Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-04-30 Transcription April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 1 April 30, 2001 Special Work Session 6:30 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Donnell, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Pfab, Kanner Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Dilkes, Franklin, Nasby, O'Malley, Schoon, Davidson, Matthews, Boothroy TAPES: 01-47 BOTH SIDES; 01-48 BOTH SIDES Lehman/It's a work session, we have an executive session to go into first, Marian. Request for Addition to Consent Calendar Marian Karr/We have a request from an applicant to add a liquor license to the agenda, Ryan would you like to step to the podium identify yourself and your establishment. Again as we customarily do if they've missed the deadline for an agenda prep. they come before you and ask. Ryan state your name and your establishment. Ryan Rooney/My name is Ryan Rooney, I live at 230 Fairchild here in Iowa City and we're trying to apply for a liquor license at 118 South Dubuque. The name of the place would be "Etc." it's in the alley, just off the alley located next to Burger King. Kanner/Who' s the owner of that license? Rooney/Herbert Pohl. Lehman/Okay and we want that added. Karr/Mr. Mayor the application is not in order and it's my recommendation that it not be added late to the agenda. Champion/Oh okay. Karr/The application does not, there is a requirement to have the County Attorney and Sheriff sign and those requirements have not been met and Mr. Rooney may wish to. Rooney/Actually the only signature that we don't have is the County Sheriff and we don't have the County Sheriff because I've taken it to him several times and he's refused to sign it because of a side note that was written by the County Attorney about a memo that he wanted to add to the application and it said memo or see This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 2 attachment and there is no memo, there is no attachment and he said he wanted to give a statement at the meeting on Tuesday but there is no memo and we've explained that to him again and again and the City Clerk realizes there is no memo and so he's refusing to sign it because of that. Dilkes/Can I just give you my understanding of this? Lehman/Yes. Dilkes/If you look at the application there' s a place for each individual who needs to sign off to either check approved, denied, or in this place Pat White has checked neither and put an X and said see separate memorandum. It's my understanding that that memo was going to be forthcoming before 5:00 today because he knew that in accordance with our normal procedure I believe that 5:00 was the deadline to get things added. Mr. Rooney's right we don't. Rooney/He did not do that and we met with him on Thursday. Lehman/Well do we need that signature in order to act on it? Champion/Yes. Dilkes/Yes. Lehman/So there' s no point in putting it on the agenda if we don't have the signature. Dilkes/I think it' s, what' s there, there' s a signature but it's meaningless because it's not approved denied and there' s no separate memo attached and so you will have no, based on what you have now you will not have the input from the County Attorney. You may have it tomorrow as Mr. Rooney expresses and you would have the discretion to add it to the agenda but it would contrary to your normal practice which is to have a complete application before you, before you notice it. Rooney/And I understand that it would be contrary to your normal practice but at the same time there are reasons that he's refusing to sign off on it and if you wanted to deny every person a liquor license you can just refuse to sign it. All they had to put was deny and put their reasons, they've had tons of time to do it, they're purposely dragging their feet and he just refused to sign it so it wouldn't go through. Champion/Well what about. Rooney/And so that' s why I would ask for an exception and if he wants to put his reasons for not agreeing with or not accepting our application that' s fine but he' s just refused to sign it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 3 Champion/A lot of times we do Planning & Zoning matters when things aren't complete and they're completed by the time the meeting by the time we vote on them. We could put this on the agenda and the stipulation that we won't vote on it if it's not complete. Dilkes/Again I think you have that discretion, I think if you do make that decision you need to understand that' s contrary to normal practice and I think it does set up, although I understand perhaps there are different circumstances here but it does set up a difficult position because we don't have any procedure then for when we do put a liquor license application on the agenda. Do we, is two signatures enough to get it on the agenda? We would need some direction from you if we were going to change that the way we deal with it. Rooney/I had this the entire packet filled out completely with the two checks, everything was signed off with the exception of Pat White, the Chief of Police, and the County Sheriff. They knew about this last week, we agreed to have a meeting on Thursday where we'd discuss it, we talked about what kind of place this bar would be. This is not going to be another you know 18 year old bar people. Lehman/Well what its going to be or what it isn't going to be is irrelevant. Rooney/Well what I'm saying is we had the meeting with Pat White and when I talked to the Chief and the Sheriff I was told by both of them that they wouldn't sign off on it until Pat White had, we talked to Pat White, we spoke to him, he signed off on it, and then the Chief of Police signed off on it and the Sheriff is still refused to. Vanderhoef/No he hasn't signed off on it as long as he has not checked whether approved or disapproved. Rooney/Right he wouldn't put disapproved or approved he just simply refused to sign. Vanderhoef/So it's not signed off. Rooney/Correct. Kanner/I tell you I would be agreeable to discussing an application that didn't have all the facts if it was done in a timely fashion but with not having done that I think we ought to wait for the next council meeting and if he doesn't get the required sign off at that time we can, I would say we should consider it and discuss it. Lehman/Well there' s too much we don't know about. Dilkes/There is some possibility I believe that you may be scheduling special meetings. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 4 Lehman/We could do it then. Dilkes/In the next few days and maybe that' s a possibility. Rooney/I mean I feel like that this is exactly what they had in mind to happen and they got their point across by refusing to sign it, it's now not going to get in here, if we can't get a liquor license and actually say what' s going on here and let them explain to you why they've dragged their feet on this and refused to sign I think that you guys should know why they refused to sign it. Lehman/I agree. Rooney/And if I don't get open by graduation I mean your talking about $40,000 in that two weeks (can't hear). Lehman/I don't doubt that but that building has been empty for six or seven months and I don't see where 3 or 4 days is a big deal. Rooney/If you don't make graduation week. Lehman/I know that but that building has been empty for how long? Rooney/Again it was Blimpie's before and we took it over I don't know. Lehman/I know that, well you ought to know. Rooney/We've been working on, our construction has been four months. Dilkes/I really think you have a right to make your case about getting in on the agenda but we can't start talking substitive stuff here we have. Lehman/Well do we have four people who want to put it on the agenda? Dilkes/You know I think you have the discretion to add it to the agenda, Mr. Rooney has some compelling reasons, you just need to decide if your going to put it onto the agenda contrary to your normal policy or not. Lehman/Okay. Vanderhoef/I'm not in favor of it. Pfab/Put it on. Lehman/Okay we've got one to put it on. It isn't going to go on however. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 5 Rooney/I'm just asking that they come in and explain their reasons if he would have just simply put it on paper like he said he would have then we would have these all these signatures. This was prepared ready, all the checks were done, the dram shop insurance, everything since last Tuesday and his refusing to give the memorandum to the police and Sheriff is what' s cost us, I just ask that he explain to you his reasons for denying us our liquor license when I thought it was your decision to grant or deny liquor licenses. Lehman/Well we may very well have, you may have an opportunity within the few days for a special meeting which we will take care of as long as we have it signed off. Pfab/Ernie I was going to suggest to you that if we put it on there (can't hear). Lehman/I realize that and I think Eleanor made that clear. Vanderhoef/But that' s contrary. Lehman/But there's still not. Pfab/I mean but ifthere's a reason and we don't know what it is and he doesn't know what it is, you say you ask and. Rooney/He simply, he had written down that he was going to put his concerns in writing, he never did and so he told I believe the City Attorney that he was going to do that by 5:00 and he never did. Dilkes/Let me state again there is a place for approved, there is a place a for denied, neither of those are checked, Pat White has checked see separate memo. Pfab/Okay. Dilkes/And I believe that we communicated to him that in order to get it, that our normal practice would be that we would need to have that by 5:00 today to put it on the agenda but again you have the discretion to add it if you see fit but I think you need to make that decision. Vanderhoef/We can also add it tomorrow if we choose to. Pfab/Ahead of time. Rooney/It has to be 24 hours. Dilkes/We have to have 24 hours Dee we can't just decide tomorrow whether to deal with it, that' s the whole issue, if you want to have the, if you want to have the ability to discuss it tomorrow you have to tell us now so that we can notice it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 6 Pfab/But it also we. Vanderhoef/We can wait until later. Pfab/Can't we decide not to do anything even though it's on the agenda? Lehman/Yes you can do that. Pfab/I would suggest let' s leave the option open and I would suggest that we agree to put it on the agenda what we do with it after that you know that' s. O'Donnell/Did we have three or four agree not to do that? Lehman/Yea I think we had six not to so it won't be on the agenda tomorrow. Rooney/I don't know if you've taken. Kanner/(Can't hear) during public discussion but Ryan your welcome to come during public discussion tomorrow and you can ask the County Attorney if he'd like to come for the public discussion and give some of his reasons why he didn't check off (can't hear) agree or disagree with that. Rooney/One five second last plea I guess. Is there any way that you would be willing to consider to put it on the agenda and not discuss it or take it off tomorrow if in that time because our lawyers are in Denver right now that we can't get Pat White in communication wit h the Sheriff and the Sheriff signs off whether he approves or disapproves, if we could have that signature by tomorrow would it be acceptable for you then to discuss? Lehman/I think. Champion/Could you relax a little bit because we are, there is a very strong possibility of a special meeting this week yet and so it might not be hopeless. Rooney/I know but it is you know. Wilburn/Can I ask one question? Lehman/Yes. Wilburn/You mentioned that there were several, I don't remember how many signature that you've been trying to get here, at what point, I mean how long before today did you realize that the stuff with Pat White before but how long did you not have all the signatures? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 7 Rooney/Last Tuesday, we've been trying since last Tuesday. Wilburn/Okay. Rooney/At that point so approximately a week and I think all together on that sheet there's probably, I don't know it requires a dozen signatures. Karr/Oh no, no, no, no, there's four city officials and two county. Rooney/But how many lines for signatures to be approved. Karr/Well some of them are duped, some of the same people signing for the City and the County so there' s 12 but there' s two dupes in there Ryan so. Wilburn/How long did you have the application, how long did you start getting this filled out? Rooney/We put it together so that we'd have it done by the last Tuesday. I understand we could have done this three weeks ago, a month ago, we were under the impression that when we had our meeting scheduled last week with Pat White that the concerns would all come out, we'd come to an agreement and he would sign off on it then which he did he just didn't put this attachment that he said he was going to for the Chief and the Sheriff. Wilburn/But when did you pick up the application for the liquor license, how long ago? Rooney/Probably a month ago. Wilburn/All right. Lehman/Marian if we schedule a special meeting will you call this gentleman immediately and let him know because that can be placed on the agenda for a special meeting. Karr/Sure Ryan I'll keep you posted or you can touch base with me either way. Lehman/Thank you, you bet. Special meeting the Iowa City Council April 30, 2001 come to order, roll call. (Tape turned off at 6:45 PM and gone into Executive Session, returned to open session work session 7:26 PM) Planninl~ & Zoninl~ Karin Franklin/We may or may not have our audiovisual aides. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 8 Lehman/It looks like we've got them. Franklin/Oh we do. Okay the first two items are setting public hearings May 15. ITEM A. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 15 ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM P, PUBLIC TO CB-10, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT FOR APPROXIMATELY 0.76 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF IOWA AVENUE BETWEEN LINN AND GILBERT STREETS (REZ01-00005) ITEM B. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 15, 2001 ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (ARTICLE e, COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS ZONES) TO ALLOW PUBLIC, MUNICIPAL PARKING FACILITIES AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CB-10) AND CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB-5) ZONES. Franklin/And the first item is to rezone property from P to CB-10 and the second item is to amend the CB-10 and CB-5 zones to allow public municipal parking facilities. Basically what this is to do is to deal with the issue of zoning Tower Place. Tower Place has privately owned property within it as well as the public parking facility on the same piece of land and we needed to resolve how to exactly zone this property and this is the way we have chosen to do it. Deeming it to be the less complicated. Lehman/Okay. Pfab/I have a question, your talking, do you have the pointer there? Franklin/We're not on this yet. Lehman/Tower Place downtown. Pfab/That's what I was going to say. Franklin/I do need a pointer though. ITEM C. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY PLAN FOR WALNUT RIDGE PARTS 8, 9, AND 10, AN APPROXIMATE 35.15 ACRE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON KENNEDY PARKWAY. (REZ01-0003 ) Franklin/The next item is a public hearing on an ordinance amending the sensitive areas overlay plan for Walnut Ridge Parts 8, 9, 10. I'm sure there' s a way to turn this around but I don't know how to do it so if you'll just kind of look at it sideways. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 9 Lehman/Looks okay. Pfab/Looks fine. Champion/I thought it was fine. Franklin/This is Kennedy Parkway and this is noah at this end of it, part 9, 10 and 8 are in this section of Walnut Ridge. Basically the issue here was to amend the tree conservation area in Part 10 and the recommendation of the staff to the Planning & Zoning Commission had been denial based on the clause in the code which indicates that the city needs to determine that because of site constraints or public improvements, there is a reason to amend the conservation area for trees and the buffer area. At the time we brought it to the Planning & Zoning Commission it was not evident to us that there were such site constraints that the properties could be built upon with the existing conservation easement and the buffer area. At the Planning & Zoning Commission the developer made the argument to the Commission based on a 40 foot setback that evidently is the norm within this development project and the size of the houses in this development project that houses comparable to what are already at in Walnut Ridge that could not be built without an amendment to the conservation easement and buffer area. The Planning & Zoning Commission did recommend by a vote of 6-1 that this sensitive areas ordinance plan be amended to diminish the conservation area and the buffer. And this, the yellow indicates the area in which the new buffer line would be so basically this yellow area which is currently within the buffer would be excluded. Pfab/In simple language what does that mean? Franklin/What that means is there could be construction into this area which in fact may affect some of the root system of the trees, there would be obviously tree removal right here and by having construction up to this line could affect the root system of trees that are just behind that line so it's the consequence of a loss of more trees, there is replacement which increases the number of replacement trees by 22 trees. Pfab/How many, if I remember right there' s quite a, there' s quite a few trees disappeared off this piece of land. Franklin/Yes. Pfab/And I think that' s a really, pushing credibility to come out after you've come out how many trees? Come down and say we want to cut a few more down, it just doesn't seem right to me. Franklin/I think that was one reason why there was one vote against it at the Planning & Zoning Commission. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 10 Kanner/They made a mistake before and was there any consequences of that mistake? Franklin/No. Well time. Vanderhoef/They planted additional trees. Franklin/They will be planting replacement trees and with this the number of replacement trees increases by 22 to 82 total. Lehman/That' s a lot of trees. Champion/I have a. Pfab/Is this, are these new developers? Is this the first development they ever did? Franklin/No. Vanderhoef/Tell me about the Alder Court are you saying that the site distance determined where Alder Court goes up of what is it Kennedy Parkway. Franklin/The site distance. Vanderhoef/You said something about site distance and I wondered about the placement of where Alder Court goes off of. Franklin/Okay one of the suggestions that we had made was that Alder Court be pulled farther south to get it away from the tree line there, you do start bumping into another tree line then down here. The developer may be able to address some of those issues tomorrow night. Vanderhoef/So the specific place where the entrance of Alder Court is still flexible, there isn't a site distance problem with that part? Franklin/I'm not aware of a site distance problem on Alder Court, what one could do potentially is have that same entrance but pull the bulb down. But I think tomorrow night at your public hearing the developer will be happy to address those issues. Vanderhoef/And the wavy line that' s going through 95 and 96 that' s the tree line? Franklin/That is a tree line also as it this right in here. Pfab/I have one, are you finished? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 11 Vanderhoef/Yes, thank you. Pfab/I have one question, go back to the larger map there, is this a street that keeps going on or is that close to a dead end street? Franklin/This ends in a cul de sac and then this is Alder Court here, Kennedy Parkway goes onto the west. Where we're talking about Alder Court that' s the end of it. Pfab/Okay but it's also, as far as it being a dangerous place to get off and onto a street it' s another dead end just a block or two? Franklin/Right, right, yea. Mr. Mayor the developer' s representative would like to say something tonight, he's sitting behind you looking anxious. Lehman/I can't see him. Franklin/He's invisible. Lehman/I'm glad you've got, lean over my shoulder please and don't say (can' hear). Glenn Siders/I've got just one comment, it's kind of a technical thing, on your agenda it says Walnut Parts 8, 9, and 10, actually it's just 9 and 10, Part 8, the final plat has been approved on Part 8 already, so it' s just Walnut Part 9 and 10. Lehman/Okay thank you. Pfab/Could you go back to your map (can't hear)? Champion/And so the trees that are replanted where are they replanted at? At there, anywhere they choose? Franklin/In the development yea. Pfab/Is it also proposed that some will be on the right of way? Franklin/Yes, I'm getting a nod from Glenn. Pfab/So it's an even. Kanner/Are there pedestrian/bike walkways through some of these areas (can't hear)? Franklin/There is sidewalk on Kennedy Parkway and that' s the extent of the pedestrian system in this development. Kanner/Any reason we don't require? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 12 Franklin/That' s going back to the original plan development plan that was approved for this development years and years ago, well years and years, years ago. You would be talking about changing then the agreement that we had with the developer when Walnut Ridge started. Kanner/Do we do that differently now then? Would we? Franklin/Yes we do it differently now. Kanner/More grid patterns, would we ask for that? Franklin/Yes. Pfab/And also so that that (can't hear) in a sense kind of grandfathered in there' s a lot of (can't hear) developer because of that. The newer one it wouldn't be able to get by that. Franklin/When Walnut Ridge was originally conceived and adopted as a development plan was at a time when the City Council felt that there would be advantages to have large lot development in the city that would compete with the large lot development in the county. And so it was originally conceived as a much more rural type of development, and in fact it evolved as time went on with the construction of it such that the street standards in terms of curb and gutter more closely matched our standard streets in the city rather than having just a rural cross section. Pfab/But in Part 9 and 10 where all these trees were cut down that put an end to the rural part of it, the rural affect. Franklin/I think that' s an editorial comment that your making that. Pfab/That's fine, (can't hear). Lehman/Okay. ITEM D. AN ORDNANCE REZONING 24 ACRES FROM P, PUBLIC TO SAO-5 SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY AND AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY SAO PLAN OF THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORFlOOD, AN 82.1 ACRE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF FOSTER ROAD. Franklin/Next item is an ordinance to rezone 24 acres from P to SAO-5, excuse me, sensitive areas overlay and amend the preliminary SAO plan for the Peninsula neighborhood. This is a project that we are undertaking to essentially make the lawsuit brought by the Elks Club moot. There are 24 acres roughly defined by this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 13 line that I'm outlining by the cursor that is land owned by the city with an easement granted to the Elks for two golf holes, one at the top of the hill, one at the bottom of the hill. The Elks have submitted a lawsuit which contends that we do not have the right to transfer this density in order to calculate the density for the entire Peninsula neighborhood. We disagree and don't believe that there is any merit to that suit however the lawsuit will inhibit our proceeding with this development project which the consequences to us could be substantial damages from the developer. Therefore we have taken other land that we own in the lower part of the Peninsula equivalent to 24 acres and substituted this piece in that lower part for the 24 acres upon which the Elks have an easement. And we are asking you to basically approve this rezoning and this amendment to this plan in an expedited fashion so that we can move forward with this development project. Kanner/Is there any special protection needed for that easement there beyond what we normally do with an easement? Franklin/The easement for the Elks? Kanner/No, no, for what we're proposing to transfer. Franklin/What we will do is we will signify that that is an outlot and that it is for open space and it will be treated as will all of the other land in this lower part of the Peninsula, as part of the Peninsula Park and all of the precautions that we will take here in terms of no use of chemicals and that sort of thing because of the wells will be instituted on this piece of ground as well. Is that what you mean? Kanner/That yea. Franklin/Okay. Pfab/And I think maybe what Steve was coming to is that means that because of that nothing can ever be built on that. Franklin/Nothing will ever be built on this piece, we will use the density that potentially could be there and transfer it to the top and have the same number of units in the Peninsula neighborhood as been originally planned. Any other questions? Lehman/If we, we have the public hearing and the first consideration tomorrow night and I'd ask the Council to bring their calendars with us because we're going to need to set a special meeting for. Dilkes/We'd like to get some indication of that tonight because we're going to need to set the time and notice it tomorrow. Lehman/Does Thursday morning at 9:00 work? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 14 Champion/Perfect. Lehman/Thursday morning at 9:00. Pfab/That is the 5th. Franklin/No the 3rd. Lehman/Third, Thursday the 3rd. Vanderhoef/9:00. Lehman/9:00. Pfab/(can't hear). Kanner/9:00 AM. Vanderhoef/Karin would you let David Schoon know that I won't be available right at 9:00 for a visit. Franklin/A visit. Okay. Lehman/And my understanding is that we will be being requested to give this expedited consideration at that time and have the second and third readings at once. Franklin/That' s correct. We will also have an amendment to the developer' s agreement to change the legal description and may have the final plat. Pfab/And what time is it? Lehman/9:00. Pfab/Okay. Lehman/Okay go ahead Karin. ITEM E. 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). Franklin/Okay Item E is an ordinance changing the zoning designation from I-1 to CI-1 for approximately 12 acres on Highway 1. You had this on your agenda last time This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 15 for public hearing, it's been continued because we didn't have a signed conditional zoning agreement. There are two issues which the potential buyer of this property want to bring to your attention that they will bring at the public hearing tomorrow night. One has to do with a condition in the Conditional Zoning Agreement in which the property would be limited to one free standing sign, they would like to have two free standing signs. The one free standing sign requirement is something that we had used both in the Menards development to the west and in the Wal- Mart development to the east. Lehman/But this rezoning would allow one more sign to be added to this property. Franklin/To this particular property and what they are going to ask you is that the Conditional Zoning Agreement be amended such that they could have two free standing signs. Lehman/Okay. Franklin/They also would like to, I think they are going to ask you to make some modification to the access easement which runs across the property and I can't tell you at this point exactly what they're going to ask you to do but we'll deal with it tomorrow night. Pfab/What are the benefits to the city (can't hear). Franklin/Of the flee standing sign issue? Well one point of information that you should have is that right now in our sign ordinance there is a provision that you can have a certain number of free standing signs based upon the lineal foot, feet that you have along the right of way. The Conditional Zoning Agreements for both the Menards and the Wal-Mart developments were more restrictive than that, than the sign ordinance. The reason being was to try to minimize the amount of sign clutter on this entrance way into Iowa City and so basically it becomes a judgment for you whether you think one, two, or the sign ordinance which would allow that perennial foot is the most appropriate place to be. So I can't say that staff has really strong feelings about this in terms of one or two but we were being consistent with what had been done on these other two properties. Pfab/All right by allowing the second one. Vanderhoef/No. Lehman/No. Pfab/By not allowing it. Lehman/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 16 Franklin/By not allowing a second one we were being consistent with these other two properties. Pfab/Okay. Franklin/Allowing two on this property will no doubt at some point bring you a request from one of these to have another flee standing sign. Kanner/What does traditional zoning allow with that footage that they have there? Franklin/I'd have to look that up Steven. Kanner/Do you think it likely might be two? Franklin/At least two. Kanner/At least two. Lehman/Isn't there also some regulation on the signage that if you have contiguous parking, we dealt with this on South Riverside Drive and I think we also had some talk about it on the Kmart area where you may have more than one business involved but if the parking lot is contiguous it's treated as a single area and can only, then I think the footage kicks in to it like 300 feet or something. Franklin/Right, that' s correct, then you also can have flee standing signs based on your, if you have frontage on more than one street like Kmart. We changed that to allow free standing signs on the multiple frontages. So the zoning ordinance is much more liberal or much more open to more signs on these properties than what the Conditional Zoning Agreement' s. Pfab/But also basically this is another entrance into Iowa City right. Lehman/Right. Franklin/That's right, that was the rationale for limiting it. Vanderhoef/And the frontage on this is smaller than the properties on either side but only have one. Franklin/That's right. Kanner/And they had, the new light regulations will allow them to go up a little higher than the old ones. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 17 Franklin/No only for wide based signs. (All talking). Lehman/Well one foot. Vanderhoef/Broad bottom. Franklin/Yea unless it's a hill. Lehman/There are also regulations limiting the height of signs because of the airport. Franklin/Yes. Lehman/I don't know what the clearance is but it's right at the end of the runway. Franklin/Well I would imagine, well probably when you get to the highway you could probably put the 25 foot up when your going from grade because your still below the highway. Pfab/I still have to think of our sister city what Coralville went through a number of years past trying to clean up the strip and get rid of a bunch of signs I don't. Franklin/Well I just wanted to let you know that' s what your going to hear tomorrow night. Lehman/Okay, will someone from staff be available to address the access easement that we don't know anything about? Franklin/Yes. Lehman/Because if we do have first consideration tomorrow night. Franklin/Yes. Lehman/It would be nice to be able to answer those questions. Karr/You don't have CZA signed so it would be continued (can't hear). Franklin/Oh I'm sorry, your going to have to continue. Lehman/Oh this will be continued, okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 18 Franklin/Because then we won't have it signed but there' s the chance that we'll have to modify it and if we have to change it then we need to just continue the public hearing. Thank you Marian. Lehman/So that would be the 15th is that correct? Franklin/Right. ITEM F. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE ARTICLE (D), DEFINITIONS, AND ARTICLE (L) PROVISIONAL USES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AND TEMPORARY USES, TO ALLOW ACCESSORY APARTMENTS IN ACCESSORY BUILDINGS. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Item F is second consideration to allow accessory apartments. ITEM G. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION BY ESTABLISHING A CONSERVATION OVERLAY ZONE FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF BURLINGTON STREET ALONG GOVERNOR AND LUCAS STREETS. (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Item G is pass and adopt on the conservation overlay. ITEM H. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PRAIRIE EDGE SUBDIVISION, A 5.66-ACRE, FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PRAIRIE DU CHIEN ROAD AND NORTH OF LINDER ROAD. (SUB01-00003) Franklin/Item H is a preliminary plat of a subdivision in the county on Prairie Du Chien, this is in fringe area A and basically, well we have recommended denial, the staff has recommended denial as well as the Planning & Zoning Commission. The fringe area requires that the development be built to city standards and the plat that came in was not and so it's fairly simple. Lehman/Actually if we allowed that we would be in violation of the fringe agreement that we have with the county. Franklin/Right. Lehman/Okay. Vanderhoef/There was a question about the roads going in there also and I was just curious how much undeveloped land is to the west of that that needs access so we don't land lock. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 19 Franklin/Well the land to the west has this huge flag lot that goes off of Linder Road. There is opportunity for access via this flag, the pole of the flag for this property in here and then this property has access directly off of Linder Road. One of the things that we were arguing in the staff report was that instead of doing this kind of loop drive here for this house that there be a more conventional street put in to stub out to here and would allow the opportunity for this area in the future to be subdivided into urban size lots. So I mean basically the way this is designed is as a rural subdivision and it's inconsistent with what we are requiring in the fringe area. Vanderhoef/Okay thanks. Pfab/I think also there were problems with run-off or sewer. Franklin/This would be on septic systems. Pfab/Yes but I mean, was it causing more water or more problems than some of the neighbors? Franklin/I don't think so, you might be thinking of the Arbor Hill development which hasn't come to you yet. Pfab/Okay, no, no, it's this one. Franklin/Is it? I don't know Irvin I'd have to ask Bob. Pfab/There's some (can't hear). Franklin/That' s the beginning again. ITEM I. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE THE NORTH DISTRICT PLAN. Franklin/Okay the last item is a resolution amending the comprehensive plan to include the North District Plan and you had that on your agenda for public hearing last time. Lehman/Very good. Thank you. Review A~enda Items Lehman/Okay review agenda items. This is the kind of review I really like. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 20 Historic Preservation Commission ADDointment Lehman/Historic Preservation Commission appointment we have no application is that correct? Lexim~ton Avenue Traffic Calmim~ (IP1 of 4/26 info. Oacket) Jeff Davidson/Last July we began working with a group of neighbors on Lexington Avenue who had come to the City requesting some relief to what they perceived as traffic operating in a reckless manner on Lexington Avenue. I've been here just over 20 years and this was the third or fourth time that we had a group of neighbors from Lexington Avenue approach us regarding this matter. We're all aware of the unique geometry of the road with the dips. We went back and looked at what had happened previously and basically the neighborhood was able to coalesce into a group that wanted a single thing done to Lexington Avenue in the past and that' s why all the previous proposals fell apart. We came to you at that time and explained that the request that had been received from the neighborhood group, there was a petition attached to it, you might recall was to have a barricade installed on Lexington and this is not something under the city' s traffic calming program we would typically do. We would consider things to slow down traffic and get it to behave, calm it as the program goes but we would not actually barricade a street. We did ask if you would have this considered under the traffic calming program proceed through the steps and you said at that time acknowledging the unique situation on Lexington that you were willing to do that. So what we have done since that time is proceeded with the traffic calming program and I won't bore you with the details of that, ifthere's anything specific to any one of the steps you want to discuss please just ask the question. Last November we had proceeded far enough to have a meeting of the neighborhood, the neighborhood being people who have property contiguous to the street or in the case of the McLean Avenue cul de sac that must go through Lexington Avenue to get to their property. And at their meeting the coalition that the neighborhood had, or at least perceived that they had started to break down a little bit because of concerns of people that lived at the park end of the street being able to get in and out during the winter months when there' s snow and ice present. The neighborhood group went back and did a little additional work and came back with the second proposal that involved, well at the time I think we expressed it to you that the barricade that would have a gate that would be open during the winter months, closed during the rest of the year. I think now probably what we would consider it is simply the barricade would be removed during the winter months and installed probably be removed November through March and installed the rest of the year. And this is the proposal that then went to the neighborhood survey and you will recall that you recently raised from 50 percent to 60 percent the requirement for the neighborhood survey, they did receive 71 percent approval and very high rate of return. I believe it was about 88 percent so I think the survey does represent what the people on Lexington Avenue feel. I was then contacted This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 21 by a number of people who live, I will just tell you antidotally that during the neighborhood survey I had people on both sides of the issue mad at me feeling that they were being treated unfairly so I guess we had a fairly fair process since people on both sides were mad at me, but we. Champion/Now you know what it's like to be on the Council. Davidson/I did encourage those people who were not included in the formal survey to contact you directly by e-mail, or letter, or phone and I did notice that we did have 34 letters in the council packet which is a record I think since I've been here. But you do have the benefit then of knowing how some of the other folks in the neighborhood feel about the issue. So basically we're here tonight to see how you all feel about what has been proposed and to answer any questions you have. Wilburn/I guess I have a question about, just looking at the area emirely I mean I've looked at the letters and heard some folks from phone calls and e-mail's and things. Some people feel that traffic would flow to some of the other streets, some feel it wouldn't. Just kind of looking at the area and the park and can you give us a flavor if a permanent barricade were put up? I know it's anyone' s guess but. Davidson/I think Ross there' s a couple things to think about there, one is the, when we took the traffic count on the street and measured the speed and volume of traffic we showed 250 to 270 vehicles a day in that range. And that doesn't indicate a lot of traffic from outside the neighborhood, some certainly but if we had had a traffic count of 800 or 900 that would have indicated a lot of traffic from outside of the neighborhood on the street which would have meant as you say that that would have been then diverted to parallel streets obviously the streets barricaded. Now the other factor to consider and I know persons in the neighborhood feel that a lot of the traffic from outside of the neighborhood using Lexington Avenue is doing so because of the fun. And that in fact that they would not be drawn to Manville Heights if it were not for the dips so you know we feel that certainly there would be potential for some traffic to be diverted to Magowan or Lee as the two parallel streets that go through but not a tremendous number. Wilburn/And so if fun is the, assuming that' s the primary factor folks are coming on that street, if, you mentioned a barricade is a typical, is not a traffic calming device that you would use. If you were to recommend a traffic calming device that you traditionally use for this street what might be a recommendation be? Davidson/Well that's been the problem in the past Ross because of the dips and all the driveways those probably being the two major factors we haven't been able to come up with other traffic calming features that met the approval of the neighborhood that we also felt were reasonable. And basically we felt what they would do is add more fun. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 22 Wilburn/So for example if you put a speed bump in that adds. Davidson/Speed humps and traffic circles are the two things we're probably most familiar with that I think that work successfully in the areas that we've installed them, we just don't think their appropriate for Lexington Avenue, nor has the neighborhood group said it's something they would like to see. Wilburn/And there' s one small stretch of sidewalk on the east side of Lexington I believe, somewhere in. Davidson/I don't recall but yea. Wilburn/I was going to ask (can't hear) who put that in there, the property owner or? Davidson/Obviously the fact that the majority of the street does not have sidewalks is also one of the things that the neighborhood feels gives special consideration to their. Champion/Why don't they have sidewalks? Davidson/I don't know Connie, I assume the topography has something to do with it but I you know, it was platted in the 20's so. Wilburn/Well there' s part of it is a real big drop on one side, there' s a couple big trees on the other side. Davidson/In previous discussions we have discussed installing sidewalks on Lexington Avenue and once again hat has not been anything that the neighborhood has been interested in personally. Champion/Does that mean I don't have to have a sidewalk in my neighborhood if I don't want to? Lehman/You've already got one. Champion/Well I know but I have to repair it now too so maybe I'd rather just not have one. Davidson/Certainly a project like that we would typically do as an assessment project and you have that under your control. Wilburn/How long ago had you had conversations with you said in prior discussions sidewalk what? There was no interest or. Davidson/There was no interest form the neighborhood in installing sidewalks. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 23 Wilburn/How long ago? Davidson/It was 97 1 believe the last time we talked about that with the group of folks representing the neighborhood Ross. Wilburn/Do you recall what those feelings were for them not being interested in it? Davidson/I don't recall Ross. O'Donnell/I think it would really be a hazard trying to walk down that sidewalk, these are extreme hills. Vanderhoef/They walk down the street. Champion/They walk down the street. Vanderhoef/Absolutely. O'Donnell/Well but you know what we take care of the streets. How many, have we done a speed check on this street Jeff?. Do you have an average speed? Davidson/Yes. Yes, the, that was one of the criteria Mike that basically was one of the steps in the process and we did have let' s see 85 percentile speed 24.8 in one direction, 25.2 in another, 30.4 which was the one that got it over the have to be 5 miles over the speed limit and 29.4 so. O 'Donnell/It's average. Davidson/In one direction it was closer to, fairly close to being the posted speed at 25 and the other direction it was slightly over, more than 5 over. Kanner/And what was the range? What was the high range? Davidson/Yea that's been a question that I've been asked Steven by a number of people, in the one direction just you know to give you off the cuff here we had two cars going 50, three going 45, at another point at the street we had one going 55, one going 50. And in the other direction we had one going 50, one going 45, seven going 40, and two going 45 at the other location. And you know, as we know it's those outliners at the top of the percentile that' s what the concern is. Kanner/What percentage are those high (can't hear)? Davidson/Very very low, well that' s two out of, well I don't have it, but the total the total. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 24 Kanner/If it were 40 MPH what' s the percentage of the total that you counted? A rough figure just get an idea. Davidson/Well just to give you, put you in the ballpark here let' s say we had, let' s go 45 and over if we had what between 5 and 10 probably and that's like out of 250 to 270 in both directions. Vanderhoef/Very small percent. Kanner/So like 2 percent or something like that. O'Donnell/How many cars has gone across Park Road and ended up in the (can't hear) or? Davidson/I don't know are the Wyrick's here tonight I mean they were the ones who would be able to answer that Mike I know it's been at least a couple. Vanderhoef/The e-mail said two. Davidson/How many? Okay somebody in the audience said the letter said 4 from the Wyrick's. Irvin. Pfab/I spent a fair amount of time in the neighborhood trying to sort this thing out. My first approach (can't hear) (END OF 01-47 SIDE ONE) Pfab/To entirely different process after you spend time in that neighborhood. To walk in the street is does not make a person very safe, now I look at it as we put the other rigid process to make a change in that street. We asked the neighbors to go through seven step process. Davidson/Eight. Pfab/And we upped the ante as how many people to agree which was higher than had been before, they exceeded that by quite a bit and they basically came to a basically one idea of what to do with it and that was to put in a seasonal barricade. And I don't think there's any other way, now ifI had my druthers what I would do is put in some permanent video monitoring of the current stop signs with the ability to ticket the cars that go through there if they show up. I understand that' s something that the City Council can do if we have the political will to do it. Lehman/It's against the law in the State of Iowa. Pfab/It's not against the law. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 25 Davidson/Actually I don't believe that a citation. Pfab/According to what I was told. Lehman/Can't issue a citation like that. O'Donnell/A video is not going to show up very well at 2:00 in the morning, that' s when a lot of this occurs. Pfab/Well you can put more lights there so you can enhance the production quality. Kanner/Can we hear what the law your saying it is okay. Davidson/My understanding which could be goofed up, but my understanding is that Iowa State Law does not permit a citation to be issued off of a video image. Lehman/Right. Pfab/Can I ask ifthere's anyone in the crowd here that would have a different opinion? Lehman/I would think our transportation director probably would have privy to that. Davidson/Like I said that' s my understanding. Andy Matthews from the City Attorney' s office. Andy Matthews/Irvin approached me in the hall and he asked about installation about video, we didn't talk about it in terms of issuing citations, we talked about it in terms of the approach Council has taken with the use of video cameras generally as a tool. Pfab/Okay so I was under the impression that that would work the law enforcement and you said that's not true. Matthews/Not for it being able to issue a citation based on that video, you would need more evidence than simply that, you'd still need to be able to identify who the driver of the car was. Iowa law is somewhat different than California law where those are used as a method of issuing citations, it's the manner in which we have to prove our citations that differ from other jurisdictions and simply the use of video cam to make a case for a violation in of and itself would be insufficient you still have other elements you would have to prove. Pfab/Now I understand that a number of times the citizens have called the police with a number with a license plate number and they can not get a ticket issued because if the police don't observe themselves they can't make it stick. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 26 Davidson/That' s my understanding Irvin. Pfab/Okay so that so now you come down to really what is, do the people on that street have a right to feel safe in their neighborhood and I think they do and if you take out, that was going to be my first choice. I understood that the video you could ticket off of that and eventually too uncomfortable and too costly but our professional joy riders to get over that. So then the next thing that I would do, my next suggestion would definitely to put in a seasonal barricade but I think there' s an even a more permanent solution but I don't think the neighbors or the city would agree to it. I believe that that street could be reconstructed to take away those dips. If you go out and look at it I think it could be done. Lehman/I'm sure it could. Pfab/And so it looks to me like the most obvious or the only thing that will really work is a seasonal barricade. Kanner/Your saying it's too cost prohibitive to take out the. Champion/It would look like an expressway bridge. Pfab/(can't hear). Lehman/Build a trestle. Kanner/But you just abandoned it your saying go with the barricade. Pfab/Well no I don't think the neighbors want it and I don't think the city wants or whoever is going to pay for it wants to do it. Champion/Well I agree that I think they do have a problem there and I think it's a safety issue, I think the neighbors can stay out of the road but I also think it's a safety issue for the people who are driving their cars down there or somebody who might be. I think they do have a real safety problem, I do have problems with closing that street, there aren't a lot of through streets over there, I think the Fire Departments letter was pretty pointed that they obviously do not want it closed and what kind of provisions have we made like if we get another wind storm like we had a few years ago. Are there only four, there are only four through streets there between Park Road and in between the highway and Dubuque, there' s Ferson. Davidson/There's Ferson and Magowan, Hutchinson doesn't and Lee, yea that would be the other one. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 27 Champion/And so we have very few through streets that begin with and my concern is emergency response and what happens, well I suppose if it's (can't hear) some one could drive right through it, I mean how are you going to address that? How do the neighbors address those concerns, do they talk about those? Davidson/Well clearly you've seen the Fire Chief' s response that he feels it would inhibit their ability to respond in a timely fashion, which is the most important thing to them, how fast they can get there. Champion/They would have to have in their materials that they would use when they're on the way to a call they determine the route to take and they would just have to make sure they understood that the house numbers from the barricade in that direction were on that side and from the barricade to the other direction were on the other side. Vanderhoef/Public Works will have, would have a concern trying to turn the trucks around down at the barricade where ever it is and go back. Davidson/As I indicated Dee in my information to you once a public works did call me and ask specifically would the barricade be removed during the snow plowing time of year and I said it would, and so once they knew that they decided not to send any comments which I suppose means that they're okay with it. Vanderhoef/I recall also we had requests to close a couple streets in the near north side and one of the chief concerns at that time was the same things that we're talking about here safety and for refuse to get through and have to back up and down the streets because ofturnaround possibilities. So which safety are we going to look at folks, this is something that I think is a judgment call on which safety is the most important in the eyes of the city, not in the eyes who' s sitting on or living on a certain street. We've got people sitting on streets on either side who live in the greater Manville Heights area who are saying okay so now your going to push an increased number of cars on my street, we have X number of children on my street and so the possibilities of problems there. We have elderly living in there who may need the response time from both fire and ambulance, it's a safety problem there and that' s for the greater part of Iowa City. I guess I really would like to not at this time but in the future I would like us as a Council to sit down and talk specifically about sidewalks and what we do with them in the greater Iowa City. We've got spots through the city where we have incomplete sidewalk network and we need to have a conversation about it. Champion/We do. Pfab/Okay so then what your suggesting, from the inference of what your stating is that the street to the east, is that Magowan? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 28 Vanderhoef/There' s Hutchinson that is incomplete and Magowan. Pfab/The one that is incomplete, that should be made a through street then. Vanderhoef/No I didn't say that, I didn't say that. Pfab/Safety to all the neighbors. Vanderhoef/I didn't say that, I'm saying to close off anymore streets. Pfab/But the one that' s closed offthat's fine because that' s done. Vanderhoef/That one's been closed for. Champion/It's never been open has it? Vanderhoef/Hutchinson. Champion/Has there been a bridge across that gully I don't think so? Vanderhoef/Not that I'm aware of. Champion/Never. Pfab/All right when you go through the pro' s and con' s on this thing you come up with that neighborhood used to have an older average age in that population area. I think that your seeing a turnover with younger families coming in there a lot more children there and I think that they have, I think any of us have a right to feel safe in our neighborhood. And I do not believe, if you go out and walk that neighborhood, just feel a part of it, that neighborhood street is not safe for children. So if they're not safe in their own neighborhood does the city have no obligation to these people. Champion/Irvin none of us are saying that the situation is a good one. Pfab/Well there' s a simple solution is to keep the joy riders out of there. Vanderhoef/I think we will have to increase patrol there at certain times of the day and alternate patterns so that we do have a real presence out there but we have the same kinds of things on straight away streets that people are asking for stop signs. Well now we're hearing in this neighborhood people are running the stop signs meanwhile we have Highland Avenue who's been asking for some relief for the traffic that comes through there's and because it's a nice straight street and people don't want to get caught in all the traffic up on Kirkwood they're zooming through there and so they're asking for stop signs and we're saying they aren't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 29 very safe because people roll through the stop signs when they get frustrated with being tied up in traffic. So how is this different than the Highland Avenue because there' s probably more children down on Highland Avenue than there is on Lexington Avenue? O'Donnell/Dee there's a very big difference. Champion/Yea. Pfab/That's what I was going to say. O'Donnell/There' s a very big difference. Vanderhoef/The geography is one thing, but here again we're hearing the stop sign issue here, we're hearing safety for our children in both places, I mean I heard one person say why don't we just barricade Highland Avenue like it used to be down at the west end. This is a precedence that I don't think we are as a Council should be setting. Pfab/Well I would say that eventually that the law will change where you can ticket running through a stop sign. Champion/Your assuming. Pfab/A lot of neighbor states are doing that, it's one way because now I understand these people have called the police on any number of occasions, their response is not there, the police don't have the wear with all to sit over there at joy riding time. O'Donnell/You know Irvin that really doesn't matter because that' s not what we're speaking of here, I don't think it's appropriate to compare Highland to Lexington. Champion/No I don't either. O'Donnell/Lexington is like a roller coaster and it does call people there at 2:00 in the morning. Some of my letters said well they want a private street, well that' s not true, there' s no objection to the number of cars and the number of cars is only like 240 or 250, you know I live on Park Road and I've got between 8,000 and 9,000 coming down a big hill that and Irvin I think your right, there really is, there' s 250 cars a day on this road and I think half of them are coming because of the hills. The objection is not to the cars, it's to the cars at 2:00 in the morning going 50 mph and you know that's I think that's very clear from my letters. Lehman/Other comments. Well let' s get somebody else here we've heard quite a bit. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 30 Wilburn/I have another question, you said you've made a change in thinking that rather than unlocking this barricade it would just be removed. Is this a barricade, I'm sorry, is this a barricade that can be constructed out of existing materials somewhere in departments or is this something that needs to be purchased special? Davidson/I think we would probably purchase the barricade itself, it's not an incredible expensive or anything like that Ross. It just seemed to me that for the sake of the neighborhood and the aesthetics of the neighborhood it would make sense to just remove it entirely and we'd hood the signs that indicate the roads are barricaded so we wouldn't we have to take them up and down. But I assume the neighborhood would prefer to have them removed entirely and put back rather than just swung over in someone' s lawn where they have to mow around it or something. Champion/I have one more problem too, I mean I probably am going to reluctantly support this because I don't know what else to do with it, I think it is a safety issue. But I don't really believe in closing streets but, what are you going to make this barricade out of ? That' s another thing that I think and if these kids, and I'm assuming it's kids driving down there at 60 MPH in the middle of the night, it looks like it would be a lot of fun but I wouldn't mind doing it but I wouldn't do it. Davidson/I've had full grown adult people tell me that they go to the Iowa Basketball games and before they leave they make sure they do the dips. Champion/Really because I would like to do it but I would never do it. Davidson/It' s not just kids. Champion/So what are you going to make this out of?. I can see people just going through this thing all the time. Davidson/Well obviously we'll make it of something that you can't go through it, what I'm more worried about is people that will go through the lawns and that kind of thing, we may have to deal with that, we have not researched the barricade just because we'd wait and see if it's something that you'd want to do. I'll probably get together with Public Works and Parks & Rec. and see what' s out there available and then sit down with the neighborhood and look through what the alternatives are. Champion/Okay the other thing that I would ask you to consider is to make sure it isn't something that if somebody crashes into their going to kill themselves crashing into the barricade. Davidson/Well where with the signage and the retro-reflective materials Connie we make sure that it's done in a way that's safe so that obviously somebody can see it and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 31 that kind of thing. And that' s been indicated to the neighborhood that that' s all part of the deal that signage and that kind of thing. Lehman/Steven. Kanner/A couple of questions and comments. Sidewalk, I prefer to start simpler and work our way up to the barricade and think about sidewalks, think about perhaps extending the corner curbs in, that' s a traffic calming device that might have some small affect on people to give the appearance that it's not as wide open. Or if we don't do sidewalks to think about a traffic circle that' s (can't hear). I think one of the problems on College and traffic circles is that there's not enough room to make them wide enough so it really, I don't think it deters people enough. Lehman/Yea it works really well over there. Pfab/It does. Kanner/Well. Davidson/Well when we checked it a year later it had reduced speeds. Lehman/Dramatically. Kanner/That was at a different time of year. Champion/Oh and you did bring that up. Kanner/But I think so well then that' s an argument that it could work over there also if it were wide enough and if you don't have sidewalks you have a little more room perhaps. Or perhaps to put sidewalks in, further in, or I think speed bumps could work if they were significant enough. I heard from a couple people that a few years ago we had a test demonstration of speed bumps that the neighbors could try and most of them said that it really did nothing but I think we would need to try higher. Lehman/The ones that we have right now work dramatically well and they're the ones that we put in like four years on Teg Drive. Kanner/Well then again I think we should try those first before we do the barricade, I think that' s the last resort. I too don't like to block off (can't hear) pattern streets and I think it's appropriate to keep it open for the most part and let' s try this for a year, some of the other solutions and then move to that, look at it again a year from now. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 32 Lehman/Well I haven't, I think Andy's, I was probably more influenced with Andy's letter than anything else, not very long ago we told almost of the people of Iowa City that First Avenue was a very important link on the east side of town and we based a fair amount of our argument on response time to get to that area for emergency vehicles. I have a real concern with this neighborhood but I have also a very great concern with reducing that response time. I also have a concern with using the closure of a street to handle a problem of speeding and stop light riding, I mean I think if that would occur that we will, and I think we will get requests from other folks in town particularly on streets that do not carry a large volume of traffic request to close that streets because of speeding or whatever. And I think it's a really bad precedent, on the other hand these are by the very nature a very temporary sort of thing and they could be very much like the notorious chicanes on Highland Avenue and if found not to be effective or to be too much of a hassle could be removed with out a great deal of difficulty. But my, you know I do think people are entitled to police protection, their entitled to have us patrol that street as much as we can. I don't think it's possible to have a car there 24 hours a day and I don't think we're going to have one parked there at 2:00 in the morning. But obviously we are unable at this point are not able to control the situation to the satisfaction to those neighbors and I think there is a definite safety issue now whether or not sidewalks, I never asked you about circles Jeff, but the circles have slowed down cars. Davidson/Remember what we're considering tonight is a proposal the neighborhood has brought to us for consideration. Lehman/I'm well aware of that. Davidson/And these other items I would certainly want to go back to the neighborhood group if there was a majority of Council that directed me to do so and say okay we've got some other things that Council wants to have discussed, but in the past I mean those are the specific things we have discussed with previous neighborhood groups, we're dealing with different people now. And what they have said steadfastly in this instance is that the barricade is what they are interested in having you consider. Lehman/And that's the only thing? Davidson/And that's the only thing. Lehman/All right. O'Donnell/I really think it would be difficult Ernie to come up with another street in Iowa City with these circumstances. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 33 Lehman/No I don't disagree with you but I think there would be people who would try to make an argument. Pfab/And I think the fact that' s it's temporary, it's seasonal and I think the only thing that if you designed it is that in case of a windstorm or something that it would moved around through traffic could get through. But as far as response time how do you work on a street that' s already closed, it's no different, are those people in greater jeopardy? No the fire department goes and the police department they know where if your going to a certain address, yea, go a certain way, and I can't see where that's going to slow down. It can cost congestion and that's why I believe the fact that it's a season barricade that could be open by the fire department in case of an emergency something like that fine. Lehman/What' s the cost of doing this? Do we have any idea? Davidson/We don't but you know you have a CIP item at least $20,000 or $25,000 worth of traffic calming (can't hear) and I'm sure we'd be well under that and it would be installed by city crews. Lehman/What' s the pleasure of the Council? I mean the question is not traffic calming Lexington, it's whether or not we close the street. How many would be in favor of closing the street, putting up a barricade? Pfab/Put in a temporary, and not closing the street. Davidson/Seasonal barricade. Lehman/Seasonal barricade which means it's closed 9 months out of the year. Davidson/Closed 8 months of the year, open 4 months of the year. Lehman/How many are interested in closing the street seasonally? Wilburn/If we do this where there will be a natural reevaluation after one year? Davidson/After one year, after one year. Lehman/Or sooner if it's like the chicanes. Wilburn/Right. Pfab/Right but that over in that neighborhood they're the people who complained the most, they didn't want the chicanes over there or whatever. Lehman/Well and most of the objection' s to this are also from the neighborhood. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 34 Pfab/No not from the people on the street. Champion/Well the other question tell me the next thing now if we are willing to approve this for like a year, before this is done, I mean most of my, obviously most of the objections that you hear are not from the people who live on the street, we'd all like our street closed. The objections came from the people in the neighborhood who don't live on that street. How will these people be notified, is there a hearing for these people, tell me what the next step will be? Davidson/The way the traffic calming program works Connie and of course it's your program, you can change it be anything you want. Champion/I know but I don't read it everyday you do. Davidson/The one, some of us go to bed reading it every night Connie. The way it sits right now is that we survey people with property adjacent to the street proposed for the traffic calming measure or people on a street that connects to a street, the only way they can get to it is on that street. In the case on Lexington Avenue it was 24 properties. O'Donnell/Did we survey the guy? Champion/What's next as far as? Lehman/Put up the barricade. Davidson/As far as the process, you direct us to go ahead, we go ahead. Lehman/Put it up. Champion/There were 24 people notified. Davidson/24 people surveyed. O'Donnell/88 percent responded. Vanderhoef/And 70 (can't hear). Davidson/I had several others Connie from the larger neighborhood who contacted me wanting to know how they could provide input and you saw the 34 letters. Champion/Right I saw your letter about that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 35 Pfab/I think there' s something that maybe I don't think I can close still with the way you said that. Champion/Why? Pfab/You know we'd all like to have a closed street. Lehman/She said our street she said. Pfab/What did you say? Lehman/She said we'd all like to have our street closed. Pfab/Okay these people don't want their street closed. Champion/Irvin why are you arguing with me I made a comment? Pfab/(can't hear) the street, they'd rather have the police stop this (can't hear). Lehman/Okay now. Pfab/It's an inconvenience to them too. Lehman/Okay folks we've talked about this quite a while. Are there four people who would like to see the barricade go up for a, actually it's a test period of one year, it will be a seasonal barricade it would go up rather quickly and it would be there until perhaps the first of November and would be reevaluated again next Spring? Are there four people who would like to do that? Wilburn/I'd be willing given your comments about the unique nature. Champion/It is. Wilburn/I don't like, I'll do it for your, take a look. Davidson/Two, three, four. Lehman/You've got four. O'Donnell/Ernie I didn't see you vote. Lehman/I've got four votes. O'Donnell/Smooth, let's take a break. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 36 Lehman/I'm not, I don't think it's a good idea on the other hand, it isn't something that can be. Vanderhoef/Then why do it? Pfab/Because there' s no other alternative. O'Donnell/The unusual circumstances Dee is why. Lehman/The only reason I would go along it anyway because we can reverse it. We're taking a break until 25 till. BREAK Mormon Trek Extended (IP2 of 4/26 info. packet) Lehman/Steve are you going to? Davidson/Let me get started off real quick Mr. Mayor, I don't know how much background you want on this issue, you'll recall that we've discussed, well I guess maybe the most important part for your consideration with last, the approval of the budget this year you reordered the priority on the extension on Mormon Trek Boulevard and basically said you were interested. Oh excuse me Jane can you not hear? (can't hear). Davidson/Okay I'll try and speak up and lean into the microphone a little bit better. With the approval of last year' s budget you said you wanted to accelerate the project and construct the extension of Mormon Trek Boulevard between Highway 1 and 921 which is Riverside Drive and actually then request to the Johnson County Council of Governments shift $1.9 million in STP funds from Sycamore Street reconstruction to this road and in accordance with that priority. This is scheduled for fiscal year 2003 which begins not this construction season in July but next construction season so there is the possibility that next year we could get started on this after July and what we need from you is essentially a decision on the alignment of a portion of the road in the vicinity of the Dane and Williams' farms, I think the most of you are familiar with this. The rest of the alignment you have already said what you want to do, it is this area in the vicinity of the Dane and Williams farm where we need a decision from you and I think Steve wanted to say a few things and while he's doing that I will put up a diagram which shows the three alternative alignments under consideration. Champion/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 37 Atkins/I think Jeff' s pretty well summarized for you sort of where we are in the issue. In order for us to begin that formal process of putting this all together and please keep in mind and I'm sure you have because of the discussion' s we've had in the past that this is as much transportation related as it is land use and economic development. In order for us to get this road built from Highway 1 to Riverside Drive around the airport we need to get into a very detailed process of planning and that planning process requires us to have some indication from you what route alignment you would find acceptable. Once you've given us that indication and in tonight' s presentation we're going to be recommending N-1B for you to consider, we can then meet with the property owner' s, discuss all the pertinent issues, because folks there' s water and sewer extensions, storm water management, there is a proposal for some of the land to be preserved in open space in the form of the dedication as you know a whole variety of issues associated with trying to get this project to come together. Phasing is another element of it, and I think with that again we just need some indication what direction you'd like us to go. Davidson/The materials you received did have a summary of the N-1A, oops N-1A and N-1B, basically these two being considered alternatives to the original alignment which was up here N-1. If you have any questions or anything you'd like to discuss about those, all three of these can be built in accordance with our arterial street design standards, there are pros and cons of each which you had summarized, I don't think any of those pros or cons are insurmountable with respect to if you direct us one way or another I think we can work through the issues. And that' s basically what we want to start doing is working through the issues. Irvin. Pfab/This is going to be an arterial street right? Davidson/Yes. Pfab/What is in current terms if that street was up what would be the speed limit on that street? Davidson/It just depends on the, if it was through a residential area it might very well be 25 mph. Pfab/Is this residential? Davidson/The comprehensive plan shows for the area from wherever this road ends up to the south as being residential and from the road to the noah being commercial and industrial. Is that right Karin? Okay. Pfab/Is there going to be, is that street going to have somewhat limited access? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 38 Davidson/Yes similar to Scott Boulevard or a street like that. And just to finish what I was saying about the speed limit Irvin though just so everybody' s not under the impression it will absolutely be 25 mph. Through the commercial and industrial area it might be as high as 35 mph. Pfab/Okay it looks to me the top one just doesn't make a bit of sense to me no matter how I look at it, the second one isn't much better, the alternate 1-A the one that really makes sense to me is the 1-B, now there are some. The only thing that I don't understand is what does that do to those lots in that manufactured home? Davidson/Yea and that was one thing that I wanted to point out is the alignment in the road in this vicinity was drawn here by our consultant in an attempt to basically go between Lake Ridge and the William' s farmstead. And depending on if you were to select the N-1B alignment and direct us to go we would then have to have some negotiations with the Williams, see what their thoughts were, as I indicated in my memorandum to you we haven't been able to get a real clear understanding of what their desires are and we would want to do that. It might very well be Irvin that we could move this to go alter this somewhat in this vicinity so it did not go directly through this area. Pfab/Okay when you look at that it looks like the best use of land for a road, it doesn't make any sense to go up through the farming area up there, it looks like you have a sharper turn in the street up there, you have a larger flow turn on the bottom one and the Williams, and I think Ernie, Mayor Lehman made a comment there you build a street there for a long time and it sometimes there' s going to be inconveniences of people that are there at the present time and all do respects to the people, the Williams, I think that to get a good street into that area, that' s what condemnation is for and it happens to be. Davidson/Well we would negotiate with property owners initially. Pfab/Yea I mean, and right it but probably would, it just makes a whole lot of sense to (can't hear). Lehman/Well Jeff now, my understanding is that we, staff is recommending alternate N- 1B. Now that is correct me if I'm wrong, as we're looking at it or some variation of that, which means and I have the same question that Irvin does, as that road goes east it goes back up north again instead of going straight across. Is that an option? Davidson/It is an option to look in through here, Ernie it is possible that this could go more straight across, that also impacts the Dane property, it is their desire to have that road as far south on their property. They have indicated and is part of our recommendation or for consideration of this alignment to you that they would be willing to donate the right of way through their property subject to negotiation of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 39 other issues but that' s at least their position for negotiation. If we start moving that road noah they may feel differently about it, that's something we would have to work out with them. Lehman/Well you'd like from us some indication as to whether or not. Davidson/Just which basic alignment you want us to work with. Lehman/Which variation we would like you to work on, is that correct? Davidson/Yes that is correct. Lehman/All right what' s the pleasure of the Council? Champion/Well I just have one question first. Tell me where that big hill is on the Dane property. Davidson/It' s, let me get my bearings here, it's in this vicinity right in here, that' s the. Champion/So it's not close to the. Davidson/The sledding hill as you've heard George Dane refer to it as. Lehman/N-1 and N-1A go right through the side of that hill. Champion/That's my question. Davidson/N-1 Ernie is near the top of the hill, it's not on the top of hill it's near the top of the hill, 1-A goes smack through the side of it. Champion/Okay I just needed to have that clarified because my computer shut down about a half hour ago and I. No he got me a plug. Kanner/(Can't hear) University building. Davidson/That' s just off the map here Steven in this vicinity here. Kanner/So all three routes converge before it gets to there. Davidson/Exactly, yea, it's a single route past that point. Kanner/You mentioned in the memo that you had not had much success in getting an opinion from the Williams family, have you since then gotten anything from them? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 40 Davidson/No, we have met with the Williams, I think the Williams understand the city' s position but they chose not to indicate very succinctly as the Dane family did what their preference was. Kanner/And which route has the least environmental impact as far as wetlands and (can't hear)? Davidson/The potential wetland disruption is most significant with alternate N-1B, we just last week had an assessment done of that, the wetlands were characterized, the wetlands that were identified in the field evaluation were characterized as very low quality wetlands as judged by the animal habitat and plant species which were present and that' s important in this consideration I believe because my understanding is when one attempts to reconstruct wetlands in another location that reconstructing a low quality wetland is a relatively easy thing to do, reconstructing a very high quality wetland is a very difficult thing to do so the wetland specialist that investigated this felt like the wetlands that she found were good candidates for being mitigated at another location. Kanner/Do you have both locations for (can't hear)? Davidson/No, I mean depending on which alternative you select we would investigate that further. Vanderhoef/Okay tell me how big an area are we talking about? Davidson/Small, in fact we're not sure. Vanderhoef/Is it big enough that we have to mitigate that (can't hear). Davidson/We're not even sure that the Corps of Engineers consider it, there was a wetland, a small wetland on the property to the south of the Dane property in this vicinity in conjunction with a development project that was proposed there by Mr. Wolf that the Corps of Engineers virtually told the same person who did our wetlands assessment it was not jurisdictional, that basically. Vanderhoef/Oh well good. Davidson/And it was the highest quality of all the ones, the other ones that she identified were down at the bottom of the hill here and then an area that extended up slightly and this one on what we used to call the Maxey farm was of a higher quality than those others. And so we're talking about a very low quality invasive type species of grasses that she found and something that she felt could be similar quality wetland relocated on another site, there were not any animal habitat or anything like that present. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 41 Vanderhoef/Even if it was so small that it wasn't a jurisdictional one. Davidson/Yea if it's not a jurisdictional one then it becomes a local decision as to whether or not you want to do anything with that. Vanderhoef/To mitigate it. Okay you had a comment in there about the road that is there presently and you said it is an easement not a county owned road you can (can't hear). Davidson/That' s my understanding. Vanderhoef/So where is the ownership? Davidson/Well the county roads typically are an easement to the center line and actually belong to the adjacent property owners but are an easement to the center line and my understanding is that's the same situation here, that's the same situation throughout Johnson Country. Vanderhoef/Okay that was what I. Davidson/State highways, the State DOT typically went out and purchased the right of way but for county roads it's typically an easement for the purpose of the road to the center line. Vanderhoef/So if the road were ever closed that land would go back to the original property owner. Davidson/I'm not certain of the process that has to go through to vacate a road like that Dee but it is an easement is my understanding. Vanderhoef/Okay and would you show the alignment where that road comes out (can't hear)? Davidson/Well unfortunately, I believe you can see the end of it right there. Lehman/Right there. Vanderhoef/It's there but it goes right into the farm. Davidson/It's essentially a lane that goes into the Williams' farmstead. Vanderhoef/Right, just to be sure that everybody understands that. Davidson/It looks like a farm lane but my understanding it is a designated county. Irvin. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 42 Pfab/Can I use your pointer a second? How do you turn this on? Lehman/Push the clip. Pfab/Now I think Ernie and I both have the same question. If property (can't hear) this is the way right? Davidson/Yes. Pfab/I think both of us don't like to see these two ends of the road, now they would disappear like this if negotiations, favorable negotiations would be worked out with the Williams' right? Davidson/Well and the Dane' s are also involved in that because the portion directly adjacent to the Dane road part of that is on the Dane property, so it would be negotiations with both the Dane's and the Williams. Pfab/But the Dane' s have told you in that area they are very favorable (can't hear). Davidson/They are very favorable to the N-1B alignment. Pfab/Right but now does that change if it goes up through here? Davidson/We would have to ask them. Lehman/Could I suggest if, is the Council in agreement that some variation of the alternative N-1B is the direction we'd like to go? O'Donnell/Yes. Champion/Yes. Pfab/Yes. Lehman/Then may I suggest that we give it back to you with that recommendation. Davidson/That's all we need at this point. Lehman/And I would suggest and I guess this is your call from here, some variation of that but I really would strongly encourage if possible to get all the property owners involved in that to sit down together and see what you can come up with. Obviously the final decision we've got to move somewhere with it but I sure would like to see. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 43 Davidson/Obviously since it's a property acquisition we would have an executive session over it once we get to the point where we're considering what to do. Lehman/I'm aware of that but during the process of deciding where your going to put that road it might be, it might not be, but to me it's worthwhile if we can get the William' s, and the Danes' together with city staff and a council person or two if they wish to be there. Davidson/Sure. Lehman/And see how close we can come to working something out that' s going to be mutually acceptable to everyone. But I believe we have told you some variation of N-1B is what we'll go with and leave it to you folks to try to work out. Davidson/That's what we need right now, thank you. Atkins/Ernie it's important that we also we understand will start to spend money because I'm sure the Dane's, Williams's and other folks will ask reasonably specific questions that may require us to do some engineering work. Lehman/I'm sure, no, no, I think. Atkins/Just so you understand we will start spending money on this project. Lehman/Okay. Willow Street and Union Road On Street Parkinl~ (CC #4g(44) (a) (b) Davidson/This was deferred at your last formal meeting, and my understanding from conversation I had with Connie subsequent to that was that the deferral was pretty much for any of you to go out and verify for yourselves what the situations were on those streets. I don't think staff has any additional information from you unless there are any questions. Pfab/I, nobody asked for my opinion but I'll state it. Lehman/That' s what we're here for. Pfab/Okay I am uncomfortable with either of the changes. Davidson/Okay. Pfab/I mean that' s after you go out and look at them I think probably the best thing to do is to do nothing, that would be my personal opinion. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 44 Champion/I disagree, I think Willow Street is an accident waiting to happen. Lehman/Well we're here, are there any questions for Jeff because this is going to be on the consent calendar tomorrow night? Champion/Well I have a suggestion. Lehman/Yes. Champion/I think we ought to make Willow Street one way. Pfab/I beg your pardon. Champion/I think we ought to make it one way, it has easy access to cross streets and two streets going down, and then you could have parking on it and still be able to go over the top of that hill. Pfab/From what I can gather if I, if it's my turn to speak, is that the problem came up by one or two people on that street and it came up because of some rather lengthy parking of a motor home type of vehicle that made it difficult and narrowed that up. And there' s somebody that was visiting over there and I think that that was really where the big problem came up and because it was there over a period of time one of the people farther down the street really was uncomfortable with it which I could understand that but other than that I don't see where it was much of a problem. Now that's how I understand it, that doesn't mean I'm right. Is that relative? Davidson/That is relatively accurate. Pfab/So it was really a temporary thing and it's been there for years. Davidson/Actually Irvin it was relatively accurate except for one thing, the letter that we received did not identify it as being because of a single vehicle of a certain type that was parked there, it was just presented to us as it' s always a problem because of vehicles that are parked there. Otherwise everything you said was accurate. Champion/There was, did you tell me there was a head on collision on that road. Davidson/There was one when we looked at the accident record for the last three years, there was one head on collision. Champion/It is really a fairly narrow street and if you are going up that hill you can not see a car coming, you can not, ifthere's a car parked, and you have to pull, and if your going, I don't know my directions but if your turning off of, is that Muscatine? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 45 Davidson/Yes, going north. Champion/Okay ifthere's a car parked on the right hand side you have to go in the left hand lane to get around that car, if somebody' s coming over the crest of that hill I'm amazed that there' s only been one accident. Pfab/But I think there' s no parking on side of the street right? Davidson/On one side there's no parking. Champion/But the road isn't wide enough to have two lanes. Pfab/So you don't have a second to negotiate and with a little bit of caution I mean, it's not an arterial street. Champion/Well I think. Lehman/Are there other questions for Jeff?. With the recommendation from staff is that we do prohibit parking. Davidson/In both locations. Lehman/As a safety issue on both. O'Donnell/On hours Ernie, specific hours. Lehman/Is that your, is that around the clock or from? Davidson/Yes. Lehman/Would. Davidson/We're proposing around the clock. Lehman/Okay, I mean, would a ban on parking (can't hear)? Davidson/Let's put it this way, the disability issues exist 24 hours a day. Lehman/All right fine, I've got you. Vanderhoef/They do and we don't have any snow removal kind of ordinance in place. Davidson/Yea the Union Road request was from the Streets Department and the Police Department, Streets Division and the Police Department. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 46 Vanderhoef/Yea and you can't see around there even when there' s not a car parked. Davidson/Any other questions? Lehman/We'll deal with it tomorrow night. Davidson/Thank you. Lehman/Thank you Jeff. Council ReOresentation Lehman/The next item was one that came up a couple weeks ago and this was relative to Steven your vote at JCCOG when a Council. Kanner/Well actually Ernie let me read you from what was supposed to be on the agenda but I think it's somewhat indicative of how the meetings are run, I'm quoting from the transcript April 2, "Kanner/but I think in the broader sense of who, how we vote and what' s majority and get back to that what' s the team player I think it would be great to have that general discussion talking about in a greater sense than just JCCOG. Lehman/I don't have any problem putting that on a work session, I would go for that that's fine" and then there's question marks and some other verbiage that you can't tell who said that so I think what was to be put on the agenda was the general discussion of who we represent not just on JCCOG but in general. Lehman/All right let' s just make this general and I think we're talking about actions Council have taken a position on what is the duty of a Council person when representing an issue that the Council has already taken a stand on when their representing the Council that' s. Kanner/We're not taking a stand, we're in the general community I think is the question. Lehman/No, no, no, not general community at all because I think that all of us. Kanner/Because that' s what I meant in the broader sense and that was what the understanding. See I think that' s part of the problem Mr. Mayor is what you call a team player is what you say is the majority vote and that' s it your a team player so you go along with the majority vote. But I brought up the point of who do you represent when you make statements about Iowa Child and you go to a press conference as the Mayor of Iowa City and so I think that is some of the broader question that I'm willing to debate and that' s what I thought we were going to discuss. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 47 Lehman/Well we can talk about that but I think when we're talking about an official position that is taken by the Council and one of us as a Council person goes to any other organization to represent this body on a position that has already been taken I think there' s a certain expectation that whoever we send will represent the view of the majority of the Council. They can state they disagree with them but I think that when the vote comes they must vote the way the majority of the Council votes. I have no problem with discussion, but I think there is an obligation on the part of every person sitting here and this was brought to my attention by Coralville Council people, by Council people sitting here at that meeting, everybody at that meeting said what's going on, you know you people voted, your Council voted 6- 1 to do this and then you send a representative to a meeting who votes against what his own Council voted for. Kanner/Just so it should be very clear to the audience that' s watching here and anywhere else there' s no legal obligation to vote the way the majority voted, in fact my understanding and the way I think most ordinary citizens would read it is that the reason we send six people to JCCOG's instead of sending one person is to have that freedom. And actually that' s good you got that report back because they knew that there was a minority opinion. Lehman/The reason we send six people is because Iowa City represents the vast majority of JCCOG and we're entitled to votes based on the number of people here. It has nothing to do with the number of opinion. Kanner/Right so send one person to vote. (END OF 01-47 SIDE TWO) Kanner/Minority opinion, the majority hold, I think people are sophisticated enough Ernie to realize that the majority is the one the that holds today but they hear a minority opinion and that' s good for Iowa City. But I think the reason we have six votes is to say we all have to be in lock step and I hope you campaign on that when you run for reelection if your going to do that. Lehman/Well let someone else on the Council comment. Champion/Well let me tell you Steven I don't care what you say at a Council meeting about how you want to vote for something or against it that is your right as a Council person. Out in the public I don't care what you care what you say on any issue that the Council has voted on you are welcome to state your opinion a million times if you want to, I don't really care about that, that is your right. But when you are representing this group on major money funding and we have made a decision that that' s where our money is going to go, or this money or whatever money it is and then you don't grant us the ability to do that I think your doing the city a disservice, your doing the Council a disservice because you are no longer This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 48 able to, you should not be able to vote your minority opinion at that point because your representatives on that Council, we have six votes, you are one of those votes and it is your obligation to carry through what the Council' s majority opinion on that. Otherwise I don't feel you should be on JCCOG. Kanner/That' s your concept of a team player is. Champion/No, no, I don't care if your ever a team player. Kanner/Minority position Connie I think that' s why your saying. (All talking) Champion/No, and a Council no your twisting my words. Kanner/And I wanted to campaign on that issue Connie and I think that' s going to really. Champion/I'm not going to, I would suggest that if you don't want to support the majority opinion at a JCCOG or any regional meeting we send you to that you should not sit on that position. Kanner/I think that' s a dire mistake and I think that is something that' s wrong with your philosophy of so called team player. Champion/I'm not, I have never used that term, I have never used the term "team player." Kanner/I agree with you, you haven't used the term but you are in support of the so called "team player' concept. Champion/No I'm not, I have never objected to anybody having a difference of opinion than mine, I think your wrong but I don't object to it. Kanner/You have objected you've cut off debate a number of times Connie. Champion/I will continue to do that when it's not going to change the discussion level because I don't have all night to sit here so you can have your diatribe. Kanner/Connie I think that' s how you do it I think that' s fairly typical in trying to limit debate, I represent the citizens of Iowa City, Ernie. Champion/You represent Steven Kanner. Kanner/Ernie one time Ernie you said who do you represent when we were trying to have a discussion on different ways of negotiating contract and you said Steven do you represent labor? Well I didn't answer you at that time and I'll answer you know, I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 49 do represent labor and I represent business and employees and the City Manager, and the City Attorney and the City Clerk, my job is to represent all the people and not just the Council majority. You have a right to vote as the majority which you do and you stifle democratic process through and through by not allowing minority opinions to be debated. I think you make a mistake and you hurt the citizens of Iowa City when you take away my voice at JCCOG's. Lehman/Steve I think it's very, and I have no problem at a JCCOG meeting with you expressing your displeasure with how the Council voted, look the Council voted to do this I absolutely disagree, I think it was a bad idea, but as a member of the Council I am bound to vote the way the Council voted. I have no problem with that. Kanner/Ernie why are you so afraid of if my vote if my vote is a minority vote, why are you so afraid of that? What I'm more afraid of. Lehman/Wouldn't have had to been a minority vote, that could have been a close vote where that project wouldn't have been funded because you did not uphold the decision of this Council and that could have happened. Kanner/And if it could have happened that meant that other people agreed with me and that's good for the County, let me, what I think is even more dangerous. Vanderhoef/Good for the County but your not representing the County. Kanner/When we do an open discussion like is done at JCCOG's I think it's great that people bring out their virgin viewpoints, I think what' s even more dangerous is the question of who do you represent when you make trips to lobby with the Chamber of Commerce? Who do you represent? Do you represent the business interest and your store downtown Iowa City? I think that' s the question people are asking, I think who do you represent, when as Mayor your in support of Iowa Child, I think that' s the question we ought to be asking in a general sense. When I take a stand it's all their at JCCOG's and everyone knows about it. When you're doing your things there' s little back room deals and there' s. Lehman/No that's not true Steven. Champion/Oh. Vanderhoef/Come on now, that' s. Lehman/Steven. Vanderhoef/That' s going way far off. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 50 Wilburn/Cut it out. Lehman/Would somebody else before I lose my temper with this character? Go ahead. Wilburn/I think the difference Steven is at the point where we take a vote in here it's city policy and so on JCCOG where we have a vote on city policy in my opinion that' s where however many votes we have are suppose to comply with city policy. I think what Ernie was saying and what Connie were saying at that point I think Council blew it, they shouldn't have voted this way, in addition to that I think prior to, well either at or prior to I think it would have been your right and representing your constituents to essentially lobby the other entities of JCCOG. But at that point in my opinion you should have voted city policy. Your example of the Supreme Court expressing minority view acts their deliberative body, the justices then don't go onto some other place where they are voting, you know, that' s the difference, I think you express your minority view when in the minority here and you can express it minus the vote when your not out someplace taking a policy vote because in mind that' s what JCCOG is a policy vote. Now we've got two Council Members that are on different sides of Iowa Child, Iowa City hasn't taken a policy vote on that and so I don't see them as having any conflicting interest there. The Chamber of Commerce, if we take a policy vote in here and the Mayor or the City Manager then in my mind they have to vote to city policy the majority that was implemented and so that's my opinion. Vanderhoef/And when it comes to legislation it was one of those things like this year I brought to Council and ask you for a policy vote on the bottle bill, it was one of the things that I felt that there probably was good support with given our previous votes however if the policy had been not to support bottle bill I certainly wouldn't have signed onto it at ECICOG because my Council would have spoken that that was not something that they wanted, since this Council said yes I took it to the regional COG and asked them to consider it, they had a month to consider it and they came back and it passed with the exception of one vote and that County had chosen not to support it. But that vote when I get out away from City Council, when I vote on something like that the first thing I'm thinking is all right, how is my Council going to approach this? How will they react to this vote? How would they want me to vote? It's not my personal opinion, it is how would the City of Iowa City like to be represented on this particular issue? Kanner/Actually Dee I think you have more of a case there than a case with JCCOG's where there' s six representatives and I think again I would like to make the point that things that are done at JCCOG's are above board. I think that what' s even more dangerous is people working on different issues and not knowing where they're coming from and then voting certain ways and I think that' s the issue of who do they represent. Ernie I think that' s a good thing, Dee when I think when you talk in your campaign for City Council about I don't need a library because I'm an owner of a book store, I think that' s. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 51 Vanderhoef/I did not ever say that, excuse me, but your putting words in my mouth. Kanner/That' s what I heard at a forum that we had when we (can't hear). Vanderhoef/No way. Lehman/Hey the question folks. Kanner/I'll quote you, but the point is the, that is where your coming from and that's even more dangerous than someone representing a different viewpoint and going to JCCOG's and voting that. And if your afraid of that, that' s a pretty sad state of affairs. Vanderhoef/It has nothing to do with fear, it has to do with policy of this body. Kanner/What' s the policy that' s harmed if there are five other people that are in agreement with something and one person brings up another point of view about money being spent from JCCOG's. Vanderhoef/I didn't say anything about having the discussion, what I'm saying is the vote. Kanner/Right but how is that, you said your not afraid, what was the term you used that you? In any case why is there concern? I can't see why there' s concern if there are five other people that agree or four other people that agree with the policy it's not going to change that policy. Vanderhoef/I think it was pointed out to you by what Connie was saying was the fact that we are representing X number of people at JCCOG, that' s why we have six votes. This was a money issue that was decided by this body at City Council level that we wanted to switch the funding. Now we technically could have lost that vote had all the other people, members of the JCCOG voted not to allow us to switch that. That's the fear, and this time it was one vote, well what's to say next time we have a similar kind of thing happen and it won at Council with 4-3 and the three opposing votes are on the COG so that three votes plus others. I mean that' s a funding stream and we're required by state law to set our transportation plan at that meeting and it is the long range plan. Lehman/Let me ask you a question Steven, if your vote would have made the difference between the funding being transferred to Mormon Trek extended and not being extended would you have voted no? Kanner/Well let me tell you Ernie. Lehman/Well answer my question because that' s the question. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 52 Kanner/Let me answer your question Ernie I think one of the. Vanderhoef/Say yes or no. Kanner/No it's not a yes or no. Lehman/Yes it is a yes or no, if your in a situation. Kanner/Ernie I'm going to answer it in the way I see fit then and if you don't want to accept it that's fine. Lehman/In other words your not going to answer it. Kanner/Will you just hold on Ernie. Lehman/Go ahead. Kanner/JCCOG is there to oversee the whole County, we're part of the large urbanized city in the Johnson County area, and if the County, if the JCCOG's board, majority to sees fit to deny funding for something that Iowa City majority wants I think that's what it's there for. Lehman/Right. Kanner/I would vote to not fund that because I don't think it's in the best interest of the citizens of Iowa City, I was not convinced by the vote here in the City Council and I was not convinced by JCCOG's. But JCCOG's has the ability to put a check on that and that' s why it is set up there as an entity by the federal and state government to have that kind of check not to put a muzzle on people coming from different City Council' s. Lehman/But what you said then that you would have voted against it even if it had meant the funding wouldn't have been transferred. Kanner/Correct. Lehman/Six, Five of your Council, six of your Council cohorts voted for it and you would have, one person then could have overruled the wishes of six Council people. Kanner/Actually Ernie it would have been how many people are on the JCCOG' s? Lehman/We're talking about the Council. Kanner/No how many people are on the JCCOG's board? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 53 Lehman/I don't know offhand, that isn't the point. Kanner/No the point is your making a scenario that didn't happen. Lehman/No but it could have. Kanner/If the scenario did happen that meant there was a majority of people on this board who' s purpose is to over see this money and see what' s best for the whole area. Now I would have agreed that it was not best for Iowa City and if that scenario played out like you said that meant the majority felt it was not best for the area, not the best use of these funds which can be used not only to build roads but can be used to do transit and to do bicycle enhancement and do a host of other things Ernie. Lehman/I hear you, I disagree with you, Mike do you have any comments? Vanderhoef/That is one of your things, however when you take that scenario your taking that out of context because there are times that we have votes at JCCOG that have to do with funding streams for various entities. And if Iowa City' s request for funding of the STP funds is denied that just means the possibility that that pot of money is going to go to the other entities. O'Donnell/We sit there, we sit there six of us as Iowa City's representatives, and we made a decision here, we aren't representing the County, we're representing Iowa City, that' s our function, we're City Council Members. Wilburn/Exactly. O'Donnell/And if we go there and all of the entities sit at JCCOG are lobbying for funding for their own little projects and you know it may come to a point in time Steven where that one vote means that we can't complete a project. But the wishes of the Council at that point in time aren't being put forward because one person didn't support the wishes of the Council and forgets the fact that their City of Iowa City representative on that board. Vanderhoef/Your right and in another time period it could be two Iowa City Councilors or three Iowa City Councilors who would chose to go that way even though it passed by a majority of the Council. Wilburn/I'm thinking of another places where I've seen some folks, a way that they've expressed their minority view and if I felt at JCCOG that in my conscience whatever maybe whatever the issue just couldn't exercise the wishes of the majority of the Council then I think I would ask for an alternate to go. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 54 Lehman/We have alternate. Wilburn/You know folks I can't, I can't go, I can't do this, your going to have to send someone else, just another. Kanner/There' s a whole lot of influences that are going on, we have people that are lobbying, we have staff people that are lobbying our representatives all the time. We have people that have been lobbying for this parking ramp on Burlington to our state or US Representatives, we have people that are lobbying part of National League of Cities, we have people that are lobbying for the State League of Cities, we have City Manager who is part of the Chamber, doesn't vote, part oflCAD that votes, we have Council Members that are doing all these different things and so we're out there with a million different things giving our opinions and again there' s no legal obligation, we've not seen that there' s any legal obligation. I think there's moral obligations that we each decide who we're going to represent in all these different things and what is influencing us and I think actually the place that' s most above board about where we're coming from is an official public body we're required by state laws to do meetings in a certain manner and I think to vote is probably the most above board way of doing something where people see where you stand and again I would urge you to think about who you represent in not just voting but in all different things and I think that' s the main issue. You certainly have the votes to vote me off JCCOG which is what your apparently going to do. Wilburn/If your talking to me, I have not had those discussions with anyone. Champion/We haven't had that discussion. Wilburn/If your suggesting that I'm not quite sure what you mean by above the board, if your accusing me of back room deals or something like that I'm highly offended by that. I take personal pride in what. Kanner/Did you hear what I said Ross? I said that we're all doing different things representing different things at numerous places. Wilburn/Your expressing your opinion, your not implementing a policy out there, your not executing a contract on your own out there, that' s the difference and I'm very offended by that, if that' s what your implying. Kanner/I'm saying that everybody is working towards different goals and different ways, a vote is only one way to move towards that and I think it's probably the procedures that are set up here are the most above board way to do it. And JCCOG's, a vote there is above board and very visible and people can see where persons stands and the City Council can see where persons stand and if they prefer not to have that then they vote in the majority side which seems to be prevailing pretty heavily but to me it's just ludicrous to say that six people going to JCCOG's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 55 all have to vote the same way because then there' s no purpose of having six people going. Wilburn/I disagree with the purpose, or we can disagree with what it means to implement the policy of the City, we disagree then. Lehman/Well just let me suggest Steven and I agree, I think that every minority opinion needs to be heard and you had the opportunity when we voted to change the funding to make your case to the Council and you did and it was a 6-1 vote. And I think you exercised your obligation to vote the way you felt and I think everybody respects that I mean all of us have been on the short end of votes once in a while. I think we generally respect each other' s opinion as to why but when we go to JCCOG we're no longer representing ourselves individually, we are representing the actions of the City Council now that' s the difference between your thinking as going to say JCCOG and what I believe this City does when we send people to JCCOG their there to represent the position that the City has taken and the representation at that point is to the City. That doesn't preclude you or anybody else from making a statement I totally disagree with what the City has decided to do but as a representative of the City I must uphold the decision that' s made by the Council, not that I believe is the (can't hear). Kanner/Well you can certainly put that in as Council policy that there' s an obligation to vote that way, maybe you can't, I don't know what the legal ramifications are but you could try to do that and I would disagree with it and but I would follow the law. And I just want to get back to one thing Ross you said many months ago about an action that you disagreed with that something was voted on and you don't go out and you just disagreed with the name, you don't go out and chisel something into the building. Well I didn't answer at that time but I'm going to answer now, I think that's illegal to do that, where my policy is to do what's legal, and right now it's legal to vote what I feel are the best interests of all of Iowa City on the Council and at JCCOG's and I'11, and you also have the legal right to vote me off of JCCOG if that's what your planning to do. Wilburn/I just told you, I just told you I have not had those discussions. I have not talked about that. Lehman/Well I guess the real question is are you willing to support the Council' s position on JCCOG or when you have an official, not anything unofficial but in an official vote where you represent this Council are you willing to cast your vote in accordance with the majority of the Council or the Council' s wishes? Kanner/I'm not going to adhere to that, and I don't think anyone else should have to adhere to that. Lehman/Fine and that' s the question guys. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 56 Champion/Well you know I have real problems with that, I really do and I'd like to suggest and that we ask Mayor Lehman to decide what he wants to do about finding seats on JCCOG again. Lehman/Irvin you haven't said anything. Pfab/No I, I'm going to try to ask a neutral question and I'm not sure if this is easy to do here but that' s going to be my attempt. What I'm trying to sort out is can we expect that any of us go to represent Iowa City and I mean every one of us go to different organizations as representatives of Iowa City are we expected to vote the whatever way the City Council voted? Lehman/If that. Pfab/The majority. Lehman/Well ifthere's a vote, but see I think there are very very few organizations that we go to that we have votes that Council has ever acted on. Tell me of another one. Pfab/Well okay the only one that I can think of right now is if you go to League of Cities there are sometimes there are votes there. Lehman/Yea but most of the time not issues that we've even voted on. Pfab/Well okay. Lehman/We're talking about specific issues that this City has taken position on. Pfab/Okay, all right I'll go along with that so okay let' s say specific issues that we have voted. It is, it looks like the wish of the Council that that vote is, that vote should be cast the way the majority of the City Council voted. Lehman/That' s the point. Pfab/Okay all right. So then I have one other question again in a neutral sort of way. Okay now when that happens and by various going to different organizations is there an obligation or do we expect a person that's made to vote at that organization report back to the Council how they voted? Lehman/We've never had to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 57 Pfab/No but is it, would that be a reasonable thing to expect? If you take the City' s official vote to someplace and you vote should the City Council expect to have a report on how the vote was made? Champion/(can't hear). Vanderhoef/That's why we put. (can't hear). Vanderhoef/Then it's in the packet so it's very how, then it's of the CVB and their, we could put those in there too. Pfab/Okay that answered that was the part that you filled in the spot that I didn't think of, okay that' s fine, you answered my question. I have no, I'm sitting here listening and I don't know ifthere's anything on any action on the table is there? Champion/No. Lehman/Well the only thing is I do believe we need to have some understanding that people who represent the City on decisions that have been made by the City will vote in accordance with majority of the Council. And this was brought up obviously by a JCCOG action. Pfab/Okay. Vanderhoef/I brought it up because I was pretty floored. Pfab/I guess after I listened to this when we go as representatives of the City it looks to me while we may not always agree with the vote I think from what, my feeling right at this second is we should vote the wishes or the decision of the City Council. O'Donnell/And I don't know how you can see it in any other way. Pfab/Yea I. O'Donnell/We were transferring funding but you have to, the very important thing is we're all there, different communities lobbying for the same pot of money and we will reach a point in time when we have. I've been on there for three years and we have occasions where one vote did make a difference. And when you go there your one of six that representative Iowa City, we go through all the work here, the staff goes through the work, sometimes there' s already money involved but we're lobbying for the funds and each community is lobbying for funding for their own This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 58 projects so that's why, the and normally that one vote isn't going to make a difference but it could and that' s why. Pfab/I think the fact that before a vote is made a person can state their violent opposition to (can't hear). Lehman/Absolutely. Pfab/But I mean I think it's right that we go as City representatives we probably should, that' s, that' s just a gut. O'Donnell/That' s the way you have to look at it I believe. Pfab/I mean I don't think, I don't know ifthat's something that we should pass as something we are obligated to do, I don't know, but that' s my gut feeling when I sort it out, that' s where I'd have to go. Lehman/And your not willing to agree to vote and I'm not saying discussions, obviously you can say whatever you think but your not willing to agree to vote the way the Council has voted on JCCOG matters? And if your not. Kanner/Ernie again I put this in the larger context of representation, if your agreeable, we had talked about for instance financial disclosure maybe we can reach a compromise, if you want to be a team player, you take into account some minority position, you have a minority position on economic development, that's a team player. If you want to talk about compromise I might be willing to compromise, if we throw a bunch of things into the pot and talk about ethics for Council Members, I'd be willing to talk about your asking. But we throw it all in the pot and talk about an have some really good discussion and have compromise and consensus because we don't have, you have the majority and that's it and there's no incorporation of minority position and that's the way it operates that's fine but if your serious asking about trying to come to a compromise I'm willing to work with you and talk about that Ernie and throw all these other things into the pot which I think are just as important about the larger sense, the ethical sense of who we represent and I think it's appropriate for a legislative body to look at those things. I think those bodies have made those kind of rules for their members at different levels and if we can do that and if you want to have that discussion. Lehman/I don't mind having that discussion although perhaps we should have that some other time other than a Council meeting. Vanderhoef/I don't think it's germane to what we're asking at this point. Lehman/Well what we're asking right now and I think that it's really important if you really want your minority opinion heard at a JCCOG meeting I believe that the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 59 Council is going to tell you that you need to support the position of the Council in your vote, not in your opinion, not in your discussion but when it comes to vote I think you need to tell us you will do that if you don't do that I'm going to ask the Council if they wish to replace you, we will replace you. Kanner/I think you do what you have to do Ernie I think that' s a wrong position, I think if we have it in the whole context again of who we represent I think it's appropriate to have that discussion. Lehman/Okay what' s the Council' s pleasure. Vanderhoef/Well I hear no, I hear that you gave a choice to Steven and he's not willing to make a commitment so I suggest that we replace him. Champion/I agree. Lehman/Do we have concurrence in that? Dilkes/I'm going, I have a couple comments here. Lehman/Yes. Dilkes/And I'm going to address these in the context of JCCOG because I don't believe that you can take every many of these group situations or fact specific and so but I'm going to address my comments to JCCOG. JCCOG is not a group of individuals but I think if your right and if you even look at their bylaws your appointed because your a representative of a certain entity. You have no mechanism Steven as right currently to require a Council Member to vote in accordance with your wishes. I don't see that there is that mechanism currently existing. I think you could create such a mechanism. That being said if it is your desire to remove Steven there is a state code provision regarding removal of appointees which I think we've discussed before in the context of board appointments. I think this code section is likely addressed to that situation but we probably imply with it as in this one as well. And it requires a written notice filing with the City Clerk opportunity by the appointee to request a public hearing that kind of thing so I don't think, I think we need to take a few more steps in order to make that removal happen. If it is the expressed decision here of the City Council to start that process then I can go ahead and get that done. Champion/Okay. Lehman/I really don't want to go through this, I mean I just think this is not, Steven this is basically a no brainer. I think you are, as Eleanor said you are there as a representative of an entity not as a representative of the audience here or the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 60 Johnson County but as a representative of this body that sits here that' s what you go to JCCOG meetings for. Kanner/What I heard Eleanor say was slightly different from what you are saying Ernie I think that our appointments are as a representative of the entity and again I heard that there's no legal obligation. Lehman/That's exactly right. Kanner/To vote, so I didn't hear necessarily the same degree that you heard and I don't think it's a no brainer, I think there' s sharp philosophical differences certainly and my position and the other majority position and right now you have the upper hand and it could change. Lehman/But you have the opportunity to make those distinctions when we voted the first time, when the Council made that decision you had your opportunity to make your point, you made your point it did not prevail, but you had your opportunity. Pfab/I think there' s even one other thing here and I think not only it points you as spade Ernie I also think it was just a case where you could not express your opinion at JCCOG which is what we're talking about and there may be others and you can make you point and say well I'm going to aye or nay but I'm going to hold my nose when I do it but I think if we go there as representing the City I believe that' s probably the knowledge we have, that' s my gut feeling, I don't know. Wilburn/Well I don't support removing him because I don't think it's necessary, I think that I still hold firm that you represent, you represent in that case your representing City policy do, and I think it's a matter of, if voicing your minority (can't hear) and you choose to do that in the future I think that' s probably making a political statement, I think it works in the reverse too if you choose, if it's perceived that your not implementing the policy of the City then that' s a political decision so you know. The reason I say that is because I also I don't I don't think it's my experience so far is that I'm not looking at trying to make it mandatory vote that way I think if a Council Member chooses not to implement a policy I think it's a statement in itself. Kanner/I would agree with you. Pfab/Unless, I'm going to make a suggestion, I think we had a really good discussion, I would propose that we put this off for a month and maybe at the next, at a month later work session bring it up and see once where it is and maybe decide. O'Donnell/What would change? Pfab/I don't know. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 61 O'Donnell/Philosophy, I mean that doesn't. Pfab/I mean it's, I think we had some really hard hitting discussions here and I don't know if this is what we came prepared to do that' s fine, then maybe we want to go on with it. I don't see do we want to start the process as Eleanor? Are we ready to do that that propose that we have to do? I'm not. Dilkes/I think the other, I mean I think one of the things that you should consider or maybe want to consider is formalizing the policy that it sounds like the majority of you have with respect to votes at JCCOG specifically. Lehman/How would we go about that? Dilkes/Well I think you'd do a resolution. Champion/And how would you enforce? Dilkes/I mean you have the right to establish rules for yourself. Champion/How do you enforce it then? Dilkes/Well that' s the next step, you know, I don't think we can assume that once that is a formal policy that it will be violated but in the event it is then you would have the removal option. Wilburn/Well that' s, maybe this is applicable maybe it's not, I mean right behind me is an example of, maybe that wasn't a formal policy but it's against the wishes of the majority of Council so I don't know how that adds to the mix or not. Lehman/Would the Council concur in having the staff draw up a resolution that would the cover the situation that we're talking about? Vanderhoef/Yes. Wilburn/Not at this point. Pfab/Me neither, not now. Vanderhoef/Yes. Lehman/Well the resolution would just require that if your sent as a representative of the City of Iowa City that you would vote to support the actions of your Council. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 62 Pfab/I would want some time between our discussion tonight before I would decide on that. Vanderhoef/Yea but the resolution would have to come at a formal meeting so we'd have. Pfab/Listen I would want to sit and think about this a little bit before I would vote yes on it, I would vote no tonight right now but I, that doesn't mean that if I had time to sort this out a little bit more I might change my vote I don't know but if I had to vote tonight I'll vote against it. Champion/We're not voting. Kanner/Actually Mike, Mike you asked what would change a delay. If there was true a sense of trying to reach a compromise I think for me to sit down with Ernie with perhaps a mediator to see if there could be a solution that could work out that would be to the benefit of the Council as a whole, I'd be willing to do that. Lehman/I'll sit down with you but I don't think we need a mediator. Kanner/I think I do for my point of view I think I need that. Lehman/In any event, there is no compromise in voting against when you represent this Council, there is no compromise that would allow you not to support what this Council (can't hear) and if that's the compromise that your looking for then there' s no point in sitting down because I think that' s your obligation. Kanner/Well again Ernie I said I'm willing to compromise if we bring in other issues too and so perhaps there is room to negotiate on that. Lehman/What do you guys want to do? Vanderhoef/I would look at a resolution to have it in place and let people think about it and bring the resolution to Council say the first meeting in June. Champion/How many? You know I do have problems with the resolution on telling people how to vote, tell people how they should vote but the problem with the whole thing of not supporting Council decisions I really have more problems with that. How many? Lehman/I don't have a problem with not supporting a Council decision, personally that' s fine but when you are representing an action of the Council I don't think we have the ability or should have the ability. Champion/Well that's, I didn't say that but that's what I mean. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 63 Dilkes/Well I think we we'd want to narrow the, we would want to focus on Council appointments to particular bodies. Champion/Right, absolutely. Dilkes/I mean we can't just, we have to speak in some specific terms. Lehman/Well we're burning up a lot of time folks we're not getting anywhere, what do you want to do? Champion/Well I'd be willing to look at an ordinance that would require us to vote Council policy in specific situations such as JCCOG. O'Donnell/It's really a shame that we have to do that. Lehman/Yea it is. Is that a big job Eleanor? Dilkes/No I don't think so. Lehman/Why don't you go ahead and get something at least we can talk about. CDBG Allocations O'Donnell/I think we have to take a break. Lehman/Pardon. Champion/Take another break, we're emotionally drained. Lehman/Allocations. O'Donnell/I'm tired. Lehman/Well everybody is. Steve. Steve Nasby/Yes sir. Lehman/Yea I guess. Vanderhoef/Anybody want a pop or a water? O'Donnell/I want a pop. Vanderhoef/Diet. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 64 Steve Nasby/I'm losing my audience. O'Donnell/(can't hear) second. Pfab/It might be a done break. Nasby/Possibly. Pfab/(can't hear) Nasby/All right Mr. Mayor at your April 17th meeting you had a public hearing on the annual action plan for fiscal year 02 and the annual action plan is a tool that we use to implement our funding for the Community Development and Block Grant program and the home program. The public hearing was opened and closed at the last meeting and for the meeting tomorrow evening we've got the final passage of the annual action plan on your agenda. And we do need to pass the plan as it or in an amended format as you see fit so we can get sent to HUD by the 15th of May and you had requested that we bring this up at the work session this time so. Lehman/Yea is there discussion, we think we're all pretty much aware of what' s been proposed and we had the public hearing. Nasby/Correct. Lehman/Two weeks ago and we're going to be acting tomorrow night is there discussion or questions we've got for Steve? Vanderhoef/Questions or Comments? Lehman/Comments. Vanderhoef/I'm going to be proposing an amendment in the housing funding to delete the funding for Foxboro project and fully fund the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and city housing on the Peninsula property and put the remaining dollars into the Habitat for Humanity. Champion/I'm not going to support that although I'd like to see the housing, both of those people have more money, I'm not willing to decrease the funding to Foxboro fund because I think it's already been staged and well planned and I'm not willing to change that at this point. I don't have my notes with me but one of the things that bothered me were the economic development projects was money being allotted to increased salaries and I have problems with that in a young business, that money is being used to increase salaries, I just have a problem with it, I'm not saying I want to get rid of it. I don't know where else we can get the money for This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 65 the Iowa City housing and the Habitat for Humanity and the Peninsula Project but I hope there's somewhere else that we can get it than that particular project. Vanderhoef/Well I'll state my reasons tomorrow night for the public on my reasoning on that amendment. Kanner/I had a question, or a comment. I was talking to staff about economic development and what I got out the conversation was that basic, the basic thing of economic development is to get people from low level to wage jobs to livable wage jobs in a sense that this is in a sense the proposal from Ruby' s Pearl is the basics of what it's meant for economic development money from CDBG home fund. Nasby/Job creation and job retention are the two goals, one of the byproducts that the City Steps would like to see and commission would like to see (can't hear) the living wage job s. Kanner/And this Ruby's Pearl proposal does that in going from $7.00 an hour to $9.00 an hour. Nasby/Yea their proposing to retain the two jobs and possibly create one more so that would be the basis for the funding and that' s what we would tie them to through the agreement the living wage portion of that is something they've added into it. Kanner/One thing I might propose is a different amendment tomorrow night and I want to throw this out to the Council and to you. For the Foxboro project it seems that the critical level is $234,000 but we see that it's only 8 percent private financing. Nasby/Correct. Kanner/And so I'd like to see that raised to the equivalent of metro is up to about 12 percent I think is what we figured out and see if we can perhaps require that from Foxboro or perhaps ask both of them to go up, it seems to me a compromise would be $50,000 from Foxboro and $50,000 from Metro Plains and give that to the greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship which wouldn't be their $200,000 but it would cut that deficit in half that they were asking for. Nasby/I'm looking up my number here for you. Kanner/And I know it makes it more difficult but maybe we could hear from the developer' s if it' s still doable. Vanderhoef/No we can get that tomorrow night. Lehman/Yea. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 66 Nasby/Metro Plains is about 17 percent privately funded. Kanner/17 so maybe even ask Foxboro to go even higher. Vanderhoef/Go higher you mean. Kanner/Privately funded, right now they're at about 8 percent of the project. Vanderhoef/So what your saying is decrease their funding that much more requiring then to have the project go forward that it would have to have more private dollars into it. Kanner/Right to go up to 17 percent. Vanderhoef/Okay however they can work it out. Kanner/Could you tell us tomorrow what that, if they go from 8 to 17 percent what that would be approximately and what we would save? Nasby/How much do you want to give me and I can figure it out. Kanner/Well tomorrow is fine. Nasby/Okay. Lehman/Well then, I mean tomorrow night, apparently we're going to have some discussion relative to you brought up Greater Housing Iowa City Fellowship, we're going to have some discussion about Habitat for Humanity, there's going to be some discussion relative to Foxboro and there apparently may be relative to Ruby' s Pearl or at least Economic Development, are there other issues that we want to talk to Steve about? O'Donnell/I'm coming basically with what Dee said. Vanderhoef/I have just some wording that I might as well tell you what I'm thinking about on the Economic Development funds, we've been not been looking at micro enterprise start up businesses previously so this is a new venture for all of us, that means the Commission, the staff and the Council. When I started looking at the HUD requirements for Economic Development funds it specifically talks about the feasibility of the project and obviously when we're talking about $125,000 we want to be sure that we're putting it into a feasible business. In talking with. (END OF 01-48 SIDE ONE) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 67 Vanderhoef/It might take staff with an outside consultant to look over business plans to see if this is a feasible project before we allocate funds so what I thought I would suggest tomorrow night is that we fund the recommended micro enterprise businesses subject to the feasibility study that they are good solid candidates to make a success and then not release any funds to them until that has been completed. Pfab/I wasn't involved with DARE (can't hear) but I was involved a fair amount, at this point I don't think it's perfect and I don't think it's ever going to be perfect and I would suggest that we except it as it is with making more change and different changes that after the season and accept it as it is, that' s my proposal. Vanderhoef/Well staff has to go through a feasibility anyway because that' s the HUD guideline. Nasby/We would do diligence with those projects prior to (can't hear). Pfab/I think that they've done (can't hear). Vanderhoef/That' s why I say fund them and if it's a feasible project then we will release the funds. Pfab/I am very much against changing the rules after the game is just about over. Vanderhoef/It isn't changing the rules because the HUD guidelines require us to do this. Pfab/Well then if their not changing the rules we don't have to do anything because the rules are already in place. Vanderhoef/All we're saying is that we need to have a feasibility, that we know that it can succeed with the capitalization and so forth that is available. Pfab/I think these people have gone out of their way to get the best better than I will and maybe better than any one of us on this Council that have expertise in this area and I think they've done that and I think to grab them by the neck and say hey we don't like, we just don't like you so we're going to put some more rules on I don't think that' s the right way to do it. Lehman/I don't think we're trying to do that, one thing I want to just mention and then I think we have this discussion tomorrow night but as I think we're all aware the Greater Housing Iowa City Housing Fellowship was funded 100 percent by the state, it was also rated I think our number one priority by our own committee and was funded to a lesser degree. The state funding for the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship, the degree of funding from the state depends on the degree of funding from the city so if we fund them at a lesser amount they will not also not This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 68 receive the full funding that they have received from the state. Their plan as I understand it is to purchase and build 19 lots, or 19 houses on the lots in the Peninsula property which I think at least it has been for some time a very high priority of this Council to see that project start out and be successful so I think if between now and tomorrow night ifthat's a priority for us we need to figure out how we can come up with the money it takes to see that one fully funded I do think it's definitely in the best interest of the community to get that project off and running so. Pfab/I guess I have a question did I not understand the, having a senior moment here, that basically they agree to expect the way things were done? Lehman/Well I think everyone accepts what they've given, I mean what choice. Pfab/No, no, I mean accept the outcome of the whole thing. Lehman/Well everybody accepts the outcome because that' s all they get. Pfab/No, no, I was thinking that I saw a statement support of the different process that we're going out. Lehman/We got a pretty good, pretty long letter from them prior to the public hearing pointing out to us the how important it was for them to receive 100 percent funding so they could maintain the level of funding from state and also pointed out that the properties they wanted to develop were in the Peninsula which has been a pretty high priority to the City. Pfab/So in other words if the only problem is finding the part that didn't fund (can't hear) city budget. Lehman/About well or somewhere. Pfab/$150,000 $190,000. Lehman/$198,000 anyway something to think about between now and tomorrow night. Pfab/So in other words that is really the only problem that we have, if that can be funded somewhere else then everything. Vanderhoef/No. Lehman/No, no, that' s just, I just mentioned that from my perspective that may not, the Council may not share that perspective. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 69 Pfab/Okay, okay, I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm saying that' s the difficulty as you see it. Lehman/That' s one of the problems but I do think from my perspective as well that the funding will be found in the CDBG moneys, I'm not interested in going into the general fund or something else for that money. Pfab/But if there are other housing funds someplace else. Lehman/If we could work something out or be creative I think it's a project that (can't hear). Pfab/Ifthat's the case then would we be willing to accept the rest of it as it is? Lehman/Well it's up to the rest of the Council, I mean there' s seven of us here. Pfab/I meant. Vanderhoef/We'll vote and talk about it tomorrow. Lehman/Steven. Kanner/I have a question, we do have a letter here from Foxboro suggesting other revenue sources, are these realistic housing affordable housing funding pool, HCDC projects that will not proceed, longer payments HCDC? Nasby/The affordable housing funding pool we budgeted $150,000 for FY02 as the Housing Community Development Commission has already reviewed those guidelines the project wouldn't qualify for them because their for out of cycle projects which is one of the criteria. Another of the criteria was that there at least 25 percent privately funded so it wouldn't qualify for that and if we did bend those rules I think you would need to talk to Charlie and Maryanne about whether they could even make that work because it's my understanding that that' s a loan and that may not work in their debt structure. As far as money recaptured we've got $20,000 that we're kind of waiting on to see if Old Brick and right now that' s the only one that we may recapture and that's $20,000 and as far as program income we've budgeted every dime we have. We haven't even budgeted a contingency this year because Old Brick may not go and if we've got that money back that would be $20,000 and that' s less than 1 percent of our overall budget so we would kind of like to keep that for contingency but we budgeted everything we have. Kanner/Okay and another question about Economic Development funds. The City Council Economic Development Committee requested funding for year round revolving fund. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 70 Nasby/Correct. Kanner/Some low and some grant. Could HCDC do the same thing which they would have year round set aside if Council (can't hear). Nasby/If Council authorized the authority for the Commission to do it I suppose they could. Kanner/Was that considered at all as a possibility? Nasby/I don't have that information. Kanner/I mean was it considered by HCDC at all? Nasby/No it was not considered by HCDC. Kanner/How would that proposal. (somebody's cell phone rang) Nasby/That was Dale' s wake up call. Kanner/So what would initiate that? I would assume Council would initiate that, would HCDC initiate that? Nasby/I know that under May discussions they want to talk about the Economic Development Fund proposal, what those discussions are going to be I can't tell you we haven't had them yet. Lehman/Steven I think they could have recommended the funding for the two economic development projects they sent us, they could have recommended I'm sure that they establish their own fund and put that money in the fund, I mean they could have done that couldn't they? Nasby/Yea they could have done that but that isn't something in their purview. Lehman/Chose to allocate it instead. Nasby/Yea and that' s generally not in their purview to do as. Lehman/Right but they could have asked to do that. Nasby/Yea and maybe in May they will. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 71 Champion/Okay well one question I will be asking tomorrow night and I don't know if anybody has the answer is where can we get the money, the Iowa City Housing Commission? (All talking) Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship. Champion/Fellowship for the Peninsula project that' s the question, what are the possibilities for getting that money where could we get it besides out of the air? Nasby/Well you have a lot of, Steve' s staring at me, you have a resources at your control. Champion/He's probably staring at me by asking that question. Lehman/One place we can't get it is the general fund. Champion/Well I know but I think it's important that we have that money and so I want to look, I want to explore ways that we can get it. Lehman/Well I think we need to be prepared to talk about that tomorrow night. Champion/I know. Vanderhoef/Bring us your ideas tomorrow night. Lehman/Yes. Champion/I'm asking people for ideas, I'm asking. Vanderhoef/I hear you, if I had any I would put them up to begin with. Champion/We have to have that money. Nasby/Okay and we will need to approve the plan in some form tomorrow. Lehman/Right we do need to approve something tomorrow night, the way it is, amend it, however, but we do need to approve something tomorrow night. Nasby/Please. Lehman/All right we will do that. Nasby/Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 72 Alcohol Ordinance Lehman/Eleanor it's time for a drink. Would you kind of walk us through the proposed changes to the Alcohol Ordinance and we'll decide what we're going to do with that. Dilkes/Okay as we said in the memo we did as you directed ask for written comments from licensees and also met with those licensees interested in meeting with us on April 19th, as I told you in the memo we got written comments from two and six individuals representing four establishments were at the meeting on April 19th. And I'm looking now at Section 4-5-7 on limitations of sales because that' s the only thing that we were focusing on. Number 2 you will see that we added to the end of that or an unlimited number of servings was free, it was brought to our attention by some of the bar owners that a practice of other bar owners is to offer an unlimited amount not for a specific price but for free and we thought that made sense to add that if you can't give all you can drink for $1.00 it doesn't make sense that you should be able to give all you can drink for free. On the third one this is about increasing the proportion of alcohol, increasing the alcohol in a drink. And the questions we got along those lines were well what I have a short that has one shot in it and I serve a tall that has two shots in it but my short, and these are drinks I always sell and my short is $4.00 and my tall is $6.00 is that not okay because it's not a proportional increase in the price? And our response to that was that' s an increase in the price of drink that you, or increase in the volume of alcohol that your already serving. That' s not, that' s not like making a special, okay come in tonight, this size glass which normally has one shot in it and I'm going to put three in for the price of one so we have given them that response. We did consider removing the word proportionally from that provision and it just makes the whole thing meaningless, we didn't do that, we tried to focus on the drink and that will be our interpretation of it. Number 4 which is the price reduction of prices from that normally charged has been eliminated at the Council' s direction. Old number 5, now number 4, this is the out of sight sales one, we have amended that to focus on the serving and the delivery of the alcohol as opposed to the selling of the alcohol. If we said your prohibited from selling more than two drinks to one individual, you'd have to have a sell, a cash transaction each time you sold, for each two drinks and that didn't seem workable to us from the bar owners perspective. Yea for the reason that you couldn't run a tab, you couldn't buy drinks for the whole table that kind of thing so and again that fits with the, the purpose of the section is to deliver to be people you know to be of age. Then the last section was the private event section and as I think I told you at that last meeting we removed catered from that as it didn't provide much to that since we're only talking about on sight sales anyway. And we have defined private event to one that is restricted to a particular group or persons and there has to be a means by which to identify those persons, that could be in a number of different ways, a different room, a different space, tickets, wrist bands, that kind of thing. And I think I gave you the example of the small tavern owner who said I do This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 73 birthday parties but I'm just one room and I have no place to segregate them. And we changed the effective date to August 1,2001 so that we will have the same amount of time for discussions with the police department about enforcement and education that we would have had had we you done three readings already. Lehman/All right how will we handle this tomorrow night? Do we amend the original or do we defeat the original and then replace it with this? Dilkes/Yea, it's on your agenda, you see that you've got an A and B on your agenda and we put them out that way specifically so A. Karr/16. Dilkes/Is it 16 Marian? Lehman/Number 16. Dilkes/We've got both of the ordinances on there, they have the same title and I think it's just easier and easier for the record to get rid of the first one if your so inclined or to vote on the first one. Lehman/First one second consideration if we choose to not to accept that we'll vote no and then Item B would be a motion to adopt the ordinance as it has been amended and rewritten and that would constitute as the first reading of the ordinance. Dilkes/Right. Lehman/Do we all understand that? Champion/Totally. Lehman/Are there questions for Eleanor? I can't believe this is the first time we've ever talked about alcohol and there hasn't been questions. Thank you. O'Donnell/Thank you. Champion/I'm just going to throw one thing in here. Vanderhoef/No. Lehman/We almost got by without one. Vanderhoef/Put her down. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 74 Champion/Okay just to show how ridiculous all this is. So now we have somebody who goes into the bar and orders let' s say two pitchers of beer, maybe it's a big table, maybe it's a table this size and they order four pitchers of beer and 10 glasses or whatever. Dilkes/One person, wait, one person comes into the bar. Champion/Well then the bar owner has to deliver it to the table, I don't have any problems with that, so they deliver it and then four kids sit down and, I mean this whole thing is ridiculous is we're not going to stop anybody from drinking who's a minor because they're going to sit down at that table and their going to grab a beer and they're going to drink it. So what are you accomplishing here but a lot of harassment for people who aren't breaking the law. Lehman/Connie, the biggest thing, well there' s no harassment if your not breaking the law like they always do that' s not harassment. The thing you really accomplish is when you let someone in your bar who' s underage or intoxicated you are assuming responsibility for that person because there civil penalties that we able to enforce against the bar owners that here before we have not been able to do. Champion/The civil penalties though I don't have a problem with. Lehman/The guy who came up and told us he had five people coming up four of age and one minor, what am I going to do turn them away I've got four good customers? Yea you either turn them away or you accept responsibility for what happens to the one who isn't of legal age and by letting them in that they accept responsibility for which we now would have civil penalties. Dilkes/We did convey to the licensees that we spoke to anyway because we were going through these hypothetical situations, what if, what if, what if, that I mean there are certainly ways around these specials restrictions and what we told them is our understanding from the Council was that if these things don't have any impact that you'll look at other things most likely a 21 ordinance so. Lehman/But the civil penalties are the real dramatic change. O'Donnell/I support the civil penalties. Champion/I do too. O'Donnell/But you know you can't buy three drinks, but you can make four trips, buy 2 drinks. Lehman/You can buy 20 drinks and have the bartender serve them. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 75 O'Donnell/Yea you can and if your 21 that' s not against the law to go up to the bar and buy 20 drinks but if your 19 if it is. Lehman/It's against the law to buy any if your 19. O'Donnell/That' s what I just said. Lehman/Yea, well, if we wait until we get a silver bullet there will be 150 Council' s later we'll still be talking about it. Any other questions for Eleanor? Kanner/I don't understand, can you explain to me the how this changes the concerns that were brought up about private parties and bars being able to call almost anything a private property or offer fraternity night every different night? Dilkes/I don't know that it addresses those concerns and frankly I don't think we can. I think that we'll just have to see how it's works, if it's abused, I think the intent was to provide some additional definition so what we would be looking for is that there was some means to restrict access to a certain group of people but if a particular fraternity has a private party at a particular bar every night I don't know how to deal with that. Andy Matthews/Unless you wish to define the type of events that would be permitted there. Champion/Eleanor. Matthews/Wedding receptions, birthdays, unless you want to get that particular. Dilkes/And I don't know how, where you draw those lines and you'd have to have that discussion, try to enforce that and identify it. Champion/So could this happen? What if the bar said okay tonight' s going to be a Mardi Gras private party, you could pay $1.00 and get into the private party. Dilkes/Well that's not, that's not limited to any particular group or person. Champion/No. Dilkes/That's not. Champion/Well yea you have to pay a $1.00 to get it, you have to become a member of the club to get in. Dilkes/It's a possible abuse we'd have to look at each situation on it's own facts. But again I don't know how to draft around that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 76 Champion/I know that, that's what I'm pointing it out, there's no way to draft around it, it's not your problem. Dilkes/Yea I mean I think that those your just going to have to wait and see what happens. Pfab/Well I can assure you we will see resource fullness. Dilkes/Probably so. O'Donnell/Thank you. Champion/Thank you Eleanor. Pfab/(Can't hear). Vanderhoef/Thank you we appreciate that tonight Irvin, it's getting too late for that one. PCRB Lehman/Okay PCRB, we talked about we met with the PCRB what about less than two weeks ago and as we're all aware the sunset clause for the PCRB is I believe is it the first of August Marian? Sunset clause. Karr/Yes it is sunset clause. Lehman/And we need to decide what direction we want to go, I think we all, the majority of the Council indicated at our meeting that we would like to see the PCRB continue, there' s some disagreement or different opinions as to what their actions are going to be limited to or the scope of their action, we need to decide how we want to handle this. I think there' s time for us if we would like to have a brief discussion indicating to staff some of what we would like to see, that we could have some sort of report in two weeks which we could look over and then forward to the PCRB for their comment. Irvin. Pfab/I think there' s two issues here and I will give you an example if you push me I'll be glad to do it, I'd rather not. I think there' s two issues, are we going to renew it? I think that PCRB has indicated on their own that they want to make some changes and I think that' s a separate issue, the changes and whether we renew it. I think we ought to go ahead and decide we're going to renew it and then set up the process after that to do it because they have other things they have to do, they're short, they need, there are vacancies I believe, they can continue on with that and then go on from there. I think really the only thing we should be addressing is are we going to continue it? Is it going to have life after the first of August? I would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 77 strongly support it and then at another time I think we would sit down after this they put the board put together and negotiate what changes we want to see. That' s what I would put forward. Wilburn/Sounds good to me. Pfab/We can get two more agreements and continue on. Kanner/I'll agree. Lehman/Well I don't think there' s disagreement as far as continuing the PCRB, if we have any notions of making any substantive changes, I think that we should, they need to be on notice that we're thinking about changing. We need to put ourselves on some sort of a timeframe that if we renew the PCRB, in other words eliminate the sunset clause or renew the ordinance for one year or whatever I believe we need to set some sort oftimeframe for us to address the issues and make whatever changes that we agree with the PCRB should be made. Pfab/I would go along with that, I think our schedule, our work schedule here has been very heavy, probably will for the next month or two, I would say a month, 45 days, that would be fine. But I think the idea is renew it, get that out of the way and then go on. Champion/I'm not sure I agree that we should renew it, I don't really think it should be renewed and in the format it's in now and I certainly don't have any desire to give them the power to make police policy, I have real problems with that. I think that comes from us or from you know whatever but not from a commission, or committee whatever they are. But I'm willing to continue because I think there' s a feeling out there that people need to have a place to go if they feel they've been treated badly by the police and that' s kind of the latest vogue in the country that everybody thinks they're being treated badly by the police and there people who are being treated badly by the police so I do want something in place that people can go to although they can always come to us with that too but I think they feel better not going to a public body like this. So I'd like to see it in place but I'm not sure maybe somebody has some ideas, I don't have any idea on how to do it, but I do want to change it. So I hate to just make a blanket policy about keeping it and going to a future date because when you say your going to keep it that makes them feel it's going to be just the way it is. Lehman/Well I think we should make it very clear, at least from my perspective that I personally would like to see some changes made but I believe it's the PCRB is something that should remain in place I think we may be able to change it somewhat remain. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 78 O'Donnell/And I agree. And I think we will see it remain in place Irvin because it has some votes too just to stay but it's function is I think what we're talking about right now and I favored several weeks ago as I do now that it should function like the Board of Adjustment and I agree with Connie I don't want to see them setting police policy but I feel the Board of Adjustment is you know "on call". Pfab/I think there' s a possibility of a fairly lengthy and substitive discussion of what this board is and whether how much it would change, I think there' s a lot of input that can be put in here. I disagree with some of the things that I think I'm hearing you say and I would be real happy to defend it but it would take some to do it and I'm not ready to do that now but at the same time if it's still what the majority feels. I can bring you stuff that I've pulled out and come across, I think this is a wonderful place, this police citizens review board, it's a wonderful safety valve for this community, I think it's very beneficial to the citizens, I think it's equally as beneficial to the police department even though the police chief and I have some very strong disagreements about that. Lehman/Okay I think we're all agree that we do want to continue it. How do we want to proceed as far as making or discussing changes to it? You know I think that the PCRB is like and I don't disagree that it has a certain value but I look at not just locally but I look at boards and commissions or whatever whether they be local or state and many times they take on a life of their own and I think it's important that the Council tell this, these folks whether it's the Planning & Zoning, which I guess is established by the law or the Historic Preservation Commission what we expect from those folks and give them some guidelines, obviously I think that there' s interest on the part of some very very sincere people on that board to expand their scope and I personally do not think I'm interested in doing that but when do want to discuss this? Pfab/Okay are we going to divide this up into two parts? Lehman/Well I think that we have consensus that we will extend the PCRB. Now it's going to be a matter of how long we'll extend it for and my understanding is there may be some problems. My personal preference is to extend it for a period of time that would require us to act in a timely fashion but I don't think we can do that. Champion/Why? Vanderhoef/Why? Lehman/Because of appointments that are coming up, Marian what' s? Is it possible for example the sunset clause is the first day of August. Is it possible to set, to move that sunset clause to? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 79 Karr/You can amend that section of the code and amend the sunset clause if your so inclined. Lehman/Is that going to present a problem if we extended the sunset clause for 90 days to give us time to amend the ordinance? Karr/No are you asking in relationship to the appointments? Is that what your asking? Lehman/Yea. Karr/Well right now the appointments we would advertise in June and make in July, now if your going to extend this 90 days that allows certain option and discretion that you would need to make. I know certainly that' s one thing that PCRB is very concerned about, is would you advertise it at the typical time in June to make the appointments in July when the persons doesn't know what type of board they're going to be applying for. Champion/Right. Karr/The function, the scope, would you consider, I know there was a proposal to extend those terms but by extending then you have some other issues involved with ordinances and resolutions. The third option would be simply advertising realizing that, note that in the advertisement and the individuals then would apply for the full term and then depending on the results of the discussions and results of the Council they would then choose to remain on or resign, those are all options to you. Pfab/Could I offer something here, I would suggest that we vote on it and say we're going to extend it for another full year? Lehman/I'm not willing to do that until we make whatever changes that we feel are necessary. Pfab/Well then at that point we make the changes. O'Donnell/We need to decide what the function of the board is going to be Irvin before we set any time. And it's only fair that we're going to advertise for applicants for the board that they know exactly what they're been appointed to. Pfab/So then at that case then I would like to set up a rather lengthy work session to go over that because I would certainly. Pardon. O'Donnell/Unavoidable, unavoidable, I mean there' s no way that we can not have that work session. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 80 Pfab/Are you being facetious (can't hear). Lehman/All right we're not going to get anywhere on this tonight obviously, I think the consensus is we will extend it, I would like you to think about it though about the length of time will, obviously Marian we're not under the gun, if we're going to extend this we need to decide whether we want to do this for a short period of time to require us some time to take some action or whether we want to do it for a longer period what we don't have. Karr/Typically we would advertise in June and appoint in July so you would have certainly another work session if your so inclined. Lehman/We'll tell you two weeks from tonight what we're going to do. Is that all right? Karr/That's fine. Pfab/How much time are you scheduling for? Lehman/No, no, no, I'm not saying that we schedule making the changes in the ordinances two weeks from tonight that we schedule to decide how long we're going to extend the ordinance whether it be. My personal feeling is that we extend it three months and then we, we obligate ourselves to make those changes to that ordinance rather than letting it go on indefinitely. Pfab/Yea I think the changes will probably take, it can't possibly take longer than three months. Champion/No they won't. Lehman/We have five months, May, June, July, August, September, October. Pfab/We've got June, July and August. Lehman/We've got May, May starts tomorrow okay. Pfab/May, June, July. Lehman/August. Pfab/No you don't have August, it's sunset clause. Lehman/Extend three months you've got six months to do it. Pfab/Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 81 Council Time Lehman/Anybody have anything for council time? O'Donnell/One quick thing. On our work session we used to have timing set and now it appears we can come at 6:30 and leave at 6:30 the next day. I think if we start at 6:30 and allow a specific amount of time for each subject at least we showed some form of organization. Champion/You forgot why we quit doing that because we'd finish something early and we couldn't move on. O'Donnell/But at least it's more organized if we've got a schedule. Champion/We don't keep it anyway. O'Donnell/Connie we could take on one item for 3 ~A hours and if we limit ourselves I think we could be more efficient. Champion/Sweety it's not going to happen. Vanderhoef/Okay I have one thing. O'Donnell/Don't start up with me. Vanderhoef/Request to put on the work schedule discussion about sidewalks. Champion/Oh good idea. Vanderhoef/Anybody else want to talk about sidewalks? Champion/I do. Wilburn/Sure. Dilkes/Just sidewalks, just, anything in particular. Vanderhoef/Rolly rolly polly ones. Dilkes/You understand, okay well that's all that matters. Vanderhoef/There are several different things, surfaces on them, where they should be, where they shouldn't be. Several different things like that. O'Donnell/I just hope you don't want to put sidewalks on a closed street. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 82 Lehman/Anybody else have. Vanderhoef/Me. Lehman/Anything else council time. Champion/It's been fun. O'Donnell/No it hasn't. Lehman/Eleanor, Eleanor. Dilkes/I have three, I'm sorry quick things. The question was asked at an earlier meeting whether the City could file a HUD complaint regarding access at one of our funded buildings. Our preliminary research says likely not as we wouldn't have any standing, the City as a governmental entity would not be an aggrieved person, that' s the preliminary information we're getting on that. On number two I'll get you a memo on the court's decision on the US West vs. Coralville case which we were helping fund as a number of cities were. And the smoking and restaurants thing we're still working on how we're going to get that information. Champion/Take your time. Kanner/The wetlands information, we were going to get a memo on wetlands. Dilkes/Yea staff is still working on that. Kanner/Oh. Pfab/I have one comment, can you check the legality putting together a video, what is required in the law so we can video monitor stop signs etc. with video tape or whatever it is and enforce the law that' s been broken. Champion/You're the only one interested in doing that. Lehman/I don't think that' s true, I think there was an awful lot of people who interested in doing that. Champion/Really. Lehman/I don't think the state law will let you do that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001. April 30, 2001 Special Work Session Page 83 Pfab/Well in other words what I'm saying could you check, would you be willing to check what is not permitted, what is permitted and what it not permitted (can't hear) change those laws. Dilkes/If Council wants me to sure. Champion/Not necessarily for me. Lehman/Save it for two weeks. Pfab/Okay. Two weeks. Vanderhoef/Remember. Adjourned 10:20 This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council meeting of April 30, 2001.