s Association. Stamper/A town architect which would be a local architect, right now that' s Sue Licht, we have a contract with her to be the town architect. Pfab/I mean I'm talking after you sign off and take off. Stamper/That's what I said, there's still three people, there's an official from the Planning Department, someone in Karin's job, Karin or Karin's job, there' s someone from the Homeowner's Association, and there's someone called the town architect who really is the person who reads the codes, understands what that means and interprets them for someone. Pfab/Doesn't that leave a little bit of slight representation flom homeowner' s. Don't the homeowner's get a little short changed there, ifthere's a 2-1 vote against them. Stamper/Well with what they're buying is they're buying the code as part of the operation so the town architect is really just interpreting the code. Pfab/It enforces it. Stamper/Interpreting yea, and so you need a skilled person in that position and you need somebody from the City because they have an interest in the long term outcome of this thing and you need somebody from the Homeowner' s Association because they may be on your side, they're going to say this guy wants to build this big garage or build this big addition on the back of this house is that in the code? Or if This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 26 it is in the code can it look like this, doesn't it have to be different? And so that' s where all these parties come together and work that out. Pfab/I never heard of that arrangement, (can't hear). Franklin/The City representative on the Architectural Review Board is included in the development agreement which has already been signed by the developer and the city and it is also in the covenants and deed restrictions which will be recorded. Lehman/Go ahead. Kanner/A few other questions. You meant in the conditional zoning agreements, it talks about some development will happen in buffers around protected slope. The developer must show how the slope will not be impacted and fencing will also be used. Will you talk a little bit to this Karin and mention what, how is the developer assured us that the slope won't be impacted. Franklin/Well the grading plans have to submitted before you guys approve the plats and that will come in phases. Now the grading plan for the Bob, would you come up please, for this preliminary plat, my recollection is that we're suppose to have that from public works prior to them approving the plat. Bob Miklo/And that should be approved before you vote on the plat which will come with your third reading of the ordinance. When we drafted this language there have actually been some revisions of the plan and the work in the buffer actually had been much less than we anticipated early on. Pfab/You mean much less disturbing? Miklo/Yes I think a few areas where it will occur is and this area where there was already some disturbance that occurred with the construction of the golf course which resulted in a pond here which has stagnant water, that needs to be corrected and part of the storm water management for this facility will meet to that correction and it will require some disturbance in those protected slope buffers which is permitted by the ordinance with our review. Franklin/Do you understand that Steven? Kanner/I think so but just to clarify, it says the onus on the developer to show how. Franklin/What are you looking at just so I? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 27 Kanner/Page 116 in our Council packet, let me see if I can find it. The sensitive areas ordinance allows buffer reduction where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that development can occur without impacting the stability of the slope. Staff is working with developer to ensure that the proposed developments. Franklin/Oh that's in the report. Kanner/Can occur within these parameters and to identify areas that may conflict with the requirements of the ordinance. Franklin/Okay you're reading from an update memo to the Planning & Zoning Commission on December 21 from Bob to the Commission? Kanner/I'm not sure ifit's the 12-7 one or. Franklin/21. Kanner/We were given both I think. Franklin/Yea, yea. Kanner/It was I think 12-7, the 12-7 memo. Franklin/And that' s what we're working through and there will not be violations of the sensitive areas ordinance. Kanner/Okay. And what' s the final percentage of tree removal that developer' s will do? Miklo/I don't have the exact percentage, I believe it was roughly 25 percent, it might have been actually a little bit less than that, we can have that for you tomorrow night. Kanner/Well, yea, it said it was at 23 percent in the 12-7 one and maybe you could explain the tree removal figure needs to be adjusted to include the 50 foot buffer requirement for wooded areas. I'm not quite sure how that impacts the percentage needed more or less. Miklo/The area in the buffer actually has to be, can not be counted as retained trees even though there won't necessarily be removal of those trees and so when we, we had to go back and include those and it's less than 25 percent as I recall and I'll get you the exact figure before. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 28 Kanner/So that buffer is a small amount that really doesn't raise percentage. Miklo/It's a area surrounding the woodlands. Franklin/Is this basically the area were talking about around the scum pond? Miklo/Right there will be removal of trees in that area. Franklin/Well it is, it's real scum. Kanner/But in general for the whole plan it's envisioned that there will be 23 percent removal of trees. Miklo/Right give or take a few percent. Kanner/Or so under 25 outside of the buffer areas. Okay. And it said the open space should be 1.81 acres and then it gave in square feet what is open space so can you tell me if it's at 1.81 acres open space. Franklin/That was before we did this to. Miklo/It's well over it, the open space that will be dedicated to the City will be Emma Harvat Square plus this large area here, there will be several acres. Franklin/When that 1.81 when we're looking at that in square footage that was before we had discussions with Terry about this whole outside area so it goes way beyond what their open space requirement is. Vanderhoef/That outside area, that' s our permanent FEMA (can't hear). Lehman/No. Franklin/No, that' s above that 6 something line for FEMA, this was part of the ground, it's part of the ground that they're buying. Vanderhoef/Okay. Franklin/And it' s, then it's being dedicated back to the City as public open space, so basically it's the hillsides around the edge. Vanderhoef/So we're not seeing the river there? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 29 Franklin/No not once, there' s the last time you see the river. This is the lower peninsula down here. Vanderhoef/So this is where we get the total acreage that we need to have to say the density that we have. Franklin/Right, that' s for the density transfer. Vanderhoef/Got it, okay. Franklin/You've got it. Kanner/So accessory units won't count for towards the overall density limitation of the 400? Franklin/No, they don't now, if you have an accessory unit on your property. Kanner/Okay. Franklin/The difference is is that in this project to have an accessory unit neither the owner nor the person who' s in the accessory unit needs to be elderly or a person with a disability, that's the distinction. Kanner/And most of these could have accessory units, there' s a great per. Miklo/It could actually be, there's less than 100 of them, we went back and (can't hear). Kanner/Less than a hundred. Miklo/Some of them because their lot was designs couldn't accommodate them. Vanderhoef/And tell me the auxiliary buildings, or accessory buildings whatever you want to call them, what' s their limitation on their size as compared to their size of then. Miklo/The accessory apartments could be I believe up to 650 square feet. Vanderhoef/650. Miklo/(can't hear). Vanderhoef/What was that? Miklo/Those would be the ones that are above the garage. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 30 Vanderhoef/Above the garage, so it is not changing anything on the footprint on the lot, okay. That was one of my concerns and the garage can not be made into a work space, is that right with the covenants? Champion/What do you mean by that? Vanderhoef/In other words instead of having a garage back there you could have an on- site work space because we're also talking about live/work in some areas. Champion/What do you mean by work space though tell me? Vanderhoef/A home business. Champion/What if you don't have a car? Vanderhoef/So if you choose to use that area. Franklin/Dee you can in some. Champion/Right. Franklin/And it depends on what type of house you have, in a peninsula house, which is a single family house you could have, well an accessory unit or a workshop in that area or parking. I'd have to go through each one but if you look at the code. Vanderhoef/I looked at them, and the one that I had a real question about was the townhouse live/work section which I think is, where my questions are on page 154 of our packet at least. Neighborhood/commercial uses. Franklin/Yep. Vanderhoef/And oh well I'm just seeing something that I didn't see so maybe I don't have a question. Lehman/Irvin does. Pfab/Okay now you talked about the larger what it is accessory. Franklin/There' s an accessory unit yea. Pfab/Accessory unit, in the garage, now are those going to be full size walls above the garage? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 31 Franklin/Yes, they have to be built to meet building code. Pfab/So they won't end up being this way, so it will be a full. O'Donnell/Two story. Pfab/(can't hear) all the way around. Okay that's, I just thought you might run into a problem with the architectural garage, be a silhouette of the garage, that' s not a problem. Kanner/And two other things, we had the protest by the Elks do they comprise 20 percent? Franklin/No. Kanner/Okay so it doesn't require the super majority. And there was a list of, after that letter there was a list of Elks concerns and possible remedies, was that written by staff or them? Franklin/Them, we had a response to them which I think was in your information packet. Kanner/Yea, so I'm wondering is this something that you foresee being worked out with the developers and them and us? Franklin/I, go ahead Ernie. Lehman/Let me respond to that, we met with some representatives of the Elks a week ago last Thursday and I don't think this development is any different than, in this regard it's no different than any other development, I believe that we will be as sensitive as we can to our neighbors, in this case the Elks. And there may be some things for example in helping screen along the golf course that we might be able to do. The thing that we are unable to do and several of the points that they ask they are just things that we can not do. But I do think some of their concerns can, we can perhaps work with them, and I think one of things we talked about was screening and another one is if they choose to build a fence or something we could certainly go along with that but I really think more than anything else we agreed to do within what we can without changing the concept of this project, we will do what is within our power to make this as least intrusive as we can on our golf course. Kanner/Well I'm just worried that, let' s say they don't want to do anything and they, and then maybe we decide not to do anything and then people get bombarded by golf This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 32 balls, that' s what their saying is the road, Foster Road might get hit by golf balls and some of the houses. Franklin/Well you know. Champion/There are houses and golf courses all over the country. Franklin/I can't contain myself. We talked about this for three years with the Elks, for three years. Lehman/Yes. Franklin/And agreed on an alignment for Foster Road which they agreed to, they then hired a golf course consultant to design their golf course, if there' s a problem, they have a problem. Kanner/What can we do if they might have the problem, what can we do if, do we have any recourse? Franklin/Well I don't believe that anybody is going to be bombarded by golf balls. O'Donnell/You've never seen me golf. Champion/Well you're not allowed to golf out there. Lehman/You're not, you are not a member are you? O'Donnell/No I'm not, you know but. Franklin/Maybe they need to offer lessons. O'Donnell/No but there were safety concerns and I know that we will cooperate with them and address them. Franklin/Of course, we will do everything that we can that' s reasonable. Lehman/In as much as we can do that without compromising our plan and I think we conveyed that to them, but Karin's exactly right and that' s why I asked when we first started if this layout is essentially the same as that which was what proposed three years ago because that is precisely what we looked at and the Elks looked at in the alignment of that road, in the positioning of the trail, and putting in the utilities, I mean this whole thing has been a subject of public meetings charrettes, it's been in the paper, it's been before Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 33 it's twice, we've sere it out to bid, every time it has been the same footprim, so there' s nothing new here. Franklin/Since 98 yea. Kanner/I just warn to see if we can clarify or maybe we don't have to that the things that were suggested by the City Manager, or are the City going to be responsible for those possible remedies or would the developer be responsible? Lehman/Neither, that' s the Elks responsibility, they built knowing full well the design of that subdivision, they knew where the road was, they knew everything, they chose to build it the way they built it, that doesn't preclude us from cooperating with them, but as far as the responsibility, that goes with the Elks. Champion/That was very well said Mr. Mayor. Lehman/Well then maybe I should try over again. Pfab/You didn't screw it up enough, do it again. Lehman/Isn't that correct? Champion/That's correct. Franklin/Yes. Lehman/The responsibility does go with the Elks for any mediation of difficulties associated with. Franklin/We're waiting to hear back from them. Lehman/Right. Pfab/I heard from a previous Council Member who was involved with the Elks and the gist of that conversation was we sort of by taking away some of their previous golf horts, or holes or whatever holes, I'm not a golfer so, anyway that forced them into a compromising position which they're in difficulty now and when they swing the ball instead of the ball going down the road, the ball goes way up it and it's pretty hard to build a barrier to keep it from going into the neighbors, see that' s. Lehman/Well let me just say that the agreemere with the Elks Club that was emered imo with the City of Iowa City was a compromise as much on the part of the City as it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 34 was the Elks Club, neither of us were particular happy with that agreement which means it probably was a pretty good agreement. Pfab/So, okay, I really don't know anything they have one way or another. Lehman/Any more questions for Karin? O'Donnell/I don't see how there could be. Franklin/Done on that one? Lehman/I am excited about this, I am just so anxious to see this thing start. Champion/I wish I was 20 years younger or it was 20 years older. Franklin/You can still move Connie. Lehman/Let's not get any conflict. Champion/I'll be living in a state house and that's like a phase 6, I'll be 6 foot under and (can't hear). Pfab/She's worried about her storm water. Vanderhoef/A nursing home (can't hear). Lehman/Moving, moving along Karin. Franklin/Yep, we're moving along. Lehman/Terry thank you very very much. D. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 14-6J-1 THE OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TO REQUIRE ONLY ONE OFF- STREET PARKING SPACE FOR SMALL ONE-BEDROOM SINGLE- FAMILY, TOWNHOUSE, AND DUPLEX DWELLINGS. Franklin/The next item is the public hearing on the ordinance amendment regarding the off-street parking that I referred to earlier for a small. Lehman/Does that apply everywhere in the City? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 35 Franklin/That would apply everywhere in the City, yes, we felt that this, I mean whether it's here or anyplace else, if you've got a house that small with one bedroom and that' s what is necessary, that it meets that square footage requirement as one bedroom, this is analogous to what we require for apartments. Lehman/Okay. Kanner/How many (can't hear). Franklin/Let's give it a shot. Lehman/I do too. Kanner/How many houses are there in the City about percentage that are one bedroom? Franklin/I have no idea. Housing Inspection Services couldn't even tell me. Lehman/Well it goes for duplexes, townhouses, and single family, so it (can't hear) construction. Vanderhoef/As long as it's single. Franklin/It has to be so small and one bedroom that I don't think you're going to find a lot of them. Kanner/(Can't hear) square feet, how many will this affect approximately, can we find that out? Lehman/What difference does it make? Kanner/What? Lehman/What difference does it make how many are affected if they only apply to one bedroom? Kanner/Well I think because it's, to see how wide spread it is, we're doing this basically for the peninsula project but it affects the whole city, so I would just like to know the facts and the figures of how many will be affected by this, how many. Lehman/I think and I think Irvin you said you agree with this totally but I think this is one of the things that we're criticized for being to restrictive in our requirements and when it comes to affordable housing obviously requiring an extra parking space This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 36 when there' s only one bedroom but this is why I'm assuming, Planning and Zoning and staff whole heartidly support this. Franklin/Right. Wilburn/The changes to, when we do the storm water management thing if we do the thing with the model. Lehman/Right. Wilburn/Come out of. Vanderhoef/Impervious surface. Franklin/Impervious surface. Wilburn/Right I can't talk tonight so, and this would benefit someone who would have less to pay. Kanner/Yea I think it may well, I'd just like to. Vanderhoef/(can't hear). Franklin/I don't know how to find that out Steven frankly because I can't just go to the database that' s Permit Plan because it doesn't have all the dwellings in Iowa City. I mean it would be a phenomenal task, I don't know how to, how we'd do it. Vanderhoef/As long as it's by bedroom that' s okay because there are duplexes that have two bedrooms that are under 1,000 square feet. Lehman/But that' s what it says, it says only one bedroom units. Vanderhoef/That's what I said, right. Pfab/I think it's really appro here because isn't the City' s lack of one bedroom, affordable one bedroom apartments really a huge need. Franklin/Yes. Champion/We're not talking about putting up apartments here. Pfab/No, no, but it will make it easier and more affordable to build them, those are. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 37 Franklin/To build one bedroom houses. Pfab/Or one bedroom houses, one bedroom apartments whatever so they're affordable, right now I think that's, ifthere's any unmet need, I believe it's probably in that area. Lehman/Okay we like it next. E. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE NORTHERNMOST 60 FEET OF THE DEAD-END ALLEY ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE OF 405 SOUTH SUMMIT STREET. (VAC00-0001) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/The next one is second consideration of the vacation of that alley on Summit, near Summit Street. F. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND MANUFACTURE HOUSING SITE PLAN OF SADDLEBROOK ADDITION, PART 2, A 201.2 ACRE, 6-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND 290- UNIT MANUFACTURED HOUSING SITE PLAN LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF HEINZ ROAD. (SUB00-00015) Franklin/Item F and G are the Saddlebrook addition, and this might be deferred again. Champion/Oh. Vanderhoef/Oh. Franklin/But just to refresh your memories on what we're talking about here, it's the Saddlebrook manufactured housing park. This is the drawing of the entire development just to orient you. This road is not there, it' s the planned parkway, kind of the continuation of the Sycamore L as we went across in that previous drawing. Pfab/Now is that going to be a bypass? Franklin/No. Lehman/No. Pfab/Oh all right. Franklin/No, not unless it goes over the river farther south and connects to the interstate. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 38 Pfab/I just had trouble envisioning it, that' s all right. Franklin/Yea, well this is the conservation easement with all the wetlands from the whole beginning of Sycamore Farms thing. This is Heinz Road coming up here, and right now it's built to about here, this is the entrance to Paddock Boulevard and this is the existing part of Saddlebrook which isn't totally built out yet. One of the issues with this project is secondary access, and so we have a number of 416 units which addresses the manufactured housing as well as the apartments that are built in this RM-20 area, that when we reach the number of 416 that' s it until secondary access is provided either to the east ifthat's annexed and developed. To the west and then up to Whispering Meadows or down Heinz Road and the parkway is put through, so the developer is aware of that. G. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT AND MANUFACTURED HOUSING SITE PLAN OF SADDLEBROOK ADDITION, PART 2, A 77.65 ACRE, 5-LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON HEINZ ROAD. (SUB00-00015) Franklin/The last item is the subdivision, which is to subdivide Saddlebrook into five lots basically one, two, three, four and five. Kanner/What' s the reason for the possible deferment? Franklin/There are some issues that we're trying to work out with them regarding escrowing for capital improvements and making sure that all the details on the legal papers are done. Pfab/Have there been any problems previously with (can't hear)? Franklin/No it's changed a lot from the beginning but it's a good size development and that happens, no. I'm done. O'Donnell/We should (can't hear). Lehman/It doesn't bother me. Thank you Karin. Franklin/You're welcome. O'Donnell/Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 39 AGENDA Steve Atkins/Ernie for Agenda Items. Lehman/Yes. Atkins/Linda Kopping, Jay Honohan and Joe Fowler are here if you have any questions about the Senior Center Bridge Project so they don't have to show up tomorrow night, is there anything you need to know? And Joe is also here for Zender's and Doug is here for the vehicle storage ordinance. Vanderhoef/Well I would like to talk about the vehicle storage. Lehman/Okay but is there anyone who wants to talk about, I mean the Senior Center. Vanderhoef/Senior Center. Lehman/Laying out the contract, estimate of costs, do we have any questions on that? O'Donnell/No I think it's a great thing. Kanner/Well yea I have some questions, we, who's doing the. Lehman/Well what are your questions first? Atkins/Senior Center. Kanner/Well we never, we saw a presentation by the Senior Center Commission but we didn't see from our staff, I'd just like to get an explanation of what it's going to be, haven't really seen any drawings from the staff per se. And so we've got this one figure that was in our packet, that' s the only information we've had basically from the staff, I mean yea from the staff. Atkins/I think Joe can help you out, Linda also. Joe Fowler/Neuman Monson has done the design work on this, it's not a staff project, I've got one drawing that I can pass around to you. Lehman/Joe explain briefly to the Council, originally this walkway included an elevator that was going to have to be installed. Fowler/Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 40 Lehman/And my understanding is that has been changed so would you just kind of briefly walk us through the change that was made. Fowler/Okay what we had was a problem with the grade difference because the floors in the parking facility weren't lining up with anything in the Senior Center and to overcome the need for an elevator what they did was start the slope for the skywalk back inside of the parking ramp, basically just about halfway the width of the parking ramp so inside of the parking ramp right now is built kind of, the foundation to build a slope to get up oh probably picks up about 3 feet inside of the parking ramp and then the slope continues in the skywalk into the Senior Center. Vanderhoef/So that makes it an acceptable ADA grade? Fowler/Yes, right. Lehman/And it eliminates the elevator. Vanderhoef/And eliminates, I think that's wonderful engineering. Pfab/I have one problem, what happens if a truck hits that (can't hear) holding up? Fowler/It's going to be surrounded by ballerd at the bottom to protect it. Pfab/Okay so, you were able to, it's not, no concern. Fowler/No. Lehman/We hope he has good insurance. Kanner/So how far in did you say into the ramp the into the ramp the skywalk starts? Fowler/The skywalk starts at the edge of the ramp but there is a ramp inside the parking facility to start making up the grade difference and it's probably 150 feet wide so probably 60 feet of the interior, has a gradual slope and then there is an option for people that don't want to use that that have the ability, there's a set of steps that also would take you up to that landing. Kanner/Okay so there's going to be railings that's coming, it's hard to me envision, it's going to be in the middle of the roadway? Fowler/No, it's going to be right up against the back of the commercial space. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 41 Champion/Like behind that wall. Lehman/Against the wall. Vanderhoef/Along that west wall, okay that makes good sense and where it comes out in the Senior Center then is on level, and the accessibility then to the interior elevator how are we set up for security in there? Fowler/Inside of the building, the doors to the skywalk will be on the locking system from the Senior Center so they'll be able to lock the skywalk when the building is closed. And they may have to do some interior movement of equipment to have it not out in accessible area like on the weekends when the building is not fully occupied. Vanderhoef/Okay. Kanner/So when people rent GO8 after hours they won't be able to use the skywalk, is that correct? Fowler/I don't have anybody GO8 or after hours. Kanner/G08 is. Fowler/Well I know G08 but I don't know anything about the. Kanner/The room in the basement and it's open for rent to the public. Linda Kopping/In order to let people use G08 after hours we'd have to open up the whole building to let them trail through, so there is another ADA accessible entrance off of Washington Street which is the one we would time to open for use of the G08 after hours. Kanner/So the ramp won't be available for the majority of the day, the 24 hours, it will be available just the hours that the Senior Center is open and staffed which is from 9- 57 Kopping/That's not entirely true because we're also putting a timer on a room that's, a large room that' s directly adjacent to where the skywalk will enter into the Senior Center in room 202 and we anticipate that that room would be available for after hour room use also. Kanner/For rental from the public like G08. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 42 Kopping/That's correct, that's correct. Kanner/Okay. Pfab/Is the entrance of the skywalk into the Senior Center is that going to be that (can't hear) previously? Kopping/Where Jean Mann' s office was. Pfab/That's what I was (can't hear). Lehman/Other questions. Kanner/And the original, what, can you remind me what the original estimated cost was with the elevator? Lehman/$358,000. Kopping/$358,000. Kanner/So we're saving about $70,000, not your, $90,000. Kopping/That' s a good saving. O'Donnell/It's a lot simpler, approximately $120,000 has been raised. Lehman/Okay, any other questions for Joe? O'Donnell/No. Lehman/Thank you folks very much. Fowler/Would you like to have Neuman Monson come tomorrow night and put on a presentation with pictures? Lehman/I don't think that' s necessary. Vanderhoef/No. Fowler/Okay all right. Champion/Save everybody's energy. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 43 O'Donnell/Especially ours. Champion/Especially ours right. Lehman/Other agenda items. Vanderhoef/Yes. Lehman/Okay. ITEM NO. 6. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 1 (NUISANCES) OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY BY ADDING STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES TO CONTROL THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES PARKED, STORED, PLACED OR KEPT OUTSIDE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Vanderhoef/Item No. 6 which is the. Lehman/Doug you might as well. Vanderhoef/Yes sir. Boothroy/I wasn't sure Item 6 was (can't hear). Lehman/It wasn't until now. Vanderhoef/Well I'm having to work with, but I've got my other agenda, the ordinance as proposed is allowing six vehicles outside plus one for every licensed driver that lives at that residence. I found this probably excessive because if I counted up correctly we could have the six, we could have four, a family of four with four more vehicles, and then in the mix there could be undercover more vehicles, I still think this is too much in the way of storage outside on a permanent basis. For me I really think we ought to be considering two vehicles plus the number of licensed drivers that live at the residence. Champion/By vehicles do we mean cars, motorcycles. Lehman/Cars, boats, airplanes. Boothroy/Anything that's licensed to. Champion/Anything that's licensed to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 44 (All talking) Vanderhoef/So the trailer. Boothroy/I don't think airplanes would be an issue. Champion/My husband has four motorcycles, we'd be in trouble with your ordinance. Vanderhoef/Yea but they could be in the garage. Champion/Oh he'd have to empty all of his cars (can't hear) I mean I don't know, I think, I like, I think the question you bring up is valid but when this includes all registered. Pfab/Motor scooters. Vanderhoef/Only the ones that sit outside, so you have as many, if you have a two-car three car garage you can put as many as your motorized vehicles. Boothroy/So under Dee' s proposal, if you had a couple living in a house, they could have four vehicles stored outside in addition to. Lehman/Whatever they store inside. Boothroy/Whatever vehicles they store inside the house. O'Donnell/No I thought I heard Dee just say two. Boothroy/Two but two for each registered. O'Donnell/Oh two, okay. Boothroy/So that would be a total of four. Vanderhoef/Two plus the number of licensed drivers, so a family of four could have six that could sit outside plus whatever else they have undercover, and I think that' s enough. Boothroy/And in trying to deal with the issue of addressing the number of people that might live in a home that might have a vehicle, it's opened up this question that Dee' s raising which is if you start counting everybody that' s living there that has a vehicle plus the number that's stored outside it could get to be a larger number than we started out with because if you recall a month ago when we first started This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 45 with this we were one time just talking about a maximum of six period. And then to deal with the Brady family, for example, I added this provision which I think is a good provision to deal with that so you have the flexibility but it can lead to a lot more vehicles than maybe it was intended by the council. Kanner/But Dee said a family of four and the way I read it is if your a family of four, four licensed drivers, you still can only get six cars. Lehman/You can get 10. Vanderhoef/No what I was saying. Kanner/No I thought (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Was saying that as an example Steven that as an example a family of four that all four were licensed drivers under my suggestion then they would have the two plus the four drivers, if you had six licensed drivers you would have two plus six so you'd be able to have eight outside so that takes care of the family who has four kids in college who still call this their permanent residence, plus two teenagers in high school that have drivers license then mom you know, it would go up incrementally with the number of licensed drivers. Dilkes/I think there' s another way to read this and I think there' s an ambiguity in this sentence that may address the issue. The way I read this which I think is the way Steven read it is the total may exceed six by the number of licensed drivers so in other words if you have four licensed drivers you still just get six, or it doesn't exceed six. Vanderhoef/That isn't the way I read it. Kanner/Yea. Dilkes/If you have, but I think that may be the way we should deal with it, if you have and I think there is an ambiguity in this sentence, if you have six licensed drivers you still just get six, if you have 8 licensed drivers you get eight. Vanderhoef/Ifthat's what your intent is but that isn't the way I read it. Dilkes/I think doing it your way Dee I think is problematic because if you, you can only have stored outside period unless you have more licensed drivers in the house and I think that's problematic. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 46 Lehman/Well what she' s saying is that you could only have, if you have no licensed drivers you're entitled to (can't hear). Boothroy/I don't see the ambiguity but we can talk about it later because. Lehman/Eleanor what' s under Dee' s scenario, ifthere's no one in the house that operates a vehicle of any kind they're still entitled to have two cars parked outside, or two vehicles. Dilkes/But that' s a pretty minimum number when we're talking about what the purpose of the ordinance is. Champion/Right. Dilkes/I mean, it has, remember it has to get to a point of storage at which it impacts the neighbors in a negative way and I don't know that two get you there. Lehman/I hear you. Pfab/I think the problem will also get solved when they get charged with their storm water assessment. Champion/Why that wouldn't have anything to do with it? Pfab/Because they'll have to have more space (can't hear). Champion/Well they could park in the grass. Kanner/No you can't. Boothroy/Well I guess the question is based on Eleanor mentioned is that the way you want to go with this and ifthat's the case we can work on the wording? Lehman/No I think Eleanor' s. Champion/No I think Eleanor' s statement is. Dilkes/That' s the way I read it, but I think I may have read it wrong but that is the way I read it, you just need to indicate what you want to do. Champion/Exposed right, those are exposed vehicles. Boothroy/Right outside. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 47 Champion/Outside. Vanderhoef/Just go with a max. of. Dilkes/Well you, it's six unless you have more than 6 licensed drivers. Vanderhoef/That I can go with, you know, if you can make that clear, that addresses. Dilkes/Does that (can't hear)? Boothroy/Well so if you had four licensed drivers in the household I'm not sure what you're saying Eleanor, you're saying it's 10. Vanderhoef/You still can have six. Dilkes/No, no, no, I'm saying it would be six. Boothroy/It's still six. Dilkes/Because you only get to exceed six if your a licensed driver exceed six. Boothroy/Okay yes, I've got you, I'm not so sure that says that. Dilkes/I know. Boothroy/Okay. Lehman/Then you're saying that if I have six licensed drivers that live there. Boothroy/I could have six. Lehman/I could have six, if I happen to own, if they happen to own a boat, or snowmobile trailer that that can not also sit outside the property because then it goes to seven. Champion/Right that' s correct. Vanderhoef/That's correct. Boothroy/That' s true. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 48 Vanderhoef/But in many cases you have at least a single car garage, a carport qualifies as a covered or an uncovered? O'Donnell/(can't hear). Vanderhoef/Exposed, as long it as a roof on it. Boothroy/I would say, well I'd have to, I think basically the way we've treated outdoor storage is it would have to be enclosed. Vanderhoef/Enclosed well then a carport doesn't count. Dilkes/Connie, the other way to address your concern what you could do is say is you get six plus the number of licensed drivers exceeds something less than six. Boothroy/Two. Dilkes/Four, five whatever, you see what I mean so that if you get six and let' s say that you have four licensed drivers then you'd get two additional. Lehman/Is six a reasonable number? Boothroy/Well six is a number that, well I looked at a number of different ordinances in putting this together and trying to come up with what is a reasonable number, and most of the ordinances that I looked at and it was about a half a dozen, six was more common, some had four, but it was either four or six were the two numbers that I saw. Vanderhoef/Six if they are on concrete. Boothroy/Well all of them would be. Lehman/They all have to be on concrete by the code. Vanderhoef/But make that clear to people. Boothroy/They would have to be on concrete. Lehman/But that' s in the code anyway. Boothroy/It would be considered parked so it would be required as a parking space. Champion/And this is really, we're talking about storage. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 49 Boothroy/Permanently parked. Champion/Right, so like if somebody has all their family members and they're. Lehman/It doesn't count guests. Boothroy/It doesn't count guests. Lehman/Only if you live there. Champion/Okay. Boothroy/So we'll need to work on that language I guess to clarify that. Champion/But is six too many I don't know, is six to many? Lehman/It's a lot. Vanderhoef/It's a lot. Champion/It's a lot. Boothroy/It's basically putting a cap on six, though the incident we've had the most complaints on which has led to this you know we're looking at anywhere from 15 to 17 so I mean that would be a significant reduction in number of vehicles. You know many driveways, many homes have two car garages and they'll have a double wide drive so it's not unusual to see three or four vehicles, so I don't think six is going to far, I mean I think it's a reasonable appearance. Vanderhoef/I'd be willing to go with the six and if we get complaints and so forth why we could take it down. Boothroy/We could always amend the number. Vanderhoef/If it shows up more. Wilburn/Was it difficult to find other places that had this type of?. Boothroy/Well most of these were out west, California Seattle area, Texas, so I didn't find any in the midwest but I think I did the search over the Internet and there were a number of places that I couldn't get into so it's not an exhaustive search because This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 50 I checked in Iowa and I didn't find examples in Iowa, but I did find them in California and in the sunshine states I found a few examples. Wilburn/The only reason I ask I'm still struggling with even doing this. Boothroy/It's not unique but it is, it would be unique for Iowa, and I don't know ifit's just in this particular climate we have more garages whereas on the west coast and the sunbelt there are less garages and maybe they have more problems with this issue. Champion/And less salt, cars last longer. Boothroy/Yea cars last forever so they can be parked forever. O'Donnell/How pieces of, is this a frequent problem Doug? Boothroy/We've had frequent complaints on this one particular situation. Vehicle storage is a frequent problem but most of the issue deals with inoperable vehicles, there are, most people don't go to the expense of keeping them all licensed and operable. We deal with you know I don't know, over 100 complaints of inoperable vehicles, vehicle storage a year but this is just another nuance of that particular issue and in this case the neighbors are upset because you know the backyard is stacked with vehicles and it looks more like a parking lot and more commercial nature than what we typically see with in a residential neighborhood. O'Donnell/But we are creating an ordinance for. (END OF 01 - 103 SIDE TWO) Boothroy/(can't hear) I don't say I advocate doing that but this is. O'Donnell/But we should have a tool that we can respond if we get the complaint. Vanderhoef/And this then assists us with the street storage thing which is the 48 hour which we already have so it keeps them moving. But I also would like to talk a minute about the whole number 3 section with the antique cars and membership and so on and so forth. Personally I would like to just delete that whole section, I think it opens up more questions than it answers and creates more judgment calls on what' s antique, what isn't antique, where collectible falls in there and where people are working on them, my experience with people working on older cars that are collectible and maybe in the antique is that they pretty much keep them in the garage anyway while they're working on them and I think this is something we don't need in there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 51 Boothroy/I'd like to point out the staff doesn't have any problem with it it's just in the ordinance or not. I put it in there because it adds another facet to in terms of looking at this type of activity within a residential area and maybe worth pursuing but ifit's not something that you want to do at this time we don't need to go there. And it' s easy to remove because we would just remove three and four, and they just drop off, they stand alone as paragraph' s they're not integral to any part of the other ordinance. So ifthere's a majority that wants to consider that and don't want to take on that particular aspect tell me now and we'll get rid of it. Do we have four that? Champion/I need to look at it. Boothroy/Okay. Kanner/Maybe hear the public hearing and then we can delete it by amendment after. Vanderhoef/Okay, if you'll take a look at. Boothroy/It doesn't require any redrafting, it just take a (can't hear). Lehman/Well the only thing I would like I think we need to really think about if six is a good number, I don't like to see us adopt a number to obviously or responding to a problem situation and if six is a good number and that' s the right number then that's fine but let's not go to a number and then have to go back and redo the number later. Boothroy/I was getting the impression that what we're talking about is the six is the number an there was some indication that possibly there would be an exception to additional vehicles under, did we talk about just a minute ago. Vanderhoef/No. Dilkes/If there are more licensed drivers. Lehman/Seven drivers you can have seven cars or seven vehicles but six. Dilkes/But you raised Ernie the concern about the snowmobile. Lehman/Right. Dilkes/I think that's what Doug was talking about. Boothroy/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 52 Dilkes/The snowmobile and the, and do, and I mean do you want that addressed, I mean I think that' s a valid concern? Boothroy/What you were saying was that if you had, do that again for me because I can hardly remember exactly what you said, because you said it well. See if you can remember. Dilkes/Okay you get six plus one for every person over four licensed drivers, that allows for two additional vehicles, do you see what I mean? Lehman/That would do it, right, that would cut down on the snowmobile. O'Donnell/I think that' s. Dilkes/In other words if you have four licensed drivers, you can have six vehicles and a snowmobile and a boat. Lehman/Right. Vanderhoef/Then I think that' s too many, then I think we need to cut down the number. Dilkes/Well I think you need, as I understand the complaints that you've had are about 15 vehicles on this, 15 and 17, and we're going to drop down below six. I mean we have one instance to show what the, that there are complaints and what the impact of the neighborhood is and that' s an instance where there are 15 vehicles stored and we're going below six I mean I think you need to think about that. Champion/I think we should (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Well as long as you don't add the two extras. Lehman/No. Champion/That's if there's extra drivers. Dilkes/But you're trying to accommodate the larger family, I mean it's the balance between the private property right of the large family and the impact to the neighborhood. Boothroy/I think what we know is that we don't want that many vehicles that we're getting complaints on it sounds like a good compromise. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 53 Champion/It does. Champion/It does. Vanderhoef/Okay. Boothroy/But we'll have to work on the language if you can remember what we said. Lehman/Well let me ask you this then tomorrow night is the public hearing going to be on the ordinance as we see it here or is it? Boothroy/Yes. Lehman/It is going to be. Boothroy/This is the one that has been published. Lehman/Okay so ifthere's going to be a change that would change it to six plus an addition for one each driver more than four that would be, an amendment would have to be made the first, when we have the first reading. Boothroy/Prior to the. Vanderhoef/Could we not have a second one printed up for tomorrow night that we've asked for? Boothroy/An amendment. Vanderhoef/And the amendment and have that available at the door also? Dilkes/I think we could because I don't think there' s a public hearing required on this ordinance, you just wanted one. Boothroy/No right I set it for a public hearing but that' s. Dilkes/So I don't think we're under any constraints as far as. Lehman/Is there consensus on the Council that we would go with the six vehicles plus one for each licensed driver over four and print it up that way before the public hearing. O'Donnell/I think that' s. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 54 Lehman/Then why don't we do it that way. Champion/Yea I like the way. Vanderhoef/If you would I think. Pfab/It doesn't make, I see pluses and minuses so I, I have, it doesn't make any difference to me. Lehman/Well it would make a significance difference, if you had four licensed drivers under the present, the way it's written right now, you could have 10 vehicles. Dilkes/No you could eight. Lehman/You could have eight on what your talking about, but the way it's written here, you could have 10. Dilkes/Oh yes, right, under this, 10 under 8. Vanderhoef/And that' s too many. Lehman/All right we'll get it written that way tomorrow night. Boothroy/And I'm assuming that your wanting us to take out paragraph 3 and 4 in the amendment. Vanderhoef/Okay I just have one question while your there. What came up for me while I was looking at 3 and 4 was talking about the auxiliary building and how that is figured what the size of it could be and it had to do with the size of the square footage of the primary property. Champion/No, we already have that in place. Vanderhoef/On that lot, it was in the discussion, anyway it brought up for me is that on a 2-story house that you had the additional garage building on the back it could get so huge and it could conceivably have a bigger footprint than the size of the basic residence. Wilburn/That's not what this says. Lehman/I don't think that. Vanderhoef/And that would be. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 55 Wilburn/It said it had to be less than this. Boothroy/It's not, part of the. Vanderhoef/It could be on total square footage. Wilburn/Okay. Vanderhoef/And on a two story house it becomes, and I would like, if everybody agrees to at least have them look at that and consider working off of the footprint of the primary building rather than off of the total square footage of. Boothroy/That wouldn't be an amendment to this ordinance, we're talking about. Vanderhoef/It wouldn't be to this. Boothroy/We're talking about an amendment to the zoning code at some future point where we have some kind of percentage or specifics, specifications in terms of what size the accessory building. Right now what it says is that an accessory building is less square foot in the area than the principle building, it doesn't say to what degree. And so the way we apply that is, if you want to build a garage detached we say that the garage has to be less than the floor area of the house, in the case of a two story house is what Dee' s saying is that you get both floors counted in that total floor area and theoretically the garage might be equal to or bigger than the house. Champion/But don't we have an ordinance that controls how much square footage your lot can be used up by building? Boothroy/But if you have a large lot that number is irrelevant. Lehman/But this is another item. Boothroy/That's right. Vanderhoef/Because this is where this particular case they were going to build a garage and it was getting bigger (can't hear). Boothroy/Yea the original garage, he wanted, the person wanted to put up a huge metal building as I recall and the permit was denied because it was not subordinate to the principle structure, an area. He has a, in the zoning ordinance, when you figure total floor area, garage is deducted so he has a 3-car garage on his house and he This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 56 couldn't count that so all he had was the house itself so he didn't go forward with the garage, he just paved a concrete slab out back so. Lehman/Okay. Boothroy/Okay Lehman/Thank you. Boothroy/Thank you. Lehman/We are going to take five. (Break) Lehman/Are there any other agenda items? ITEM 3b(1) MINUTES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION - November 9 Kanner/Yea I've got a few. In the consent calendar under minutes of Boards and Commissions Item 3b(1) the Airport. I have a question there was mention about SWA hanger screw up on the building and talking about the inside panels that were left out and outside and got mined then. Was that settled to the satisfaction of the City? Dilkes/Of the Airport Commission yes I believe so. Kanner/Okay, that's good to hear. ITEM 3B(3). MINUTES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION - December 8 Kanner/And then in Minutes and Boards, B(3) Civil Service, Dickerson of the Commission of the Civil Service Commission asked about getting a summary report, breaking the applicant pool down by race and gender as the process progressed. Can I get a copy of that also? Atkins/I'm sure we can get one. Kanner/Was that ever supplied to him? Atkins/I don't know, we'll find out for you, Dickerson's. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 57 Kanner/Dickerson requested, this was from December 8 Civil Service. Atkins/Okay that' s an application pool for position of. Kanner/Summary report breaking the applicant pool down by race and gender as the process progress, I think for the police. Atkins/Yea ifit's easy enough to get we'll (can't hear). ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER AN ORDNANCE TO ADOPT THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AKA "CITY CODE, 2001." (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Kanner/And number 11, on our agenda, ordinance to adopt the code of ordinance, it says it's by code, it has to be done at least every five years. Karr/That's correct. Atkins/Marian can do it for you. Karr/That's fine. Kanner/So 94 what happened, how come it wasn't approved? Or was it approved in 99 and we're just? Karr/No in 99 we talked to our City Attorney and we were under the impression that because of our supplementation procedure that we adopt supplements and ordinances in a timely fashion. The State Code allowed that provision, however doing the last audit we were informed by our auditor they prefer we adopt it so we are going back and just following that particular subdivision of the state code and adopting the 2001. We believe we've been in compliance because of our method of supplementation. Kanner/Can you explain what that means supplementation, what your? Karr/Okay, our codifier, every time we adopt an ordinance we send to our codifier a copy of that ordinance, I contract, he then provides a supplement, hard copy supplement as well as a on-line supplement to update our present code. And by contract we request our supplementation to be done every six weeks. This provision in the State Code was mandated so that all cities across the state would at least minimally once every five years compile a new code. We compile a new code every six weeks depending on ordinance, so we believe we're in compliance but again This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 58 because there are a number of cities that don't the Auditor, the State Auditor, requested that documentation, it's a simple enough process, we just thought it was just as easy to do the ordinance and adopt it than it was to. Kanner/The Auditor, is that from the Secretary of State's office or, what. Lehman/State Auditor. Kanner/What is the Auditor looking at just how we're complying with State Code. Karr/My feeling is the auditor has a check off list of a number of different things that each city must comply with and that' s just one of the many things he's looking at and again as I said I believe we're in compliance it just wasn't worth taking anymore time. Kanner/Does the auditor come every year to do that kind of audit or? Dilkes/Well we've had the Auditor' s here recently for months, Steve does our audit? Is it McGladrey. Atkins/I can't pronounce it, Deloitte. Karr/I can't either. Dilkes/Oh yea Deloitte and Touche. Lehman/Thank you, excuse me for not pronouncing that. Dilkes/And I think, it's required by State Code and they consult with the State Auditor on some things and they brought it up. Kanner/And do we have to pay for this or is that the state for it? Atkins/The audit, oh we pay. Dilkes/No I think we, we pay for it. Karr/Oh the audit itself, no we're required to pay. Champion/We pay dearly. Dilkes/Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 59 Karr/Handsomely so. Dilkes/They're here a long time. Kanner/Thank you. Lehman/Other agenda items. ALLEY CALMING Lehman/Alley calming, Noahside. Jeff Davidson/You're all aware of our traffic calming program that' s been in place since 1996, the program that you all approved and gave to staff to use. We have implemented four projects, we had one taken out after implementation. The other three I think are operating successfully. We've also had probably again as many considered and not implemented I believe one of those the Goosetown one did get to you for decisions, others have been preempted before they ever get to you. There have been two changes proposed in the traffic calming program since it's inception, the first one was to raise the collector street threshold above 3,000 vehicles a day, you decided not to do that one. And then just recently you indicated to us that you would like to have a 60 percent approval rather than a 50 percent approval so that' s now the threshold we are using. You've received the correspondence from the Noahside Neighborhood Association and my response to them, we have a request for traffic calming on an alley, the alley in block 73 of original town and we are prepared to do as you wish if you'd like us to take this through the standard traffic calming program, we will be glad to do that. The traffic calming program does not include alley' s at the present time. We have, this would be the second one we've considered on an alley so if you decide you want to include this on our evaluation, I guess I would ask you do you want to just include alley' s period from now on or do you want us to come back to you every time we have one on an alley. Champion/Well then (can't hear) always expecting because a lot of people use that alley to access some of those houses, those larger residences and (can't hear). Davidson/There's a transitional housing, a building that used to be a fraternity, and then there' s an apartment building down at the Dubuque Street end. It's pretty obvious to me from the correspondence and also some conversations I've had with neighborhood representatives that it is that sort of multi-family at the one end, single family at the other end that is causing the issues here and part of what we will look into. Of course the consideration will be given to the opinions of both groups as part of the traffic calming evaluation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 60 Vanderhoef/I guess if I had a choice here, I'd like to see it as a general traffic concern because of the topography and the diversity of the neighborhood. I think, whether we're talking, I don't think traffic calming is going to. Wilburn/There are other issues. Vanderhoef/Approach on that because I think we're talking, when we talk traffic calming, we haven't put anything in that addresses what this is all about and I don't think we've got the number of (can't hear). Davidson/Don't forget that what the traffic, what we're trying to do with the traffic calming program is to get motorists to behave basically, to slow down, I mean that' s the main thing. And in some situations actually reduce the volume, we want to be careful though that we're not diverting it off to other streets it then becomes somebody else' s problem. But those are the things that we're trying to do with the traffic calming program and I guess from the information from Mr. Neuzil representing the neighborhood and certainly the speed and volume and traffic seems to be the concern. Vanderhoef/There' s some of that but for me because of the topography and with snow and ice it creates another safety kind of thing when you have a lot of speed and traffic on an alley and some of that traffic ought to be over on the streets that are addressing these other (can't hear). Davidson/Yea and if your concern is what we might propose doing, remember that we, and in the first case it's very generated from the neighborhood, we won't propose won't propose doing something that the neighborhood, as a group indicates to us right up front no we're not interested in that, we are interested in this. The second thing we do is make sure in the case of a slope like we have in this particular situation that we propose something that we feel is reasonable and there' s a whole range of things, there we're a couple in the letter from Mr. Neuzil that are proposed. So we will take into consideration the unique site characteristics of this location if you indicate you want us to go ahead. Lehman/So you're asking us for is whether or not we wish for you to evaluate the situation and come back with a recommendation to the neighborhood or the Council. You're just asking if we. Davidson/Right, and I guess specifically Ernie if you want us to follow the traffic calming rules that we have in place for dealing with these types of situations. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 61 Wilburn/How likely is it that an alley is going to meet the volume that is set forth in the traffic calming (can't hear)? Davidson/Well we don't have a volume number for alleys although using. Wilburn/Would you apply the same standard, that' s my question, and that would? Davidson/Well the standards would be somewhat different in the speed limit in alleys set by city code is 10 mph so we will do the same data assessment up front to find out how much volume there is and how much, what the speed of traffic is, remember to even qualify going further you have to be at least 5 mph over, I have no doubt that we will meet that in this alley. But we'll see what the volume numbers are, see how they compare to a local street type volume and what that will do Ross is give us an idea of what the magnitude of the problem is. I mean if we end up with a volume that's more than what we want to see on a local street and that alley is there intended to be for the access of the people with lots of letting it, we're going to be able to tell right away what the scope of the problem is. Kanner/What was that threshold again Jeff normally? Davidson/For, 5 mph over. Kanner/No for the number of vehicles to look at something for traffic. Davidson/For a local street? Kanner/Yea. Davidson/500. Kanner/500. Lehman/Do we want him to proceed and look into this? Champion/Yes. Pfab/I would certainly not, I would encourage you not to look at it as a traffic calming, I think it's a problem, that would be, I would support what, I'd strongly support what (can't hear). Davidson/Okay and I mean, is there, when you make that statement is there any range of possible solutions to the neighborhood concerns that you see us specifically evaluating so I'm aware of what those are? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 62 Vanderhoef/With the safety concerns I've got a couple, number one as I understand there' s a lot of parking happening along this alley. Davidson/That' s a lot of alley' s of course. Vanderhoef/And posting it as a tow away zone all along that alley. Davidson/Remember removing a lot of that parking Dee is going to make traffic go faster. Vanderhoef/And in conjunction I really would like you to look at the gate situation. Lehman/Well do we have? Pfab/(can't hear) the what? Vanderhoef/The gate. Pfab/Okay. Kanner/Well isn't this all part of the possible traffic calming solution? Vanderhoef/Yea and it could be part of it. Davidson/The gate thing could be evaluated in conjunction with traffic calming. Lehman/Are there four people who would like to look at this? Vanderhoef/Yes, absolutely. Lehman/All right you've got a go. Davidson/All right there will be a slight delay, we need to put traffic counter' s down in order to collect baseline data. What I intend to do is talk with the neighborhood and get those conversations out of the way between now and say March and then put the counter' s down in March. Lehman/We have budget to do, we've got alcohol issues to do, we've got smoking issues to handle and we won't hurt our feelings if it isn't until March or April. Davidson/We'll be back, see you then later. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 63 Champion/Well If you'll, can I just interrupt a minute and before you leave one of the things I want to bring up at Council time is you're the one I want to direct it to. Davidson/Okay. Champion/So do you mind just sticking around for a minute? Davidson/Not a bit, can we do it right now? Lehman/We're doing Council time, you're up, you're up, you're up. COUNCIL TIME Champion/Okay do you remember the situation we had on Gilbert and Kirkwood when we had those funny stop lights, like you could only be in the middle lane if your going to turn left, and then you corrected that by making both lanes go and just changing how the stop light configuration went. Davidson/Right, we did change the phasing of that signal and I. Champion/And it works great. Davidson/Okay good. Champion/And I'm very happy about that, but I think we have the same situation now on Burlington and Governor. Davidson/Burlington and Governor. Champion/That we have cars backed up for five blocks on the right hand lane because they want to go straight and nobody in the left turn lane. So I'm wondering if maybe you can just give me your opinion of that, like today when I came, well I went home, it was about 6:00 and there' s cars, cars were backed up for 3 blocks in the right hand lane, there was no cars in the turning lane and then there were 3 cars in the turning lane, but they didn't turn they went straight anyway. So I think what we have is a situation that' s not being used, I mean if people are not going to wait in that long line if they know they're going to go straight on you know what I'm saying, they're going to go straight on Burlington to Muscatine. Vanderhoef/Straight east on Burlington. Champion/So I want to turn right on Summit so I'm going to stay in the right hand lane, but I think we have the same situation we had at Gilbert and Kirkwood, we have a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 64 lot of kind of anxious motorists and we have a lane that looks to them like it goes straight ahead (can't hear) use it whether it's a turn lane or not. Davidson/My guess Connie would be that those motorists are doing that knowing full well that that' s a left hand turn lane. Champion/Oh they know it, that' s what I'm saying. Davidson/Knowing that fully well, I mean that' s very clearly signed. Champion/I know, that' s what I'm saying, they're doing it full well knowing that they're not suppose to but they're doing it so I don't know if you've had other complaints about this or not. Davidson/Haven't had anything, haven't had a complaint. Champion/Am I the only one who complains about this? Davidson/Haven't had a complaint about that but that certainly is not to belittle your comment. When that was put in the State, remember that's a State highway. Champion/I know. Davidson/They require a dedicated left turn lane and when I say put in, when we put the conventional signal in, when we changed it from the flashing lights to the conventional. Champion/Which is better than the other thing. Davidson/They required the dedicated left turn lane, I would say Connie we do have the, we will have to do it with the State' s approval, we have the ability to manipulate that signal but the State will require a very detailed engineering study in order to do that, and we can put that in the hopper and do that. Champion/I wouldn't have you spend that much time on one complaint (can't hear). Davidson/They won't let us do it just sort of at a whim. Champion/Well I think it would work just as well to have that light. Davidson/We can certainly keep also track of it and if I do start receiving comments about it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 65 Champion/Because if you're not receiving complaints I'm totally amazed. Davidson/I actually have not received one. Pfab/Look amazed. Champion/If you're not, I'm amazed. Davidson/Now last time I made that comment the whole First Avenue issue happened so, so, tomorrow I probably will get a 100 calls. Champion/And of course it's one of those situations in Iowa City that' s only a problem for about 45 minutes of the day, you know in the morning and at night and we do have, but if your not getting complaints it's just something that I've noticed (can't hear). Davidson/Well I appreciate you bringing it to my attention and we can at least be aware of it then. Vanderhoef/All right there' s another place where this happens. Champion/I would not have you spend (can't hear) dollar on this. Vanderhoef/And people are doing the same thing that Connie's talking about and that's when your headed west on Benton and you get lined up in the right hand lane to go where the bridge lanes all melt down and you go west across Riverside. Davidson/Now don't forget we just improved that intersection, you're not in the right lane anymore to go straight across, you're in the middle lane. Vanderhoef/All right that one has changed because people were. Davidson/That one has improved. Vanderhoef/But as soon as you get across the street though you still are in a designated that you have to turn left and people use that one regularly to get through the light and then they'll pause in that lane over there until all of the right hand lane gets. Davidson/Yea, which is actually Dee not an illegal movement to do that, I mean you can. Vanderhoef/It isn't? Davidson/I mean you can go across and yield and wait to get into the line of traffic then. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 66 Vanderhoef/Okay. Davidson/Irvin. Pfab/Okay so I just, this is for (can't hear) clarification. So you're saying that (can't hear) back to Connie's. Davidson/Are we back to back to Governor and Burlington? Pfab/Yea, that, you can't, the State will not allow you to use a detected, a left turn on a green arrow only and not have a green, have a green arrow and then a green? Davidson/They required Irvin a left lane must turn left lane, which is how the highway is designated, Highway 1 is designated that, yea, the traffic signalization we can modify within the constraints of that left lane must turn left at that location. Pfab/But they won't let you, they will not allow you to ifthere's no one wants to turn left that you can go on at your own risk (can't hear)? Davidson/Not with the existing traffic control no. Pfab/With the control or with the rule? Davidson/Well with the existing traffic control that we have in place at that intersection that is an illegal movement to do that. Pfab/Right but is there, will the State stop you from putting the other type in? Davidson/If we did a detailed engineering study and were able to prove to them that it would work better another way and they concurred with that then we could, then you would have to adopt it and we would change the thing. Pfab/I would support Connie's that you proceed. Davidson/I think Connie said not to proceed. Champion/No, I don't think so, he's not getting complaints but I am. Pfab/I've seen a lot of people cut across that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 67 Champion/But the other thing that is not bad about it and I understand it because I drive that way constantly is that it really is a long light and so even if your 3 blocks away, well you can because you can stop and (can't hear). Davidson/I mean that left lane clears out, you observed hardly anybody because it's got a protected movement, which is what the State wants, they want a protected movement for their state highway turning noah and so your. Champion/Well it's a stupid place to have a State highway anyway. Lehman/Right, talk to the State about that. Davidson/They do help us maintain it, they do help us maintain it. Lehman/Jeff just a question for you and I'm sure there are situations all over town where this happens but when you're going south on Dubuque Street, you cross Jefferson, the center lane is left turn only, it's posted that way. Davidson/There' s a weaving movement there. Lehman/Would it be possible, and there' s two green lights up there, one in each light, why couldn't the green light in the turn lane only be an arrow instead of a plain light? Davidson/Yea we've actually changed that out in a number of places. Lehman/I really like that because it really doesn't encourage people to go straight through because it isn't a green light, it's a green arrow. Davidson/Okay it's coincidental that you brought that up because remember, you might remember a couple years ago and a little bit less than a couple year' s ago, changed all the red traffic signals to LED's, from incandescent bulbs to LED's and there was a tremendous energy savings, they cost more up front but it only takes you two years to pay off the energy savings and the lights, the LED' s are guaranteed for five years and we think they're going to last 7 to 10 years, so it was a wonderful wonderful program. At that time the greens, it didn't make sense to do the greens because the greens aren't on as long, the red's are on longer than the greens are, and the greens were much more expensive, the green' s were $485.00 per lens. Well they've come down in price to $245.00 per lens now, so we are currently evaluating going to the green LED's as well, there are a couple financing programs that we have and we're working through the calculations of how long, what the energy savings would be, the incandescent bulbs use 165 watts an hour, the LED' s use 10 ~A watts an hour, so we're evaluating right now the energy This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 68 savings and how much it would cost, and what the pay back would be. And one of the things that I asked the signal crew to do is to find any location like that because the arrows the arrows, the LED' s arrow' s use even less electricity than the green, we call them green balls, pardon the expression. The arrows use less electricity than the green balls so it appears that there are maybe 20 to 30 locations where we can just like the one you highlighted that we can go from a green ball to a green arrow, we're going to figure out what those all are. Lehman/Well I think. Fine. Pfab/In that street can you go through if it's or is left? Davidson/You can go through the right lane and you have to turn in the left lane. Pfab/The left lane does not. Lehman/It says turn only. Davidson/And it does go to a one lane street Irvin because remember we put on street parking in that next block on Dubuque Street. Lehman/It really, I think it would help, it really would help. Pfab/I think the LED' s would keep an eye on what' s going on in California, I think we ought to look at any way we can to save energy. Davidson/And those LED's are about 5 times as bright too. Lehman/Yes. Champion/Okay then I have. Lehman/Thank you Jeff. Davidson/Is that is for me? Champion/No, I'm done with. Lehman/Thank you sir. Council time and before we get into Council time we all got a copy of something from, Marian would you explain this to everybody. Karr/I'll try to give it a shot. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 69 Lehman/Maybe we can tell you what we think we'd like to do. Karr/That would be swell. Lehman/I'm not sure that we can but we'll try. Karr/We have a procedure that you're all aware of announcing Board' s and Vacancies and it was brought to my attention late this afternoon a very valid point. Those vacancies that we put on our web page as well as in the newspapers and handout with all of our applications, simply state when the appointment will be made, it doesn't say the application deadline. And a couple of people noted that they felt disadvantaged by the fact that Council took applications right up until the last minute and didn't know about an application deadline, pointed out that when you apply for jobs you have the application deadline, you don't have a date your going to be hired so they requested that that be considered. Well that suggested then, I took a look at the code, and the code states that we give at least 30 days notice of the vacancy to be filled. At that point it occurred to me that a few months ago when we moved up the distribution of the packets to you so that you would get those applications on our off week. We were actually cutting in to that 30 day notice, you were still accepting your applications because you accept applications right to the very last minute so we were still meeting the requirement. So I'd like to know from Council one of two things, and I did a bunch of scenarios that I thought would make it easier but I'm not sure I did so for that I apologize. But the bottom line is, is there interest on the part of Council to set a deadline, if there is not, then we simply internally will extend that 30 day window to allow you to get those applications a week ahead of time, you won't notice it, but ifthere's an interest in doing a deadline then I need some direction from you internally on how to work that out. The first scenario is what we currently do, I just did a mock up because it was easier for me to think it through. The second one states the applications are due the 14th and the appointment will be made the 20th but it does shorten that 30 days see. The third option takes out when your going to fill the appointment, and this is likened to a little bit of the job application scenario, the deadline is blank. Now the agenda won't be changed, your agenda will have the same dates on it, but for the application announcement. Lehman/Did the switching of the, putting those applications in the Council packet at the off week, is that what created the problem? Karr/No, no, not necessarily. Lehman/(Can't hear) really solve the problem either. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 70 Karr/No, that' s exactly right it did not. The problem is people want to know if there is a deadline, number one, but number two based on that request today I want to be sure we give them the full 30 days and that they're not "penalized" for being late, and you see if some, even though you accept the applications, if they're going to be viewed as late per se because they didn't make that, we're not giving them the full 30 days so that' s why if your not interested in establishing a deadline and you still want those on off weeks, we'll simply extend that window and we'll take care of it eternally. Champion/(Can't hear) deadline. Pfab/You're right, I think the deadline for the application is more important, and I think that' s so people, so they all put, play on a level playing field and that' s I think (can't hear). Champion/I think that' s true, I mean. Wilburn/Well I think also if you have a deadline and reduce or eliminate the amount of handouts that you're getting as you come in here, I mean practically speaking you are eliminating them because your not giving them the full consideration that you have you know so I think it could be helpful. Vanderhoef/It can work both ways on that for sure. (A few talking) Vanderhoef/But the deadline would have to be then. Champion/30 days from the announcement. Vanderhoef/From the Wednesday prior to the. Karr/If you, we'll calculate the time, you tell us what you want. Pfab/I think the deadline is the more important part here for the public because everyone has an equal chance and we have an equal chance of checking or visiting with anyone prior to (can't hear). Lehman/May I suggest that there be a deadline for applications to be placed in a Council packet, in other words, you must have your application in by a certain date in order to be included in the Council packet. Karr/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 71 Lehman/That would not eliminate someone from us getting an application on a Monday or whatever of the work session. I have a, the only problem I have is (can't hear). Karr/That's not a deadline Ernie. Lehman/We have some problems getting applications sometimes. Vanderhoef/That's my concern and. Pfab/Let' s do it again. Vanderhoef/When we find out, we find out like when we get the packet on Wednesday, well the packet is printed on Wednesday. Lehman/I get mine on Thursday. Vanderhoef/And we pick, it' s, the deadline to put it into the packet. Karr/What we're recommending, whatever, if you want a deadline, and I think this is the real critical thing, we're recommending a 5:00 one, because it goes to print at 9:00 the next morning so I, you know it's really a 5:00 deadline. But if you're not going to adhere to a deadline, then I think this is really critical, then don't say you've got a deadline then make exceptions because that's a different message again. Vanderhoef/I'd rather not have a deadline, I'd rather be able to take applications up through the work meeting. Pfab/I would respectfully disagree with you on that. Lehman/How many would prefer having a deadline? Pfab/A deadline, I think it's fairer to everyone. Lehman/A deadline for receiving applications anybody who applies after the 5:00 Wednesday time would not be considered for the appointment which they were applying. Wilburn/All applications received after the deadline would be held for three months for the next vacancy. Pfab/That's fine. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 72 Champion/That' s okay, I mean in some ways I agree with both of you not wanting a deadline but on the other hand I think it's fair to all applicants to have a deadline. Pfab/I think it. Lehman/Okay I hear one deadline, Steven. Kanner/A deadline. Lehman/Deadline, you've got a deadline, now that means somebody shows up Thursday morning with an application they are no longer going to be considered for that application. Karr/No. Champion/I think the deadline should be 30 days from the announcement. Karr/Okay, now, let' s just, let me clarify, I can work out another scenario, I'll do whatever you want. Do you still want them a week on your off week packet because that saves you. Champion/I don't care. Vanderhoef/But that gives you. Karr/But that cuts the deadline one more week. Do you see my point? Pfab/I think they should have 30 days and when we get it. Karr/I'll calculate that, I just want to know if you want them a week ahead. Champion/I don't care about that. Lehman/They don't have to be a week ahead. Vanderhoef/A week ahead of time at least alerts us if we haven't any applicants. Karr/Well if you haven't any applicants then that' s not a deadline. Lehman/That' s not a deadline. Vanderhoef/Well it alerts us that maybe we ought to be out recruiting. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 73 Karr/Then you've just exempted your deadline, your going to have to readvertise anyway. Wilburn/When I advertise for a position at my agency I put a must be received by, any other time of year I always tell people, feel free to turn in a resume and I mean that last statement are all, all applications received after the deadline will be held for three months or until the next vacancy so I mean, someone brings it in, you understand the deadlines past, we'll keep this and so if there's another vacancy, I mean in my mind that. Pfab/I think that' s the right way to do it. Lehman/Well that' s what (can't hear). Pfab/It also encourages people, they say, well if you want to make application, this is the deadline, that' s what I would suggest. Kanner/Let me ask a clarifying question. Does this also mean, let' s say there is only one applicant for one position, does that mean that at that Monday work session the Council can say we'd like to postpone it for. Champion/Right. Lehman/We can always readvertise. Kanner/So you can, you still have that. Karr/Absolutely. Kanner/Even though you're saying the deadline, so if someone comes in two days after the deadline Council can say well I like that person a heck of a lot. Champion/No that' s not what we're. Karr/You won't know it. Lehman/You won't know. Kanner/No, no, even in an informal way but we're going to. Lehman/You won't know because your not going to have it, your only going to get the application' s that meet the deadline. After you decide to readvertise you'll get the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 74 next one, but you're not going to get it, you're not going to know who applied that isn't qualified. Dilkes/Unless you know (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Unless you stop at the office and ask. Lehman/Well unless we told you. Karr/Okay can I answer that scenario in a possible way. So you have one applicant for one vacancy, the deadline is past, you have in your packet that one person, somebody comes in, we say to them the application is past, the deadline is past, we'll hold your application. They though have your phone numbers, so they're going to call you and say the reason I'm late is because, so you'll know they came in perhaps okay. The point being it's your decision then, you simply can readvertise the position, by readvertising it you'll get all of the applicants in the pool including this one and you give it another 30 days. Pfab/I think that' s, I. Dilkes/And you put everybody in the same playing field as. Pfab/Fair enough. Lehman/But what we're saying is that we could not appoint a person who apply whomever's application was received after that deadline unless we readvertise. Karr/That' s what a deadline is and that' s why I'm asking for. Lehman/All right now, the other question that I have for the Council, is it all right with the Council then that the applications be included in our packets whether they be in the off week packets or the packets prior to the Council meeting. Champion/Right, I don't care. O'Donnell/I don't have a problem with that. Pfab/I don't care. Lehman/All right Marian applications can be as you receive them, in other words you do not have to be in the packet. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 75 Karr/Okay again I caution you then that what' s the deadline for, I thought the deadline was so that you get all the applications at the same time. Champion/Well that would be great. Dilkes/Just saying. Lehman/No. Champion/The deadline is to keep. Dilkes/I think all they're saying is you don't have to back up the deadline by a week to get it in their off week packet. Karr/Oh I see. Dilkes/That' s all they're saying. Lehman/No, right. O'Donnell/It's getting late. Lehman/Okay, then I guess you've got a deadline. All right other Council time, Marian had her Council time. Champion/I had another thing. I met with Lane Plugge. Pfab/Plugge. Champion/Yea, Plugge and Joan Vanden Berg today and we talked a little bit about a possible partnership for the Family Resource Centers at specifically at Grant Wood School, is where they'd like to start. I think it's a wonderful idea so I do know what the next step would be, we talked briefly about it a the last work session. Would she come and present something to us that night we have all those presenters or would we like her to come to a workshop and is there any other support for this program besides? Pfab/I strongly support it. Vanderhoef/I think we should hear about it. Lehman/Well I think we talked about. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 76 (All talking). Kanner/Actually we said we were going to have a work session. Atkins/My suggestion would be that it's part of the list of budget issues and then often what you'll do is select an issue that no we need to spend more time on this, set it aside and then you bring someone in at a work session and consider it independent of all the other issues. Champion/Okay so we probably need to do that soon if we're going to be doing (can't hear). Atkins/Yea I'm in communication with Joan and I, and I just think it's a matter of getting this thing scheduled. If I'm hearing you say you want to schedule it independent budget. Lehman/I thought we said we were going to schedule it. Atkins/No, I know that, but independent of the budget process because you all haven't even heard about whether you think it's a good idea or not. Champion/I know it. Vanderhoef/I guess what I would like is information more about it and a rough idea of what resources in the way of dollars. Champion/We did have this is in our packet. Atkins/That' s an old (can't hear). Lehman/Steve tell her to have a 10 minute presentation, if we have questions we can drag it as long as we wish to talk about it, okay. Atkins/I'll take care of it. Vanderhoef/I want to take a look at it before I make budget decisions. Champion/Right that' s exactly what I was thinking about, and also before we do the Human Services Allocation I think we need to hear this before we do that. Atkins/I'll get to it right away. Champion/If we decide to do this we need to decide where this money is coming from. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 77 Kanner/So you're talking at a possible non budget work session like maybe next week. Atkins/I have no idea Steve, I'll have to talk to Joan, but I'll get to it as soon as I can. Kanner/But that' s what we're talking about. Atkins/You're telling me to get to it as soon as I can. Karr/May I just note that next week is condensed because it's only 5:00 to 7:00, you've got it the same night as your formal so you don't have a lot of time. Champion/That's next week, we're coming back here next week. Vanderhoef/Well we have plenty of time before we make our allocations for Human Services. Atkins/You're fine, I'll get to Joan and let you. Vanderhoef/There' s no rush on that because that truly gets finalized with the finalization of the budget. Lehman/Next week is not the week. Atkins/I will call Joan. Champion/It would not be (can't hear). Lehman/Other Council time. Pfab/(Can't hear) immediately and really try to (can't hear). Champion/(Can't hear) Vanderhoef/What, flush what out? Pfab/Whatever the Neighborhood Center, that type of thing. Vanderhoef/That' s what I'm saying but I want to hear about it and Steven and I don't have to make our allocation recommendation immediately for Human Services if that' s where money might be coming from. Champion/It's all part of the budget process. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 78 Vanderhoef/Because that' s where it gets finalized is at the budget. Lehman/Okay, other Council time. Vanderhoef/Yea, I've got a couple things. Just a heads up, you maybe noticed it in your bulletin but State Legislative Day in Des Moines for League of Cities will be February 28 if you want to put that on calendars just for information. Then if anyone else is interested the Broadband conversation that we had at the last Council meeting brought up some questions for me and I did a little clarification for my own edification I guess but it, it appeared that there is some differences of thought processes on how that $125,000 and moving out to the $250,000 over the lifetime of the contract, and I would look to send it back to Broadband TV to discuss because what I have learned is that money is all money that belongs to the City, the City at (can't hear) talked with the idea of doing a. (END OF 01-104 SIDE ONE) Vanderhoef/And in my mind if there were capital projects that came forward then that' s when the City Council would decide but I would like a recommendation from Broadband TV on those dollars and bring them back and then I'll go forward with my own thoughts. Lehman/What does this do to the? Karr/Can I just note that that' s what the minutes say from the last meeting. The minutes do note I believe that it will be, it will be reviewed the January 16 meeting of the City Council after recommendation when the Telecommunication Commission has received was part of the motion that was defeated 3-4 but then the transcriptional indicate that there was still going to be. Vanderhoef/A discussion. Lehman/A recommendation. Vanderhoef/Okay, that part was what was not clear to me. Karr/Because there was not action, not a motion per say but. Vanderhoef/So I'm asking that this action take place and that it goes back to them for recommendation. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 79 Helling/Okay that' s fine, you will not have a recommendation, a formal recommendation by next week because they don't meet until the last, or the fourth Monday of the month. Lehman/When are we going to, act on the thing we voted on at the last meeting? Helling/Next week if the bids are reasonable. Lehman/We're going to be acting on that (can't hear) before we get the recommendation from, acting on those bids certainly indicate some sort of commitment on how we're going to pay for that. Helling/On at least part of that money yes. Vanderhoef/Yes, but legally we can move forward with that part of it. Lehman/Well we can move forward but do you want to move forward with the contract to spend that money without knowing where the money' s coming from? Vanderhoef/No we have the ability to spend that money or all of it. Lehman/I know but we're going to have that opportunity at the next meeting without the recommendation. Vanderhoef/Right, so we will spend that money, the question is forthcoming $125,000 that will be collected over the following. Lehman/Oh you're not concerned about the original $125,000, it's, all right, that's, way out. Vanderhoef/No, I'm talking about only the other $125,000 that will be collected over the next five years. Dilkes/And I think that was the discussion as I recall that. O'Donnell/That was. Lehman/Okay anything else. Vanderhoef/That's it. Lehman/Mike. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801 January 8, 2001 Special Work Session Page 80 O'Donnell/No. Lehman/Ross. Tomorrow night guys. Adjourned 9:05 PM. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council meeting of January 8, 2001. WS010801