HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-04-17 TranscriptionApril 17, 2001 Page 1
ITEM NO. 2. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
a. Public Access Television Day- April 19
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Rene Paine, Director of PATV.
Paine: Thank you for this proclamation. I just wanted to make a note that Madan
passed out our annual report to each and every one of you so if you could
just take a few minutes when you get a chance and look that over that
would be great. You will notice in the report that this last year, the year
2000, there were over 100 people trained here in the Iowa City community
to produce television programs. And there were almost 1000 new locally
produced programs on Cable Channel 2. Other than that I just want to
invite the Council personally and everybody out there in the viewing
audience to our Big 11 party that is going to be on Friday May 4 at Public
Access Television. That is 623 S. Dubuque Street. We are celebrating 11
years as Public Access Television Incorporated. And we are looking
forward to another great year. Thank you very much.
Champion: What time? Is it the whole day?
Paine: Oh, it begins at 3:00, 3:00 to 6:00, and you can come and be on open
channel beginning at 5:00 if you would actually like to be on TV. The
public is welcome to attend. Thank you.
Pfab: Okay, May 47
Paine: Friday May 4 from 3:00 to 6:00 at PATV.
Pfab: Sounds great.
Paine: Thanks.
b. Arbor Day- April 27
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Terry Robertson, City Forester.
Robertson: I would like to thank the Council Members for their past support and I
hope their continued support. And since there aren't many things that we
can say about trees that people don't realize, the beauty, the things that
lend- they all lend to Iowa City, I would like to encourage everyone to
plant trees this Arbor Day. And more than that, I would like you to think
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 2
about something we sometimes forget, and that is making sure we plant
the proper tree in the proper place. That is something that is important
because we don't want to see some of the bad things that happen that we
see every once in a while around town. So thank you very much.
Lehman: Thank you Terry.
c. Toastmaster's Day- April 24
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Laurie Stunz, President of the Old Capitol Toastmaster's.
Stunz: I would like to thank you for making this proclamation. Old Capitol
Toastmaster' s is one of three Toastmaster's Clubs in Iowa City but it is the
oldest of the three. And for 50 years it has provided a place for people to
improve their public speaking skills in a supportive environment. This
next Tuesday, April 24, is the 50th anniversary of our charter. We are
having a special celebration next Tuesday night and we have been trying
to contact former members and other interested people to see if they can
attend the celebration. The contact information for this celebration is
posted on Public Access Television, so if you are interested please check
that out. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you. We have at least one Councilperson who is a Toastmaster, I
think. Irvin?
Champion: I thought we all were.
Lehman: Are you not a Toastmaster?
Pfab: Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 3
ITEM NO. 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: OUTSTANDING STUDENT
CITIZENSHIP AWARDS- Weber Elementary.
Lehman: So if the students would come forward please. This is one of the really
fun times on the Council. Everybody on the Council looks forward to this.
We do a lot of work but this is a recognition that is really pretty special to
all of us. So, if you would read your name and why you were nominated.
Lipman: Thank you very much. My name is Josh Lipman and I am a sixth grader
at Weber Elementary. One way Weber is different from other schools is
that Weber has seven core virtues. I have been asked to tell you the ways
that I show the core virtues. I am the Vice-President of Student Council
where I learn giving and honesty. I am a Captain of the Safety Patrol
where I must show perseverance, self-discipline and responsibility. I also
was a conflict manager where i learned respect and kindness. Mrs. Kurtz,
my teacher, is an example of all of these every day when she puts up with
my classmates and me. Overall I have learned a lot from Weber to guide
me through the rest of my life. Thank you.
Laffoon: Hi, my name is Amanda Laffoon. I am from Weber Elementary School.
Thank you for honoring me with this award. During school I work at the
school store. It is something that requires a lot of responsibility because
you are handling money. I think that participating in the school store is
very useful because it is like having a real business and you are doing it
while you are learning. I am a member of the Safety Patrol. You also
need to be responsible because of all of the younger kids that look up to
you. On Patrol you also have to show respect because you are helping
other kids. This year I won an award for the Peace Poster Contest
sponsored by the Iowa City Lion's Club. During school I take cello
lessons and have been taking them for three years. I think that it takes a
lot of perseverance to do it for such a long time and it pays off at all of the
concerts. After school I participate in Tae Kwon Do three days a week,
almost every week. I am a red belt in Tae Kwon Do and have been doing
it for three and a half years. This summer I will hopefully get my black
belt. The most important thing that I have learned from Tae Kwon Do is
that you have to have a lot of perseverance and self-confidence and then
you can do anything. I just wanted to thank my grandparents, my
teachers, my parents, my brother, my friends, and the Council. Thank
you.
Lehman: I really liked that "grandparents". I appreciate that.
Kamps: Hi, I am Elyse Kamps of Irving B. Weber Elementary School and I am
very happy to be recognized with such an award. I know there are lots of
other people at my school who deserve this so I really appreciate it. Some
activities that I am involved in at my school are being a Media Helper in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 4
the Library, working at our school store, and I am currently the President
of the Student Council. Outside of my school I am a member of the Iowa
City Girls' Choir, I play the trumpet in the Westside Beginning Band, and
I baby-sit a lot, which is one of my favorite things to do. At Weber School
from the first day of Kindergarten and everyday since, we leam about
seven core virtues that are great ways to live your life. They are
compassion, giving, honestly, perseverance, respect, responsibility, and
self-discipline. I think they have really helped me to grow up learning the
fight ways to treat people. Thanks again and I will keep trying to be a
good citizen.
Lehman: You say your grandparents are proud and I am sure they are, and so are
your parents. But the City Council is very proud of you too and so are a
lot of folks right out here. So, I am going to read these awards and I will
hand them to you. (Reads award).
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 5
ITEM NO. 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Champion: Move adoption.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion?
Kanner: I would like to withdraw two things from the consent calendar. Items-
under correspondence- it would be item number 4(f)(17) and (18) on
recommendations on no parking on Union Road and no parking on part of
Willow Road, so that we could have discussion and a separate vote on
those.
Lehman: I think that is f(14)(a) and (b), isn't it?
Kanner: 147
Lehman: Consent calendar?
Wilbum: (Can't hear).
Kanner: Okay, yeah, I guess- I had the- okay, you are correct. I am sorry.
Lehman: So your motion is to remove those for separate consideration?
Kanner: Separate consideration.
Lehman: Moved by Kanner. Is there a second?
O'Dounell: I will second.
Dilkes: You don't need a motion.
Lehman: We don't need a second?
Dilkes: Any one can pull it off the consent calendar.
Lehman: All right. Any other discussion?
Kanner: Yes, I have been reading the number of arrests for people under the legal
age for the past number of months and was hoping I wouldn't have to do
this anymore with new ordinances coming up but it looks like changes are
(can't hear). So I would just like to bring to the attention of the Council
and the community the number of arrests and visits by police to the liquor
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 6
licensees that are up for renewal and note that Sam's Pizza has 0 visits and
therefore 0 arrests. This is through December of 2000 for the year. And
that the Moose Lodge has 1 visit and 0 arrests for people under the legal
age. The Deli Mart is not listed on Mormon Trek. The Vine has 4 visits
and 0 arrests for the year 2000- the calendar year 2000. College Street
Billiards has 32 visits and 11 arrests for a arrest to visit ratio of .34. And
the Linn Street Caf6 is not listed. And for the city the overall average is
.94 arrests per visit. So none of these are exceedingly high so I won't
make a motion to consider them separately. I will mention a concern
though for a possible new licensee. My understanding, and I don't know
if this is true or not, but the owner of the new bar that is opening in the
place that is being called Etc. on the Ped Mall is owned- is the same owner
as the Union Bar which is under investigation fight now by the state. So I
think it is something that we should look at very carefully when that does
come before us for a new license, the charges that are being brought
against the owner for his bar in our city.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. Do we have a motion to
address items a and b?
Champion: So moved.
Vanderhoef: I would-
Lehman: -address them.
Pfab: Pardon?
Vanderhoef: I would suggest that we defer these.
Lehman: Are you making a motion that they be deferred?
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Champion: I see. Yes, I would like to see them deferred. Second.
Lehman: We have a- now, this does require a motion. Is that correct? We have a
motion by Vanderhoef and a second by Champion to defer from the
consent calendar items f(14)(a) and (b) to the next meeting?
Vanderhoef: Yes.
Lehman: So we can get some more information. Okay. Discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 7
Kanner: Well, am there people here tonight that discussed this issue and does this
preclude them from bringing their concems tonight? I would like to hear
tonight if there is anyone here.
Lehman: It is up to the Council.
Champion: Well, I think we should hear them if they have come to talk to us about
this. The mason I want to see it deferred is I don't feel like I have enough
information to make a decision for this.
Lehman: Are there people who would like to speak to either of these items? Okay,
if you would like to sign in and give your name and limit your comments
to five minutes or less.
Garrison: My name is David Garrison. I live at 2012 Union Road. Ithinkby
removing or putting no parking signs there I think you would open up a
like a speedway because there are no stop signs on Union Road right now.
Another thing I would like to bring to your attention is in the last five
years there have only been three accidents them and none of them have
involved any kind of fatalities or anything like that. I have got those
records from Johnson County transportation from Kevin Doyle. Another
thing that I would like to point out is we could also put maybe some no
parking during snow removal signs, maybe a speed bump or a stop sign at
the comer of Arizona and Hollywood or Arizona and Union, I am sorry. I
feel like you are taking away any kind of parking for the residents there
right now for any kind of company or relatives who come over. Unless
you've got a bigger driveway or something right now then you are
basically taking away any kind of company parking along the road. I do
believe there is a problem there and I would like to see maybe some no
parking during snow removal signs. I think that would better suit the
people who live along there and also our community because if we do put
no parking on both sides it is just going to open a speedway up and I
guarantee these figures will go up within the next five years.
Lehman: This is on a curve isn't it?
Garrison: Yes it is.
Lehman: Okay, thank you.
Garrison: Thank you.
Walter: Hello, my name is Matthew Walter. I am at 2008 Union Road. I emailed
and dropped off information this morning to the City Clerk and I presume
everyone has at least gotten a copy of this information.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 8
Lehman: We do.
Champion: We do.
Walter: (Can't hear) my phone and so forth is on there so if anyone would like to
contact me. I do agree with Dave that I think the potential of eliminating
parking on that portion of the road will actually cause more problems than
not. I also wanted to kind of give you some indication of other streets that
have a similar situation where you've got a curve but there are no
restrictions on these roads. They include Hollywood Court, Beeson Drive,
Grantwood Drive, and Palmer Court. Palmer Court was the only one that
actually had any type of restriction and it was a no parking/loading zone
only, 5-8 p.m., or, 8-5 p.m., and that was only enforced during the school
days. I think some similar sign posting of speed limit signs would be
appropriate. That is all. Thanks.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Harney: I am Ed Hamey. I live at 910 Willow Street. They want to put no
parking- there is no parking on the west side of the street, they want to put
no parking on the east side of the street. Our house is on the comer of
Muscatine Avenue and Willow Street. We have five grown children.
When their families come to visit us we have got 11 grandchildren, one
year to seven years. You know, if they have to park a block and a half
away and cross Pinecrest to come to our house I think that is, you know, a
problem for us. There is very little traffic on this street. Very low traffic-
it is only three blocks long. The view is not, at the hill is not real bad. I
talked to two people, one that I know that lives on the 700 block and one
that lives at the 800 block, and they have had no problem with this- with
being able to see. There is only two houses on this block plus the house
on the comer of Pinecrest. The people on the other- 908- spend the winter
in Texas and very seldom ever have anybody over there. And the people
on Pinecrest are allowed to park on both sides so it is not a problem for
them. You could drive down that street five times a day seven days a
week and probably not find a car parked on the east side of that street.
The only time we have parking there is when we have a family gathering.
The worst time is Thanksgiving because all of my wife's relatives come
over that day.
Champion: (Can't hear) no parking.
Hamey: What? We can park three cars in our driveway so for the most part there
is probably three to four cars parked in the street when it is a personal
family gathering. And that is in front of our house, which is at least 200
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 9
feet from the crest of the hill. So we would just like to have you leave the
parking as it is. I don't know- we have lived there for nine years and don't
know of any accident or near accident there. The hill is marked school
crossing, pedestrian crossing. One sign is at the intersection and the other
one is back toward our house probably about 110 feet, so it is marked to
be careful and be safe. We just hope you leave the parking as it is. I do
want to also mention that because the assisted housing at the bottom of the
park across the street from us has no driveways getting in and out of them
other than at Pinecrest the emergency vehicles do come up that street plus
S.E.A.T.S bus. And I don't know of any- if they have ever complained
about a problem seeing or not being able to get up that street. So, I mean,
I would just like to leave this as is.
Pfab: I would like to ask him a question. I understand that at one time there was
a problem there because someone parked at big motor home-
Harney: It was a pickup track with a camper type trailer on behind. It sat there for
a few days. Apparently it was somebody visiting someone at the home
across the street.
Pfab: That is the only known time?
Hamey: That is the only time we know of any instance there was a problem.
Pfab: Okay.
Lehman: Thank you. Anyone else who would like to address either of these two
issues? All in favor of deferring these-
Pfab: I would like to speak against deferring it. I would say just take care of it
and get rid of it. I am going to speak against the deferring it. I would say
just vote against it and go on.
Kanner: You would like to do away with the no parking?
Pfab: No. Just take that off and vote.
O'Dormell: Leave it as it is?
Pfab: Leave it as it is. I don't think that it is going to gain anything by carrying
it on. I don't think there is enough support. I don't see any support in the
neighborhood so I would say it was something to bring up, it was
something to discuss, but I think the answer is leave things alone.
Lehman: Other discussion on the motion to defer? All in favor ofdeferral say
"aye". Opposed? Motion carries 6-1, Pfab voting in the negative. That
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page lo
will be on the agenda- and I think it would be well if we could get a little
more report from Jeff on those.
Atkins: Yes.
O'Donnell: And (can't hear) Irvin, I think your motion had a lot of merit. I would like
to get some more information.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 200t Page 11
ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
[UNTIL 8 PMI.
Lehman: This is the time reserved for the public to address the Council on items
that do not otherwise appear on the agenda. If you would like to address
the Council sign in, give your name and address, and limit your comments
to five minutes or less.
Atkins: Ernie, could you have the folks at the door-
Lehman: Oh yes, we need to- the doorway has got to be kept free for the Fire
Marshall. Yeah, we need to move away from the doorway. And there is
room along the wall up here too. Okay.
Hora: Hi, my name is JoAnne Hora. I am on the Senior Center Commission. I
am hem to give an update and I would like to extend an invitation to all of
you to two very special events that we are having. The first one is next
Tuesday April 24 from 2:30 to 4:30 and it is to celebrate the Intemational
Year of the Volunteer. And we have both honorable Mayors Ernie
Lehman and Jim Fosset who will together present a proclamation at the
beginning of the program. And then we have Dr. Robert Bender who will
be our guest speaker. So I invite all of you to attend that. And also then
on Wednesday May 9 from 2:00 to 3:30 we are going to host the Senior of
Distinction program and reception. And Professor Jay Holstein from the
University will be our guest speaker and he is always very good. And the
Senior of Distinction award I leamed today will be given to Bob Welsh
who many of you know. And then there are lots of things happening at the
Center. Lots of great programs and classes that everyone can benefit
from. And I especially invite you to maybe stop in and look at some of
those. And then Jay Honohan, Mike O'Donnell and Connie Champion
will be meeting with the Board of Supervisors to further discuss the 28(e)
agreement with them. And there also we have had one meeting to discuss
the donor recognition plaque that we will put together to honor the
contributors to the skywalk. So, those are just some of the things that are
happening at the Center. And we invite you all to stop in.
Lehman: Thank you JoAnne.
Hora: I will finish my address here.
Thompson: Hi, my name is Bob Thompson. I am here to address a specific issue that
came up in an article in the DI today. Basically I am going to limit the
focus of what I am asking. I am not going to address the major scope of
the article in deference to the major focus of the article who would be the
first to tell you that he has suffered enough already. Basically my concern
is the person was quoted in the article basically put words in a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 12
Councilman' s mouth and I am just here to verify if those are actually the
sentiments of the Councilman. I think all of you know what this is about.
The article had to do with KCJJ. And the particular focus of this article
that I am concerned with is statements that were made as to the ethicacy of
using gun violence to settle Council disputes. They were bantering about
that on the air. Specifically, let's see, I will just quote from the article here
and I would like to get the conunent from- well, I will explain that in a
minute. "One example of such on air discussions suggested that Iowa City
Mayor Ernie Lehman should be allowed to shoot City Councilor Steven
Kanner for repeatedly interrupting Council meetings. Then the owner of
KCJJ is quoted, "Kanner didn't complain because the recommendation
was ridiculous. No one can perceive that as reality."" Essentially the
KCJJ guy put words in Mr. Kanner's mouth. I would like to give him an
opportunity to verify whether that is the reason he hasn't said anything
about this or whether he has said anything about this and if anybody else
has comments to make I would be happy to hear them. Mayor Lehman,
you have known about this for a few weeks right?
Lehman: I have heard about it, yes.
Thompson: Yeah, I think most of you have. I want to clarify one thing that I heard. I
am not sure if this is true. Is it true that you have recently- your business
has started advertising on KCJJ?
Lehman: That is not relevant.
Thompson: Okay. I just, yeah, okay. Well, if you want to abstain from comment for
that reason I would certainly emphasize with that. Mr. Kanner, is that a
fair statement that you didn't complain because the recommendation was
ridiculous that Mr. Lehman should shoot you?
Kanner: Bob, thanks for bringing this up. I think you are a brave person because
any time anyone confronts hate speech and speech that promotes violence
and sexism and racism like is being done on KCJJ deserves our applause
and thank you for working on this. I appreciate that. And I think what is
being done on that radio station is despicable and I think the reason that I
have been relatively silent on this issue is because what happens is if one
says something and you are well aware of this, one the station
immediately attacks the person that brings this up and their personal life is
brought into it. and two, it just increases their ratings sad to say. It creates
more for them to talk about. But I think it is time that we do speak up and
that the good citizens of this city speak out against it. Now, they certainly
have a right to do that as free speech just as the Ku Klux Klan has the right
to have free speech. But it doesn't mean that we can't use any legal
method to fight against it. And I would recommend that people do a
number of things to fight against this free speech issue. One is to contact
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 13
the FCC. The airwaves are community airwaves and when this radio
station applies to renew their license- in theory they are supposed to look
at comments from the commtmity and that this station is supposed to be
beneficial to the community. So ifpeople are opposed to what is being
said on this station I think it would be good to make comments to the
FCC. Email or write them or to call them. Two, I think it would be
appropriate for our Human Rights Commission to not look at this as a
complaint because clea~y there are within their legal rights to free speech
but I think part of the purview of our Human Rights Commission is
education and when swastikas were being painted throughout the
community the Human Rights Commission took a stance. And I think this
is just as bad as painting swastikas. My understanding is that KCJJ has in
recent times over the years they have rated the women coming in and out
of our Civic Center with numbers one through ten. They have also talked
about basketball teams from a neighboring Iowa community that had a
significant African American percentage of teammates as a team from
Ethiopia and you've got to look out for the flies that are around their team.
There is a number of abhorrent statements that they have made and
language that they have used that I think is something that we shouldn't
accept in our community, the vulgarity of it. So I think that one, people
should talk to the FCC and two, should talk to our Human Rights
Commission and ask them to take a statement and three I think it is
appropriate to ask advertisers on this station that this is the thing that they
want to support. And the fourth thing is I think we should also hold
accountable people who are working there which includes our County
Supervisor, (can't hear) and I think people should ask him does he want to
be associated and make money from a station that does this kind of thing.
So once again I thank you and I hope all good citizens will join you and
join me in speaking out against this hate language that espouses violence
and sexism and racism. It is something that I think we need to stand up
against in our community.
Thompson: Thanks. Anybody else like to comment?
Lehman: Thank you Bob.
O'Donnell: It should be said that we have heard now- I did not hear this.
Thompson: What is that?
O'Donnell: I did not hear this. I know you sent me a tape but you know, I think it is
appropriate-
Thompson: (Can't hear).
O'Donnell: Didn't you send me- somebody sent me a tape.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 14
Champion: That is a different tape.
O'Donnell: I didn't listen to it but the comment is inappropriate but I did not hear it
and this station I know in the past has done great things for the Crisis
Center as far as fund raisers and everything. The comment is
inappropriate but I believe in the name of fairness that probably they
should comment. That is all I have to say.
Thompson: KCJJ should comment?
O'Donnell: I would like to hear their comment.
Karr: I am sorry, I am not picking up any of the remarks.
O'Donnell: That is it.
Kanner: Mike, I think it might be appropriate- I think that is a good idea to have
the Human Rights Commission hold a forum on this kind of thing and to
have them be there and to have other people talk about what they are
hearing and what it means. I think that is the best way to talk about these
issues when people are espousing hate language and hate speech is to
bring it out into the light of day and have reasoned discussion. I don't
think it is reasonable to have it on their radio station but to have the
Human Rights Commission have a forum where everybody has an equal
chance to be heard would be a good thing.
O'Donnell: I know, but an elected official's name was brought up here tonight and in
the name of fairness I don't think that should of happened. He has nothing
to do with this. I guess he is employed by the radio station and I just think
it was not fair to bring up (can't hear) name.
Kanner: I think people who are making money from things- if someone was
employed by the Ku Klux Klan I think we would want to bring that up and
say that we don't want to support that. And they might want to
disassociate themselves from that kind of association.
O'Donnell: With the Ku Klux Klan I agree with you totally.
Lehman: Carol?
De Prosse: Thank you. I would like to lend my support to Mr. Thompson and Mr.
Kanner regarding their previous remarks. I have heard KCJJ and I think
that it is completely inappropriate for the community and I would even
have a question as to their right to call on air for the Mayor to be shooting
his fellow Councilpersons because they interrupt Council meetings. If that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 15
happened in a high school we know very well how long that would stand
in the community. But I am here to address you on a different issue. I got
an email today from a friend who said that he had read an article in the
Iowa City Gazette that talked about a person who had been cited for
littering on the Pedestrian Mall and that the person had been searched as a
result of this citation for littering by the two police officers who arrested
him. So I went to the Library today and spent about an hour and a half
searching for this article because I had not seen it myself and I finally
found it. And there are several interesting things that I think are
interesting in the article. The three people cited for littering on March 22
were- and I won't bother to give you their names but I will give you their
ages- they were 24, they were 20 and 20. Once again this seems to me,
and I have brought this up before with various kinds of activities of the
Iowa City Police Department, but I know that I see people of many ages
smoking on the Pedestrian plaza. I know that there are many people
staying in the hotel downtown that are well over these young ages and I
very much doubt that particularly depending upon the way some of the
guests perhaps in the hotel are dressed that they would receive this same
kind of treatment from the Iowa City Police Department. So I would like
you to be aware of that. One of the people in the article is quoted as
saying that when the- or the article says that when the officers discovered
Butler had flicked a cigarette butt they cited him for littering and then Mr.
Butler was quoted as saying the officers motive for stopping me wasn't
just littering. Butler said the officer searched Butler before letting him go
with a $10 ticket. Butler feels the officers may have been looking for
drugs. Now, I know that you may as individuals disagree with me
sometimes about some of the things I say about the Iowa City Police
Department and I know you may as individuals have some disagreement
with me about your role as supervision as elected people over the Iowa
City Police Department but I have copies of this article for each of you. I
will leave them with the City Clerk. I think this is a very significant issue
in this community and that it at least bears some investigation on your
part. Someone is stopped for littering- littering a cigarette butt and they
are searched by the police. If this is true this is significant. I mean, pretty
soon we will all be searched for breathing. For coming down here and
being able to stand up before the City Council and talk to you about this
we will be stopped and searched. I mean, who knows what will be next.
This is ridiculous that somebody' s personal space, his backpack, his
belongings, are invaded because he dropped a cigarette butt on the ground.
Now, I don't support littering myself and I often look at the Pedestrian
plaza and I think it looks like frankly a hell hole down there. So I have
mixed feelings about this but I noticed that when we enforce seat belt laws
in this community often times, or when we do speed checks or we are
going to do other kinds of things we publish it in the paper. I hear- I have
heard Council people on the radio say we are going to have a seat belt
check this week, everybody be careful and watch out. I think that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 16
something like- I mean, I have lived in this town for 30 years and there are
not a significant number of arrests at any given time for littering so if we
are going to have a big bust on the downtown plaza I think that it would be
important to put the word out to people and to initially, despite what the
officer says I would disagree, but perhaps give warnings like we do with
many other infractions and say if you litter again you will get a ticket the
next time. And to that end I would like to invite the community please to
attend tomorrow night the Police Citizen's Review Board is holding a
public forum at 7 p.m. in Room A of the Iowa City Public Library on the
issue of community policing. Captain Matt Johnson from the Iowa City
Police Department will be making a presentation about community
policing. And then after some of apparent controversy with the Chief and
the Police Citizen's Review Board about whether it would occur or not, it
has been decided that there will be time for public discussion afterward
with Matt Johnson being able to address questions and comments from the
audience. So I hope Council Members who aren't already obligated will
be able to come to this and I do invite Council members to come down
and attend this important meeting. And one other thing that relates to the
drug grant is that after the Council passed the budget I believe I read in the
paper that one of the Council Members, and I don't want to put him or her
on the spot because I am not exactly sure who it was, but said that they
were not interested in deleting the Edward J. Burns Memorial Grant from
the budget at the time you were passing the budget but that you might be
interested in bringing it up for consideration before the budget actually
went into effect on July 1. And in view of the fact that I think it is very
likely that this search was directly related to trying to meet this quota to
achieve so many felony drug busts, which is directly related to your
Edward J. Byme Memorial Grant, I would like to suggest that you do
bring this grant up for discussion before it would be for authorization on
the first of July or menactment on the first of July. Thank you.
Champion: Is there a date on that paper that you are giving us? A date?
De Prosse: April 1st.
Champion: Okay.
De Prosse: The arrests were on March 22.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Pfab: So moved.
Vanderhoef: Second.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 17
Lehman: Moved by Pfab, seconded by Vanderhoef. All in favor? Motion carries.
Any other public discussion?
Kanner: I just wanted to comment I think that Carol brought up some points that
are worthy of discussion and I hope that when we- we are going to be
talking about the Police Citizen Review Board and whether we want it to
continue or not. It has a sunset clause.
Lehman: Right.
Kanner: And I hope that this will be part of the context of the discussion of how we
want our police to operate and I think that relates to the Police Citizen
Review Board. They can be a good mechanism to interact on that kind of
discussion.
Lehman: And that meeting is Thursday morning. Are you interested in talking
about the alcohol issues?
Marc Fortney: Is that possible?
Lehman: It comes up later on the agenda.
Fortney: I didn't know that.
Lehman: That is the time. Yeah, it does come up later.
Fortney: That is fine.
Lehman: And that is when we- that is fine. That is okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 18
ITEM NO. 6b. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE
ZONING DESIGNATION FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (I-1)
TO INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL (CI-1) FOR APPROXIMATELY
12.09 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1.
(REZ01-0002).
Lehman: The public hearing is open.
Karr: No, we are going to continue-
Lehman: We are going to continue this public hearing to May 1st. Do we need a
motion? We need a motion to-
Plab: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Pfab, to continue the public hearing to
May 1. All in favor. Opposed? The motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 19
ITEM NO. 6c. CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM HIGH
DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RM-44, TO
SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY, OSA-44, FOR APPROXIMATELY
4.01 ACRES OF PROPERTY TO ALLOW 39 DWELLINGS IN
THREE BUILDINGS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF
HARLOCKE STREET. (FIRST CONSIDERATION).
Lehman: Item c is one that I need to recluse myself from this and Mike O'Donnell
will conduct this one.
O'Donnell: (Reads item). (Change tapes) We will have the public hearing first and
then we will be voting on the first consideration. The public hearing is
open. I'll ask you to come forward, sign in, and limit your comments to
five minutes or less.
Klink: My name is Judith Klink. I live at 1101 Harlocke Street, right around the
comer from the proposed development. My husband Bill and I live the
old Weber farmhouse (can't hear). It was moved to this location from
Benton Street in the late '50's but built around 1910. To orient you to the
neighborhood ours is the only older structure in the immediate
neighborhood. Otherwise there are approximately 50 owner-occupied
homes built from the '60's onward. On Harlocke Street immediately
across from the parcel in question there are several apartments (can't
hear). We have a plan of a proposed development-
Pfab: I believe if you aim at the comer of that screen somehow or other it gets
up there. I don't know (can't hear).
Klink: I will just start and I will go on and I can come back to this to get it up
there. Our neighborhood is grateful to City Council for opening another
hearing on our request that proposed development be denied. We will try
to keep our remarks brief. We know that you have a crowded agenda. We
will try to present you with fresh information. So here we have the plan of
the proposed development. To the right is Benton Street offof the map.
Harlocke Street bends around for a while. It is parallel to Benton Street.
And that square in the upper right hand comer is our house. And the 8-
plexes and duplexes 29, 21- or, 20, 21, 22, etc. are the dwellings in the 900
block of Harlocke. 23 is the single family home. So I am going to talk to
you briefly about the need for a park in our neighborhood and our desire
that this land be purchased for a park. The Neighborhood Open Spaces
Plan was adopted in November 1993. It calculates that there was a 7-acre
parkland deficit in Miller Orchard District. I was on the Parks and
Recreation Commission when we wrote guidelines for addressing this
deficit. The hope was to have several neighborhood parks in this
widespread area that goes all the way from Riverside Drive to Wylde
Green Road. In order to provide easy accessibility from the various
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 20
neighborhoods. A recent purchase of park area on Benton Street reduced
that 7-acre deficit to 5 acres. To make up the deficit there are in fact no
other suitable flat sites. This whole area was once marked by extensive
deep ravines and is now developed except for the sloping area of the 22
Ruppert tract- the 22-acre Ruppert tract. Land once developed is
permanently lost. In 1995 the Parks and Recreation Commission
considered purchase of this very plot. And it is shown here just to the
south of Harlocke Street. It is a little bigger then that map shows. At that
time Councilor Vanderhoef was chairperson of the commission. She
promoted the purchase noting, and I quote from the minutes of October
11, 1995, "There is an open space deficit in this area and an opportunity
did not lend itself to other open space in the area". Furthermore, she
stated that, "the Jensen property would be a real anchor in getting things
started". That offer was turned down. The situation however has not
changed. There is still a parkland deficit in this area 5 acres. This is still
the only open tract available. Approximately half of this parcel, that
immediately fronting Harlocke Street and extending back in the middle
where you see the plans for the two buildings facing Harlocke Street, there
is kind of this triangular section there which is basically flat and it goes
down a little bit in the middle there. The other half of the property
contains the fingertip remnants of two ravines. One on the north, that is to
the right where you see the tip of it there that red, and one on the south on
the left. The parcel is now surrounded by apartment complexes- Benton
Manor Condominiums is directly south of this. It is really a square four
acres and so directly south of this is Benton Manor. Hillsboro West and
Colonial Manor are to the right on the white part of the map there. They
face Benton Street and the apartments at the end of Harlocke. So 200 feet
away where our house starts is the beginning of the single family homes
residential area. A park poised between the high density apartment region
and our single family homes would see heavy use. There are 45 children
in our neighborhood and there are also families with young children as
well as students and more mature residents in the neighboring apartment
buildings. Oaknoll with its large active senior citizen population is one
block away. Perhaps the purchase price could be partially met by a city
block grant. Everyone knows the parcel is private property but it has
functioned as very welcome open space for many years. The noah ravine
there on the right, you see just the tip of it because it really goes down
quite a ways, provides a natural barrier between the various apartment
complexes and the single family neighborhood. The many ravines in Iowa
City contribute to Iowa City's unique attractiveness. They cut through
residential areas. They cut through Hickory Hill park. Often the remnants
of them are wooded parcels with spreads of native wildflowers. These
ravines were carved a half million years ago when the glaciers last
retreated. They collected the melting water as it flowed down to the
ancient Iowa River drift plain to the south of us. The terraces that that
very ancient wide river cut are still visible from the end of Harlocke
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 21
Street. Perhaps this outdoor museum would qualify for a (can't hear)
grant to help in the purchase. This ravine offers great potential for
restoration. Even left as it is it would provide wonderful places for people
to walk or sit and enjoy a quiet respite in nature. The site offers both a
welcome haven with woods and woodpeckers adjacent to a highly
populated adjoining area and a flat open plains space for kicking around a
soccer ball. The neighborhood is presently discussing how it can help
with ravine restoration and park maintenance. In a quick survey made last
week 65% of the households in the neighborhood indicated on a petition
their strong support of a park. We hope the park deficit in the southwest
section of the city can be alleviated by acquisition of the parcel as
parkland. Thank you.
O'Dormell: Thank you. Any other discussion?
Niederecker: My name is Olympia Niederecker and I live at 923 Harlocke Street. My
home is the single family dwelling opposite the proposed development and
my husband and I built it 32 years ago. I would like to address the traffic
and safety problems my neighbors and I have faced over the years in the
Weber Harlocke neighborhood. Five and a half years ago I was
confronted with an unfortunate situation. My elderly mother fell in my
home. After trying for about 20 minutes to get her up I realized I needed
assistance. I called 911 and waited another 20 minutes. When no one
came I went outdoors and saw a fire truck a block away. I walked to the
truck and talked to the three firemen who told me they couldn't drive
down Harlocke Street to my home because cars were parked on both sides
of the street and the truck could not get through. I talked them into
leaving the truck and walking to my home as I didn't think the equipment
on the fire truck was necessary. All I needed was help getting my mother
up from the floor. The firemen were all very helpful, professional and
empathetic. If this had been a life-threatening situation there could have
been serious consequences. Who knows what they would have done if
there had been a fire? There was absolutely no way they could drive a fire
truck on the 900 block of Harlocke Street. There have been no parking
signs on one side of the street for over 30 years. The signs have never
worked. Cars park on both sides of the street. We already have serious
safety problems on our street. Adding 39 2-bedroom units on the east side
of Harlocke Street will only exacerbate the problem. Thank you for
allowing me to speak.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Knabe: My name is William Knabe. My wife and I reside at 1101 Weeber Circle.
I am speaking to you tonight as an area property owner and a member of
the Weeber Harlocke Neighborhood Association. I do not wish to belabor
the points that have already been made in previous discussions of this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 22
rezoning issue. Like you, I feel trapped in an old Humprey Bogart movie
and the only line I can hear is "play it again Sam". Instead, I want to
focus your attention for a few minutes on the major problems which
having a single street access to the Harlocke property represent. One, the
amount of increased traffic the proposed development would generate
could cause major parking, noise and air pollution and safety problems for
the neighborhood. We are not talking about the development of property
that is adjacent to the neighborhood. We are talking about development of
property that is part of the neighborhood. Two, all traffic to and from this
development must occur on Harlocke and Weeber streets. According to
the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, slopes on single access streets should not
be greater than 8%. Harlocke Street exits into Weeber Street. North on
Weeber Street there is a slope that exceeds 8% before entering Benton
Street. South on Weeber Street there is a slope that exceeds 8% before
entering the Weeber Street extension. Due to the topographical area it is
extremely difficult to enter or exit Harlocke Street especially during
normal winter weather conditions. With the addition of a 39-unit
apartment complex at the end of Harlocke Street the topographic
conditions exist so that streets become a major concern for the movement
of traffic, especially emergency and service vehicles, in and out of the
area. Three, if one examines the 22 year history of efforts to develop this
piece of property as documented in the minutes of the City Council
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Planning Staff reports there is
one conclusion that always rises to the surface. This property has
topographical constraints and the potential for serious traffic problems
because there is only one road from which this property can be accessed.
Over the years there has been agreement among a representative number
of Councilors, Commissioners, Staff members and neighbors that the
availability of only one access to this property makes a development such
as that currently proposed unacceptable. A review of previous Council
and Commission votes and the comments made in support of such votes
substantiates this conclusion. On occasion, in 1995 for example, even the
developers have publicly acknowledged that "the lack of another access
does present additional problems". I ask you, could all of these people be
so wrong? The problems cannot be so easily addressed. How can a
solution be found to this if it has existed over 22 years? Perhaps it would
be best for me to conclude my remarks this evening with a few words of
wisdom from Aristotle. "In the area of human life the honors and rewards
fall to those who show their good qualities in action." I am asking you
tonight to show your good qualities in action. Your recognition that there
is more at stake then tacit approval or disapproval of a technical
compliance to the Sensitive Areas ordinance. I am asking you to do what
is in the best interest of the general public. I am asking you to cast a vote
for the future of our neighborhood. I urge you to vote "no" to the
proposed Harlocke rezoning. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 23
Kanner: I have a couple of questions for you.
Knabe: Yes?
Karmer: You own property land that is undeveloped in this area?
Knabe: I own four acres of undeveloped land in this area, yes.
Kanner: And have you been approached about establishing some sort of open space
parkland there?
Knabe: . No I have not.
Kanner: Would you be open to that idea?
Knabe: That would be something we would have to discuss. My wife and I would
have to discuss.
Karmer: Has the neighborhood discussed it? I mean, because it was brought up the
point that there was only- this space here- but it seems four acres is quite
sizeable and-
Knabe: Several years ago we presented to a Commission a plan to address the
deficit of space in the Benton hill area- park space or open space in the
Benton Hill area. By looking at our developing a series of contiguous
mini-parks that could be connected by a series of trails that proposal
included some properties which I believe the Buss family were
considering contributing to the city as well as the property which now has
· been relegated as Miller Orchard. And the centerpiece to that particular
proposal was to what we referred to as the Jensen tract which is now the
tract that Southgate owns- or the Harlocke tract. And we discussed the
possibility of extending that also to some property that is in our area as
well as some property from Mr. Ruppert. But we have discussed it and
talked about it but we have not made any kind of any commitment, to my
knowledge.
Kanner: Having asked you that, I have another question that I will also ask
Southgate Developers if they testify tonight, my traderstanding is there has
been perhaps some conversation between your neighborhood and
Southgate and that your neighborhood association might be willing to
accept two of the units being built and not the third one, the farthest one to
the east.
Knabe: If you don't mind, I am going to defer that. One of our speakers is going
to tell you about those negotiations.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 24
Kanner: Okay, thank you.
O'Dormell: Thanks Bill.
Cox: Good evening. I am Emie Cox. I reside at 913 Harlocke Street. IfI could
have the lights please. Thanks. I have made an attempt to translate the
sentiment that I have about this project, that it is inappropriate, into the
specifics of the applicable ordinance and I hope that that is obvious. The
scale of this project will only exacerbate existing planning and zoning
problems in the greater Benton Hill area. The problem being development
of incompatible building types within this same neighborhood. I felt that
an excellent example of this is the recent three story Oaknoll addition on
Benton Street. If you notice, this is directly adjacent to single family
housing. Not only the home here but all of the homes on the south portion
of Benton are single family dwellings. My home is at 913 Harlocke. It is
the duplex lot 21. Just down the street is Olympia's home, lot 23, which is
a single family dwelling. And in addition we have lots 20, 22, 24, and 26,
which have one 8-plex each to those lots. The duplex and the 8-plexes are
two stories. They have fairly either flat or a slight pitched roof. All of
these structures are directly across from the proposed development. The
buildings proposed by Southgate are three stories tall with pitched roofs- a
significant pitch. And this far exceeds the scale of existing development
on Harlocke. This issue is addressed directly within the Sensitive Areas
ordinance under the title of"Land Use". It is stated that multi-family
buildings such as those proposed should be compatible with adjacent
lower density residential developments such as the homes present on
Harlocke now. The residents of the Weber Harlocke neighborhood have
watched over the years as the scale of buildings has grown from single-
family to duplex and then 8-plex. And now we are faced with the
possibility that the upper limit will be pushed to a 15-unit structure. I
believe the benefit of the Sensitive Areas ordinances was not in place
during most of the building activity in our neighborhood. But now at this
critical juncture the Council has the benefit of a well-defined ordinance,
which attempts to make multiple building types compatible within a single
neighborhood. The proposed development pushes beyond the limits of the
ordinance in this regard. I respectively request the Council to look closely
to this aspect of the plan. And I thank you for your time this evening.
Christina Alexander: Good evening. My name is Christina Alexander and I live on 917
Harlocke Street Apartment #2. I moved here, as you can probably tell
from my accent, from somewhere from a different country, from the
Czech Republic, three years ago. I started my graduate studies here at the
University of Iowa. I was searching for an apartment that would be close
to the campus but it would not be right at the campus and would be
somehow different. This is a very different apartment that I am living in
and it is a very different apartment building. What you can see in this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 25
picture is this is what I can see from my apartment. It is a beautiful field
that really can make a difference. When I was searching for my apartment
and I went for example to Benton Street where you can find several
apartments all you can see is just parking lots. In the morning I wake up
and I see this beautiful field and I can see the wildlife. I just can see a
piece of nature. I think it is a very important issue to be considered
tonight. And I have to tell you, I come from a country that was under
Communist regime for 40 years. I am so impressed by my neighbors and
the attempts they are trying to pursue here and what they are trying to do.
In my country nobody was able to make a difference. Nobody was able to
discuss issues. There was no open space for discussion or communication.
I would like to ask you as a person who comes from a different country
please do hear my neighbors and please do consider that they really want
to make a difference. This is really democracy and I am really impressed
by this action that they are taking. Thank you.
Kanner: Christina? I had a question for you. Is this the space that the plan is to put
the two duplexes on that we are looking at?
Alexander: Yes.
Kanner: Did you expect that it would never be developed?
Alexander: I expected- sincerely saying, I thought that this field is a park. I was really
surprised when I found out that it is a private property because I thought
this was such a beautiful piece of land that should be used by the public,
not for building houses. I think it really should be considered as a park. I
did not know that it is a private property and I thought this will remain this
way. It never crossed my mind.
Kanner: Thank you.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Tulley: Good evening. My name is Steven Tulley. I have been a renter at 917
Harlocke Street since 1996. And I have been asked to briefly address
several concluding issues, which concern the neighborhood. The Council
has already been informed that Harlocke Street is 24 feet wide, three feet
narrower then standard sized streets in the city. Planning and Zoning staff
has estimated that the proposed development would almost double the
amount of traffic on Harlocke and Weeber, an amount which they consider
acceptable. We are concemed about such an increase for several reasons.
The first is parking. This is a shot of Harlocke Street looking north from
the end of the terminus. Even with zoned allotments for single-family and
multi-family dwellings, many residents can only find parking on the street,
further constricting the space available for drivers to pass. The proposed
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 26
development would have room for 79 parking spaces but given the
experience of local residents, we feel that parking would worsen as a
result. The second is traffic. Because the only ingress and egress to the
development would be on Harlocke Street all cars would have to negotiate
this curve on Harlocke and then make a sharp turn onto Weeber to access
Benton. This photo of the intersection Weeber and Harlocke shows how
steep and sharp this turn can be. This is the 8% grade that William Knabe
spoke to you previously about. The house that you see here is the Graf
residence at this intersection. The Graf's have raised a family in this home
and occasionally have had to deal with cars which have missed this tum
and ending up on their lawn. Here is a photo of one such incident, which I
took just this morning where the driver apparently missed the turn onto
Harlocke and ended up on Bill's lawn. We believe that increasing the
flow of traffic on these streets is not in the best interest of pedestrian
safety, especially for the many children who do play and reside in the
neighborhood. Third, we are concemed about the access of large
emergency and service vehicles on these streets. Now here is a somewhat
famous video taken this year of a trash truck backing up almost the entire
southern portion of Harlocke Street to access a driveway. As I mentioned
in a previous presentation this occurs often, with or without snow present.
The video shows the driver successfully negotiating the driveway but on
other occasions we have witnessed similar trash trucks who have been
unable to manage the narrow turning radius in the driveways when cars
are legally parked on the street and off to one side of the driveway in
question. And just this week Judith Klink spoke to a LIPS driver who
jokingly requested that we not ship more items with that firm because he
would have to make more trips onto Harlocke. And as I mentioned
before, the drivers are usually very safe about making this maneuver and
sure that no one is coming up behind them when they do so. We have
been informed that some people think that such an issue is not germane to
the discussion of this development. But given the experiences of
professional drivers on Harlocke Street and Olympia Niederecker's story,
we do worry about the ability of large vehicles to access this
neighborhood. We have also informed the Council that there are
impressive wooded ravines on this property. And my neighbor Judith
Klink has made an excellent case for preserving these valuable nature
assets for the city. As you can see from these photos and others in the
presentation, these (can't hear) are dense and contain some sizable trees.
Our presentation this evening has had to rely on photos, maps and video to
inform the Council about what we believe would be the impact of this
development as it is currently proposed. We think a sensible approach is
to follow the wisdom of the old phrase, "A picture tells a thousands
words". Here is a recent photo of the lot in question, taken from the
second story of 917 Harlocke where I live. As my fellow neighbors on
Harlocke have told you, it is a very picturesque view and you can see why.
But let's take a look at what the same scene would look like if the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 27
development were built in accordance with the plans submitted. This
structure, one of the 12-plexes, which is mapped to scale which we got
from Planning and Zoning literature that was made public, does not look
very sensitive to us. Indeed, it is quite large and dominating due to the
high peaked roof and three stories visible from the street- features, which
are not currently found in existing structures in the neighborhood. The
placement of these structures are a concern because three of the rental
properties on the west side of Harlocke use sliding glass doors as the sole
entry to the units, which provides the only access to eastern sunlight. The
construction of the 12-plexes as currently proposed would of course
eliminate most of that sunlight. During our efforts to inform the Planning
and Zoning Commission and this Council about these concerns and others
we have heard voices stating that the issues we have raised and
experiences we have related to you are superfluous to a narrow
interpretation of the Sensitive Areas ordinance. As you have heard from
us tonight and seen in these slides and video, we beg to differ. Towards
that end we have retained legal counsel with experience in this area, who
will shortly address the Council. Thank you.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Robynn Shrader: Hi, my name is Robynn Shrader. My family lives on Weeber
Cimle and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you again tonight. Our
neighborhood association has worked really hard to reach out to all the
residents affected by this development and make sure that everyone' s
views and concerns are heard, as that is what the public process is all
about. We have presented these concerns to you now on two occasions,
although as I understand it, only this public hearing will be part of the
public record. We have had sincere and straightforward discussions with
the developer in hopes of finding a palatable resolution to this for
everyone concemed. We have presented options to the developer that,
from our perspective, are reasonable. The problem or obstacle that we
face is time, as the developer is unyielding in his intent to construct
buildings for rental this fall. The discussion, work and process involved in
pursuing these alternatives is in my opinion unrealistic within the
developer's aggressive schedule. I want you to know however that we
have made an earnest attempt to resolve this with Southgate. Yet the
proposal before you tonight remains unacceptable and the application, in
our view, should be denied. We believe that you have the discretion and
the duty to protect the public interest in matters of zoning and
development. We also believe that the Sensitive Areas ordinance was
devised to protect vulnerable communities from precisely the problems
that we have addressed you with tonight. We do not think it is in the
public interest to increase the number of cars that will poorly navigate
Harlocke Street and end up on the grass yard. We do not believe it is in
the public interest to have mammoth buildings directly adjacent to single-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 28
story homes. It certainly does not serve the public interest to increase
density and population in an area where fire trucks are unable to respond
adequately to 911 calls. And we don't believe that our community is
served by increasing traffic and parking problems in an area where there is
no potential for alternative access to provide some relief. We ask you- and
there are actually many more of us here tonight than have chosen to speak-
to vote "no' on the application before you. You have the authority to
evaluate the information you have been provided and use your good
judgement in comparing our situation with the ordinance in question. I
hope you will do the right thing for our community and vote "no". And I
don't believe that denying this application prevents Southgate from
realizing an acceptable outcome. It would simply put us all in a position
to wholeheartedly pursue one.
O'Dormell: Thank you.
Shrader: And I will take the question that Steven answered unless you feel I have
addressed it in my remarks.
Kanner: Well, what has been the result of your negotiation with Southgate?
Shrader: Glenn Siders made it very clear to me that they intend to construct
buildings to be rented by fall. We have laid forth the proposal that you
had caught wind of that there be two buildings with 2 acres or more
purchased for parkland and the problem with that is that I don't believe
that in the time frame that we would be allowed to make that happen we
could actively pursue the public process with the city to make that occur.
For the proposal at hand- or, for that proposal to work I would think that
Southgate should come back with an application for rezoning to build
structures that incorporated the two and a half acre purchase as part of that
proposal. The other key thing for us is these buildings and the architecture
of these buildings. And our neighborhood feels very strongly that there
could be some lower construction or less intrusive construction that could
happen that would not be so detrimental to the neighborhood. And there
simply isn't the time for Southgate to make those changes, nor the
willingness at this point.
Kanner: Thank you. And just before you start, unless I am mistaken, what was
said at the meeting- the previous meeting- is part of the public record.
Robynn had mentioned that she didn't feel that it was part of the public
record.
Dilkes: This is the public heating on this rezoning and so if people want to make
comments that are part- they know will be part of the record they should
make them tonight. In terms of whether comments made at the other
hearing would turn up as evidence in some proceeding, I think that is a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 29
possibility. But I think people should be on notice that, you know, there
was a- a claim was made that the earlier public heating was tainted and so
the hearing should be reheld- the zoning code, the state zoning code
requires that a public hearing be held and we consider this to be that public
heating.
Holland: My name is Joe Holland. I am an attorney here in Iowa City. I have
practiced almost 24 years. I am here on behalf of the Weeber Harlocke
Neighborhood Association to explain to the Council why you can and why
you should reject this rezoning application. I asked people in the
neighborhood to keep their presentations brief and to the point and I think
that showed tonight. You didn't hear about lake Weeber as they call it, I
think, which came up in the last public heating. I think working with them
they have had a much clearer focus on what the issues are here. So I hope
that you will indulge me if I may run a little bit longer than the five
minutes. I do know a little bit about Sensitive Areas ordinances. I was on
a Johnson County Committee with Glenn Siders for almost 18 months.
You may or may not know Johnson County as a Sensitive Areas ordinance
floating around somewhere for eventual consideration by the Board of
Supervisors. I am in a somewhat unusual position tonight because I am
here telling you I think you probably have more discretion and more
power in these proceeding then your City Attorney thinks. We see this
from two different perspectives and we don't agree exactly on where the
City Council' s discretion stops and ends under the Sensitive Areas
rezonings. All rezoning decisions vest the goveming body whether it is
the City Council, County Board of Supervisors or whomever that may be,
with discretion to act in the public interest. Rezonings are done by
ordinance rather than by resolution or by the staff of a public body. And
these rezonings can't be arbitrary or capricious. They have to have
something that is in the public interest, something of substance to
underline whatever your decision is. But it has to be based on what is in
the public interest. The Sensitive Areas ordinance was adopted in 1995.
At that point the Council that had adopted that ordinance made a decision.
There are two things that could have been done. There could have been an
ordinance, which provided only for site plan review and approval by staff
or by Council about technical compliance with the ordinance. That was
not the decision that was made at the time that ordinance was adopted.
That would have been a decision more like a subdivision application.
Probably all of you have sat here on many evenings and listened to
applications for subdivisions and a lot those have no discretion on the part
of the Council. Does it meet the technical standards of the ordinance?
That is far more like a site plan review than what we are here for tonight.
The Council in 1995 could have adopted that approach but didn't. And
implicit in the Sensitive Areas ordinance is a public heating and a concept
that the site is not going to be developed according to normal zoning
standards. It is an overlay zoning. Another thing that Council did in 1995
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 30
was to provide the procedures under the PDH- that is the Planned
Development Housing portion of the zoning ordinance- control the
proceedings you are here for tonight. One thing I haven't seen is a
specific report from your Planning and Zoning Commission, which is
required by the PDH ordinance, which says- it has to include a finding and
uses the word "shall" in the ordinance which makes it mandatory that the
Planning and Zoning Commission provide you with this report and these
findings which says the combination of land uses will be in the public
interest in harmony with the purposes of this chapter- that is the zoning
chapter- and other building regulations the city will not adversely affect
nearby properties. Now, the Council chose to have this public hearing by
ordinance back in 1995 and I don't know why there would be a public
hearing if the only issue were technical compliance with the ordinance. I
don't know what most of these people have gotten up to speak know about
the intricacies of the Sensitive Areas ordinance or about technical
compliance when you look at that site plan and talk about critical slopes
and protected slopes and all the things that go into Sensitive Areas
ordinance consideration. I think you have to ask yourself why do we even
have a Sensitive Areas ordinance? Obviously it is to protect spaces within
the city that judgements were made about being areas that were worthy of
protection. And who are those protected for? They are protected for the
public to improve and maintain the quality of life in the city both in the
immediate area and in the city in general. And I don't think that can be
accomplished if the only issue you are going to look at is technical
compliance. That is a one size fits all approach to looking at a Sensitive
Area and saying we are not going to look at anything other than just does
this meet some standards we have set up in this ordinance? Again, it is not
unlike subdivision review and approval, which is supposed to be for
technical compliance, but even in subdivision proceedings the Council has
discretion. There is an Iowa Supreme Court decision- Oaks versus the
City of Iowa City, the City Council here denied a subdivision for lack of a
second access into the subdivision. Nowhere, if you read the ordinances,
nowhere if you studied state law at that point could you find a power on
the part of the Council to deny that. But, the Iowa Supreme Court said
that is within the Council's discretion to act in the public interest. I think
you also need to remember Southgate hasn't owned this property all this
long. It is referred to by the people in the neighborhood as the Jensen
tract. Southgate bought this property knowing that this rezoning
proceeding was going to have to take place. It is not like they have owned
this property for 30 years and somewhere along the line the rules of the
game changed on them. They knew this was going to go through
rezoning, not through a site review. Now there are some specific things I
think the Council should and can consider and can act on in considering
this application. Judith Klink got up and spoke about parkland dedication.
There is a deficit ofparkland in this particular area of Iowa City between
Highway 1 and Benton Street and Riverside Drive over to Sunset and even
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 31
farther. The ordinance under which you are going to act requires that
there either be a dedication of open space or a cash payment. There is
nothing to purchase in this area that would have the same features as this
parcel. It is flat land. As Judith noted, a lot of this is ravines and terrain
that is not suitable to what you and I might think of as a park. You don't-
you can but don't necessarily get a lot of recreation walking through those
ravines. Plus buying parkland across town if you take a cash donation
from- not a cash donation, but a cash influx from Southgate, isn't going to
benefit the people in this neighborhood. If they have to drive to Willow
Creek park, if they have to drive to City Park, if they have to drive
someplace else in the community it doesn't have the same benefits as
those neighborhood parks. The city has made ajudgement that
neighborhood parks are preferable altematives. The ordinance- the
Sensible Areas ordinance- speaks specifically in terms of usable open
space. It doesn't talk about ravines and areas that can't be used for
recreation. There is a mandatory provision in the ordinance, which says at
least 90% of the open space dedicated will be located outside of areas with
slopes greater than 15%. And when you take the 33,000 and some square
feet and look at where it is placed on this site and try to avoid all of those
ravines, it is an awfully tight fit and frankly I am not sure it can even be
done. The building and the drives and the parking and the lawns for the
buildings use up almost all the usable open space on this property outside
the ravines. Another question that has come up is about the retention of
vegetation on this tract. It is clear it is not a woodland. And those parts of
the Sensitive Areas ordinance don't apply. But there is another provision
in the Sensitive Areas ordinance talking about groves of trees. Now a
grove of trees is ten or more trees 12 inches in diameter that are close
enough together that the canopy of those trees cover 50% of the area
encompassed by the trees. Now, I haven't gone out and walked this site to
see if there are groves of trees because first of all it is private property and
I didn't have permission to go out there and walk around, and secondly
with the trees not in leaf I don't know if I could tell how much area the
canopy covered. But you saw some of the slides which show some good
sized trees. I don't know that anybody went out with a caliper to see if
those were 12 inches. The ordinance requires that those groves of trees, if
they are present, be shown on the site plan. I saw very few trees
illustrated on the site plan other than what appeared to be trees that are
going to be planted after construction is completed, and sort of vague tree
lines. But I didn't see if there were groves are not. I think that is at least a
question you ought to ask if it has been determined by Southgate.
Statements I heard in looking at a tape of the earlier public hearing was
that a substantial fraction of those trees on the site are going to be
removed. Maybe up to 40%. I am not sure how that protects the Sensitive
Area particularly when you consider there may be groves of trees, which
the ordinance requires that steps be taken to retain as much of those groves
on site as possible. This is an illustration, the next one I want to make,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 32
which is about have the residential development guidelines in the
ordinance been satisfactorily addressed. There is a specific part of the
Sensitive Areas ordinance which deals not with protecting the Sensitive
Areas but it deals with what is going to be built on the site. It says,
"buildings located adjacent to single-family and duplexes," which there
are along Harlocke Street, "should be of a scale massing an architectural
style compatible with the lower density residential development". This is
a good illustration of what is going to be across the street. If you saw the
slides of the apartments you would notice that even the apartments are two
story apartments. They are on grade, two stories above grade with
essentially a flat roof. These are apartments which are a full three stories
above grade and a pitch roof above that. They are going to be large
dominating buildings. It is going to be a lot different than anything else in
that neighborhood that you can see currently. The design guidelines also
discourage cul de sacs and roadways with a single entry point. This comes
up not just in the issue about secondary access. It comes up in the way
that Sensitive Areas are supposed to be designed and developed under the
Sensitive Areas ordinance. But let's talk about secondary access.
O'Donnell: Joe, are you about done?
Holland: I am about done. There are guidelines which the city prorogated at one
point dealing with secondary access. And it says that a local street is
deemed over burdened if it has more than 500 vehicle trips per day.
Harlocke will be overburdened. The city staff concedes this and what I
heard in the last public hearing was it is just a little bit over 500 so that
really shouldn't concern us. Well, you can say that in a variety of
contexts. Why do you have RM-44 zoning and not RM-45 zoning? Life's
arbitrary, zoning is arbitrary- you draw lines someplace and you say you
don't cross this line. This violates what are taken to be the standard
secondary access guidelines. Secondly, in you secondary access
guidelines it says secondary means of access may be required when
physical features, which would inhibit emergency vehicles access if a
single means of access were blocked. These may include slopes of 8% or
greater. You have seen the slopes on Weeber Street. If you have been out
there you know those are fairly significant slopes coming both directions
toward Harlocke. It also says you can require a separate access if there is
vegetationwithatrnnkdiameterofover2inches. Something that could
fall across the street and block it and if you have looked along Harlocke
there is lots of trees along Harlocke that are bigger than 2 inches around. I
finally think you need to look at the effect of the site use on the Sensitive
Areas. What is going to happen when dirty snow gets pushed into those
ravines? What is going to happen when things are rnnoff from the parking
lot- oils and leftovers from cars and the fumes from the 500 plus vehicle
trips per day, the 200 and some from this site? Finally- I am about done-
the neighborhood association understands that something is probably
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 33
going to get i)uilt on this property unless the city steps in and buys it for
parkland. Now, I have told them and they understand and I sincerely
mean this, Southgate is one of the both more responsible and responsive
developers in the Iowa City area. But they have a certain plan they have
for this property and that plan is not what is compatible with the
neighborhood. This proposal is not in the public interest as it is presently
constituted and it would be better for the Council to reject this proposal
and send this back for rodesign at a minimum to see what can be done to
meet the kinds of issues that are still out there. Now, if any of the Council
members have any questions I would be happy to try and answer those.
Thank you very much.
O'Dormell: Thank you Joe. (Changed tapes)
Karmer: I have been thinking about the runoff issue and the previous meeting we
had talk of horrendous problems with runoff on the other side on Weber
and Harlocke I think. And we were told that this drains towards ravines as
you mentioned and that this will help drainage problems. They said that
even though there will be increased water flow, the drainage that will be
built to handle that will put it in better control. I was wondering if you
comment on that. You mentioned about snow going in there. How does
that all fit in with the drainage question?
Holland: Well, I would say a couple of things. One is I don't think it will have
much effect on the drainage problems to the west. That topography is
such that the water on this side flows to the east, which means that the
water is going to have to go into those ravines because the water flows
downhill and the buildings are all going to be on the high side of the (can't
hear) property. One of the effects of providing for that drainage is to lose
a lot of trees because as you know there is going to be a stormwater
detention basin on one side of the property which is going to involve clear
cutting whatever is there to open up that basin. Whatever drains out of
those parking lots when whatever is it, whether it is refuse, whether it is
oil, whether it is gasoline spills, whether it is snow, gravel or whatever it
may be, eventually it is going to fit its way into those ravines. Unless
somebody scoops up and hauls it away, and that is not common practice in
apartment complexes to haul your snow off site.
Kanner: You are claiming, in essence, that the environmental effects will be worse
with the development there as far as drainage is concerned?
Holland: As far there being contaminants in stormwater and rate of flow, I think
that is right.
Wilbum: You've- I am sorry, were you done?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 34
Kanner: Yeah.
Wilburn: You have stated that you have disagreements of interpretation with our
City Attorney, are you also suggesting that City Staff and their
recommendation that this is in compliance with the Sensitive Areas
ordinance are you suggesting that they are misinterpreting the existing
statute?
Holland: I suggest there are a number of ways you can interpret that ordinance and I
don't agree with some of the interpretations they have made.
Wilburn: Okay.
Holland: Reasonable minds can disagree. Eleanor and I have known each other for
a long time and we disagree with that. They only way you find out who is
right is to have a judge tell you. Because we know from talking earlier- I
guess it was last week- we know that some points we don't agree on and
we won't agree on.
Wilbum: Okay.
Pfab: I think there is one other thing that is here and it hasn't been spoken of and
that is we have talked about runoff from those parking lots and what not,
salt and not gasoline, but what about the salt that is drug in the wintertime
that you pick up as you travel around?
Holland: I thought about mentioning that. I assume they are not going to salt their
parking lots, they would be the streets.
Pfab: But the salt is brought in from other places too.
Holland: And I think that is just a number of the things that could be in the surface
of that lot get flushed into the ravines.
O'Donnell: Any other questions? Thank you Joe.
Siders: Good evening. My name is Glenn Siders and I am with Southgate
Development Company. We are the applicant for this project. I will h'y to
keep my comments brief also but because this is a public record I feel
compelled to reiterate a few things that I talked about last time. This
project is on a four-acre parcel of land. It is piece of in fill property. It is
currently zoned RM-44. We are yielding a much less density than that by
proposing 39 living units of constrnction. Because this is an in fill piece
of property all the infrastructure is present in the way of streets, sanitary
sewer and water. The only infrastructure we need to provide within this
development is the stormwater- we need to provide the sanitary sewer and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 35
stormwater for the domestic use of the buildings themselves and the
stormwater facility for the project, the stormwater basin. We are at about
23%, the potential development- the maximum development of this piece
of land.
Champion: I am sorry- what percentage did you say?
Siders: We are at about 23% of the maximum potential development of this
property with the 39 units. We have over 70% of unoccupied space, open
space, that is not occupied by any buildings or parking of any type. We
feel that we have complied with every request the city has asked of us and
complied with every ordinance that has been demanded upon us. We are
required to provide a stormwater detention basin for this facility and for
that reason and that reason alone we are here before the Council after
presenting our proposal to the Planning and Zoning Commission to
develop the stormwater basin. We are barely infringing upon the Sensitive
Areas to do that. The only portion of the Sensitive Areas will be the tip of
a protected slope to install a storm sewer pipe. And we are required to
build a concrete structure to dam the water so we do get an effective
detention basin in our facility. It is minimum disturbance. Those types of
activities on a protected slope are permitted by your ordinance in the
Sensitive Area ordinance, and it is minimized. In fact, one of the nice
things about this detention basin and this project is most often when you
have to provide a detention facility you need to dig a hole in the ground to
do that. We do not need to dig a hole in the ground to provide that
detention facility, which allows non-disturbance of the existing vegetation
and will help erosion problems immensely. A couple of things I did not
mention the last time that have come to light was that there was a question
about an archaeological study. That site has been reviewed by the state
Archaeological Society and found that we do not have an Indian burial
mound on that. I think that can be confirmed by your staffif you would
like to further investigate that. Mr. Holland mentioned parkland. It is tree
our parkland does not meet the requirements of the parkland ordinance-
the 90% of less than 15% slope. However, he did not mention that
because it does not meet that requirement we are financially compensating
you for that parkland. As you are well aware, the open space requirement
does not necessarily require you to dedicate the parkland. If the park
doesn't want it you can compensate that financially. We propose to do
both. We propose to do that under the recommendation of the city staff.
Trees arc shown your site plan. We are no where close to removing 40%
of the trees. If you recall at the last meeting I believe I passed all of you
this plat. It shows the existing tree line in a light green wavy line. It
shows the new tree line in the heavier green line. I have not computed the
percentage but it is way less then 40%. I cannot give you an accurate
percentage of how much tree rcmoval. We intend to take out as few trees
as possible. If you'll also notice the total area on that plat the lighter
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 36
brown area is the area that will be the entire area of all excavated areas on
that site. And very minimally they are in the Sensitive Areas. With that I
would be happy to answer any questions the Council may have, even if I
had answered them at the last public hearing.
O'Donnell: Questions?
Kanner: What is your perspective on the negotiations or discussions that have
taken place between you and the neighborhood association?
Siders: Actually, I think Robynn summarized them quite accurately. I did tell her
we have a developable piece of property. It has always been our intention
to develop that property this year in construction. We have been working
on this project since last summer. We fully intend to begin construction
on that so we can have fall occupancy of that project. So time is of the
essence. But there is room to talk if somebody would wave a check in
front my face right now, that obviously closes that time gap. But there are
other concerns that need to be met that I don't know that physically can be
met such as things as altering site plans, going through the process to do
all that. Time is of the essence.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Gelman: My name is Tom Gelman. I am legal counsel for Southgate Development
Company. I just have a few comments to make tonight. I think it is very
important to keep the Council focused on the issues at hand. There are a
lot of issues and circumstances that have been addressed tonight but I
think it is our obligation to remind the Council what in fact is before the
Council. Could I have a site plan up there? The Sensitive Areas site plan
that was submitted for the site? Oh, it is not here7 Well, anyway.
Karr: I just do lights.
Gelman: All tight. If we looked at the site plan what we would see is that only one
thing brought that plan to the City Council- the Planning and Zoning
Commission first and now to the City Council. And that is because a
Sensitive Area has been intruded into. And those Sensitive Areas are
regulated slopes. There was nothing else that would have brought this
document, this plan, before the City Council. And if that Sensitive Areas
had not been intruded into, none of these issues would have been public
issues. It would have been simply a building permit process and there
would have been no public input. There would have been no Planning and
Zoning issues and there would have been no City Council issues.
Champion: I think there might have been some (can't hear).
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 37
Gelman: Pardon me?
Champion: I think there might have been some input anyway.
Gelman: That is possible. But not in this context.
Champion: No.
Gelman: In this context what we have hem is a Sensitive Areas overlay site plan
that was submitted in order to obtain a Sensitive Areas overlay zone. It
was filed for the sole purpose of dealing with the intrusion into this
Sensitive Area. The intrusion is a very minor intrusion. It is a
underground pipe that leads to the bottom of the ravine. And there are
specific standards in our ordinances that have already been adopted by this
Council that deals with these particular issues. We need not to create new
legislation tonight and we need not to use convoluted interpretations of the
ordinance. The ordinance is very specific and is very concise and it says
that in connection with Sensitive Areas that- first of all it is section 14.6kl
paragraph 6e it looks like, or section e I mean- uses permitted with
protected Sensitive Areas and buffers. And the standard that the Conncil
is to apply in this instance is in the ordinance. And it says when it can be
shown that a use will not be detrimental to the functioning of the Sensitive
Areas and associated buffers or pose a public safety hazard. The
following uses are permissible- so there are your two standards in that
portion of it. Not detrimental to the functioning of the Sensitive Areas,
and I don't think we have seen any showing that the intrusion that is (can't
hear) is in fact detrimental in any way to these Sensitive Areas or pose a
public safety hazard. No one has suggested that the pipe leading down the
hillside as it will be buried, nor the facility that will be built in the ravine,
will pose any sort or public or safety hazard. Section three of the
ordinance also says essential public utilities are specifically permitted.
And among the specific public utilities permitted are stormwater detention
facilities. And these are permitted if they are designed and constructed to
minimize their impact upon the protected Sensitive Area and associated
buffers. That is precisely how they have been designed in this instance.
They have a minimum impact upon the Sensitive Areas which was the
purpose of the ordinance to protect those areas. Let me respond briefly to
some comments that Mr. Holland made. Southgate was aware when it
purchased the land that it had to abide by the ordinances of the City of
Iowa City. And I think Southgate does a pretty good job of doing that and
has a good history of doing that. That was clearly known to Southgate.
And it has the same expectation that the City Council will abide by the
laws of the City of Iowa City. This is not a subdivision proceeding. This
is the approval of a Sensitive Areas ordinance plan and the discretion that
might be available to a City Council in connection with a subdivision is
not by analogy available to the City Council in this proceeding. It is an
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
Aprill7,2001 Page38
inappropriate application of the law. And it is not applicable to this
circumstance. The design guidelines contain within the planned
development housing overlay zone ordinance are not applicable. The
design standards that are applicable are those specifically articulated and
those that I have already read in the Sensitive Areas zone. Mr. Holland
read for you a section from the planned development housing- or quoted to
you a section of the planned development housing ove~ay zone ordinance,
but only a portion of it and I would like to read the entire section because I
think it gives it better meaning as to clarification of the meaning. He
relied upon this as giving you broad discretion to consider things that are
not relevant tonight. This section relates to the procedures for reviewing a
Sensitive Areas site plan. This says the report shall include findings that
the variances and setbacks, lot area requirements, building heights,
building types, sizes of buildings, and the combination of land uses will be
in the public interest in harmony with the purposes of this chapter and
other building regulations of the City of Iowa City and will not adversely
affect nearby properties. The words that Mr. Holland left out are
absolutely relevant. Variances, setbacks, lot area requirements, building
heights, building types, sizes of buildings, and the combination of land
uses- none of which is what this is about. What this is about is an
intrusion into the Sensitive Areas. And if you substitute that in this
paragraph, which is what should have been done then none of these
become applicable and none of them provide discretion for the Council to
do what it wishes and to make a decision about a Sensitive Area based
upon criteria there not relevant to Sensitive Areas. Let me conclude by
simply indicating that the Council has an obligation to all citizens to abide
by the ordinance it and prior Councils have passed. The ordinances in this
instance are very clear on their face and do not require a convoluted
interpretation. As Councilors you are not legislating tonight. That is not
your role. But you are reviewing compliance with these particular
ordinances that were cited. This Council protects all citizens and the
public interest of all citizens by following the City's ordinances. And I
think that that is what your obligation is tonight and I think that the
applicant here has shown that the site plan submitted is in compliance with
all of the city ordinances and is in fact consistent with the applicable law
upon which you are to base your decision. In that regard too I would
finally ask that as you vote it would be helpful for you to record the
reasons for your vote because that would be helpful for the record tonight.
Thank you very much and if you have any questions.
O'Donnell: Any questions?
Kanner: Yeah, Tom, I guess one of the problems I am having is that actually it
seems to me that as a representative of Southgate that you are picking and
choosing which parts of the ordinance that are applicable. It seems that
when we get- when the ordinance kicks in that we can't pick and choose
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meetin g of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 39
and we get the whole package. And even more so it seems we have a
Supreme Court decision that talks about a Council having some discretion
in interpretation ofthe ordinance. I was wondering if you could address
that.
Gelman: The second first. I have actually addressed both of those but the second
first. The Supreme Court case that Mr. Holland cited, if that is what you
were referring to, was a subdivision case. And I specifically said this is
not a subdivision matter. This is a zoning overlay matter and the issues
and the decision making process that are appropriate to each are very
different. And in the subdivision context developers know that they need
to comply with not only the specific requirements that are set forth in the
statute but also requirements that may be imposed by that process. And
the Supreme Court confirmed that additional requirements beyond those
contained in the ordinance may in fact be imposed by a subdivision
process. That is not what we are doing here. And it is not applicable.
This is a zoning matter and we have specific regulations that are
applicable and those have been complied with.
Kanner: In the decision isn't there an implication that part of the original zoning
ordinance said Council could look at these things and so therefore I do see
a connection between that case and saying that there is that implication
and the case that we are looking at now.
Gelman: I can't control how you interpret it but I can tell you how I interpret it as a
practicing professional. And my feeling is that it is not applicable and that
you can't by analogy want it to be applicable because you want to get a
different result than the law would dictate. The other issue that you raised
had to do with picking and choosing. To the contrary, Steven, I think we
have focused on those sections that are applicable to the circumstance. It
is not Southgate that is picking and choosing. I hear other people picking
and choosing and searching and hunting and trying to find sections that are
in fact not applicable to the facts and circumstances and to the narrow
question that the Council truly has before it. We picked and choosed the
sections that we are required to comply with. And those are the ones that
were applicable to this particular development. And, you know, I guess I
would turn the question around. I mean, I see a lot of hunting and picking
and searching for other provisions that are not applicable. And I think it is
very incumbent on the Council to look at in fact what is applicable and to
take legal action and to do it in a way that is consistent with its own
ordinances.
Kanner: That is the question before us.
Gelman: Yes. And it is not just my interpretation. I think your own legal counsel
has said pretty much the same if not exactly the same about the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 40
applicability- the relevancy of specific sections and the applicability to
what is before the Council. This is one of those rare instances where I
agree with your City Counsel.
Kanner: We will make note of that.
Gelman: Thank you.
O'Donnell: Thank you. I don't want to get involved in a legal battle here Joe.
Holland: I understand that but I would just like to make a couple of points because I
think what I said has been misstated and I want to make sure the Council
is clear. I have heard this argument both at the last hearing and this one
that it is only this little pipe running through the site that brings the
overlay zoning into effect. In fact, if you look at the Sensitive Areas
ordinance which is what I have in front of me it says the Sensitive Areas
ove~ay rezoning is required prior to development activity on properties
containing anyone of the following sensitive features. Talk about picking
and choosing- what Tom is saying is that if you single out this little part
that is flat that doesn't have an ordinance on it and ignore the rest of the
property you wouldn't even be here. But because they have to go down
through the Sensitive Areas- I don't read the ordinance to intent that. I
think you look at the property as a whole and not one little part of it. And
what he is saying is you look at one little part and because you have to run
through another part of the property you are here. I don't' think the issue
is that narrow and that tiny. Secondly, the design standards I quoted are in
the Sensitive Areas ordinance. They are not in the Planned Development
ordinance. If you want to look in the Sensitive Areas ordinance that is
where the architectural standards are. That is where you will find those
design standards. And finally, I agree with him, Mr. Kanner, that the
subdivision example I raised and secondary access and the powers that the
courts have extended was an analogy. This isn't a subdivision. This is a
rezoning, but the processes involved are pretty similar and the only point I
was making my analogy was I think the Council has more discretion then
you may have realized in the past. Thanks for the additional time.
O'Donnell: Thank you. Any other comments at all? The public hearing is closed.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Kanner: Second.
O'Donnell: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Kanner. All those in favor? Okay. I
would entertain a motion for first consideration.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 41
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Wilburn: Second.
O'Donnell: Moved by Vanderhoef, second by Wilbum. Discussion?
Champion: Well, I guess I could start. I know what we are supposed to be doing here
and I am not against development of this land and I think the plan you
have presented on paper looks wonderful. I think you have done a lot of
concessions. But a couple of things bother me and I would like to suggest
that if these things that bother me are bothering other Council people that
we send this back to Planning and Zoning. Two things bother me.
Number one, can emergency vehicles get down this street? Is that story
about the fire truck true? Are we going to put 39 apartments down there
that we can't get a fire truck down to? What are we going to do to take
care of that safety problem? Because I think that is a major one if that is
really true. And I guess I don't know if it is really true. I just know I have
heard it. The other thing is that this City Council this year- maybe it was
last year- time goes by fast when you get old- but we spent a lot of time
developing an overlay ordinance that (can't hear) intrusive buildings in
neighborhoods. And here we have apartment buildings that are going up
in a neighborhood that are out of shape- what do you call that?
Vanderhoef: Proportion?
Champion: Out of proportion. And so now we have spent time developing new
ordinances to protect neighborhoods with in-fill development that are
proportional to the neighborhood that is there. And that happened because
of a portion that was built on a street that was way out of proportion to the
neighborhood. Now, are we going to do that again and then develop a
new ordinance overlay zone to cover newer neighborhoods to protect them
from the same thing? Those two things I think are issues that we need to
have addressed before I can vote for this development even though I am
really for your development. The scale and the match, and the secondary
access or the fact can a fire truck get down the road? I guess I need to
have that question answered.
O'Donnell: Okay, any other discussion?
Vanderhoef: Well, I guess I will speak next. Cormie, I think you are right on that there
is a street width problem and what had been crossing my mind in here is
whether that street could be widened now before development. I am sorry
that we haven't had the opportunity to do the Comprehensive Plan in that
area because I think that will address some parkland in that area and take
care of that five acre- what am I trying to say- deficit. Thank you. Judith,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 42
yes I would have loved to have bought that piece of property a long time
ago and we certainly negotiated hard for it and it wasn't possible for the
city to do and at that time the Council chose not to do that. Parks and
Recreation even said that we couldn't use all of our parkland acquisition
dollars for that piece of property. I find the Council still in that same
position of expendable dollars in the general fund to make a purchase of
that size. If it were to buy only the five or six acres that we wanted that
would have been one thing but that piece of property comes with what we
call the Sensitive Areas plus the playground areas so as I recall it was
about 17 acres or something like that that we were trying to purchase back
in '93 or '94. I think there are still other opportunities in that southwest
comprehensive planning area to put some parkland in there. I certainly
will be looking at it certainly because we now have the ordinance that
gives us land or money in lieu of land we will be in a better position as the
rest of that area builds out. So, yes, this is a lovely piece of property and
no we can't afford it right now. I would like to find out about the street
width whether we could widen that to a 28-foot width at this point. I
don't' know whether that is possible or whether that is something that the
developer would look at. The mass of the building, yes Connie, we did
have that happen in another area. I see this as a massive building and that
is not what we are talking about in this overlay ordinance right now. And
so I will support the overlay rezoning.
Kanner: I respect the opinions that we have had from our City Attorneys and other
attorneys representing this case and from the testimony that we have heard
from neighbors in the area. One thing though that I keep coming back to
is the wording in the Sensitive Areas ordinance I believe in 14-6K(1)(n).
And planned design guidelines talk about use land efficiently and preserve
environmentally sensitive areas as open space amenities. Encourage
development, which provides for easy access and circulation for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Encourage innovative residential developments
that contain a variety of housing types and styles. Strive for development
solutions that best promote the spirit, intent and purpose of the Sensitive
Areas ordinance while permitting development of the property for
reasonable beneficial uses. And although this development proposed by
Southgate has many positive things, the in-fill development I feel is a
worthwhile cause. I find that there are other things that do not meet the
spirit or the law of the Sensitive Areas development plan design. And I
will be voting against this proposal. And I believe our procedure is if we
plan on defeating something that Planning and Zoning recommended that
before we take action we hear from Planning and Zoning in a meeting.
And so I would recommend if there are it appears two votes that we vote
for deferral and call for a meeting with Planning and Zoning to hear for
their arguments.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 43
O'Donnell: This has been through Planning and Zoning, Steven, and approved. It was
narrow but it was 3-2. Do you have an opinion on that?
Dilkes: Yeah, Bob can address that. I do believe there is a practice or an actual
policy about going back to P&Z on rezonings if you differ with them.
Miklo: It has been the policy of the Council that if there is a disagreement
between the Planning and Zoning Commission and possibly the Council
then you will have a meeting with Planning and Zoning to discuss the
issue before voting.
Pfab: Before the what?
O'Donnell: Before voting.
Dilkes: Before voting.
Miklo: Actually, it has happened two ways. In one case you actually voted on the
first reading and since there wasn't agreement then you met with the
commission. In other cases you have met with them before you have
actually taken the vote.
Dilkes: Although when you have done a vote that has been a vote in the
affirmative. I mean, a denial means the thing is over. So there will be no
meeting after that so you would have to meet beforehand.
Miklo: That is correct.
Dilkes: And Madan has informed me and I think she is right that it is a resolution
that that policy (can't hear).
O'Dormell: Would you repeat that?
Dilkes: There is an actual resolution that sets forth that policy.
O'Dounell: Okay. Any other comments?
Wilburn: Yeah. I will be supporting this tonight in addition to Dee's comments,
which I agree with- legal (can't hear) are flying tonight, so, attorneys left
and fight. It has been said that reasonable people can disagree. In this
position I am compelled to- I agree with and I am feeling compelled to
follow the advise of our attorney, the City Attorney. There have been
several comments about doing the right thing in the public good. In this
case we've got the Sensitive Areas ordinance and, you know, perhaps it is
a matter of interpretation. There in addition to the county's ordinance
wherever it may be, there are some folks here who have worked on it and I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 44
am sure there are some folks who feel that our Sensitive ordinances are
too restrictive and some who feel that it does not do enough. I am- I think
I-f I have tried to not change the rules in mid-process. If there were no
application in front of us I think then, you know, if no one had gone
through the permitting process (can't hear) the Sensitive Areas ordinance
to Council for consideration to make sure that there is compliance. If
there is nothing on the table that is a time when I think we can look at
changing the rules and changing the zoning. That is not in front of us
now. And so what I guess I am looking at is what has been pointed out is
do I as a City Council Member follow the rules? And I am going to have
to- I am choosing to do that. You know, it is tough for some to hear
tonight. You are asking to change the rules in a sense and that is okay if it
works out in your favor. If it works against you it is not okay so there is
precedence with myself I am trying not to send. So I will be supporting
this.
O'Donnell: Irvin?
Pfab: I think enough has been said. I know how I am going to vote.
Dilkes: Irvin you should state the reasons for your vote.
Pfab: I believe it is not in the best public interest.
Champion: Well, I haven't stated how I am going to vote but I am still going to raise
the concern about whether the fire truck can get down that street. And
how do we address that?
Dilkes: I think you can ask the question but I don't think, as I have said before,
that that is the issue before you. And let me just- since we have had two
attorneys up here talking let me just comment briefly. I am not an
advocate for either one of these parties.
Champion: I know that.
Dilkes: I am your attorney and the city's attorney. My job is to look at this
ordinance, give it the best reading that I can- not the most convoluted one,
but the one that I think is consistent with the language, with the intent, and
with the way it has been applied in the past. My opinion remains the
same. The talk here tonight about design guidelines and things like
compatibility of uses and that kind of thing, in my opinion those are
applicable and are often talked about being applicable in the ordinance
when the applicant is seeking a variance in the requirements of the
underlying zone- changes in setback and etc. For instance, if it was an
RS-5 zoning and in order to stay off the Sensitive Areas we wanted to
transfer densities and they would build higher density units. Then all of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page
those things would come into play. They are not applicable here, in my
opinion. And I want to get that on the record because of the discussion
that has occurred here so you know that is still kind of where I stand.
Champion: Is any of this covered- never mind.
O'Donnell: Okay, in my opinion this is a Sensitive overlays matter. This addresses in-
fill development. We have 70% open space. Stormwater retention, we
have addressed that with a basin. It falls into compliance with 40% trees
are not going to be removed. And I feel that we are here tonight to
address this matter as how it complies with the Sensitive Areas ordinance
overlay and that is my opinion on it. We have been told by people on our
boards and commissions that it does, as well as our City Attorney. And I
am going to rely on that so I will be supporting that. Any other
comments?
Kanner: At this time I am going to move to defer consideration indefinitely and ask
that we have a meeting with Planning and Zoning.
Pfab: I will second that.
Dilkes: Steven, can I suggest that you defer to a particular date? I think the
applicant- I don't think you are compelled to vote tonight but I think there
should be some expectation as to when it will come back in front of you.
Whether that is May 1 or whatever you think it takes to give P&Z time to
deal with it.
O'Donnell: Would you like to specify May 17
Kanner: May 1 I will specify.
O'Donnell: May 1, and Irvin will you still second that?
Pfab: That is fine. If that is workable. I don't know how you set that date.
O'Donnell: Okay, it has been moved and seconded to defer this until May 1. All those
in favor?
Kanner: Wait, discussion before you do that.
O'Donnell: Discussion.
Kanner: Is this doable with meeting P&Z before then?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 46
Miklo: What we will try to do is arrange a joint meeting with Planning and
Zoning and the City Council. That perhaps could occur as part of your
informal meeting on April- the last- April 30.
Pfab: So you are saying that it is workable time wise?
Miklo: I believe so. The Planning and Zoning Conunission has a meeting that
evening as well so they could meet early.
Pfab: What happens if it is not workable?
Miklo: You may want to consider deferring to a later date.
Pfab: All right.
Champion: What was your hope to accomplish?
Kanner: Well, I think we have a resolution that says if we are going to be reversing
an opinion of the Planning and Zoning or a recommendation that we
should meet with them so that we could hear their opinion again I guess
and hear what they have to say and see if we want to change our minds
and not reverse their decision. So it is almost a requirement. In this
resolution I guess we could override the resolution of having to meet with
them. But I see that we have votes that will defeat this and so I would like
to meet with P&Z to hear their reasoning for passing it.
Champion: Well, I am going to- I mean, I don't know if we have the votes or not- I
am going to support the first reading at least for the same reasons that you
stated Ross. I am still very concerned about the availability of emergency
vehicles to get down this road and I may not support the second reading
and that would be why.
Dilkes: Connie I think what Steven is referring to is that it takes 5 to pass this
because it is a super majority and I believe both lrvin and Steven have
indicated that they will vote against it. That is my reading of what is
occurring.
O'Donnell: Any further discussion?
Vanderhoef: I am not going to vote for the deferral because I am satisfied with the legal
issues and I think was probably how P&Z came down and that is why I am
voting the way I am voting to begin with on this issue. And so I don't
think there is anything to be gained by talking to P&Z about this overlay
zoning change.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 47
Kanner: Keep in mind that if you vote against the deferral in essence, in my mind,
you are voting against a resolution that was passed previously because
then most likely what will happen is a defeat of the motion. And that
defeat will happen without us talking to P&Z.
Champion: No. If it is defeated we will meet with P&Z.
Vanderhoef: We can still meet with P&Z. We don't have to defer it though.
Dilkes: No.
Vanderhoef: If we ask to have a meeting with P&Z to talk about a road width, which
has nothing to do with the zoning, we can do that.
Dilkes: But what Steven is saying is that after the vote tonight ifSteven and Irvin
vote agmnst ~t, ~t ~s gone.
Vanderhoef: I understand that.
O'Dormell: It is over.
Dilkes: There is no reason to meet with P&Z on this particular application. So,
what he is suggesting is that because of the policy which is in place that
says if the Council as a whole, not you individually, but if the Council as a
whole is inclined to vote in a way that is opposite that reconunended by
P&Z the meeting occurs prior to the vote- if the vote will be to defeat. If
the vote was to approve it wouldn't matter because you still have two
readings left to go.
Champion: Oh, I see. You are right.
O'Donnell: Any further discussion? We have a motion to defer until May 1 by
Kanner and seconded by Pfab. All those in favor? Would you raise your
hand? I can't tell. Okay, Kanner and Pfab. All those opposed. Motion is
defeated. Any further discussion?
Wilbum: I think this is the first reading and hopefully some of Connie's questions
can be addressed as we move forward through this.
Champion: I hope so.
Vanderhoef: And I would encourage those that are inclined to vote against this at least
vote for it for the first reading so that it can move forward and that we can
talk about it later.
Atkins: Can I point out to the Council that this could be both first and last reading.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 48
Dilkes: That is what I just said.
Atkins: If it is a 4-2 vote this matter is concluded.
Dilkes: It is gone.
Vanderhoef: That is what I know and that is why I am encouraging those who are
inclined to vote no against this whole thing to vote yes today and so we
can continue into this discussion.
O'Donnell: And I think there is a lot of merit to that.
Kanner: And I think you had your opportunity to do that by voting for deferral.
Vanderhoef: We still have two more readings to go on this. And there have always
been folks who have changed their vote after the first or second reading.
So we can accomplish both things and move this along.
O'Donnell: Any further discussion?
Pfab: Dee, I beg to differ with you. I think if we vote, as it looks like we will, it
is over. Period. There is no more.
Vanderhoef: I understand that and that is why I am asking you to consider voting yes
tonight so that we can take another look at it and still move it along.
O'Donnell: Is everybody clear where we are? Any further discussion? Roll call. First
consideration is defeated. Kanner and Pfab voting no. We are going to
take a ten minute break and then we are going to come back and invite
Ernie out.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 49
ITEM NO. 7. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE FY02 ANNUAL ACTION
PLAN, THAT IS A SUB-PART OF IOWA CITY'S 2001-2006
CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CITY STEPS), AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID PLAN AND ALL
NECESSARY CERTIFICATIONS TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR THE CONSOLIDATED
PLAN.
Lehman: The public hearing is open.
Bums: My name is Bob Bums. I am an architect and developer and property
manager from here in Iowa City. I am representing Foxboro Ridge, which
is one of the applicants for the HCDC funding. The property is designed
for the elderly and persons with disabilities. The property will be 100%
accessible. Please keep in mind that housing for persons with disabilities
is one of the greatest needs that we have in the state and is recognized that
way by the Governor's Housing Task Force. This project is the third
phase of a four phase development that was approved by the City Council
and the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously in December of
1997. We broke it into four phases at the request of the City Council and
the Planning and Zoning Commission so that we could spread the
resources available for other uses as we move forward. The demand for
the project is calculated in the City Steps Plan, which you are acting on
tonight. It recognizes the 120 units of all four phases as being
implemented as part of the supply of the housing that is going to be
available for this type of use. Phase one is completed and placed in
service and I might add repaying the loan at the rate of $900 a month. The
second phase is under construction. The overall timetable is just as we
had predicted and is on schedule. The City funds that we have requested
of $234,000 will be a loan that is fully repaid and fully amortized. The
affordability period is a minimum of 50 years and the procedure at the end
of the 50 years would be to donate the property to a non-profit to continue
as low-income use. The use of our funds, the City Home Funds that we
have applied for and have been allocated by HCDC, leverages state funds,
private equity, and private loans for every dollar of city funds that
leverages an additional $11. So, the project is highly leveraged and the
City funds are key to attracting the other financing. The project was a-
phase one and phase two is being built all by local contractors and sub-
contractors all from the Iowa City area. The application was ranked fifth
of the 19 projects that were funded by HCDC and it was the second
highest scoring housing project. Now, I know you are familiar with the
process, but the application for the funds, the scoring and the ranking by
HCDC is a rigorous process. But something happened last night that I
recognize- the recap at the work session last night, the memo from the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 5o
City Manager to the City Council requested that you- that he is
recommending that he wanted more money for the Peninsula project and if
need beto take money from other projects. In effect, what that
recommendation is is adding a new scoring criteria. There was no
mention of the Peninsula project as a scoring criteria when they were
issued back in December as a criteria that was going to be used to judge
projects. We don't think that is fair to the other applicants. There wasn't
an equal opportunity for us to consider the Peninsula as a high priority
scoring item. One that would override everybody else's. I have to ask the
question, where is the due process of having this brought out at this late a
date? I think what should take place is that the Council should follow the
recommendations of the HCDC and go forward with them. If the Council
wants the Peninsula project to move forward as a priority let's try to work
together to find other sources of money outside of the HCDC process.
And I think there is a solution that would make everyone happy. I am not
against the Peninsula project. I participated in the design for that when it
got started and I am interested in it as an architect and a developer. I hope
it goes forward. But at what price? We certainly hope it doesn't mean the
price of affordable housing for the residents that we serve, the elderly and
persons with disabilities. If we miss funding on this cycle we are going to
miss two tax credit rounds which is the key financing source for our
developments. That will be two funding cycles and two construction
seasons. If you want me to go into the details of that I will be glad to.
That is based on fact.
Lehman: Yeah, we don't time for that.
Bums: Let me just give you some suggestions of where we can find the
affordable housing or find funds as an alternative to taking it from other
applicants. Number one, you have already budgeted in your budget the
affordable housing funding pool. There is $150,000 set aside under the
affordable housing funding pool. Secondly you could do an advance
commitment of FY03 funds for HCDC. It has been done in the past in
special circumstances and this could be that special circumstance to buy
land- to make sure that you can buy the land in the Peninsula for the
project. Number three, you could capture funds from the HCDC that have
already been awarded but the projects are not going to proceed. We
understand that the Old Brick project is in jeopardy of not being able to
move forward, and there is $20,000 that would be available. So we are up
to $170,000. Keep in mind that I think the fellowship is short $200,000 as
was pointed out last night. A fourth alternative is to ask one of the other
applicants, Metro Plains, we did this so we are not asking- we are not
suggesting anything that we didn't do- that they could lower their funding
request from $250,000 to $234,000 and still leverage the city funds to
capture as much in the state home funds as possible. So there would be an
additional $16,000 that you could reallocate. And I guess fifth, we are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 51
repaying our home loan on phase one at the rate of $900 a month. So
there is $11,000 in a year that would be available so we are getting close
to that $200,000 figure. All of those are suggestions that are all coming
just strictly from housing dollars. Not considering the one suggestion last
night to tap into economic development funds. I am not going to- that is
available I suppose but I am not going to try to suggest that that is a city
policy. That is your policy, but that would be another source too. Thank
you for your time and I am available to answer any questions if you had
any.
Kanner: Bob, I had a couple of questions for you. You said that the procedure is to
donate the development to a non-profit organization after 40 plus years?
Bums: 50.
Kanner: 50? Is that written into the agreement?
Bums: No, it is not.
Kanner: Would you be willing to write that into the agreement?
Bums: The- I wouldn't have any- to answer your question, I don't have any
problem with that. That is the investor that has to make that call. In a
limited partnership the general partner, as I act as, has to follow the lead of
the investor limited partner. But their policy has been that they would
rather donate it for the tax write off at the end of the compliance period.
Kanner: That is something that perhaps before we vote on this in May that I
personally would like to see and would perhaps sway me in one way.
Pfab: I would certainly encourage that also because I am aware of some other
properties that has gotten to that point and then somebody changed their
mind.
Champion: I am not interested in doing that. I think we should- I don't think as
individual Council members we can ask for that kind of a-
Pfab: But we can suggest it.
Lehman: Steven, you said you had two questions?
Kanner: Yeah, I had a few. What is the private equity- what percentage that is
going into this project?
Bums: Of the total development cost?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 52
Kanner: Yeah.
Bums: I would have to ask Jesse to look that up.
Kanner: And Steve it looks he is looking it up also. While they are doing that, if
you were to get less than $234,000 would you still be able to proceed with
this project if you got let's say $50,000 or $100,000 less?
Bums: Well, let me answer that question that we had originally planned to do this
project as one project back in '97 and we have applied for each cycle for
all four phases. So in this application cycle we applied for phase three and
phase four. And phase three was the only one that was recommended for
funding. And that was less than our original request of $275,000. So we
are down to $234,000, which is the minimum amount to be able to
leverage the state home funds at the rate of 3 to 1- $3 of state funds for
every dollar of local home funds- and that is what we used- we used that
favorable interest rate from the state to get the rents down to the fair
market rent. So the answer to your question is I think we are at the low
point right now.
Kanner: Your feeling is that if you didn't get that $234,000 you would not proceed
with part three which is Foxboro?
Bums: That is correct.
Lehman: When would you anticipate construction would start on phase three?
Bums: The tax credit cycle this year, the applications are due June 11 and the
Iowa Finance Authority expects to award it August 1 so we would be able
to start by September 1. We wouldn't be able to start any sooner than July
1 just because of your regulations.
Lehman: And when would your- when is phase two going to be completed?
Bums: This fall.
Lehman: This fall, okay.
Kanner: Do you have those figures anyone?
Bums: Well if you have a calculator, the tax credits will raise $1,647,000.
Pfab: What was the number again?
Bums: $1,647,000 of $2,854,896.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 53
Pfab: Okay, what was the- $2 million-
Bums: $2,854,896.
Pfab: That is as far as I am going, okay.
Lehman: The difference in that is private investment, is that correct?
Kanner: The $1.647 is private investment using the tax credits?
Bums: That is the tax credits alone. I thought that was the question.
P fab: If that was a fraction it was 51%.
Bums: Okay, that was the equity that is contributed. There is a private loan and
them is a private loan commitment fee that has been waived by the bank.
SO those are other sourues of local private funds. $700,000 comes from
the State of Iowa. And $234,000 from the City.
Champion: Bob, what is your occupancy rate on phase one? Being occupied now?
Bums: The- we took the Department of Housing and Urban Development through
two weeks ago and we had 22 rented with people signing leases and
moved in and we have 8 that are in process, which would be the total 30
units. Keep in mind we opened November 1 of last year in the middle of
winter. You can remember the winter we had.
Champion: You have answered my question.
Bums: So it has been slower than we would have liked but we (can't hear) to be
full.
Lehman: Other questions for Bob?
Atkins: I have a question for Steve if he could come to the microphone.
Lehman: Steve?
Atkins: So we understand Steve, can you walk us through the tax credit process?
Nasby: Let's see, I will see ifI can do this simply and rather straightforward. The
federal government provides low-income housing tax credit to states based
on per capita. So in Iowa we get an allocation of these tax credits that
come from the federal government. The tax credits are then administered
by the Iowa Finance Authority through a competitive process much like
our own process. And then those tax credits are given to developers.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 54
Those developers in turn sell those tax credits to investors and
corporations and the money then generated from the sale of those credits
goes into this affordable housing.
Atkins: The tax credit is not cash.
Nasby: The tax credit itself is more like a bond that you would buy.
Atkins: And the developer or someone can buy a piece of that tax credit.
Nasby: Yes.
Atkins: And those purchases in aggregate total up to $1.647 million.
Nasby: That is correct.
Atkins: And then the individual pumhasing the tax credit gets to write it off their
income tax.
Nasby: That is correct. Over a ten year period of time.
Champion: It comes right off your income tax? It is not just a deduction?
Nasby: Correct.
Pfab: Well, the tax credit is a prepayment of your income tax?
Champion: Basically.
Nasby: It is kind of like the (can't hear). Cormie is right, it is not a deduction. It
is a credit at the bottom of your tax form.
Champion: I need a lot of those.
Nasby: I am sure Bob could sell you some.
Kanner: Steve, so as far as private investor putting money into this project, an
individual or a corporation of their own money, what is that? It looks like
it is-
Atkins: It is a tax credit.
Kanner: Well, the tax credit though is not their own money. They are getting-
Champion: Oh, yeah, it is. It is still money.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 55
Atkins: You could buy one.
Lehman: It would be your money.
Atkins: Your money would purchase that tax credit. You then have the right with
that tax credit to basically write it off against your taxes.
Kanner: What I am saying is that the tax credit though which is worth something- it
is worth ultimately $1.6 million, comes from federal taxes. I am looking
at what is someone with their own money that is- what are they putting in?
What is Bums or what is- what private money are they putting in of their
own?
Nasby: In the application there was $210,000 in private lender financing and then
Bob mentioned the $22,000 fee that is being waived. Other than that I
don't- there is no other private dollars, equity dollars, coming from the
developer in this project.
Kanner: So it is less than ten percent of the cost that is actually coming-
Nasby: Actually about 8%- 8.2%.
Kanner: Okay, thank you.
Lehman: Does anyone else which to speak at the hearing?
Dennis: Hi, I am MaryAnn Dennis and I work for Greater Iowa City Housing
Fellowship. We are partnering with the Iowa City Housing Authority to
develop affordable housing in a new Peninsula neighborhood. It is a very
exciting and unique opportunity for us and we hope that you can fully
support our application.
Lehman: Thank you.
Karmer: MaryAnn?
Lehman: Yes- I am sorry.
Kanner: What happens if you don't get the amount requested? What does that
mean in terms of the project on the Peninsula- the reduction? Give me
concrete things that it is going to reduce.
Dennis: It reduces the state award.
Karmer: The what?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meetin g of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 56
Dennis: The State of Iowa has already awarded the full amount of State Home
Funds to this project. The state has a cap for this kind of project at
$24,999 per unit. So, if the City Home Fund loan is reduced the state loan
is also reduced. So we have to go back and rework the whole project.
Lehman: Which means the project will be smaller.
Dennis: It probably means fewer units.
Lehman: Yeah.
Kanner: Smaller- less units?
Dennis: Fewer number of units.
Kanner: And right now you are proposing 19 units and a rough estimate is how
many units would there be if you didn't get this funding- the full
$600,000?
Dennis: That depends- if we get- we don't know, we would have to go back and
rework the whole project. Because a reduction in the amount of City
Home funds that are loaned to this project also reduces the amount of
State Home Funds that can be loaned to the project. I don't know the
answer to that question.
Lehman: If it were reduced by the same percentage as the allocation from the
commission you would be reducing it by approximately 32% or 13 units
instead of 19. Assuming that the state allocation wasn't based on the same
percentage as their recommended percentage here, 68%.
Kanner: Well, I-
Dennis: A piece of this of course is that the lots that are available at a reduced
price for affordable housing in phase one of the Peninsula are these 19
lots- or these lots that would produce 19 units. If we don't produce 19
units in phase one we don't get more lots in phase two for affordable
housing in the Peninsula neighborhood.
Champion: What do you mean by that?
Dennis: There are- the lots that are available-
Champion: Are all in phase one?
Dennis: No, no. The lots that are available now in phase one that are offered at a
reduced price by the developer will accommodate 19 units of affordable
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 57
housing. If we can't put the financing together to do 19 units of affordable
housing in phase one there will not be an opportunity to for instance do
additional units in phase two because the lots won't be there. The
percentage of the lots are already established for affordable housing in
each phase of the Peninsula. So the developer will sell these lots that are-
he is not going to keep them for affordable housing in phase one.
Vanderhoef: And he is not planning affordable housing or offering the 10% discount in
a future phase?
Dennis: He is, but in the aggregate when the whole thing is built out if we don't
get these lots in phase one it is not like he is going to add more so that the
end result is going to be the same amount of affordable housing in the
entire neighborhood. They will be lost. If we do 13 units he is not going
to say in phase two we are going to give you another 6 lots because you
lost 6 in the first phase.
Champion: Okay.
Pfab: That is all I was going to say. I was trying to help you out of a hole.
Dennis: Thank you Irvin.
Kanner: Mary Ann, this is just my request, but before we vote if you can come up
with more exact on what it will cost you in terms of number of nnits and
submit something written I would appreciate it. That is up to you. I
would like to see that.
Dennis: Based on the HCDC recommendation?
Kanner: Yeah.
Dennis: Okay.
Vanderhoef: And as I understood it, you also are leveraging about 3 to 1 on dollars
from what comes from our HCDC allocations- our CDBG and home fund
allocations?
Dennis: Yes.
Vanderhoef: Then the state dollars also leverage out at 3 to 1.
Dennis: All of the financing, yes. And the Housing Authority is contributing
$171,202 cash to this project. Thanks.
Lehman: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 58
Boothroy: Doug Boothroy. I am here to represent the Iowa City Housing Authority.
I would like to encourage you to vote for full funding of this particular
project. The Peninsula project, as you know, has been a neighborhood
that has been under your consideration for some time. It has gone through
a community planning process. I think it is an exciting concept. One of
the things that is part of the goals for the neighborhood is mixed housing
and to have this mixed housing integrated. The developer- and this is part
of the previous discussion- designated 10% of the total number of units in
the Peninsula for affordable housing. That is approximately 40 units. And
that is in all phases, a total of 40 units. And there are specifically certain
lots that have been picked out to allow for a spread and integration of
affordable housing throughout so not every lot is available at 10%. It is
only certain lots. And so if the Housing Authority and the Greater Iowa
City Housing Fellowship doesn't take advantage of those lots that are
identified, some are in phase one and some are later on in phase three or
four, as MaryAnn mentioned they are sold and they are no longer at
market price and no longer available to anyone at that discount. So it is as
mentioned in the City Manager's memorandum, an opportunity that can be
lost if we aren't able to take full funding- to get full funding and take full
advantage of the situation. The last thing I would like to say is that I
really am looking forward to the opportunity to partner with the Greater
Iowa City Housing Fellowship. They have a proven track record in
providing affordable housing. Both the Housing Authority and the
Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship do a lot with regard to this issue.
And I hope that we are able to bring this project to fruition. Any
questions?
Kanner: Doug, yeah, I want to get at what that ten percent savings is. Can you tell
me what the total land costs are for those 19 units and then therefore what
the savings is?
Boothroy: I don't have those numbers off the top of my head, no. Pardon me? 360 is
what we are saving? We are paying $360,000.
Kanner: So it is approximately $400,000 and we save about 10% on that?
Boothroy: Right, something in that area.
Kanner: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you Doug.
Boothroy: Thanks.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 59
Oliver: Good evening everyone. I am Deon Oliver with the Salvation Army.
Bottom line is that I would like to ask the City Council to reconsider
allocation towards the Salvation Army for the rehab of our apartment.
The goal of these apartments- we have three apartments- very briefly, we
have three apartments and right now the rent for a two bedroom is $550.
Our goal is to maintain that $550, the rent charge, for at least the next five
years. But in order to do that we need to pay for rehab of these apartments
and so if that is done and if we receive funding from the City we can then
use the money that comes usually from our annual or the rent that comes
in, we can use that to maybe put in a sinking fund for expenses. And that
is really the bottom line. Thank you very much.
O'Donnell: Thank you.
Wiley: My name is Bob Wiley and I am here representing Habitat for Humanity,
that I think is a well known organization to you so I thought I would just
say one or two things and invite any questions that you care to pose. The
price of lots in Iowa City is big problem for us and we really need help in
getting what little land is available in town. Right now the only two lots
that we have available to build on, one is in Oxford and the other is
Marengo. And because Iowa City just has been very difficult for us. We
did receive a grant about four or five years ago to build four houses, which
we have built. And so now we need more land to build more houses in
Iowa City. It is a modest request and we hope that you will support it.
The only other thing I would like to say is that the last time our grant came
in front of the Council there was a question about separation of church and
state and I just want to say that that matter has been very fully decided by
the lawyers in the HUD department and so it is not an issue. If you need
the case law I would be glad to get that.
Karmer: Bob? You had requested $75,000, which was for three lots?
Wiley: Exactly.
Kanner: And it is recommended that you get it for one lot at $25,0007
Wiley: That is correct.
Kanner: And I believe we were told that you had not- you had previous money that
you still have not found a lot for?
Wiley: Oh, no, that is not true. Those houses have all been built.
Kanner: Everything?
Wiley: Yes sir. We cleared up everything.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 6o
Karmer: Okay.
Wiley: We would be very grateful for any support we can get. We would like to
see three but we will gladly take one if that is what is available.
Kanner: Have you considered the Peninsula?
Wiley: To my knowledge we have not.
Kanner: Is that a possibility?
Wiley: It certainly would be. If we could work- I have no idea. It is not my- you
know, I am so unacquainted with it that I really wouldn't be able to
answer you with anything useful. But we will look into if you like.
Lehman: Thank you.
Wiley: You bet.
Lehman: Would anyone else like to speak at the heating?
Burns: My name is Jesse Burns. I am with Bums and Bums. I just wanted to add
a couple comments regarding Foxboro Ridge. We are maximizing as
much private loan financing as we can. It takes a lot of public subsidy to
build quality rental housing that is all accessible all units with an elevator-
and I can go on and on. But it takes a lot of public subsidy to build a
product like that and rent it for $390 a month in the City of Iowa City. We
are only asking for $7800 per unit from City Home Funds. The Peninsula
project is requesting $32,800 per unit in City Home Funds. I think as big
of a priority as the Peninsula project is to the City it certainly as we heard
earlier that there are some other opportunities to get some funding from
some other sources or areas of the City budget. I will just add in closing
that everybody sitting in this room, assuming that you all live in Iowa, is
counted in the tax credit cap that goes to Iowa every year and it is projects
like this that leverage these tax credits to lowa City. Ifwedon'tdoitthey
will go to other communities in the state. So I look at this as a good
opportunity for you to get this so we can all get the benefits of our tax
credits. Thank you.
Karmer: Jesse, this project and other projects with similar financing, you pay full
property taxes?
Bums: Yes we do.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 61
Kanner: And the Housing Fellowship proposal will pay some property taxes with
payments?
Nasby: Steve, I believe in the application that they do have a line for payments in
lieu of tax. And I believe it was budgeted at 5% of the effective gross
income.
Kanner: Roughly how does that play out compared to if it were a for profit?
Nasby: Maybe MaryAnn would have a better idea.
Kanner: Does it compare half as much as property tax or full property tax7
Nasby: Since the building hasn't been built and valued yet I wouldn't know what
the taxes are going to be.
Atkins: You can establish a value. We could prepare an estimate for them. We
can prepare a memo. I think I know what you want but we would have to
do them with what the estimated value of the project would be.
Kanner: But we know though that one is going to be paying 100% of what we
expect for a for profit commercial property and the other one we will have
to (can't hear) some amount?
Arkins: Steve will have to prepare something for that.
Nasby: We will get something.
Lehman: Steve, before you go, the payment though that we receive from the Greater
Iowa City Housing Fellowship is a payment to the City of Iowa City?
Nasby: That is correct.
Lehman: And I think it is probably important to note that when we pay taxes that is
a 40/40/20- the city, cottory, school- and the Greater Iowa City Housing
Fellowship's payment is to the city. The amount probably is comparable
to what we would have received as our 40%. There is no payment for the
school or county.
Atkins: I will calculate that for you.
Lehman: Thank you. Anyone else7
Koester: Hi, my name is Kymbyrly Koester and I am one of the co-owners of
Ruby's Pearl. And I know at the last meeting there was some question
about our business plan and I just want you all to know that I have a copy
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 62
of our business plan for everyone who is here but I don't know the
procedure of how I am supposed to get that to you. I don't know if that- if
I pass it out to you now.
Lehman: That may come up a little later.
Kolster: Okay. All right. Thanks.
Wilbum: She can give us the information now.
Vanderhoef: Sure.
Lehman: (can't hear)
Dilkes: Yeah, you probably want to just take the information.
Kelsey: I am Jeanne Kelsey with Metro Plains Development and I just thought I
would take a few moments to highlight some of the benefits of our
application. I also, I believe that I did write a letter to you as a Council
thanking you for your support for our project again this year. We are
again coming forward to you (can't hear) originally requested $300,000
for this project. Every time that we get a reduction of the funding that we
have requested it puts jeopardy of our project in financial constraints. And
so right now what I believe is to your recommendation is for $250,000 and
we certainly would like to maintain that amount. One thing that I want to
clarify is that the minimum affordability that we have to do on our projects
are only fifteen years. We are electing to do the maximum with the state
and that is 41 years of affordability. At that time we also are- on this
application this year it is a priority for Congress for affordability of
homeownership. And because of it the state has enacted on your tax credit
applications the ability to select homeownership as after the compliance
period of the initial 15 years. And that your residence would be available
for purchasing of their units. And that is what we are looking at selecting
and putting together a plan for the people who would be residents. So our
property not only would end up being affordable for rental, it could end up
being homeownership as well. Some ofthe other things l want to point-
Pfab: Jeanne, can I ask you a question?
Kelsey: Yes?
Pfab: That is going to be written into the contract?
Kelsey: Correct, and that also would be in the land use restrictive covenant as well.
The other thing is that our rents as you see are well below what we could
obtain. And that is one reason why we ask that you support our project for
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 63
the amount that we have requested. Oar rents are well below fair market
rent on an average but they all are going to be tied to that fair market rent
for 41 years again in a land use restrictive covenant. You in your
community have not had the opportunity in the last three years to develop
general or have general affordability of general occupancy housing nor
family housing. And again, I request your support for that. One ofyoar
greatest needs that have been identified in your Step and also as well as
the Govemor's Housing Task Force was affordable housing in the City of
Iowa City. Those are some of the things that came forward in oar
application to you. This also is a mixed- if you look at how we are doing
in fill in this development it is going to be a mixed income but not only
mixed income in the sense that there is ownership of housing around this
neighborhood, it is also a mixture of rental with ownership and then the
possibility like I said after the 15 years for ownership as well.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: You have private funds listed here of $676,000.
Kelsey: For a $4 million project.
Kanner: Okay, so that is about 12% or so. Okay.
Kelsey: We take a different advantage. We are trying also to leverage as much on
the private end of financing with local lenders and things like that. Thank
you.
Eastham: I am Charlie Eastham of the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship.
Since Steve has asked several questions about private as opposed to public
funds I just wanted to point out that the Housing Fellowship and Housing
Authority's proposal is for about $2.1 million in total project costs and
where the project would repay $1.8 million of that over time. Over a 20
year period actually. Or after 20 years $1.8 million of that would be
repaid. So I, you know, when I think about public/private funds I think
you have to take into consideration a lot of factors if you want to make a
decision simply upon it about sources of money. And of the things to me
that would be important is how much of the money is actually going to be
repaid to whatever sources they come from.
Kanner: I would agree with you. I also look at non-profit versus for profit and take
that into consideration.
Welsh: My name is Alaina Welsh and I am with Burns and Bums representing
Foxboro Ridge. There are just a few points that I would like to mention. I
think they might have been overlooked a little bit tonight. One was that
oar project too, like Metro Plains and the Peninsula, is part of an planned
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 64
unit development. It is an in-fill lot in a community with mixed incomes
and mixed housing types. As Bob mentioned, this plan was approved in
1997. There has been some discussion of leveraging of private funds or
private investment in the project. And one thing that Foxboro Ridge
offers that is hard to quantify in terms of dollars is support services to
tenants of Foxboro Ridge. Foxboro Ridge will include an on-site support
service office and support service coordination will be offered for that site
for the full 50-year compliance period. The value is difficult to calculate.
We sat around a few months ago and tried to think about how do we put a
value on this and we talked to some support service providers and what
they would be reimbursed for support service coordination and I think
some of them are as high as $40 some dollars per hour. But over a 50
period we can all agree that will be several hundred thousand dollars in in~
kind or donated services to the project. That should be considered when
you are considering leveraging of funds for this project. Third, Ms.
Champion asked how phase one was renting out and how that was going
and I just wanted to mention that almost weekly I receive calls for tenants
who are now on a waiting list for the second phase that is under
construction now. And I think that we have 8 units remaining at Concord
Terrace with I think 15 applications pending and separate waiting list
already begun for Lexington Place. So I think that it clearly demonstrates
a demand and need in that neighborhood.
Kanner: Alaina, you mentioned the support services. From my reading the support
services might happen after all four units are completed, a full time
manager and a full time other support person.
Welsh: No, support services are guaranteed with Lexington Place, the phase that
is under construction currently and will be completed in the fall. And
Foxboro Ridge will have support services as soon as it begins to lease out.
It is not dependent on all four phases. There will be a higher level of
services available when there is four projects there because there will be
120 units and it will just demand more intense services on a full time
basis. But the services will begin to be offered innnediately.
Karmer: Is this something you will write in the leases with people saying that this is
the service available?
Welsh: The services are voluntary so they don't go into the lease. They are
separate. You don't have to use them. They will be encouraged to use
them but not required by any means so it wouldn't go into their lease.
Kanner: So there is no guarantee that you will keep the services?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 65
Welsh: There are guarantees that the services will be provided. Agreements with
the City Funds, our tax credit plan restrictive covenants will include
clauses for support services for the life of the project. The full 50 years.
Champion: That is great.
Welsh: The support services that we have worked out so far- and this of course
isn't all encompassing or limited to just this- Mercy Home Health has
agreed to hold regular office hours at a minimum of two days a week at
the project site. Successful Living has agreed to hold office hours at the
project site two days a week. And the variety of services that will be
offered to tenants, especially with involvement of Successful Living,
really are unlimited. They will take you grocery shopping if need be.
They are doing support groups. They are doing budget management,
conflict resolution, chore services, medication management. There is a
wide range of that and at Bums and Bums we are donating- we are
promising that we will have services available on site. If for some reason-
Mercy Home Health and Successful Living have entered into agreements-
but it is hard to get anyone to commit for 50 which we are making the
commitment for. So if for some reason ten years down the road they want
to get out we are going to make sure there is someone else there serving
those tenants. And that is a service that we are providing flee of charge,
the continued coordination for that project.
Pfab: Jesse, the future occupants-
Welsh: Me or Jesse?
Pfab: Is that you Jesse?
Welsh: I am Alaina.
Pfab: I am sorry. Okay, Alaina, the point I wanted to ask you was this, are those
services going to be (changed tapes) those services?
Welsh: The tenants that would live in this project, because of their low income
status to qualify for the project, would also qualify for many other
programs that would subsidize service provision such as the Elderly
Waiver Program or Chapter 24, which provides some subsidy for services
to persons with a developmental disability. There are other revenue
streams out there that supplement services and some of the services will be
offered flee of charge like support groups and facilitation of other
services.
Pfab: So the- you mentioned Mercy Outpatient for (can't hear).
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 66
Welsh: Mercy Home Health?
Pfab: Mercy Home Health, is that the name of it? And the other one-
Welsh: Successful Living.
Pfab: Yes, right, will those be available at a charge to the tenants and if so will
they be able to afford it?
Welsh: Some of the services will. Some of will be available to charge. Some will
be available on a sliding fee scale depending on the income of the resident.
But both agencies, along with us, will help tenants qualify for other
programs that would pay for these services for them, like Elderly Waiver
program.
Pfab: Okay.
Welsh: Thank you.
Lehman: The public hearing is closed.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Champion. All in favor? Opposed?
The motion carries. Are we going to discuss this further this evening or is
the discussion going to be- do you wish to discuss this further this evening
or wait until the first of May when we vote?
Dilkes: We are not- are you picking this up?
Chan~pion: (Can't hear).
Karr: We can't hear (can't hear).
Pfab: I don't think it was meant to be heard.
Lehman: It was as a matter of fact. Are we going to discuss this further this evening
or wait until May 1 when we have our vote? It is up to-
O~Donnell: I think we can wait until May 1.
Lehman: Okay, then we will-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 67
Kanner: Can we discuss it on April 30 at our work session?
Lehman: Oh certainly. Yeah. I mean, formal discussion and decision will be made
May 1. Okay. Thank you very much.
ITEM NO. 10. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, BY ENACTING NEW
SECTIONS NUMBERED 4-2-3, ENTITLED "LOCAL REVIEW OF
APPLICATION/INVESTIGATION OF APPLICANT"; SECTION 4-
2-4, ENTITLED "NOTICE AND HEARING"; AND SECTION 4-2-5,
ENTITLED "CIVIL PENALTIES"; REVISING SECTION 4-5-4
ENTITLED "REGULATION OF PERSONS UNDER LEGAL
AGE"; ENACTING A NEW SECTION 4-5-6 ENTITLED "SALES
TO INTOXICATED PERSONS"; AND ENACTING A NEW
SECTION 4-5-7 ENTITLED "LIMITATIONS ON SALES," ALL OF
WHICH PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF ALCOHOL
SALES. (SECOND CONSIDERATION).
Lehman: This is second consideration.
Pfab: Move it.
Lehman: Move what?
Pfab: The resolution. Are we doing this?
O'Donnell: We moved to defer this.
Lehman: We need a motion to defer. We discussed this last night.
O'Donnell: I will move we defer this.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Champion. Discussion? We have some folks here from the
audience who would like to discuss this. It is on the agenda as an item for
vote so we will take public comment.
Karr: Defer until Mayl ?
Lehman: Yeah, the deferral is until May 1.
Coleman: First I want to publicly thank you, thank the Council for your leadership
on the issue of reducing the harmful effects of excessive drinking. You
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 68
have listened to everyone. You have considered many courses of action.
And I really appreciate your moving forward. Tonight I have come to
express my support for the ordinances that are under consideration.
However, I want to emphasis that I support the idea of requiring that bars
admit only people who are 21 years old or older, the legal age of alcohol
consumption. This is a tried and tree method of reducing problems
associated with alcohol. Some have raised concerns that underage
drinkers will go to house parties instead. However, Ames has a 21 only
bar ordinance and they have not had a problem with house parties. Now,
why do I support the ordinances that are under consideration? First, I
believe we have come a long way in our discussion of the problem. But it
is now time to take some concrete action. We may not be quite ready to
adopt a 21 only ordinance but let' s not throw out the efforts that have gone
into crafting the proposed ordinances. In particular I urge you to retain the
civil penalties that you have proposed. Downtown bar owners have had
several years to take steps to correct the problems with excessive and
underage drinking and nothing has happened. Imposing civil penalties
will give bar owners a strong incentive to follow the law on serving
underage and intoxicated patrons. I understand that there is some
concerns about the portions of the ordinance relating to price specials and
out of sight sales. The kinds of price specials we see advertised everyday
in the Daily Iowan clearly encourage drinking to get drunk. I believe we
can prohibit them without infringing on the rights of adults to drink
responsibly. It appears to me that the sticking point now seems to be out
of sight sales of people of legal age that want to buy a round of drinks for
friends. That issue may merit further consideration. But I urge you to
separate it from the civil penalties portion of the proposed ordinance. A
good ordinance implemented today is a lot better than a perfect ordinance
that never gets into place. But finally let me end on a positive note. We
have many reasons to be optimistic here in Iowa City. We are seeing
progress on many fronts. Planet X is relocating to the Old Capitol Town
Center. The Englert will eventually offer other entertainment, another
venue, that doesn't emphasize alcohol sales. These efforts respond
directly to student's concerns about having alternatives to the bar scene. I
believe that your deliberations have contributed to the interests of those
people in developing the venues. And I thank you very much for that. So
I just wanted to express my support to you and thank you for everything
that you have done. Thank you.
Karr: Excuse me, for the record would you mind stating your name please?
Coleman: I am sorry, I am Mary Sue Coleman, the University of Iowa.
Wilburn: President Coleman, I just wanted to thank you for coming down and
expressing your comments tonight. When we first started- when we had
momentum going on the proposed set of ordinances on of the things that I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 69
was looking at is identifying different roles that we all play. And I look at
this set of ordinances as a role that Council can play. I thank you and
acknowledge you and Phil Jones for some of the effort that you have made
to look at what the University can do. Part of what we have been looking
here in this ordinance is trying to hold the liquor license holders
accountable for the product that they are dispensing and hope that they
will also step forward in addition to individuals and community members
and so again thanks.
Champion: And I appreciate your coming too although you know, by now you
probably know that I don't support this ordinance, but the parts of it that I
do support are the civil penalties and making the bar owners responsible
for the product they serve. So hopefully we can separate those parts that I
support from the parts that I don't.
Pfab: I would like to also thank you for coming in and I like the way you sorted
out the things that you strongly supported because I think that is where the
effect of this ordinance will work out. Thanks.
Lehman: Mary Sue, thanks again. I really feel that it is important to the folks in this
community as well as the state of Iowa to know the administration's
position on this and I applaud you for coming down here. You certainly
have made a statement.
Coleman: I am glad to be here.
Lehman: Thank you very much.
Marc Fortney: People are finally nodding so it must be my time. My name is Marc
Fortney. I am with Brothers Bar and Grill. You have not seen nor heard
of us in the papers or (can't hear) this committee. This is my brother Eric,
and that is it for the brothers. We have locations in Wisconsin, Minnesota,
of course Iowa here, and Illinois. The things I would like to speak with
and to you tonight are- I will be brief because I know it is late- but I have
pretty big perspective on the whole thing and fortunately it is because I am
in a multi-state area with locations. Your problem is not unique. It is not
your problem. It is a social problem, so let's start there. I sit on a
community task force- the alcohol community task force- in my home
town. I have for four years. My brother sits on an RWJ committee with
the University of Wisconsin at Madison. We are interactive. I have
spoken before the DOT, the Department of Transportation for the state of
Wisconsin, talking about, again underage drinking. A couple of things,
the reason we are here is because we spent most of the day traveling to get
here and finally to read in the paper that your work session lead in a
different direction. So we thought we would stick around and at least give
our input to the City Attorney and hopefully it will help. First off, on your
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 7o
work session last night we would like to obviously applaud you. I'll
address the portion of the specials of it- the special portion of your law and
amendment- by banning specials that is not curtailing underage drinking
by any means. Simply by banning specials what it does is drive the
everyday price of an alcoholic beverage to a new low. So the neighbor
next door sets his everyday price at 75 cents.
Lehman: You know, we have taken that out. You know that?
Fortney: I understand that.
Lehman: Okay.
Fortney: I was just applauding and then I was just repeating why that it was a good
idea. I am sorry.
Lehman: Go ahead.
Fortney: That would drive the everyday price. The next person could set his price
lower at 65 cents, 55 cents, so again, I applaud you on that. Some things
that we have seen that work that I think notes could be taken on this is
absolute sobriety. I have suggested before that absolute sobriety from the
bar owners, the managers, the assistant managers, supervisors and servers.
How many times have we seen in the Midwest and nationwide that the
server is more intoxicated than the actual customer? Why not pass a law
that is absolute sobriety for a person working in our industry? Illinois has
done it. I applaud Illinois. What about applying wristband technology? If
you are going to remain 19, that is great. Again, you forced us to do a
better job. We are- it is 19 to get in our place with a cover charge and 21
to get an alcoholic beverage. The last 6 weeks there was 100- I lost count-
it was either 113 or 133 fake falsified Ids that have come to our front
doors. We have collected these in the last 6 weeks just to make a point. I
will turn these over to the City Attomey's office. We opened March 16 of
last year on the Ped Mall to a nice addition, which you folks helped us do.
Here is 850 Ids that have been photo copied that have been turned into the
police department over the last year to third shift officers and other people.
Again, this is what we do curtailing underage drinking. Wristbanding- an
actual expense to us, it is very expensive- 5000 wristbands will cost you
$375. You can burn through those in a couple of weeks. But you identify
the 21 year olds with a wristband. So when they come to get served the
server obviously knows that they are 21 and not 19. It makes the servers
check and recheck. Annual training- whether you know it or not you have
annual training by your police department and we participate in that two
times per year mandatory for every person on our staff to go through that
training. Company wide we have 405 employees. There is an
independent company out of Minneapolis called Lost Control Services and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 71
they travel and train our people multiple times throughout the year.
Turnover with employees- you must continue to do that. The last thing is,
you know, proper training at the front door. Having an ID booklet for
multi-states that is up to date and current to identify these and turn these
over and then somehow take action. In the state of Wisconsin the
Department of Transportation takes action. They get these Ids- the police
department gets them and mails them to DOT and when the student or
whoever it might be, anybody, goes in to get a second ID it is on the
computer. And there it is and they go huh, your ID was taken away, such
and such a municipality. Why? Well, you are not going to get yours for 6
months. And then the- I am sorry.
Pfab: Is that something that is workable in Iowa too?
Fortney: I am not sure how, again, Iowa law works. I am just-
Pfab: But you say it is working in Wisconsin?
Fortney: In Wisconsin.
O~DonnelI: Why do you think there are so many underage drinkers trying to get into
your establishment?
Formey: The problem is that-
O'Dormell: Do you have a fairly good special?
Fortney: Pardon me?
O'Donnell: Do you have a fairly good special?
Fortney: You need to remain competitive in the marketplace.
O'Donnell: I understand that fully. But I would assume that- did you have like an all
you can drink for $5?
Fortney: Absolutely.
O'Donnell: Then I think all these fake Ids are clearly explained because I believe that
that would attract people.
Forthey: A special attraction- you know, it is like a lost liter at a grocery store. It
attracts you to go in and buy a 12 pack of Diet Coke for $1 .99-
O'Donnell: But there is a different in drinking a gallon of milk and 12 beers.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 72
Fortney: The difference is that you have not Mr. O'Donnell came down to Brothers
on a Thursday night we did the all you care to drink and actually
witnessed what was going on there. What was going on was that not
everyone partakes in the special. You've got the misconception that it was
the binge and purge session going on. At any establishment, as the Mayor
said to me, you (can't hear).
O'Dormell: (Can't hear) just you.
Fortney: Oh, no, Mr. Mayor said when we spoke a few weeks ago that we were not
the first but we were definitely the last. And I agreed with him. And so
you are right. But the fact is that no, if you would have come down and
witnessed it- you know, people are walking around there and they are
taking sips of their beer. It is beer- it is not liquor. It is not from 9 until
10. It was an all night thing. In all fairness, before this even got going in
a different direction the advertising and all of that stuff stopped.
Lehman: We are not here to discuss that.
O'Donnell: It is after the question.
Fortney: Sure.
Champion: In your communities where you have other bars what is the age for people
to get in?
Fortney: In Wisconsin it is 21, Minnesota is 21, Iowa is 19-21, and Illinois is a 19-
21. Have you seen the laws on the Illinois stuff?. Some of the stuff there?
They have got, again, some basic policies on camera systems that we have
employed at all of our locations, writstbanding- again, it goes right back to
it.
Kanner: Marc? I have been in your bar a couple of times, once on a weekend
night. and this was about 6 or 8 months ago. Maybe you have changed
procedures but I did not see any way to control what was going out and
who was getting what. There was just sort of chaos. It was so crowded
and there were so few servers. There was no checking of anything.
Lehman: I don't think we are here to discuss the operation of your bar.
Champion: No.
Kanner: I have a question and I think this is in regards to the ordinance because it
was brought in regards to the ordinance. My question is have you changed
any procedures or is it the same procedure that you have had in the past?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 73
Fortney: Every single person gets carded when you walk in the front door. When
you were carded you are obviously over 35 years old. I don't say that in
an insult but you are 35 years old or older and you are not being-
Kanner: I am not talking about carding me. I know it is obvious with me. I am
saying-
Fortney: Every single person gets carded every single time when they walk in.
They get a hand stamp on there. We have changed over to wristbands in
the last 9 months because wristbands are a better way to do things. The
hand stamp was for a 21-year-old. So the person would come in and have
to show the hand stamp in order to get served. One hand stamp per one
serve. We have never had a multi get up and get three beers with one
person.
Lehman: Again Marc, we really aren't talking about your bar.
Fortney: I understand that.
Lehman: And I understand, but we are talking about the ordinance and obviously a
lot of things affect the ordinances. I think your experiences in the other
states is helpful and I appreciate your coming.
Fortney: Those are just some of the things. And I can't be here- I apologize- we
can't be here on Wednesday and Thursday.
Lehman: But Eleanor I think I saw you talking to her during break and you have
certainly given her some ideas.
Fortney: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Dilkes: I just- just to clarify the meeting that we are having with the bar owners on
Thursday is specific to the specials restrictions.
Lehman: Okay.
Pfab: I think you should pass those around so we can examine them.
Karmer: Irvin, you can't get yours out of there.
Eric Fortney: My name is Eric Fortney and I am with Brothers Bar and Grill as well.
One thing I wanted also to say was I wanted to applaud the President of
the University for standing here and stepping up and urging this Council to
change the drinking age accessible to Iowa City bars to 21 years old. And
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 74
as a bar owner it is an area that it is cautiously ventured into but we have
had multiple conversations as thd Mayor can certainly attest to before we
even opened Brothers here in Iowa City that it would certainly make life a
lot easier for us as owners and as owner operators to change the drinking
age accessibility issue to get on premise 21 years old. I don't think you
are going to hear that from any other owner on the Ped Mall. I think the
owners that stand on the Ped Mall before you and wave their fists and beat
their chests and tell you that it will be on your conscience when an
individual dies at a house party or something along those lines is a bit of
smoke and mirrors. I think the President of the University stood here and
explained to you that Ames Chief of Police has stated pretty clearly that
there has been no significant increase in these on campus parties once the
drinking age has gone 21 to access these bars. I guess to answer Mr.
Pfab's question on why- I am sorry- Mr. O'Donnell's question on why we
have these Ids and why we are presenting them to the City Attorney
tonight is because I will tell you what one of the few bars- one of the only
bars in the Ped Mall in the University of Iowa that confiscates Ids. Any
one- any officer on third shift will tell you they were flabbergasted the
first week that we opened and actually turned in a stack of lds to the City
Police department. They couldn't believe it. It was- this doesn't ever
happen. What are you doing?
O'Donnell: It is a good practice.
Fortney: That is where that is coming from. It is not because of some crazy special
or something else. It is because of the training we do. It is because of the
due diligence that we do at our front door in making sure that we are
trying to curtail things. Now, maybe Mr. Kanner you were inside the bar
certainly on a particularly busy night and maybe it was difficult to
ascertain who our employees were and who they weren't.
Lehman: We really aren't here to discuss your bar.
Fortney: I understand that it is just- you know, we are also one of the only bars that
actually removes individuals instantaneously on the premise for the
balance of the evening if we catch them drinking underage on premise.
But I implore you by all means make our lives certainly a lot easier by
changing this to 21.
Kanner: That is not what (can't hear).
Fortney: It doesn't make things very popular among the student body.
Kanner: That is not what I am in favor of.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 75
Fortney: But the reality is if you are going to put 18, 19, and 20 year olds in close
proximity to alcohol and then stand here and say that we should do
something about the underage consumption of alcohol in Iowa City and
you are not going to do that as Council members then it is a little naive to
stand here and expect the bar owners that we are going to be able to do
that. We would have to staff one security person for about every five
patrons inside the establishment. Do you agree or disagree?
Lehman: There are bars who don't allow people under 21 in them in Iowa City.
Fortney: And unfortunately what happens with that- and it is a good question, it is a
question we certainly debate- you know, hey, why don't we just simply go
217 Because the problem that we have with that is one individual in the
group of 5 walking up to the front door will be 20 years old and then the
group of 5 customers walk away from the door because you are unwilling
to let their one roommate in that is 20. When in Rome do as the Romans.
And so why should we sacrifice the four legal individuals that are able to
come in at 21 years old, let them walk next door to Vito's? And now I
have lost legitimate customers standing there. If the drinking age is 21
across the board we are not faced with that.
Lehman: Very good.
Fortney: Thank you.
Kanner: Emie, I guess one of the problems I have with doing away with the price
specials is I-
Lehman: We are not going to discuss it. We are going to discuss that when we get
back to a work session.
Kanner: This is a discussion on the deferral and I perhaps am not in agreement with
your position on the deferral.
Lehman: We have a motion to defer and we are discussing that. Go ahead.
Kanner: Right. I think that the price special actually would do the opposite of what
was presented by this bar owner. I think the price special is something
that allows and encourages people of all ages and access of drinking to
come in and I think that is the thing we should implement is a price special
as one of the key components of- eliminating price specials as one of the
key components for trying to get a small handle on some of the problems.
Pfab: Steve, I think I would disagree with you in the fact that it is- I don't think
that Solomon in all of his wisdom could sort that one out.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 76
Lehman: But we also discussed this last night. Four people last night indicated that
they were willing to remove that from the ordinance. Do we still have
four people who would like to do that? Yes, we do. All right. Any other
discussion on the motion to defer? All in favor? Opposed? Motion
can'ies.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Pfab to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed?
Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 77
ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CAPTAIN
IRISH PARKWAY (PHASE II) AND FIRST AVENUE
EXTENSION.
Lehman: The Engineer's estimate was $2,490,378. We got a multitude of bids.
The lowest bid was $1,814,620 from TAB Construction Company from
Bettendorf. Public Works recommends the awarding of that project to
TAB Construction.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption of the resolution.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Vanderhoef: This is almost a half a million dollars under our engineer' s estimate.
O'Donnell: Great savings.
Vanderhoef: Good bid.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 78
ITEM NO. 13. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MORMON TREK BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENT- MELROSE
AVENUE TO THE IOWA INTERSTATE RAILROAD BRIDGE
PROJECT, STP-U-3715(618)--70-52.
Pfab: So moved.
Lehman: The engineer's estimate was $3,465,000. Low bid out of three was
$2,933,175.08 from Streb Construction. DOT has recommended the
awarding of this project to Streb Construction Company of Iowa City.
Public Works and Engineering concurs.
Champion: Move it.
Lehman: Moved by Champion.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Second by Vanderhoef. Discussion?
Vanderhoef: Here again another really good bid.
Champion: A while back we had bad bids and now we are getting good bids. We are
saving a lot of money.
Lehman: They are taking turns. Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting in the
negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 79
ITEM NO. 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
SOUTH SYCAMORE REGIONAL GREENSPACE AND STORM
WATER PROJECT.
Wilbum: So moved.
Lehman: Engineer's estimate $1,500,000. Low bid $1,121,738.50 from DeLong-
Keith Construction in Washington, Iowa. Public Works recommends
awarding the contract to DeLong-Keith. Moved by Wilburn.
O'Dormell: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Vanderhoef: Another great one.
Lehman: I was going to say, say it again!
Vanderhoef: Okay, what I want to say though is on these three bids we are basically at
$1.8 million below estimated by our engineers.
Champion: Is that also below what we estimated they would cost? I mean, where we
put them in the C1]?? So we really saved that much money?
Atkins: You truly do save. Yes.
Vanderhoef: I mean, we can do another project.
Lehman: No we can't. you've got that wrong.
Vanderhoef: The engineers are laughing too, like no more projects!
Pfab: As long as everyone is making comments, I am going to make a comment
that is why I voted against the skywalk. I wanted that to be re-bid because
I thought the market was changing.
Lehman: I see. Thank you Irvin. Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 8o
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE IOWA CITY
ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS, IAFF,
AFL-CIO, LOCAL #610, TO BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2001,
THROUGH JUNE 30, 2003.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion7
Kanner: Dale, I had some questions for you on this.
Helling: Okay.
Kanner: In 21 in the agreement, it is on page 333 of our packet, could you explain
the annual December $700 payments?
Helling: That is the outgrowth of what used to be I think common on fire contracts,
a food allowance. It was to help them pay for the food that they bought
and prepared at the fire station. The evolution of that is that in some
contracts it is turned into something else, an annual allowance rather than
calling it a food allowance. But it is just a payment once a year.
Kanner: And they pay for their own food in the firehouse7
Helling: Or to bring it in or whatever.
Kanner: Okay. But we don't supply-
Helling: The City does not provide groceries.
Kanner: We don't buy groceries.
Helling: Right.
Kanner: And did the medical costs go up for the city and did it go up for the
employees7
Helling: The medical insurance you mean?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 81
Kanner: Yeah.
Helling: It did not go up for the employees. We are still in the process of figuring
out what the final cost will be this year for our insurance premiums.
Kanner: Do you have a rough estimate of what it might go up? Is it in the
neighborhood of 50%?
Atkins: No.
Helling: Not that high.
Atkins: When we budgeted it I think it was closer to 15%. We think we are going
to be a little short because most folks are taking a much bigger hit. Our
reserve position is a little bit better and we are going to take advantage of
that. But I think we are looking at 12-15% without too much trouble.
Kanner: That is it.
Lehman: Further discussion? Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 82
ITEM NO. 20. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Lehman: Irvin? Connie?
Champion: I forgot. I forgot what I was going to say.
Lehman: I see, Mike?
O'Donnell: Nothing tonight Mr. Mayor.
Wilbum: Nothing tonight.
Lehman: Steven?
Kanner: I had a few things. One, Steve, thank you for the Language Line. We got
notice of that where people now can talk and call in to the City and if they
don't speak English we have a service now where we will have any
language around the world translated.
Atkins: He gets credit.
Kanner: Thank you Dale for that. I think that is especially appropriate when we
are talking about bringing in different types of people into the state of
Iowa. And I think we are showing leadership in that area and I think that
is a great thing to have. Thank you for that. And also thank you for the
letter about economic development to the county that was sent about how
we would like to see economic development happen in this city and if it
doesn't happen in the city it happens in prescribed places that are agreed
upon. And so that was the letter that you sent. Thank you for that. I did
want to ask- we had- I just saw the notice, I didn't know about this, the
environmental assessment for the planned parking ramp on Burlington.
The multi-modal center. If there were small numbers of people there was-
I didn't see it publicized and we had a lot going on in Council so I don't
how many people had the opportunity to go to that and I would ask that
we consider having another session for the environmental assessment
hearing. If we find that only one or two people came.
Atkins: I assume that has been submitted to the feds by now but I will find out for
you.
Karmer: Wasn't tonight the meeting?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 83
Atkins: I couldn't tell you. (Can't hear)
Dilkes: I think there was a public meeting that the reds require. I should note that
any delay in that process further delays property acquisition and it is really
essential that we start that process as soon as possible.
Champion: We are not going to delay it.
Kanner: I would object to having it tonight and without great publicity. And I
think it would behoove us to do that again if we find only one or two
people did appear for that.
Atkins: I will find out.
Kanner: I think there is interest in the community about that. And speaking of that-
Champion: But now, are there enough of us that warrant even finding out that
information. I have a real problem with one Council Member making
requests that are going to influence the decision we have already made.
Atkins: I understood Steven's request to say how many people came to the
meeting and I would report that to you.
Lehman: Very good.
Atkins: And then what you decide beyond that is up to you all.
Kanner: I don~t think any policy is being made Connie.
Champion: Okay, I am sorry, I am crabby.
Kanner: I will second that.
Lehman: Roll call.
Champion: I asked for that.
O'Donnell: You are living on the edge.
Kanner: That is why I am out here.
Vanderhoef: So you can run faster.
Kanner: The final thing is we are having the Transportation Conference with a lot
of local folks a week from Friday and Saturday at the Sheraton April 27
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 84
and 28. And we encourage and invite the community to take part in that.
Thank you.
Lehman: Okay, I have got a couple of things. First of all, there is a property tax
information meeting tomorrow night at the Johnson County
Administration Building at 7:00. The City Assessor who is an employee
of the School District, the County and the City will be there along with
someone from Vanguard who did the appraisals. And I will be there to
moderate that meeting. And we have already received I think 40-some
questions. There will be written questions accepted. There will not be a
time for public input other than there will be paper there for people to
write questions and give those questions to the staff folks to answer.
O'Donnell: (can't hear).
Lehman: Yeah, regarding the Council. Are there Council people who expect to
attend that meeting tomorrow night?
O'Donnell: I will be.
Lehman: I will be there but there cannot be more than three of us because I will be
presiding and that will-
Pfab: I would say the fourth person gets told to go home.
Lehman: That is what will happen.
Kanner: I am going to try to make the Police Citizen's Review Board.
Vanderhoef: Okay, who else is going to go to that one?
Pfab: To which one?
Vanderhoef: PCRB tomorrow night.
Pfab: I am going to try to make that one.
Vanderhoef: Likewise. So that is three.
Lehman: If a fourth one shows up one of you will have to recluse yourself because
that would make it inappropriate. We received a letter some time ago
from the folks- or a person on Highland Avenue and I think there was
some support from the neighborhood after we discussed the Kirkwood
stoplights for which there was no support about installation of a stop sign
on Highland. And that person I believe- the letter was addressed to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.
April 17, 2001 Page 85
Council. I do not believe it was addressed to Jeff but I think we probably
need to get-
Atkins: Mr. Reese?
Lehman: Yes, as a matter of fact. And I think that is an issue that the neighbors
might like to address and if we could get a memo from Jeff on it?
Atkins: Sure, I will follow up on it.
Lehman: Okay, there is also a meeting of the Johnson County Soil and Water
Conservation District at Kent Park on the 25th. I cannot go to that. If
someone from the Council would like to go it could be an interesting
meeting.
Vanderhoef: That is during the transportation I believe.
Lehman: Wednesday the 25th from 2:30 to 4:30. If anybody wants to go I have the
information. That is all I have.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of April 17, 2001.