HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-12 Transcription#2 Page 1
ITEM NO. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATION.
Lehman: On April 29t~, 2001 at 8:54 PM Rescue 1 was dispatched Code 3 to a
report of a possible drowning at the Radisson Highlander Inn. Information
provided to the responding fire unit was that that victim is out of the pool
and CPR is in progress. Information obtained on the scene is that the boy
got into the pool somehow while his parents were away from the pool
deck. The mother saw the boy under the water and began screaming for
help. The father ran to the front desk alerting desk clerk Amanda Hart.
Amanda ran to the pool area to assist while another employee dialed 911.
Amanda jumped into the pool, taking the boy from under approximately 8
feet of water. She lifted him out to the hotel manager and then climbed
out of the pool and administered CPR until the boy began to cough and
spit water. The boy then began to breathe regularly and regained
consciousness. He was active and alert upon arrival of the fire department
and Johnson County Ambulance Services. We would like to recognize
this with an outstanding citizenship award for the unselfish and caring
manner in which she was willing to act and save a life. We, the City
Council of the City of Iowa City, do hereby recognize and honor Amanda
Hart.
Karr: Here to accept is Amanda Hart. And I think Mr. Mayor we also have a
presentation from Fire Chief Andy Rocca.
Rocca: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, I too am pleased to be here
tonight in honor of Ms. Hart for her heroic actions from April 29th. The
award that I am going to present is an honor in memory of Lieutenant
Robert L. Hein. He was a member of the Fire Department who was
involved in an explosion in Mercy Hospital in 1969. And ultimately he
lost his life due to the injuries he sustained in that explosion. It is just a
wonderful occasion when we have people in our community that are
willing to risk their own life and limb for the protection and safety of
others. And so I am honored and privileged to present you with the
Lieutenant Robert L. Hein Life Saving Award. And I will go ahead and
read it now. (Reads award).
Hart: Thank you.
Lehman: Sometimes really neat things happen in Council meetings. And that
certainly is one of the nicer events.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#3 Page 2
ITEM NO. 3. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS.
a. Pride Month- June
Lehman: (Reads proclamation).
Karr: Here to accept is Dawn Kirschman.
Kirschman: On behalf of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community I
would like to thank you very much for this proclamation. And also I
would like to point out that we have an entire month of- a whole calendar
here- of events that are happening every single day. And this weekend is
the big weekend with our Pride Festival. That is a parade and festival that
is happening from College Green Park on Saturday and our talent show at
the Unitarian Universalist Society on Sunday night. Here is a calendar if
anybody wishes to look at it.
Lelunan: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 3
ITEM NO. 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Champion: I would like to move adoption. I would like to remove-
Lehman: Do we have a second first?
O'Dormell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion and seconded by O'Donnell for adoption of the
consent calendar. Discussion?
Champion: I would like to remove 15a and 15b.
Lehman: Okay.
Champion: Is that the right ones? Maybe not.
Lehman: That is correct. Other discussion?
Kanner: I had a few things.
Lehman: Okay.
Kanner: Did Andy leave? But Steve, maybe I could ask this of you. In the Board
of Appeal minutes that we are approving there was some discussion about
smoke control devices- smoke alarms- at Sycamore Mall. And it was a
Iittle confusing to me about which standards we are using and so I had
some questions about that.
Atkins: I think ~ve need Andy on that one.
Karmer: It says they are going to use via the 1997 code versus- that we have
adopted- as opposed to the 2000.
Atkins: I will see ifI can round up Andy for you. I am sorry, I am just not
familiar with fire code.
Kanner: And the other thing I did want to mention is that we have some license-
alcohol and liquor license renewals. And I wanted to give the statistics of
the number of visits and arrests and arrests per visits for these applicants
for liquor licenses. We have Dave's Foxhead, which has two visits and
two arrests. This is for the last year- for the year 2000, the calendar year
as of December. Dublin's Underground has 11 visits and 1 arrest for a .09
arrest to visit ratio. Fitzpatrick's has four visits and t~vo arrests for a .5
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 4
arrest per visit. Kum and Go we do not have statistics on that. And
hopefully after the new ordinance passes- I think we have been waiting-
we will start getting statistics on those.
Atkins: We talked about it, yes.
Karmer: And recommendations perhaps from the Police Chief about any concern-
number of arrests perhaps.
Atkins: That is what I understood you wanted us to do.
Kanner: Masala, there is no record for that. The Mill Restaurant and Bar has three
visits and 0 arrests. And again, these are for people under the legal age-
these arrests. Mumm's Saloon has one visit and no arrests. And the Wig
and Pen has four visits and no arrests. We have a Zio Johno's- did I
pronounce that- Spaghetti House has no record at all that we have gotten.
For the whole city last year we had 972 visits and 909 arrests and .94
arrests per visit is the citywide ratio. So none of the applicants really
stand out as having an undue large amount of arrests per visit. Otherwise I
would ask that we perhaps consider it separately to look further into it.
Lehman: Other discussion?
Atkins: Ernie and Steven- they are rounding Andy up. He should be here any
minute.
Kanner: I think we can go ahead from my point of view. And maybe we can just
find out at another meeting.
Atkins: Sure. We can get you a memo. I am assuming it is ajudgement made on
the part of the Fire Marshall when he reviewed the plans and so forth
associated with that building permit. That is normally where we would
see this kind of circumstance.
Karmer: I did have a question about the resolution we are passing, number (f),
amending a sewer and stormwater easement agreement with Mercy project
on First Avenue. They want to put in a retaining wall and I was
wondering if anyone 'knew how this would affect the water flow in that
area and drainage?
Atkins: I can't tell you.
Kanner: This is a resolution we are voting on.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 5
Lehman: Right. I can't imagine that we would have allowed that from an
engineering standpoint if it was going to impede the flow of water.
Atkins: Karin may know.
Franklin: It should have no effect. It has been evaluated by Public Works as to the
capacity of the stormwater detention basin and that capacity remains what
is necessary for that development. So there shouldn't be any change in
terms of the water flow.
Kmmer: Is this a Sensitive Area because of some of the slopes there? Do we have
a Sensitive Areas Overlay on this?
Franklin: You kd~ow, I can't remember. We went through the whole rezoning on
that and if it was a Sensitive Areas we ~vould have reviewed it at that time.
That is a- it is a manmade slope there that is being used for the stormwater
detention basin. That has been the stormwater detention basin for that
subdivision for some time. So, I can't- I don't know why we would of
looked at it under the Sensitive Areas Ordinance because the stormwater
detention basin was created for the subdivision.
Kanner: Okay. And one other question. Another resolution, if5), the agreements
and easements for Highlander Development were- could you explain what
that is about?
Franklin: I don't know. On the top of the resolution whose name is on it?
Dilkes: I think it is Sara's.
Franklin: Pardon me?
Dilkes: I think it is Sara's.
Franklin: Okay. I am sorry, I don't know. I wasn't involved in that.
Kanner: Okay. Does anyone have a clearer understanding of that resolution?
Maybe we could pull that out then.
Dilkes: I can suggest that if these questions were raised at the work session then
we ~vould be able to provide you with more detailed information that
would be helpful.
Kanner: Yeah, thank you.
O'Donnell: I don't want to pull it out.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 6
Kanner: It was a pretty crowded agenda yesterday and so there were a few other
items that I thought I wanted to get to and I thought I could get to them
tonight.
Dilkes: My understanding of this one is that it was a site plan that was approved
administratively and now that- there are easement agreements that have to
be executed and so we need the City Council's authorization to execute
those.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call on the consent calendar with 15(a) and 15(b)
removed.
Atkins: Ernie?
Lehman: Yes?
Atkins: Andy is here. Would you like to ask those questions?
Lehman: Andy, Steven has a question for you regarding the smoke alarms at the
Sycamore Mall. Is that correct?
Kanner: Yeah, and the decision that- I was looking at the Board of Appeals and
was looking at that issue of which code would be used for Sycamore Mall
as far as smoke control. Whether it is the 1997 code, which is apparently
what we went with, versus an updated one that would mandate different
type of smoke and fire control.
Rocca: Right now we have legally adopted by ordinance the 1997 edition of the
Uniform Codes and so that would include the Uniform Building Code and
the Uniform Fire Code. And that is where those requirements would be
set forth.
Kanner: What year is that?
Rocca: The '97 edition.
Kanner: '97?
Rocca: Correct.
Kanner: There was discussion about- this was at the Board of Appeals because it
wasn't clear I guess which code was going to be used for this.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 7
Rocca: I can't speak to that. I am not familiar with the case that was presented to
the Board of Appeals. Fire Marshall Jensen typically attends those
meetings. And so I don't know if they were looking for a variance and in
fact sometimes we look to other nationally recognized codes in order to
make a good sound decision on granting a variance or not.
Kanner: It was a request for modification of section 404 for use of alternative
methods of construction. The 1997 code requires that a smoke controlled
system be installed. The 2000 International Code does not require this
system.
Lehman: Andy could you get that information to Steven?
Rocca: I certainly can.
Lehman: Yeah, get it for him.
Rocca: Again, I am not familiar firsthand with it. I will be glad to look into it and
provide you with the details that you request. Sure,
Lehman: Thank you.
Wilburn: Andy? I just- (can't hear) for a second. I just wanted to publicly thank
you and your department. I had the unfortunate incident- one of our-
Friday one of our daughters had an accident on the Pedestrian Mall and
law enforcement Officer Fortman and your paramedics, your fire fighters,
and the Johnson County Ambulance were right there and very helpful in
keeping me calm and her calm.
Rocca: Good, well thank you. I think you know if you do have an emergency we
live in a good community for those types of situations. There is plenty of
good help. I appreciate that. Thank you.
Wilburn: Thmkk you.
Rocca: I will get that information.
Kanner: Yeah, it is in the Board of Appeals March 5 minutes. And it talks- it says
that the motion allowed 2000 International Code- which appears to be less
stringent in this regard. So that is a bit of a concern for me. Maybe this
can come back before Council and we can look at that if this is something
that might come up again in regards to Sycamore Mall.
Rocca: I know that the modeI codes are under an enormous rewrite. They are
trying to identify one code that we can all use in all parts of the country.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 8
And so a lot of people are looking to design new construction remodels
and the like to the International code because it is likely what we will all
end up with eventually. I will look into it and get you the details.
Lehman: Thank you. We have two items that took out of the consent calendar.
Does someone wish to bring those up?
Champion: These were areas that were-
Karr: Do you wish to move it to put it on the floor for discussion?
Champion: Didn't I do that already?
Karr: No, you removed them.
Lehman: You moved to remove them.
Champion: Now I move for discussion of 15(a) and 15(b).
O'Donnell: And I will second that.
Lehman: We have a motion and a second to consider 15(a) and 15(b).
Champion: These were no parking restrictions that were brought to us by the staff.
And there was pretty strong objection from the neighborhoods. There
hasn't been a high accident rate on either one of these streets and I was
wondering if the Council would consider removing the No Parking
Anytime signs and maybe just putting up a sign like Caution Blind Curve
or Caution Blind Hill or like, you know, we have had several streets like
that in town before. I don't know how other people feel about it.
Pfab: I definitely would support your position on this. I think one of the reasons
why this passed was there was a misstatement because there was a
misunderstanding about an accident that supposedly happened on Willow
Street. And it was indicated that it was a head on accident, which that was
not correct. Itwasjustacommunicationerrorbyseveralmembersofthe
staff. It was an unintentional mistake but that is the way it came out and
as a result if there was a head on crash on Willow Street obviously that
was not a safe situation, but that didn't happen.
Kanner: This is Willow Street you are talking about? What about Union Street?
Champion: We are talking about both of them at the same time.
Pfab: They are both together.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 9
Kanner: How do you feel about Union Street?
Champion: I think we could just put a Caution sign up or a Blind Curve- I mean, I
don't kno~v what the traff'fc technical thing to do there is.
Wilburn: Limited Visibility.
Champion: Blind Visibility or something.
Pfab: I don't see it as a- you know, it would be nice if we didn't have any
parking on any streets and we would get around a lot better but that is not
the way the city is set up so-.
Champion: Parking is part of traffic calming Irvin.
Pfab: Thank you Councilor Champion.
Vanderhoef: I can't support it. I went out and drove it and looked at it and I am not a
traffic engineer but when my traffic engineer brings to me a concern on
sight distance and that was what I was concerned about. That if there is
someone parked there and I have to pull into the opposing lane I am
concerned. So, I will be voting-.
Champion: Are you talking about Willow or Union?
Vanderhoef: Both.
Pfab: I went and drove them both and spent quite a bit of time in the street trying
to sort them out. I didn't see there were a big problem. That is only my
personal opinion.
Champion: Willow is just a short little street there. My other idea was to make it one
way.
Lehman: I guess I tend to- I would tend to go along with the recommendation the
traffic engineer- you are fight, Willow is a very short street and I think
prohibiting parking on something that short probably does not represent a
tremendous inconvenience for the folks there. We don't need to belabor
this. An affinnative vote on this motion will remove the parking- the no
parking signs, which were erected at the direction of Council a month ago.
Is that correct? A negative vote on this motion wilI allow the parking
signs to remain. Do we need a roll call on this? All in favor of the motion
of removing the parking signs raise your hands please. One, two, three,
four. Opposed? The vote is 4-3. The signs-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#4 Page 10
Karr: 5-2.
Lehman: 5 to 2. I am sorry. The signs will be removed.
Champion: But will we put some caution signs in there of some kind?
O'Donnell: There is not a history of a problem on that street. It is an inconvenience
and I am happy with the vote.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 11
ITEM NO. 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA).
[UNTIL 8 PM].
Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for items that do not othervise
appear on the agenda. If you would like to address the Council, please
sign in and give your name and address and limit your comments to five
minutes or less.
Petran: Good evening. My name is Jim Petran. I live at 410 Magowan. I would
like to address the Council one last time and try to clear the air on the
closing of Lexington Avenue, which is a curious coincidence considering
you are now having a public discussion on another street and no such
discussion ever arose when it came to Lexington. That was all done in a
Monday meeting. That has nothing to do with this. I know a lot of time
has past since you voted on this issue and I apologize for bringing it up
again. But, I can assure you that the animosity and misconceptions that
your action created have not gone away and will have implications for
other neighborhoods in the future so please hear me out. A few weeks ago
I stood before you to express my displeasure with the manner in which
you reached your decision to put up a gate without contacting anyone else
in Manville Heights or offering any public discussion. I was dismayed
that the City would only poll 24 homeowners and then allow 60% of those
to mandate the closing of a public street. This is in a neighborhood that
comprises almost 300 homes. If you recall, I tried to motivate some of
these people to send you emails to express their concern and I had some
success in that. While this is all really quite after the fact I would like to
offer this petition that I went around and got. And hopefully you will
reconsider. I will give it to you in a bit.
Champion: We did do traffic counts on the other streets before we put up- before the
gate. And we are planning to look at this in a year.
Petran: I know, it will be reconsidered.
Champion: So you are not so far beyond the point.
Pfab: I think you brought up a very important point and I think we are going to
act on it. The fact that we sat around and kind of made a decision to go
ahead with this and then immediately it was voted on and it was aI1 over. I
think you brought up a point that is extremely important from a citizen' s
point of view and from our point of view and that was you need time for
these things to work their way through so the public has a chance to ask
us. One of the reasons that we have the TVs on us- the cameras on us- is
so people can sit at home and watch and can talk amongst yourself but if
by the time you find this out it is all over-. So we are working with the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 12
idea of moving those discussions over a two-week time span. And I think
it is basically because of the point that you made which is very well done.
I really appreciate that.
Petran: Like you do in rezoning and posting something on-site?
Pfab: Right. I think you made a great contribution to the city government and to
your neighbors.
Petran: Thank you. I will just try to wrap this up then. Having personally spoken
with more than 100 of my neighbors up there, there a couple of
pemeptions I would like to address to you. First and foremost is a
consensus that we think we live in one of the nicest neighborhoods in this
town and your urban planners will tell you that this is exactly the kind of
community they are trying to recreate with this Peninsula project. We
have all different kinds of homes and people have all different jobs and
backgrounds. And we coexist in an atmosphere that really encourages
friendship. But, taking walks, bike riding, kids playing in the streets and
walking to school are everyday occurrences where we are. And
unfortunately the traffic problems on Lexington have become an issue that
have divided our neighborhood. And it threatens another part of the
history of Iowa City. On the one hand our city is made up of many small
neighborhoods such as ours, each with its own character and all share your
concern for safety and privacy. And many pans of town have to deal with
substantial traffic. Noise, sirens, trains and loud parties disturb us all but
that is life in the city and we have to put up with neighbors' barking dogs
and more and more speeding traffic. On the other hand the people that
live on Lexington should not be criticized for wanting to protect
themselves nor should they be accused of receiving some son of special
treatment when they have repeatedly gone to the city to resolve their
complaints. The question that really needs to be answered is who is not
doing their job and solving this problem? If laws are being broken, that is
for the police to remedy. If you need traffic calming that is why we have
traffic engineers. If sidewalks are needed then it is up to the property
owner to meet city code. And if our ability to enjoy our homes and
businesses is being threatened we put our faith in our elected officials to
find equitable solutions. So the responsibility is in your hands and the
residents of Manville Heights should not have been forced into this
conflict in the first place. So in circulating this petition practically
everyone who signed it expressed concern with which the manner in
which the city has handled this problem and throwing up your hands and
saying we don't know what else to do has only succeeded in creating a
division within an other wise harmonious neighborhood. So, that has been
more than one person. Aren't you worried that the people on Lexington
will hate you for opposing them? My answer was no because the city
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 13
offered them no recourse and the last thing they would have wanted were
ill feelings within their community. They met their criteria, the city
offered it and if that is flawed then the city policy needs to be changed.
So, in the greater realm of managing a city govern_ment I know this is
really a small concern and it has gotten way too much attention, but that is
so because the policy does not consider how traffic and safety concerns
impact everyone that resides in our neighborhoods. And with all due
respect, I hope you will learn from this and look for more public input,
which you have just given me, in making your decisions. And just as a
final thought, I was in Chicago this last weekend and had a chance
conversation with a woman who when she asked where I was from found
out I was from Iowa City, she said she had a friend of hers who has lived
in cities around the world and when she was asked what was her favorite
place to live it was Iowa City. And so it made me think what a great
reputation this town has and how lucky we all are to live here. And I
thank you for your efforts in making it so.
Champion: Thank you for presenting.
Petran: Sorry that was so long winded.
Karr: Can we have a motion to accept correspondence?
Vanderhoef: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilburn. All in favor? Opposed?
Motion carries.
Shrader: I can't think of anything better to follow because I am here to talk about
process as well. Robynn Shrader. There are two things that really get
under my skin in government and I believe both of them to be quite
dangerous.
O'Donnell: Excuse me, is this Harlocke Weeber?
Shrader: Yes it is.
Lehman: I am going to excuse myself. So pardon me.
Shrader: The two things I believe to be quite dangerous are duplicity and
paternalism. And as I listened to some of you discuss the Weeber
Harlocke matter last night these two words kept popping into my mind.
Councilor Vanderhoef, you stated on October 11, 1995 at a Parks and
Recreation Commission meeting- and I am quoting from page 4 of the
minutes- "Vanderhoef noted there is an open space deficit in this area and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 14
opportunity did not lend itself to another open space in the area. And the
Jensen property could be a real anchor in getting things started". During
the formal Council session of April 17 just a short couple of months ago
you said, "when I was on Parks and Rec we would have loved to get that
land for a park. We negotiated hard for that property but wejust couldn't
get it". Last night you then said that the four acres on Harlocke Street, the
exact same piece of land, is not suitable for parkland under the
Neighborhood Open Space Plan and this is why you don't consider it a
good use ofparkland acquisition funds. Which is it? Councilor
Champion, you stated last night that there is more to a neighborhood than
just two streets and I couldn't agree with you more. Have you looked at
the signed petitions that we presented you with several weeks back? I
haveanothercopyhereforyoutonightjustincase. There are more than
300 signatures from addresses all along Benton Hill east to the Miller
Orchard area and Douglas Court, and west to Wylde Green and
surrounding streets. This surely encompasses enough area to be
considered a neighborhood and is arguably one of the more densely
populated areas in our city with also the largest open space deficit. The
Parks and Rec commission made a firm and unanimous motion to pursue
this land to decrease the deficit in this district, only to be quashed by the
City Manager. Check the minutes. There was no dissent. They were very
clear and yet you choose to ignore them. I am baffled as to why a city
government would disregard the request of more than 300 citizens to
investigate a potential outcome to a development issue. We have
contacted the State Citizens' (can't hear) about this concern hoping to get
some answers there. Councilor O'Donnell, you don't want to set a
precedent of purchasing parkland every time a neighborhood wants to
avoid development. That development is "simply going to happen". We
are not unreasonable people. We are thoughtful, intelligent, hardworking
individuals that have invested ourselves in a neighborhood we call home.
This specific piece of property was pursued by Parks and Rec and
Councilor Vanderhoef in 1995, and again pursued by the City on June 15,
1999 in a letter from Terry Trueblood articulating a desire to buy the land
for a park. I have a copy of the letter on City stationary, if for some
reason you don't believe me. The idea of this land as a park is not new,
for the city or for us. And it is insulting that our attempts to revive interest
once again be characterized as irrational. This parcel has been proposed
for development how many times in the past decade? Each time the City
Council of the moment denied the development because of safety and
neighborhood concerns, but never initiated the leadership to rezone the
area or do some thoughtful comprehensive planning to prevent us from
being repeatedly in this same position. You once told me on the phone
that you thought it was a shame that the area had never been properly
zoned and I would like to know why you won't take some steps now to
correct it. We are being disregarded in an atmosphere that seems to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 15
suggest we have held this poor developer up long enough, just be quiet,
we know what is good for you. On tonight's agenda item number 27
refers to a proposed settlement and release with no further detail available.
I am guessing from comments made last night that it refers to the lawsuit
filed by Southgate and I am further guessing that the Cotmcil will choose
not to defend the decision made legitimately under the super majority
requirement, although I am looking forward to public disclosure of the
details of item number 27. Yesterday the Gazette featured an article about
the resolution you are voting on tonight about honoring Council decisions
at JCCOG meetings. Councilor Wilbum is quoted as saying "Karmer had
his chance to represent his constituents at the City Council' s vote and once
the majority decides then Kanner should be on board". This perspective
seems to me to be analogous to the decision made on April 17. You are
each able to represent your interests during Council discussions and votes
but once you reach a decision under your own rules you should stick with
it and defend it as a group. The protest petition and super majority
requirement is the last protection that citizens have to get a seat at the table
where our future is being discussed. The super majority requirement is
about democracy and the citizen's right to influence the really major
decisions that affect their lives. I am told that this provision under Iowa
State law has only been invoked twice in the past twelve months here in
Iowa City, which would indicate that you were doing a pretty good job of
developing without provoking neighborhoods into exercising this right.
However, the provision was exercised by us and now by the neighbors to
Arbor Hill, and you should understand the magnitude of the flag that is
being waved in your face. You compromise the super majority provision
and you are tompromising our democracy and representative process.
Could every developer denied a project under a super majority threaten
suit as a means for the City to back down from the formal council
decision? What then is the point of the super majority provision7 We just
want a fair and legitimate democratic process. A vote was taken, it should
be defended. We don't understand the unwillingness to pursue
compromise. The developer has indicated to us that he is willing to sell
the land, trade the land for another parcel or put together a combination of
considerations that meet his investment needs. Today John Moreland,
assistant to Senator Harkin-
0'Donnell: Would you wrap it up?
Shrader: I will be very quickly. John Moreland, assistant to Senator Harkin,
offered to pursue federal land and water conservation funds to help
purchase this land for a park. This was the result of one citizen making an
inquiry. Imagine what possibilities might come out ofa little concentratcd
effort. Of course you have to have a desire to pursue it, which comes from
an appreciation of neighborhoods over bond ratings. I really would like to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page I6
think that at least four of you have this appreciation. So I now ask which
of you as elected officials respect the democratic process inherent in the
super majority provision and are willing to defend this right by supporting
our neighborhood's efforts to reach a compromise to the development
initially proposed?
Kanner: Just a point of clarification, ~ve did- there is a handout for people available
for item #27 and that resolution is a settlement with the Elks- the case with
Southgate is still in litigation and we can't comment on that.
Shrader: Thank you for clarifying that.
Pfab: I thought you were asking a question and I said yes.
Shrader: Irvin, you ans~ver yes. Would anyone else address the question?
Kanner: What type of money are we talking about with the US government?
Shrader: This was an initial conversation that happened today but in talking with
Mr. Moreland he indicated to someone in our neighborhood association
that there is lots of ways to get money for parks. And this situation sounds
like something that we would want to look into and want to try to pursue
those federal monies to do. So there was no specific figure given but just
the willingness and the acceptance at face value of what we were talking
to him about with one phone call was inspiring. And that again leads me
to why we are so frustrated with the wall that we seem to be finding here
at our own city.
Champion: I would just like to make a little comment that I am not uncomfortable
with my decision but I don't feel good about it. I did talk to Parks and
Rec- some of the commissioners- today and they- getting park area in your
neighborhood is a number one priority on their list and they are working
on an area of land that would be good for parkland. So, I mean, I don't
want you to leave here thinking that we don't know there is a shortage of
parkland there. We definitely want you to have it and we can even direct
them to speed that up. So, it is not just that we don't want you to have
parkland. It is just more complicated than that. But you are going to get a
neighborhood park.
Shrader: and if the acres that you are talking about is what I have been aware of- I
have been following the Parks and Rec as well and attending their
meetings and they are pursuing two acres on the comer of Miller Street to
try to attach to the Miller Orchard Park and unfortunately you are dealing
with the same property owner that was dealt with in the past on purchasing
the Jensen tract. And when there is no response after three months it
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 17
doesn't look hopeful. And so we just simply wondered why for years,
since 1995 at least twice this particular parcel was pursued by the city as a
park, and today it is not suitable. And the last pursuit was one year ago.
And that is very- it is baffling to us.
Champion: That is kind of baffling.
Vanderhoef: The land for neighborhood open space- the requirement is for play land,
not ravines, hills, trees, and those kinds of things. A neighborhood park
was envisioned for an area where children can go out and play safely.
When that was pursued, as my recollection goes, we tried to buy the
flatland. And that is what they wouldn't sell to us. They said you have to
buy the whole thing and they put the same price on each acre at that time,
whether it was the flatland or it whether it was the wooded land. And we
simply couldn't afford it.
Shracler: And it sounds like reasonable place to begin negotiations because
obviously the ravines and the steep slopes are protected by the Sensitive
Areas and they are harder to develop so truly the value is in the acre and a
half flatland that would be excellent for play space. So I agree with you.
And I look around the parks in Iowa City and I see plenty of ravines and
areas that are not wide open soccer fields. This parcel has both. And so
all we have been asking and all I am here asking again tonight is why
won't you discuss it? Why won't you talk about it? Why won't you
initiate discussions with the developer? Because they have indicated that
they are receptive to it. They are not going to come to you however. But
they will be receptive to you coming to them. That is all I would like to
see happen. And it was very close last night. Three of you felt it was a
good idea and three of you didn't. And I am really here just hoping to
convince one of you that discussion is worthy.
Wilburu: What I had said last night was I was willing to hear what the offer was and
to have staff go ahead and see what they have to say. But we have a
disagreement about the vote about whether or not it was legal to follow
our own rules.
Shrader: And I appreciate the City Attorney making it clear in the last meeting that
I attended that you can discuss acquisition of the land as a park
independent from the lawsuit. And I believe that is still to be the case? So
I know I am taking up a great deal of time and I appreciate your patience
with me, ho~vever I just really ask you to take to heart what I have said
and what our neighborhood has been saying for a decade. And a
discussion is not going to hurt anyone. And pursuing this- allowing the
Parks and Rec commission to proceed with what they had intended two
weeks ago is not going to hurt any other process.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 18
Kanner: Cormie, you said it was complicated- it doesn't seem to complicated to
just ask and engage in discussion. And Dee-
Champion: I am saying that my decision was complicated.
Kanner: What?
Champion: I say my decision was complicated.
Kanner: Okay, I thought you meant-
O'Donnell: Folks, we are going to wrap up this public discussion at about 8:00 and I
would like to hear more from the neighborhood. So if we can hold our
comments until afterwards.
Kanner: Okay.
Shrader: I will be happy to stay for the other public discussion if someone would
like to continue dialog. May I present you with these?
O'Donnell: Sure.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
Pfab: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Kanner: Have we seen this petition before.
Shrader: This is the latest version with additional signatures.
O'Donnell: Moved by Irvin, seconded by Champion. All those in favor?
Shrader: The wording has not changed. There are just simply more signatures.
Kanner: Okay.
Karr: All those in favor?
O'Donnell: We did that.
Karr: Okay, I missed that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#5 Page 19
O'Donnell: Any other discussion? None? The public hearing is closed. Somebody
ask Ernie to come in. (Can't hear). That was public discussion, now it is
closed.
Pfab: (Can't hear) go until 8:00, we cut someone off.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6a Page 20
ITEM NO. 6a. AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION
FROM GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (1-1) TO INTENSIVE
COMMERCIAL (CI-1) FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.09 ACRES
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1. (REZ01-
00002).
Lehman: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open.
Hobart: My name is Tom Hobart and I am here representing the prospective
purchaser of the property. I was here about a month ago when we talked
about some changes that went back to Planning and Zoning, the
conditional zoning agreement was approved by Planning and Zoning
unanimously and sent back to Council. And we are asking approval. I
really don't have anything to say about it unless there is questions or
concems. We would just like to have- to move forward on it.
Pfab: I have a question when it is talking about moving the access road.
Hobart: Right.
Pfab: It states somewhere in the agreement that there will not be any display or
something else, and is- if I was a car dealer it would look like if I had a
demonstrator car and I happened to park it along there I would just be
parking my car.
Hobart: I think what they have in mind is us using that access road as a parking lot
and clearly that is not our intention. This is, as you know, sort of an
unusual piece of property because of the airport and at the back end of it
there is not a lot you can do. Or at least you can't do anything that is very
high. So, the purpose of moving the access road as far possible- as far
forward as possible is to allow for that display area between the road and
the building without people having to cross the road to look at cars. That
is why we did it.
Pfab: Would you be willing to change the non use of that or display- and I forget
what the other term was- also for no parking? No vehicle parking?
Hobart: I would sure hate to see a no parking zone there. I think that that might
affect a lot of people besides this. I mean, we already agreed not to
display cars on the access road.
Pfab: IfI am an owner and I drive a demonstrator and I just happen to park it
real nice there I am just parking my car. But you say no display- how do
you make that distinction?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6a Page 2 1
Hobart: If you are a customer and you want to park your car you ought to be able
to do so also. That is what- that would be my position.
Pfab: Is that what it is for?
Champion: It might be.
Hobart: It could be.
Lehman: We discussed this last night Tom that there are not four Council people
who are interested in changing the CZA to prohibit parking.
Hobart: You say there weren't-
Lehman: There were not four people who were interested in changing it.
Kanner: I thought someone was going to contact them?
Lehman: And ask, but as far as changing the CZA-
Kanner: Did anyone contact you?
Hobart: I wasn't contacted today but we wouldn't be very excited about that
frankly.
Kanner: You are going to have parking though on your lot for people to come?
You are not expecting them to park on the access road?
Hobart: No, absolutely not.
Karmer: So it doesn't seem like it would be a big thing to not allow parking on the
access road?
Hobart: Well, I don't see- I don't see what the problem causes if people
occasionally park on the access road. The problem that staff discussed
with us was displaying cars on the access road and we understand that.
But I don't see where an occasional car parking on it causes a problem. I
don't think there is no parking on any other part of that access road at the
moment.
Pfab: But you are asking for a special consideration.
Hobart: As all those others did also. Those are all conditional zoning agreements.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6a Page 22
Lehman: I hate to interrupt. Are there four people on the Council who would wish
to see no parking permitted on that road?
Kanner: It seems like an easy thing to do.
Lehman: Are there four people who would like to see no parking? How many
would like to see a no parking restriction on that road?
Pfab: I would like to see no parking.
Letkman: Okay, there are not four people. So that is a non issue.
Champion: That isn't a city road is it?
Pfab: But there also was an agreement last night that these people were going to
be contacted and I don't think they were.
O'Donnell: But again, it wouldn't make any difference because there aren't four
people that are interested in pursuing that line.
Dilkes: My recollection of Iast night's meeting was when it was determined that
there were four Council members- there were not four Council members
who were interested that there was no further action to be taken by staff.
O'Donnell: That is the way I understood it.
Lehman: Right.
Pfab: Okay. '
Lehman: Any other questions for Tom?
Hobart: Thank you.
Champion: Thank you.
Lehman: Would anyone else like to speak to the hearing? The public hearing is
closed. Do we have a motion?
Champion: Move first consideration.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'DonnelI. Discussion? Roll call.
Motion carries 6-1, Irvin Pfab dissenting.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 23
ITEM NO. 6b. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE
ZONING CODE BY AMENDING THE PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY, OPDIt-8, PLAN FOR
ARBOR HILL, AN 8.2 ACRE 17-UNIT RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED NORTH OF WASHINGTON
STREET ON ARBOR HILL CIRCLE. (REZ01-00006).
Lehman: The public hearing is open.
McCarragher: (Changed tapes) that street is just east of the opposed area here for the
change in rezoning. We have several concerns with regard to this
property. To give you a little bit of history, Bowling Green goes up to the
north- we have a map that we can show up here- but Bowling Green goes
up a hill and down most of our backyards comes a swill which carries
water from property that goes from the top of Bowling Green back up
where you used to live Ernie- back up to Rochester.
Lehman: I have never lived over there.
McCarragher: I guess that was (can't hear). It goes back up to Rochester and there is a
watershed that comes down through that area and carries a lot of that
water through our backyard. So we have that watershed that brings water
through our backyard. And then behind us we have Green Mountain
Drive and all the houses on Green Mountain Drive that have their
backyards sloped into a ravine is in the backyard or back into our swills.
And we have got a videotape that shows that many of those houses when
they constructed their houses took their drainage tiles from the down
spouts and buried them underground and carried them to the back part of
the property and now just dump them over onto the area which now brings
water down behind our house. And then now we have this proposed area
that now has two watersheds that drain water into our area. So we have a
fairly severe problem with water, which we are not asking the developer to
correct. But we are saying that because we now have that problem that we
are wanting to ensure that the developer makes certain that the proposed
development that they are going to plan here takes into consideration the
water we now have and doesn't exasperate it. I have some photographs
here that were taken to kind of give you the magnitude of the water that
we have. I will just pass them around for your view. The first two that I
am going to show you show our street- Westminster comes along and then
Bowling Green comes off of Westminster. These two photographs show
both of those streets under water. It actually conducted like a canal having
the water. And that is because the water comes down the hill and gets
down to Washington Street and backs up. So once it starts backing up it
just comes back up our yards. I am going to show you the other two
photographs that you will see that look like a river. That is in my
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 24
backyard and going down. And that shows you some of the water that we
get that comes down the hill. So, ifI could just pass these around. The
area that is behind us is a rather hilly area. In other words, from my house
if you were to look up- I am going to show you some photographs here
that I have taken of the area showing you what actually drains into our
yard. The first two photographs that I will start going the other direction
show- I am standing at the base of the hill Iooking up into the drainage
area and then I am walking up between the two trees and taking it again,
so you get kind of a perspective of the slope that I am talking about that is
in this area. And then the next two photographs in order will be taking a
look at kind of a panorama shot- just taking it to the left and then taking it
to the left again- to show you that all that land comes down to us. And
then the last picture shows you an area that basically flattens out the water
when it comes down through that area. So you get some kind of idea of
what we are talking about here.
Lehman: Why don't you start those at the same end and then that way we have
gotten through the first group.
O'Donnell: There are very few people who take pictures (can't hear).
Pfab: I don't know if that was a compliment or not.
McCarragher: Are you saying my photography skills are not very good?
O'Donnell: Not in those words.
McCarragher: So basically what we have been talking with the developer about is the
problem with regard to water. Now, it is interesting in those pictures that
are now coming around that Cormie has that at the present time water
comes down in that area- you will see all those trees in there- all those
trees now absorb all of that. All those trees now will be gone with this
development. They are taking out all of those trees that sit there that now
work as a watershed, taking in the water from those trees. So we have
been working with the developer and I am at least here tonight to indicate
that working with the developer we have been making progress. And that
is the whole idea here, to try to get some discussion. Our concerns
basically at the present time- and I think, I don't know- we haven't seen
new figures but the latest figures that I saw when I talked to Ron (can't
hear) of the City's office was that in a five year rain the CFCs were
actually going to increase in a watershed area that were coming back.
Now, it is my understanding that since that time that I think the developer
has agreed to bring all of the roofs into the roof drain and that may now
change the CFC figures that we had-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 25
Lehman: Jim, the numbers that we got last night from engineering is that the actual
amount of water going through the backyards will decrease with this
development over what it presently is because of the way the development
is being designed.
McCarragher: Ernie, the last figures I had when I talked to Ron, which was a day ago- I
mean, I did not talk to him yesterday but the day before that- showed that
there are two watershed areas. Probably- since ~ve don't have a diagram
up let me show you- on the proposed development here we have-
Lehman: We need to speak in the mic.
McCarragher: When you are looking at the development here there are really two
watershed areas that are of major concem to us. And one is labeled 0.98,
and that is the more northern piece. Then there is another one that is
called 2.46 acres and it kind of goes in that area or the broad area. So we
are talking about two different watershed areas that are coming in.
Kanner: Jim, so just to continue on what Ernie was saying, we were told yesterday
cubic feet per second, I guess, that it was going to be about the same or
slightly less for a five year rain. It seems that what you are saying now is
that with the new roof design that we didn't hear about- we heard
yesterday that these were figures if half of the roof would go into the
drainage- into your backyard. You are saying that them is new design and
so that would make it even less?
Lehman: No, we had the new design last night.
Kanner: I thought we had half going.
Lehman: Half going into the drive- into the storm sewer- and the other half would
go into the watershed.
Kanner: Didn't you just say that all of it would go into the-?
McCarragher: The figures that I had when I talked to Ron before showed that for the area
of the point- of 0.98 acre watershed area- that currently we had one CFS
going in that watershed area and that with the design prior to both front
and back roofs going into the roof drain there was 1.1 CFS or a 10%
increase in that area. So that was a concern when I talked to Ron. I was
indicating to him that if we have got a bad water problem now, adding
water to it would be not what ~ve are looking for here.
O'Donnell: I think we need to get this clear because we were told last night that it
definitely decreases it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 26
McCarragher: And I think what Ron has told me is that either last night or some time
today the developer agreed to take the water off the back part of the roof
and put it into the roof tile drain. And I have been told that he believes
that after they do the recalc on that, that that will make the CFSs the same.
I have not seen that yet but that is what I have been told. Ron, is that
accurate? That is what I have been told. When I got this figure when I
was talking to Ron it was an increase. So I ~vas concerned about that. The
other thing that I had a concern about is in the area- in the one picture you
saw there showed a "U" shaped area where the water went down. I had
originally thought that when the homes were going to be constructed on
the hillside and open up to that bottom part that they were not going to do
anything with that land and that that would remain the same. When I saw
the plans and talked with Ron yesterday he showed me that they were
going to cut into that and lower that area, which in my mind meant that it
would increase the velocity of that water because now you are channeling
your- you are cutting into it ~vhich would make the slope narrower and
you are pushing the ground in. So you are channeling the water and
making it- dropping it so it would come through faster and it would
channel it, which would mean the water would come through faster at that
point. And that was a concern with me too. When the water comes down
these two areas that we are talking about it comes down back behind my
house and actually doesn't bother my house because I have a rather large
burm that sits there and it goes up. But as it goes down then it flattens out
and it goes down to the houses. And Pat's here- and Pat probably gets the
first brunt of it because the land flattens out there and so when you get the
water coming down behind my house from up here and now you are
bringing the water down across this development all that flattens out. And
she has got a door in the basement of her house that water has backed up
to that door when it has flattened out there because it can't get across
Washington Street. So it is backing up. And as it backs up it backs up
into my yard and just backs up hill. But she unfortunately is a little farther
downhill then I am. And Karen, who is not here- Karen Parker- is down
one house even further and has those same problems. So what we have
been trying to work with is to really make sure that in this development
that the water concerns are adequately addressed because we are removing
a lot of trees and a whole bunch of bushes back there that when the water
comes down that absorbs- in my mind just as a lay person- that absorbs a
lot of water. I mean, you have got bushes and you've got loads of trees. I
hate to see the trees go period but I hate to see them go because they are
good at rooting and bringing in the water. So if you are removing all of
that stuff, I just want to make sure that we don't- some of the people now
who get water in their basement I don't think Belle is here, but she had
just in the rain we had two days ago, three days ago, she had to replace-
take up the carpet in her basement because she had water there. So, we
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 27
are very sensitive about the water issue. But we are also sensitive- and we
do want to talk to- ~ve want to congratulate Mike on working with us. I
mean, he has been listening to us and he has been working with us and we
want to say that we are very happy with that. But you know the one thing
that bothers me maybe the most here is what happens when Mike is gone?
And when the City Engineer who put their thoughts in this thing are gone?
And MMS and those people who have been working very well with Mike
to try to solve this problem are gone? What protection do we have at that
time that all of the things that they have put in place are going to be kept
there?
Lehman: Jim, we do have a Stormwater Management Ordinance that will require
the things put in place remain in place. And I think the Council shares the
same concern that you do. The stormwater issue- obviously there is a
problem out there right now. Our concern, and I think the concern
obviously that you share, is that this proposed development does not in
any way aggravate an already aggravating situation. From my perspective
the calculations from the engineers and whatever- if they can show us that
they can actually improve or certainly not increase the flow of water, goes
a long ways in their proposal to develop this.
McCarragher: Emie, I can't agree with you more on that but I sat down with Ron and I
said (can't hear) and I said, "Okay Ron, you live in my house. What
things would you want to see if you lived in my house and Mike is now
gone and you are gone and MMS is gone?" I came up with a few things
that I would like to see if we are going to do this. I want to make sure
there are some teeth and covenants or something that are left behind when
we leave here so that if water comes down that hill and buries Joe Leu's
house or puts water into his house or gets Kevin Bell' s house or gets Belle
Elger's house or gets my house or gets Pat's house or Karen's house that
we have somewhere to go. That we are not left without a remedy. So,
what I was looking at here and some of the things that my thoughts were-
and I could pass this out and leave it with you as well. One, that the
developer build and maintain roof drain lines to the retention basin but
then thereafter it is maintained by a Homeowners Association. That they
have an obligation to maintain that line open. That all of the homeowners
in this subdivision are to run all of their down spouts from the front and
the back of the roof into the drain tile. Them is no obligation for them to
do it unless there is something in writing that makes them do it. That the
individual lots must be initially graded and thereafter maintained by the lot
owners so that all portions of the lot from the front comers of the
residential buildings to the street directs surface water to the street, as they
are now designing. And it is maintained that way. That Arbor Hill Circle,
as I understand it, the design now- Arbor Hill Circle will collect a lot of
the surface water and bring it down to the base of Arbor Hill Circle and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 28
then there is going to be a street that goes west, and I wish I knew the
name of that but I don't know the name so I only can say the street that
goes to the west, at the base of Arbor Hill Circle. But they are going to
elevate the concrete on that road so that water coming down a 10 foot drop
mind you- the plans if you look at the elevation from the top to the bottom
it is a ten foot drop over several hundred feet, is going to somehow be
channeled across west and not down Arbor Hill and back out to
Washington Street. Because if it goes out to Washington Street we are
just adding more water to a creek that is already not taking water so my
water is going to back up and we are just creating a problem there. So, it
supposed to go over- the elevation of that concrete is to be such so that the
water goes west into the intake centers for the retention basin. So I want
to make sure that the Homeowners Association is responsible for making
sure that that elevation is kept in place. That the final land grading plan-
and I think this is probably a given- approved by the City Engineer is
followed. And then since we are sensitive to the number of the trees that
are already taken out of there- I am looking at their plm~ as to what they
are taking and are not taking but I would like some clarification as to how
many of these trees they are really taking out and how many they are not
along the boundary line. I don't think they are taking out any, I just want
some clarification. On erosion- and erosion is probably as difficult a
problem because of the grate that we are talking about of this land coming
down. If you go out there and walk behind there and especially go behind
Leu's house and Belle's house, you will see a huge ravine that now comes
down the hill.
Champion: And where do they live? What street? On Green Mountain or-?
McCarragher: It is on Bowling Green. You address? 1177 127.
Lehman: Jim, you kind of need to wind this up.
Pfab: I have got a question. This is my (can't hear) as to what is going on there.
You and the developers are really working together. I think possibly there
needs to be another person involved or another entity and maybe that is
the City. I believe- does the City have any obligation to take that surface
water and pipe it underground at some point? Now, in the discussion last
night there was a question whether you as property owners facing Bowling
Green would be willing to allow yourselves to be assessed to get that
water underground so we could get rid of it and get it out of the area.
Champion: They probably have to have a little more than (can't hear).
Pfab: That came up.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 29
McCarragher: I guess we have to talk about how much the assess~nent is and whether or
not-
Pfab: Is this the time to work to solve the problem that has been around for-?
McCarragher: I mean, I remember- I will just try to shorten up here- I remember when
Mayfield- and you had some of the creek that went across May field and
there was an open ditch on both sides. The City came in and put it all
underground. That area and all the problems with the water backing up
into all those homes on Mayfield went away. And so I do think- I am not
sure anybody got assessed for that when the City did it but something like
that certainly solved the problem. I do think there is a problem that needs
to be solved. And south of us where there is not enough capacity to take
this water away. So, just quickly getting back to the erosion- to build and
maintain the silt fence lines shown on the plat and any additional ones by
the City Engineer. And that any contractor during construction of any
building must build, inspect and maintain a silt fence on the side of the
building where we are going to have the biggest steep drop on bare ground
because it will be all dug up and the grass will be gone, and behind the
building in addition to the silt fencing that they show at the base so that we
don't get all of that stuff coming down into our backyard and we get mud
flow. I am encouraged by talking with the developer. We have seen
progress and we are willing to work with Mike. I like Mike as a
contractor. But I am concerned today as we sit here today what happens
when Mike is gone. And the City now has an opportunity to do that by
requiring as part of any zoning consideration that these matters be
incorporated by covenants or by conditional zoning or by something to
make certain that when all this planning has been done and all the thought
has been put into it that five years from now when none of them own the
property, we still have the same protections. And that is our basic (can't
hear).
Lehman: How many of the things that you have brought up with us tonight do you
think you can reach agreement with the developer on? I mean, it seems to
me that most of those things are items that you could visit with them.
McCarragher: I am hoping we can make agreement with all of them.
Lehman: If those can be agreed to are you saying that this might be okay?
McCarragher: Yeah. I am saying if we can insure that the water problem is not going to
be a problem for us and we can insure adequate erosion so that the Joe
(can't hear) doesn't sit there and watch mud coming down into his
backyard, which he has already seen when Green Mountain Drive went in,
if that could be done, yeah. I mean, people- would you like to see
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 30
something different when you have been looking at wooded trees all the
time and now you can look at the back of houses? Yeah. We don't
particularly like that. Is that life? Yes, that is life. But is having more
water come into our basement, is having to pull up carpet, is having to
deal with that part of life? No. We have a problem and we just want to
insure that it is not exasperated here. And we want protection into the
future to make sure that once the people who are working with us get it
done we don't have to deal with an empty dish.
Champion: I really am in favor of this development but I understand your problem
because I lived there when that was a fairly new neighborhood. And the
water was terrible. (Can't hear) that the water is taken care of. It was- and
you know, it is too bad that we didn't have ordinances in place at that
time. But my yard was always flooded every time it rained.
McCarragher: If you would accept this I would like to give you just something I call
Arbor Hill Requirements. It is just for you to take a look at on some of the
things that I have talked about future points.
Lehman: Why don't you make sure the developer gets a copy of that?
McCarragher: I certainly will.
Lehman: All right. Thank you.
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Pfab: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by O'Dormell, seconded by Pfab. All in favor? Opposed? Motion
carries.
Cruise: My name is John Cruise. I live on the east side of Iowa City. I am one of
the four owners of Arbor Hill LC, the owner of the property, the applicant.
I just want to be very brief because I think the issues are things that need
to be discussed by the engineers. They have discussed it and I think they
can handle everything that would be required. I want to say on behalf of
Arbor Hill LC that I believe everything that Jim McCarragher has
requested tonight is acceptable to us. Two thirds of it or more is already
part of the ordinances and laws that we would have to abide by in
developing this property. Some of the things like the rear down spouts
draining out to the front we would agree to have that in a conditional
zoning agreement that would be incorporated in the condominium
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 31
declaration for this development. I don't know what else was there but we
will study this list. I think as I listen to those requests I think we are
willing to provide each and every one of those requests that I heard. And
then I do want to emphasis that this project here is really a lesser use of the
property than was planned many years ago. And we thought that when we
came in with 8 nice duplexes to be developed as condominiums for kind
of an older crowd, that this was something that fit that neighborhood very
well. We tried to- you know, we are not trying to intensely use it and I
think this is a very good development that kind of melds the single family
with our existing 34 condominium units that we are now renting out there.
Lehman: From my perspective the only real issue for me is the drainage issue. And
if those questions can be addressed, from my perspective, this can happen.
Cruise: And I hope you can hear from our engineers tonight because I think they
will address those. Thank you.
Stephan: I am Chris Stepban from MMS Consultants, the engineer. So, you are
about to hear. I have made some exhibits and I will pass them out here.
Champion: Do you think we are going to understand any of this?
Stepban: (Can't hear).
O'Donnell: A lot better than Jim's photographs.
Kanner: Marian, could you pass that list that was just provided with the requests?
Could you pass that down please?
(Several talking)
Lehman: You got an A and a D. We are all fight.
Stephan: What I presented to you were two exhibits. Exhibit A is showing the
drainage area prior to development but as it exists out there at the present
time. We see two areas that are of contention there. You will note kind of
there is one that is noted as .98 acres, kind of off to the upper right hand
side. And another area called 2.46 acres. Those two areas drain into the
neighborhood that is here, you know, concerned about drainage. We have
done some calculations estimating the mnoffs from these areas in an
undeveloped condition. Then we have exhibit D which shows the areas
discharging onto these properties after we would put our site
improvements in place. And you will note that the upper drainage area
where we had .9 acres originally we have now cut down to somewhere
around .74 or .71 acres. The area that was 2.46 acres we have reduced to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 32
.85 or .75 acres. The runoffcalculations will show, and we provided these
to Ron Knoche your engineer, that the ranoff under a 5 year storm
condition or a 100 year storm condition we have either the same amount
of runoff or less in the developed condition as we had in the undeveloped
condition.
Champion: Is this an exact science?
Stephan: No. It is not. I would be the first one to tell you that.
Champion: Okay, when you say there is not a decrease-
Stephan: I am saying it is either the same-
Lehman: Or less.
Stepban: I don't think we are adding to the problem. Will these people be flooded
again?
Champion: Yes.
Stephan: They probably will be. Will it be my water? I don't think so. I am not
going to make- excuse me- I am not going to make their problem go away.
Lehman: No, I realize that. I think we all know that. In this Exhibit D where you
show the development the- and according to what Jim suggested- all of the
eave's water would be piped to the street and out into a storm drain so the
entire surface area of the roofs of those three duplexes then would go to
the street rather than to the backyard where it presently runs?
Stephan: Right. And it is likely that in the more severe storm event- you know, we
all- none of our roofs handle that kind of rainfall when we really get a hard
rain so in those instances I am not going to be able to pipe all of that to the
street. But, the more normal ones, yes. All of that will be into a pipe
system that will go to the stormwater basin.
Kanner: Chris, actually we were talking yesterday about what could be done to
reduce the present problem and not expecting that you would have to pay
for it but isn't now the time to try to correct their problem and see if there
is something that can be done before your development is finished in this
area?
Stephan: That is possible, not knowing exactly what that solution is. If that solution
involves a storm sewer that comes up the common property line between
the two of us, yes, then probably it would make sense that some solution
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 33
would take place while we are doing our development. So we tear it up
one time and we heal it back up and everything is fixed. If it involves out
in Westminster, I don't know how we would deal with that. I have a bit of
a difference with Mr. McCarragher about characterizing the water backing
up from Washington Street. I went out there last night and looked at that
and the low spot on Washington Street is approximately 150 feet west of
Westminster. And the low spot in the sidewalk there is about 5 feet lower
than the street Westminster intersection with Washington Street. Now that
tells me that- my drainage experience tells me the water has to get at least
five feet deep in Washington Street before it starts backing up on
Westminster. I think his problem and the neighborhood's problem is that
there is an intermediate high point in Westminster between the intersection
with Bowling Green and Washington Street that creates a bit of a dam.
The street is flat, it is a very flat grade, but there is some intakes that aren't
too far away from him and the street grade pushes that water back to those
intakes. Well, when the storm sewer system can't take water the water
seeks its own level so it will rise until it gets to that high point and starts to
go over. Well, the street looks full, which is what his photos show. So,
maybe that storm sewer system needs to be improved or we do some
different things with that drainage in terms of trying to solve that. The
backyards, there may be a solution. I have not looked at that but there is a
possibility, yes.
Kanner: So are you willing to sit down with them and the City to see if we could
work out that solution now?
Stephan: I would have to have some direction from the owners if that is what they
wish us to do. I mean, there is some other property that is in between that
is already developed on our side as well as theirs that we would have to
deal with there.
Pfab: I would like to direct a question to Steve Atkins at this point. What is it
that the City can do to help solve that problem for that neighborhood?
Now, the developers I don't think are making the problem any worse but I
think we are passing up a wonderful time to do something there. It is still
a problem and the construction what not while everything is being tom up
appears like if there is any ways the City can step forward to do something
in a timely way I would certainly suggest that that be looked into.
Arkins: Irvin, I can't answer that technically. I am not competent to answer that.
Pfab: I realize that but I am saying is that something that you would look into? I
mean, I get the feeling that there is not a conflict between the developers
and the neighborhood. I mean, they are each trying to meet each other to
the best that they can. But I don't think- I think the problem is outside of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 34
that area and it is probably a part of the City's problem. And at what point
do we step forward as a city and say what can we do to help?
Lehman: Irvin, that is not a City problem.
Pfab: Well the water is-
Lehman: That may well be but the City did not create that problem. The
development of that neighborhood created that problem. And I think that
it probably is going to have to be a solution that the neighborhood works
out. We are dealing with a development here and I agree with you there
seems not to be a conflict between the developer and the neighbors. But I
don't believe that that is a City problem when a developer creates a
subdivision that creates a water flow that is a problem in somebody' s
backyard. I believe that has to be solved by the folks who own that
property.
Pfab: Can the City make it any easier or offer a way to work with them to help
solve the problem? If there is water in the streets it is a City problem too.
Lehman: I have never been aware of water in the streets being a problem for any
period of time out there.
Atkins: I can't (can't hear).
Pfab: I have seen- I have been out there and seen water in the streets at different
times so that is (can't hear).
Lehman: That is another issue but certainly I-
Pfab: It looks to me like the problem is there and it looks like we are in the
process of trying to solve some problems. Maybe if by looking at the little
bigger picture we can solve something that we don't have to keep coming
back to.
Lehman: I would love to encourage the neighbors to look at the bigger picture but I
do believe that is a neighborhood- something that should be solved by the
neighborhood.
Champion: Karin, just nod your head and then I will tell the microphone whether you
nod your head yes or no- any new construction in that whole area, that
neighborhood, now has to meet the City Code for water runoff, is that
correct? She nods her head yes.
Lehman: Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 35
Stephan: Any other questions? I have been trying to answer them.
Lehman: And this does meet our stormwater management code obviously or you
wouldn't be here.
Stephan: Yes, otherwise I wouldn't be here. You wouldn't let me show up.
Vanderhoef: You wouldn't get this far?
Stephan: That is right.
Kanner: Chris, how many trees are you taking down?
Stephan: I don't know the exact count. Our intent is- there is a power line that runs
up the common property line and so we am not going to take fight up to
the property line. I hesitate to give you an exact number. We could sit
down and look at the plan. We haven't gone out there and identified each
and every tree that is going to stay or not stay. I don't know how many.
We could look at the plan and count it. I have not sat down and count
that.
Kanner: I rough percentage?
Stepban: I don't know. I would hesitate to give you a percentage because I haven't
sat down and looked at it.
Pfab: I am going to try something one more time. Are there Neighborhood
Associations or something that function in that neighborhood that can help
work on the problem collectively?
Atkins: There is no formal Neighborhood Association. I need some direction from
you all. If you wish the City in oar capacity to be a party to discussions
between Chris and John and Jim and Hodge folks, that is fine. We can do
that.
Pfab: I would certainly-
Atkins: But I have got to believe that they are already talking about the very
issues. Now, if you want us to pursue a stormwater project that is a fairly
hefty undertaking.
Wilbum: Another Capital Improvement.
Atkins: And it is a Capital project of some consequence.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 36
Pfab: But the problem isn't going to go away if we don't tackle it?
Champion: I don't- we (can't hear).
Pfab: If we close our eyes will it go away?
Champion: Our goal is to not make it worse. That is our role.
Pfab: Is our role also to make it a little better?
Lehman: I don't think ~ve are being asked to improve a problem. We are being
asked not to exacerbate a problem. That is why they are here.
Karmer: But Ernie, other-
Pfab: I don't think there is any argument with the developer or the
neighborhood. (Can't hear).
Lehman: The public hearing is on this development, not on the stormwater problem
that exists.
Kanner: That is one of the great things about the public heating discussion is these
(can't hear) things come up and I think the role of government is not an
invisible hand but to help out and make things better Cormie. I think that
it would be worthwhile for the City to get involved in some role and to see
if there is a way that we could help it. I think that is why we have a
Neighborhood Coordinator and we have encouraged Neighborhood
Associations. I would back what Irvin is saying, it just makes sense that
we would perhaps get involved and see if there is something that the City
can do to make it a better situation before the final construction begins on
this proposed subdivision.
Champion: I don't disagree that the neighborhood has a problem. Like I said, I lived
there, I know they have a problem. And I certainly don't want their
problem to get worse. As kind of a guardian of City money I would not
consider it the City's responsibility to take the water out of their yards. I
mean, then we are going to have everybody in town who has got water in
their yard or their basement wanting us to correct it. I think that is
unrealistic.
Lehman: They aren't asking us for that.
Champion: And they aren't asking for that. That is not what they are asking. They
are concerned about the problem that they have and I know they have a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 37
problem. I am concerned about it too. I don't want it to be made worse.
That doesn't mean that I don't have some empathy for their water in their
yard. But I am not going to use taxpayer's money to correct it.
Lehman: Would anybody else like to speak to this?
Vanderhoef: And the neighborhood has a choice if they choose to address it. they can
either come to us or go to an engineer to figure out what they want to do in
that area.
Pfab: I just want to ask- so your suggestion is- this is a question to see ifI
understand what you are saying- is that if they feel that they have a
problem that they should feel free to contact somebody at the City to see if
they can work together?
Lehman: We always are open to that.
Karr: Can we have a motion to accept correspondence from Mr. Stephan?
Vanderhoef: So moved.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. All in favor? Opposed?
Motion carries.
Schnittjer: I am Larry Schnittjer, also from MMS Consultants. In regard to Steve and
Irvin's questions on whether or not we should delay this project to review
the implementation of some sort of a drainage study on this area, I don't
think that that is really necessary in that our proposed structures are at 45
feet from the property line and most of them are- well, all of these
structures are up and above the neighboring property to the east. So any
drainage work that would be done would be primarily on their lots.
Otherwise we would be getting into a relatively steep bank on this
property.
Pfab: I wasn't- I never intended to delay your project or your development. I
am just saying as the problem presents itself we ought to try to work
together to solve it.
Schnittjer: Okay.
Pfab: I would never- I had no reason-
Sclmittjer: I guess I misunderstood you then.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 38
Pfab: No. I had no intention ofever-
Schnittj er: The only place on this whole Arbor Hill tract where the drainage was is on
the common property line is down next to Washington Street where it goes
underneath Washington Street. The rest of it is primarily on the Oakwood
lots.
Lehman: But any solution would be on the back lot lines anyway?
Schnittjer: Yes. And I would hate to see a construction company like working down
there on Highway 6 try to work up through that backyard fight now.
O'Dormell: Larry, to your best opinion is this project going to make this water
problem down there any worse?
Schnittjer: The information that we have prepared and the designs we have prepared
we have done everything we can to minimize the amount of water that
would go to the adjacent property and I think from the numbers that Chris
relayed to you this evening that it illustrates that no more water will be
going that way then is currently going there today. And in most cases it
will be less. We have done- in normal designs we wouldn't go through
the exercise we have got to on this project to minimize it. But when we
found that they had a significant problem then- and I observed a problem
when I was out there in Mr. McCarragher's lot with him one evening. It
hadn't been raining just immediately before but the ground was saturated
so I could tell that there was a drainage problem there. And it is not
something that we have created. It is something that has happened
through the development of that subdivision. There was a drainage
channel along the backyard lines there to- probably not a straight line like
it is today- but there was a drainage channel there back in history that has
been compromised and it probably needs to be looked at sometime but I
don't know if it is necessary to do it today.
Lehman: Okay.
Pfab: My point is that you have to go to extraordinary efforts to try to tell the
water to go different then the way water wants to go.
Schnittjer: We have done the best we can.
Pfab: I know. That- it postpones the problem and creates more problems as we
go. If we could just figure out a way to get rid of that water and get it out
of there that would solve a lot of problems.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 39
Schnittjer: In meeting the requirements of the stormwater ordinance we have to try to
impound as much of this water as possible to meet the requirements. By
doing as much as we have we have met those requirements and we have
exceeded the normal allowable release rates to the perimeter.
Pfab: I commend-
Schnittjer: We did not exceed it but we bettered the normal-
Pfab: Yeah, solved the problem and once and for all be done with it.
O'Donnell: It appears like the neighborhood is working well with the developer and
we are told we are going to reduce water. We certainly don't ~vant to
make more water go into that area. I am liking what I am hearing from the
neighborhood so far.
Vanderhoef: And the CZA will be the final piece.
Sctmittjer: This will be the final piece and then the density if you look at the staff
report is quite low. It is a nice comfortable development. It is one of the
last pieces of infill in this area.
Lehman: Thank you Larry.
Schnittjer: Thank you.
Franklin: All I want to say is if you are going to do a conditional zoning agreement,
which it sounds like there is a possibility of that, continue the public
hearing to your 26th meeting and then we will do the first consideration.
Lehman: Right, thanks.
Leu: I will be real brief. My name is Joe Leu and I live on 127 Bowling Green.
My wife and I have lived there 15 years. We did come to the original
meeting May 3. Just two points I would like to make and then I know
you- to make it short. I would also like to thank Mr. Mike Hodge. I know
he has been working with us. Mr. Cruise has been listening to us. One
concern I do have is to make sure that when it is all done and everyone is
gone I have something written down so there is recourse. That area there-
we have been there 15 years. It cannot- the families especially down
cannot take any more water. I sell milk for a living. 1 am not an engineer,
not a construction guy, don't know about all of that, don't know all the
numbers. We have lived in Iowa City for 28 years and it has been great
but this is very important. This whole area affects a lot of homes. Ijust
hope people are dotting their 'T s" and crossing their "t's" and looking at it
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 40
close and then making sure that after you leave and you go fishing making
sure that that is written down and everyone understands exactly where that
water is going to go. Because it can't take any more pressure on what is
coming down the hill now.
Lehman: And I think that is what Jim's suggestion and Mr. Cruise's reaction to that
indicates that there probably could very well be a conditional zoning
agreement that will implement all of those things and make sure that those
things are nailed down tight and wiI1 be controlled five years, ten years,
twenty years from now so that you don't have to worry about it.
Leu: I appreciate that. There is a cast iron drain in that back and right now it is
amazes me but it will actually if the water is coming down through there
in a bad rain, it will knock that cast iron grate offof that and I think that is
a lot of pressure. So, that is all I have to say unless you have questions for
me. Thank you for listening to us.
Lehman: Thank you Joe.
Hodge: I am Dave Hodge, not Mike. I am the owner and the builder. I went
through the list of the wants and needs and I don't see anything (changed
tapes) we can't do on the list. Like Chris said, I think most of the items
are required by the City and the engineers anyway. We sat down and
looked at the water today on the roofs and we were able to do a little bit of
roof work to be able to get the gutters to be continuous and run down
spouts to the front of the lot, which will help on the water. And then we
may have to do some larger down spouts but here a couple of weeks ago
we didn't know if we could do that with the roof line. But after today we
designed it so we could.
Kanner: You are saying that both front and back will go to the front now?
Hodge: Yeah. Correct. As far as the trees, I know there are questions on the trees.
I think the City requires us to have so many trees and so there will be lots
and lots of trees replaced. But also there the people that had started that
development put a lot of nice trees in that area which we won't be
touching. You know, up along the top of the hill and a lot of hardwoods
that we won't touch. So I think that will stay in place and always look
nice. The erosion and those sort of things are always required by the City
to maintain during construction. So that- we are used to all of that. So, I
don't know if you have any questions?
Lehman: Would it be satisfactory with you if we continue the public hearing until
the 26th, which will be our next regular meeting two weeks from tonight?
During which time you and I will have an opportunity to prepare a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6b Page 41
conditional zoning agreement that incorporates those items and then
conclude the public hearing and have first consideration?
Hodge: That would be the 271h?
Lehman: The 26th I believe. Is that satisfactory with everybody? I think they are
good suggestions. It is really kind of nice from this position to hear folks
talking to each other and getting along with each other and not screaming
and yelling at each other. Certainly you are handling this 1 think
admirably well. I appreciate that and I am sure the rest of the Council
does.
Champion: It is wonderful.
O'Dormell: That is very rare.
Lehman: Yeah, do we have a motion to continue the public hearing?
O'Donnell: So moved.
Kanner: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Kanner to continue to the 26th of June.
All in favor say "aye". Opposed? The hearing will be continued to June
26th. We are going to take a break for- we will resume at, no not 10:30- at
about 10 of.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 42
ITEM NO. 6c. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE
ZONING DESIGNATION BY DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 307 EAST COLLEGE STREET (OLD CARNEGIE
PUBLIC LIBRARY) AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
COLLEGE AND LINN STREETS AS AN IOWA CITY HISTORIC
LANDMARK.
Lehman: The public hearing is open.
Gunn: My name is Mike Gunn. I am with the Iowa City Historic Preservation
Commission. The Commission has determined that the old Carnegie
Library is a key contributing structure in downtown Iowa City, as well as a
structure that is individually eligible for the national register of historic
places. The Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning
Commission, and the planning staff have all recommended that the
property be designated as an Iowa City landmark. The owner is not
resisting a landmark designation. The Historic Preservation Commission
urges you to designate the library as an Iowa City landmark. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you Mike.
O'Donnell: Thanks Mike.
Briggs: My name is Jackie Briggs. I live at 714 Noah Johnson Street. I am the
director of Friends of Historic Preservation. I am here tonight to let you
know that Friends of Historic Preservation asks you to acknowledge the
importance of this 1904 structure by giving it landmark status. Friends of
Historic Preservation believes that landmark status will improve the
historic integrity of downtown and we ask you to consider landmark status
tonight and vote on that. There are a number of us here tonight who- some
of us will speak and some of us will not be speaking but also offer much
support for landmark status on the Carnegie. You see a lot of us here on
both sides and we are very happy because the building just in the recent
past was going to be demolished and now we are at this point. It is very
good news and people are happy on both sides. And we do hope that you
will acknowledge the historical importance of this building. So, thank
you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: I have two questions. One, what is your tag say here?
Briggs: It says Landmark the Library.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 43
Kanner: And can you just tell me in your own words what excites you or why- on a
human level why do you want to save the building or have it as a
landmark- a historic landmark?
Briggs: On a human level?
Kanner: Yeah.
Briggs: I wasn't mocking you when I said that. I was just trying to-
Kanner: No, no- I misspoke perhaps. But on an emotional level or what is it that
you see on the street when you walk down? Why save these buildings?
What is the point? What do you get out of it aesthetically?
Briggs: Well, specifically for this building what I get out of it is I feel that I am
helping add to a town that I have grown to appreciate more and more as
the years have gone by. When I first moved to Iowa City and I was
walking downtown there was this beautiful old building on Linn Street
right off the Ped Mall that had this giant bush planted in front of it. And I
thought what is up with that? This is clearly a building that once was
quite great and lovely and used and now has like a shrub in front of it and
some sort of tacked on building in back. But at least it was being used.
And I was glad for that. Well, I have seen a lot of buildings come down
since- in the last few years- and people say things never change in Iowa
City. Well, I have seen more change in this town then I have ever seen in
my entire life. I believe that Historic Preservation and business can go
hand in hand. And I think the public library on a very human level is a
perfect example of that. I think this Camegie building will have adaptive
reuse. And Historic Landmark status will ensure that for the future.
Lehman: Thank you.
Briggs: Thank you.
Wilburn: This is a public hearing tonight and we are not taking action, correct?
Lehman: We will talk about that at the end of the hearing. We may want to take
action tonight to- we have certain time constraints that we are under to
have final passage by July 7. So we may want to. Joe, are here
representing the owner? Are you here- would you answer questions for
US?
Holland: I will try.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 44
Lehman: Okay, could you give us the owner's position? I think that that is
important to the Council. It sounds as if there is agreement between the
Historic Preservation Commission and Mr. Clark that there would be some
effort made that there will be a successful effort made to save at least a
portion of the old library building.
Holland: I am not sure exactly what your question is Mr. Mayor.
Lehman: What is Mr. Clark's position on this?
Holland: I think maybe the best way to characterize that is that after the initial
reaction to potential demolition of the building he recognized the
sentiment in the community and probably inevitability of the designation
as a landmark and decided that the best path for him to take was to change
his plans for the property.
Vanderhoef: Will he be pursuing national historic registry status?
Holland: That I don't 'know at this point. I don't think there has been a decision
made on that. Unlike the landmark designation that is a voluntary process,
not an involuntary process.
Vanderhoef: Yes, and (can't hear).
Holland: It is a possibility but I don't know that it has been discussed.
Champion: You can tell him from me at least that I am delighted that we are not
dealing with the possibility of a demolition.
Holland: I suspect he will watch the tape of this meeting, so you can tell him
yourself.
Kanner: It sounds like from your perspective he is not taking a position one was or
the other? That is what I am hearing.
Holland: Well, I think he is taking the position of this is the public will and he is
going to follow what the public will is in this instance.
Lehman: I know Jim and my suspicion is that is exactly correct. I don't have any
other questions.
Champion: I just want to tell again the Historic Preservation Commission and Friends
of Historic Preservation that I as one that thinking that past old buildings
are important to the future and important to our children to know kind of
where they came from, that I think that since I have been on this Council
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 45
that you have done an incredibly outstanding job and gotten a lot done.
And it is a commission that has always worked hard but I can honestly say
in the past four years you have moved forward many many projects. And
I really thank you for that. I wish you had done this two years ago though.
Lehman: I have a question for the Council. Because of the time constraints
involved in this designation that has to be passed and published by July 7,
if there is no strong objection on the part of the Council members I would
suggest that we have our first consideration tonight. Our second
consideration then could be two weeks from tonight. I think I am getting a
"no" from Eleanor?
Dilkes: That would be contrary to the way we always prepare the agenda, which is
to note if there is a possibility that action will be taken. And I think it
would probably be best not to.
Lehman: There is no possibility that we will act on this tonight?
Karr: We could have added it last night if there was any indication.
Dilkes: We could have if we had given the notice that that was going to be done.
And I think there is an argument that you could do it but it certainly is
contrary to what we typically do.
Champion: But if we did, at our next meeting we could compress the last two readings
in a special meeting (can't hear).
Dilkes: I think that is the plan.
Karr: That is an option. Another option that was mentioned last night was the
possibility of havin a special formal prior to your work session the 25th.
And then on the 26t~ collapse it and you would be no different than where
you are right now.
Lehman: Right.
Champion: Okay.
Karr: But you would have given notice on two different occasions.
Lehman: Marian you always know the answer.
Karr: It was your idea.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 46
Lehman: I know how to fish for that, don't I? Is there anyone else who would like
to speak to this?
Adams: Hello, I am Bluford Adams. If I could I would just like to make a few
remarks about the purpose of this discussion. If you will, I would like to
say that what is at stake here is not determining the historic significance of
the Carnegie Library because that question has really been already
answered. The Iowa City Carnegie Library and the Carnegie Libraries
across the US they are generally recognized as a major part of our social
and cultural history. There were about 1600 of these libraries built in the
US and abroad and they were sites where immigrant and working class
people had a chance to have access to books and social public places for
(can't hear) exchange. And they were also significant architecturally
because they were built in a variety of styles with a variety of scales by
both national and locally significant architects. They are a product of
America with a different economy, a different relation between
government and public institutions and different styles of philanthropy.
And for these reasons cities and town across the US have designated these
libraries public landmarks. So, I don't think we can say that we are trying
to determine whether this building is historically significant because I
think it is. What is at stake here I think is Iowa City's relation to its past.
Do we want to be the kind of town that tears down its history, that puts
profit before preservation, before saving buildings that can mean a lot to
the next generation and that still have a lot to teach us? I think the jury is
still out on that given what we have seen over the last few years happen to
important buildings. On the other hand I am very hardened by the news
that there is talk of adapting this building for apartments, for preserving it.
And I am hardened by the prospect that you folks will designate a historic
landmark, which I believe it certainly is. Thank you very much.
Lehman: Thank you.
Ehrstine: Good evening. My name is Glenn Ehrstine, I reside at 228 S. Summit St.
I would like to offer my particular perspective on this. 228 S. Summit St.
is already an Iowa City Historic Landmark. It is the Summit Apartment
Cooperative, which is located on Summit Street between Burlington and
College Street. I can certainly attest to the fact, we have been a City
landmark since the City first created historic landmark and historic
landmark designations. And we have been on the national registry for
quite some time. And I am on the board of directors of the co-op. I speak
as a private resident. But, I know from discussions with our other
members and board members that since we have been designated a
historic landmark that locally our property values have increased
substantially- over 50%. And so as regard to the potential plans that the
developer has for making the library into a rental property I can certainly
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 47
attest to the fact that I think there would be a great desire to have the
building serve that purpose by making this designation. I know I have
heard arguments against the designation such as it might not add to the tax
base. I certainly know that you have to be very conscious of the fact that
the city must have income too. And I think as rental property the property
would still continue to serve as a source tax income, tax revenue, for the
City and that indeed- and I would offer this also in case the developer is
listening in, that this would indeed be a very viable solution for the
property for the building. That is all I have to say.
Lehman: Thank you.
Ehrstine: Thank you very much.
Emma Mills: My name is Emma Mills. I live here in Iowa City. I wish to say only that
I would love to see this building preserved. I came to Iowa City as a girl-
young woman- from a very rural area. We had no library or anything.
And we came here because of work for my mother who worked at VA
hospital one year after it opened. And that was the first library I ever
knew. My family all used that library and I would love to see it preserved
for future people to at least point and say, "that was an old library".
Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Sally Mills: My name is Sally Mills. I am not related to Emma. I live at 430 Lee
Street. I have only lived in Iowa City for three years but in getting
adjusted to the town and enjoying it more and more I realize that the
public library was one of the architectural monuments that caught my eye
soon after I moved here because I am familiar with a number of different
cities that have such libraries and have either preserved or destroyed them.
And the ones that have kept them have done so in a way that makes sense
with their communities and remains a legacy of a certain time period
where the public got together and did something from a public initiative
for the people of the community. And what this particular library says to
me is a) it is built in a classical style at a time when the city beautiful
movement was going through the country. And here it landed in Iowa
City. And it was promoted by people who wanted a public area for their
citizens to gather to learn from and they built it in a style that expressed
the common references to ideals of democracy and of the republic and of
education and enlightenment. The fact is that we don't have another
building like that in the City. There are other examples of classical
architecture but they are University buildings or they are commercial
buildings. We have other wonderful historic monuments that are scattered
throughout that area around Lirm Street especially- perhaps not as many as
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 48
we would like. But, none the less, the library is a monument to a certain
belief in public values and an architecture that expressed really lofty goals
for a democratic society and the role of the citizens in helping out and
taking care of each other. And so landmarking that kind of structure will
ensure that that sort of motivation and that sort of historical notion can
continue to exist in our City. And I would strongly urge that designation
go forward.
Lelunan: Thank you.
Scott: I am John Scott and I live at 127 Ferson Ave. I want to speak in favor of
landmark designation. I want to say first of all that it is a very positive
experience to be involved in a situation like this where the owner is so
sensitive to the cultural values that are an important part of that building.
Many have spoken already about the cultural values involved. I won't
speak about that. But, perhaps returning to Mr. Kanner's original
question- how does one respond to this on a personal level? I would like
to say a few things about specific details in that building and their
resonance in western culture. Of course we are looking at a classical
building, so obviously that relates to the architectural style that developed
in the eastern Mediterranean before the time of Christ. In particular we
are looking at one of the styles of Greek architecture, the Ionic. This is
especially important because we know from the ancient authors that the
Ionic style was considered a feminine style. You know if you look up at
those columns on that portico you will see volutes that turn around. And
the ancient author and architect Petruvius tells us that those are the curls of
a woman's hair. And proportions of those columns are much more slender
and more elegant than they are on Doric buildings like Old Capitol
because that, in sexist terms, was more elegant and more feminine. And
likewise in the Renaissance that style became associated with culture and
particularly with learning. And that is why we see so many libraries and
so many Carnegie Libraries with those voltues. That represents literate
civilization, which ties in to what Ms. Mills was saying about democracy
and the whole Carnegie project. Also I would like for you to notice that
there is a pediment- a (can't hear) pediment on that portico. In ancient
architecture in general the pediment was reserved for religious buildings
or temples. In our culture not only did churches have pediments but also
the great public buildings. That means they are something special. And
when you look down at those column shafts I want you to notice that they
are monolithic. They are of a single piece of limestone. Not many pieces.
That is very expensive to do. That meant a lot of money and a lot of effort
went into that portico, representing those cultural values. And then I
would like for you to notice around the cornice of the building the
elaborate carving. Those little squares that each one had to be carved.
That is called (can't hear). That is the technical term. Like teeth, right?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 49
That represents the opulence of the building and the importance of what
was supposed to go on in there. Also there are other features like the
carving on the comers, the coining and so forth, which in this case
interestingly is also around some of the windows. And that is the last
thing I would like to comment on as an architectural feature. Those
windows are not classical in the front. They have three parts- a big pane,
and then two smaller panes that are rectangular on either side. A lot of
ranch style houses have picture windows in that style. That is called the
Chicago window. In 1903 and 1904 when that was put in this classical
building it was the latest thing in architecture. It had just been unveiled by
Louis Sullivan in his design for the Carson Pierre and Scott department
store in Chicago. And the Des Moines firm that designed our library
obviously wanted to be up to date as well as to refer to the classical past.
And so they borrowed the Chicago window from Louis Sullivan and put it
in our building there. I just wanted you to have a sense of that there are
real details there that we can see and that those details have cultural
values. So, as I hope this ordinance passes and we have that building to
admire in the future when we walk by it, we can look at those details and
think about that heritage which is our own and enjoy that for generations
to come. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
O'Donnell: That is a tremendous amount of knowledge. I just liked it because it is
really a neat old building.
Lehman: That is a fitting end to the public hearing. The public hearing is closed.
O'Donnell: I think we have another one.
Lehman: One more. This is- we have been going for about 20 minutes and I don't
sense anybody here who is going to speak against it.
Tachau: No, I won't speak against it. My name is Katherine Tachau and I also live
on Ferson Ave. I will try to be brief. I want to start by thanking the City
Council for its action already in favor of maintaining the building and the
builder for being interested in taking community sentiment into account in
his planning. When I was a child I was growing up in segregated
Louisville Kentucky and my parents were refusing to go to places that
would not admit African Americans. And one of the few places we could
go was the free public library. I remember very early on when I first
learned to read my mother taking me there and explaining this was a place
that was free and that allowed everybody to read books, even if they
couldn't buy any of their own. And so I have always associated that with
classical buildings. And seeing a big stone building like that that had real
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City coun~/il
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#6c Page 50
money put into it and was designed to last for generations, I find very
warm and reassuring. The idea that there are values and ideas that live
beyond ourselves. Now, I happen to prefer Gothic buildings because I am
a medievalist but I have often gone to Europe thinking what it must be like
to grow up in Rome where you still see the Roman walls from over 2000
years ago. What does it make you feel about the continuity of human
beings and one's own place in the universe.'? And when I see beautiful old
stone buildings and churches and great works of architecture in a town like
this it makes me feel like there is a reason to come downtown. That there
are urban values that are worth maintaining. That there is such a thing as a
public thing- a (can't hear), from which we get the work republic. That
has its own value that we have a duty to maintain. So, I am pleased to live
in a city where those kinds of long term values can bring somebody who is
interested in development into finding new uses for an old building so that
they live for another generation or two. And I think that is why we ought
to designate it as a landmark and be very glad that the possibilities for it
brought lots of people to start thinking about why they care about
downtown Iowa City and particular buildings.
Lehman: Thank you. The public heating is closed.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#8 Page 51
ITEM NO. 8. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
IOWA CITY KICKERS SOCCER PARK PARKING LOT
RESURFACING PROJECT ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID
SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY
CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND
FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
b. Consider a Resolution Approving
Pfab: I move the resolution.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion?
Kanner: I have some concern with the cost. Right now this doesn't seem to be a
necessity. It seems that it is something that we could delay. Things are
going on okay there and I think if we start to look at prearranged bus trips
out there with the people that are signed up for the league I bet we can get
one or two buses and take care of some parking problems. I think there is
some other things perhaps to look at and we could hold off on the
resurfacing of the parking lot there.
Vanderhoef: I am going to support this. I think one thing we do want to is keep the
land areas in parking as small as possible and one of those ways is to have
organized parking. And by surfacing this lot we would be able to stripe it
and make it more organized and probably will make it safer for families to
walk in and out.
Lehman: Other discussion? I am assuming this parking lot is in kind of sad shape
or we wouldn't be talking about spending this kind of money to resurface
it.
Vanderhoef: Very dusty. Very nasty.
Lehman: Yeah. Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#9 Page 52
ITEM NO. 9. CONSIDER AN ORDINACNE AMENDING TITLE 3, "CITY
FINANCES, TAXATION AND FEES," CHAPTER 4, "SCHEDULE
OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES"
OF THE CITY CODE, TO INCREASE PARKING FEES IN IOWA
CITY, IOWA. (FIRST CONSIDERATION).
Vanderhoef: Move first consideration.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion? I think this
raises the rates by approximately- hourly parking by about ten cents an
hour and the monthly permits by approximately $5 per month. Is that
correct Joe? I think it is important to point out to the public, and I am sure
the Council those who were on the Council at the time, when we decided
to do the Iowa Avenue project and construct the building that presently
sits at the comer of Iowa Ave and Linn Street we were told that the
financing of that building would be very tight at present parking rates and
that we might very likely have to increase those rates at some point after
that building was completed. And I think we are finding ourselves where
we anticipated that we might have been at that time, which was about
three years ago or so I think. Discussion?
Champion: That is a very minimal increase. I am sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt.
Pfab: The only question I have is why don't we go a unitbrm rate and raise the
Chauncey Swan park rate to the 60 cents?
Fowler: Basically the policy that the City has had over the years is they have
divided the parking areas into two areas that they call the Central Business
District parking and the outlying parking. The boundary line is Burlington
Street, Gilbert Street, Jefferson Street and Clinton- excuse me, not
Clinton- Madison. And the parking inside that area has been priced higher
for people who wanted to drive to the core of the Central Business
District. The parking outside of that area has been lower for people who
were willing to park and then walk to the downtown.
Pfab: I just- I didn't know and I saw it come up last night and I thought to
myselfI had just better ask. I think it is a great idea.
Champion: I think the increases are minimum. I am glad to see that because now I
don't have to object to them. But what will happen now with Park and
Shop? Has that been decided yet?
Fowler: This recommendation calls for no increase in the Park and Shop rate.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#9 Page 53
Champion: Wonderful.
Pfab: Conflict of interest.
Champion: Is it?
Lehman: Further discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#10 Page 54
ITEM NO. 10. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3 "CITY
FINANCES, TAXATION, & FEES," CHAPTER 4 "SCHEDULE OF
FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES" OF
THE CITY CODE, TO INCREASE WASTEWATER SERVICE
CHARGES AND FEES IN IOWA CITY, IOWA. (FIRST
CONSIDERATION).
Vanderhoef: Move first consideration.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. This is the last of a series
of increases. This is a 5% increase. These were programmed out I believe
in 1994. It all fits into the puzzle of paying for the sewer plant, the water
plant. And this will maximize the rates and from this point on, barring any
huge change in federal standards for wastewater plants, we could
hopefully expect rates to start to subside at some point, especially after
these bonds are being paid off.
Atkins: That is correct.
Lehman: Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#11 Page 55
ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA BY ENACTING NEW
SECTIONS NUMBERED 4-2-3, ENTITLED "LOCAL REVIEW OF
APPLICATION/INVESTIGATION OF APPLICANT"; SECTION 4-
2-4, ENTITLED "NOTICE AND HEARING"; AND SECTION 4-2-5,
ENTITLED "CIVIL PENALTIES"; REVISING SECTION 4-5-4
ENTITLED "REGULATION OF PERSONS UNDER LEGAL
AGE"; ENACTING A NEW SECTION 4-5-6 ENTITLED "SALES
TO INTOXICATED PERSONS"; AND ENACTING A NEW
SECTION 4-5-7 ENTITLED "LIMITATIONS ON SALES," ALL OF
WHICH PROVIDE FOR THE REGULATION OF ALCOHOL
SALES. (PASS AND ADOPT).
Vanderhoef: Move to adopt.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion?
Pf~ab: I just have one question on the- what was it? The only restriction on sales
is the 2 to one person at a time? Is that right? There is no other outside
sales or- does this also affect drink specials? Somebody brought that up.
Lehman: Does this do what?
Pfab: Drink specials- what did we finally decide on that?
Lehman: You can have drink specials.
O'Donnell: It (can't hear).
Pfab: So there is no- it really doesn't affect drink specials?
Lehman: No.
Dilkes: Well, it does not affect a reduction in price- a special that reduces the price
of a drink for instance. There are a number of special restrictions that are
set forth in section 4-5-7. Two-for-ones for instance, all you can drink for
a fixed price or for free, etc.
Pfab: I had just forgotten what that was. Okay, that is fine.
Lehman: Other discussion? Make it quick, this is the third consideration after about
four public meetings over about a period of about 6 months.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#11 Page 56
Blizek: I know. This is the last reading and I thought-
O'Donnell: What is your name?
Blizek: Matt Blizek. I would just like to comment of all of the things that have
accumulated and all of the discussion that has happened I don't think it
was been went about the right way. The laws that these people are going
to affect, you know, students like myself and the 30 plus other thousand of
people that these laws will directly affect were not really consulted that
much in the drafting or the changing of these laws. The only opportunities
we had to come and speak to you were two fairly long and drawn out
public hearings, which we really got the impression that you guys were
like all right, how long do we have to put with this and when are you guys
going to sit down? You know? And your comments as I stepped up here
again kind of reinforced that.
Lehman: You are ri~at tonight. We have talked about this so many times. You are
aware of the fact that this regulates the operation of bars and not those
folks who come in bars? It largely has little or no effect on the people
who drink in the bars.
Blizek: You have stated that several times and I disagree with you. And I also
will state that it fine, it may go at the operation of bars but who works at
these bars? You know, you need to ask yourself who is the bartender, who
is the waitress, who works the doors? They are all students and they will
be affected by these laws.
Lehman: You will have to enforce the laws. You are right.
Blizek: Mr. Lehman, when was the last time you went to the Union on a Saturday
night?
Lehman: I don't think I have ever been to the Union on a Saturday night.
Blizek: Exactly. You don't know-
Lehman: But I am not part of the problem.
Blizek: It is easy to write these laws and say hey, you should just enforce them.
But you don't know how it is. You don't know how packed it is and how
out of control. These people are just there trying to keep order and safety
for people and they don't always have time to make sure that every single
minor hasn't snuck a drink in behind their back. And they are going to be
held accountable for this by the undercover cops that are in the bars. And
I just think in the future that if any laws like this are passed that affect so
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#11 Page 57
many people in this community that they should be given more of an
opportunity than these. We had- when me and Kanner had our original
alcohol forum, which I think you said was much too early because nothing
had been drafted, that was an opportunity for students to come in an
atmosphere they felt comfortable in and talk to Mr. Pfab and Mr. Kanner,
the two Councilors who were willing to attend. A normal student just
doesn't feel comfortable coming here to you and speaking at this podium
in front of the newspapers and the cameras about this issue. And it
concerns them. It does. We already live in a city where it is almost scary
sometimes to go out and enjoy yourself. And that is just not an
environment that we would like to live in. So, with that, my short time is
done. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you. Any other discussion on the part of Council?
Wilburn: I have spent some time downtown and I spent the entire last summer as we
were looking at this- Saturdays, just taking a peek at what was going on.
And I have taken input from students. There has been an opportunity
here. Granted maybe some folks aren't comfortable coming here, but they
certainly didn't have any problem sending me emails. Several of the folks
are students that I worked with through internships and things like that so
some of those things I did consider as we were crafting this ordinance. I
think that with City Council starting this discussion however long ago it
was, I think that that helped spur some conversation in other sectors of the
community- the University. And even when I walked to Technigraphics I
had folks of all ages giving me input about this. And some conversations
that we had about trying to have some type of impact on the negative
effects that as a community we have experienced of over consumption and
some problems associated with underage drinking. I look forward the
University continuing- we had the President of the University come here
and express her support for what we were attempting. I look forward to
other parts of the community as we work through seeing the results and
changes that we are hoping to affect here to see if we can try and reduce
some of the vandalism that goes on and to reduce some of the noise as
folks are going away from certain areas where they have been over-
consuming- illegally consuming. And I look forward to seeing if we can
try and have some kind of impact on persons who have been- who have
over-consumed and then get behind the wheel of a car. So, let's move
forward.
Lehman: Other discussion?
Karmer: Hopefully with that in mind, with some of the things you said Ross and
other Council members have said, that- I am going to bring this up at
Council time- (change tapes) to reduce jail usage. And I think this is a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#11 Page 58
critical part of how we manage people who are drinking excessively. And
I think that is part of the discussion that we have to have on that level. So,
lees see if people will continue (can't hear).
Lehman: Roll call. Motion passes 4-3, Pfab- pardon me- Kanner, O'Donnell and
Champion voting in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#12 Page 59
ITEM NO. 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE SALE OF
$11,500,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.
Lehman: I think this is-
Atkins: Yes.
Lehman: We got the bids today. The bid was 4.5354%? That is an incredibly good
rate. The recommendation is that the sale be awarded to Dain Rauscher
for 4.5354%, and I believe you made that motion Ms. Vanderhoef?
Vanderhoef: Yes I did.
Lehman: Is there a second?
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Second by Champion. Discussion?
Pfab: I have one request and it doesn't pertain to this one but the next time we
have a bid like this that we would also have a corresponding notation of
what like bonds sold for over the Internet.
Atkins: There are not like bonds. Every bond issue is different. Every community
is different.
Pfab: Basically these are Aaa for a certain length of time right?
Atkins: That is fight.
Pfab: So, I mean, there are Aaa-
Atkins: In the State of Iowa under the laws of the State of Iowa Aaa at Iowa is
different than Aaa in Nebraska.
Pfab: Okay, but at least I think that would be nice just as attached information
or- information that goes along just as a way to compare.
Atkins: Irvin, you assume that a Aaa of $11.5 million is sold on that day, you
can't guarantee that.
Pfab: No, but if there are some sold that day that we have access to the public
record. No, that is fine. I think that the rates are good and it is- I think we
have talked a lot and I have spent a lot of time talking to a lot of people in
the City about using the Internet for purchasing and selling and as of now I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#12 Page 60
am not aware that we are using it and I just keep asking to see what we
can do.
Champion: Irvin, I think you are a little more progressive with a computer than I am.
I think we have to leave how these bonds are sold to our management who
that is their job.
Pfab: I didn't say that I won't approve it and I didn't say that they were wrong.
I just wanted another benchmark or another reference point for when it
comes time to approve the bid.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#16 Page 61
ITEM NO. 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY
CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE
CITY OF IOWA CITY AND JAMES DUNCAN AND ASSOCIATES
TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE
REDRAFTING OF DEVELOPMENT CODES, INCLUDING
ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN ORDINANCES.
Champion: Move the resolution.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Vanderhoef. This is a project with an
expected cost of about $103,500 and a time frame of 18-24 months. And I
am delighted to see us reviewing these ordinances, some of which
probably haven't been reviewed for twenty years or so.
Vanderhoef: Maybe we will get some funny ones out.
Lehman: Excuse me. Give us a pep talk Karin, as long as we have kept you here.
As long as we have kept you here this long. I sense that you are strongly
in favor of this. I said twenty years- how long has it been since we have
reviewed some of those?
Franklin: 40.
Lehman: 40 years, so this is really something that-
Franklin: 62 for our subdivision regulations.
Lehman: It really needs to be done and obviously an outside consultant that will-
Franklin: Go team!
Lehman: (Can't hear) cheerleader Franklin. Any discussion on the part of Council?
Roll call.
Pfab: I think it would be superfluous after that. Go ahead.
Lehman: Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#17 Page 62
ITEM NO. 17. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
FOSTER ROAD GRADING AND WATER MAIN PROJECT.
Pfab: So moved.
Lehman: Let me finish this first. The engineer's estimate was $1,770,000 and we
received four bids. The low bid was a local company, Maxwell
Construction, for $1,228,678.20. Public Works and Engineering
recommends the awarding of that project to Maxwell Construction. Do
we have a motion?
Pfab: Could I do it now?
Lehman: Yes, please.
Pfab: Okay, let's do it.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab, seconded by O'Donnell. Nice bid.
Vanderhoef: A half a million plus a low estimate.
O'Donnell: Very nice.
Lehman: Roll call.
Champion: Do you think maybe the Engineers do this deliberately to get them through
(can't hear) with this project?
Lehman: Connie, I really wish you wouldn't suggest that at a public meeting. No, I
don't think they do.
Atkins: Read the next one.
Pfab: Yeah, read the next one.
Vanderhoef: Wait until you get to the tunnel project.
Lehman: Yeah, you will take that back.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#18 Page 63
ITEM NO. 18. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK
TO ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
LONGFELLOW/TWIN PEDESTRIAN TUNNEL PROJECT.
Lehman: This had an engineer's estimate of $250,000 and a low bid out of four
from Dixon Construction Company of $288,114.80. Public Works is
recommending that award to Dixon Construction Company of
Correctionville, Iowa.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Now, what
did you say Connie about the estimates?
Champion: Well, the other one was (can't hear) you know? Now because I am a little
concerned, how are we going to pay for this? Can you remind me? I
know it was probably in there somewhere.
Atkins: What we proposed to do is that the fact that the estimate was high- the
estimate wasn't high, the estimate- the bid was high.
Champion: Right.
Atkins: We have given you a series of projects, the one of some consequence is
the street- the Brick Street Repair project we would postpone in the
upcoming fiscal year and then reducing a series of other projects. What I
tried to do and had staff do was only reduce those projects that are in at
least some way directly related as in railroad crossings, the curb ramping-
and not reach out and do away with the skate park or something like that.
We should probably just keep them focused in that fashion. In approving
this I will make those adjustments on those Capital Projects as I showed
you in the memo.
Vanderhoef: What was the PIN project that we back (can't hear)?
Atkins: Something to do with a trail. I don't recall.
Lehman: This is a project that has been in the works for I think almost four years. It
has been a long time.
Atkins: And we ran into-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#18 Page 64
Lehman: All kinds of problems.
Atkins: There was a number of pits and (can't hear). There was a fiber optic cable
along the railroad that we had to work around. There was just a number of
issues that we had to get through. This project is- the neighborhood has
devoted a bunch of time to it. We certainly have. And the project itself is-
on its face it makes a lot of sense because it will improve that whole
pedestrian movement from that neighborhood.
O'Donnell: Absolutely. That is great.
Champion: Thanks Steve.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#19 Page 65
ITEM NO. 19. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING, AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AND THE CITY
CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE
CITY OF IOWA CITY AND SHOEMAKER & HAALAND TO
PROVIDE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE
CAPTAIN IRISH PHASE II AND FIRST AVENUE EXTENSION
PROJECT.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. This has an estimated
cost of $96,825. Discussion?
Champion: When you have an estimated cost is that the upper limit or-?
Atkins: We have a cost- it is basically a cost for the service to be provided. Now,
if we were to add services usually the contract will have spelled out we
want you to do this now in addition to there is a schedule. But I can feel
confident in saying that in general we are really right on the point on
these. There is usually very little variance in these projects.
Lehman: Further discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting in the
negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#20 Page 66
ITEM NO. 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN AND TItE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A FUNDING
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA AND
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY REGARDING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE MORMON TREK BOULEVARD IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT.
Champion: Move the resolution.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? This is a
joint project with the University and the City of Iowa City and Coralville
that involves a rather complicated mixture funding sources. It is really a
tremendous project that is a joint effort by all three entities.
O'Donnell: And a long overdue project. It really is for safety.
Lehman: Discussion?
Knoche: This is for just the Mormon Trek portion from Melrose up to the railroad.
So this is just the University of Iowa and Iowa City involved in this
project. It is not the Coralville First Avenue.
Lehman: You are right. The total project involves everybody.
Knoche: This would just involve the two entities.
O'Donnell: But it is still long overdue.
Knoche: Yes.
Lehman: Right. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting in the
negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#21 Page 67
ITEM NO. 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
A PUBLIC ALLEY RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND MERCY IOWA CITY.
O'Donnell: Move the resolution.
Pfab: Move the resolution.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Pfab. Discussion?
Kanner: Could I have some explanation about this expansion and vacating?
Lehman: Yep, we are about-
O'Donnell: I think we discussed it last night. Isn't it for parking?
Karmer: No, no, this is-
Lehman: Could you come up and just give us a thumbnail? This is for widening an
alley I believe.
O'Donnell: But that is what it is related to.
Vanderhoef: Onto their property.
Kmmer: So this isn't the angled parking?
Atkins: No, it is not.
Lehman: Why don't we get-
Vanderhoef: This is widening (can't hear).
Karmer: Right and Mike I think- weren't you saying this had to do with the
parking?
O'Donnell: No, Steven, I said this is related. It is all related to their project and it was
for the whole idea was the parking lot was for parking for emergencies
and so forth. This is for alley only.
Lehman: Okay, now would you tell us what this is?
Carlson: I am Robert Carlson of Rohrbach Carlson. We are the architects on the
project. What we are doing is we are doing an addition on the end of the
building, part of which is building a new entrance for the emergency care
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#21 Page 68
unit and new ambulance garage to separate the foot traffic from the
ambulance traffic. The ambulance traffic entering and leaving will be
going in and out on this alley. To make sure that we have adequate width
for the ambulances to transit and go through easily we want to widen the
alley. Mercy is willing- is going to move onto the alley and widen the
alley 4 feet onto their property. We need to do it because of staff to make
sure we have proper liability requirements and stuff once this easement is
done.
Lehman: You are really giving the city use of 4 foot of Mercy property.
Carlson: Right. And we are rebuilding the alley at Mercy's expense.
Kanner: Why are we vacating part of the alley?
Carlson: Mercy is vacating.
Dilkes: No, I think what is happening here is that Mercy wants to widen the alley
onto their property but wants to retain control of that property rather than
dedicating it as right of way to the City. And therefore we need to have
this agreement to set forth the respective rights and obligations of the
parties.
Atkins: They still intend to improve (can't hear).
Dilkes: At their expense, right. It is just that they don't want to dedicate it.
Lehman: There is no vacation involved in this right?
Dilkes: There is no vacation.
Lehman: I didn't think so.
Atkins: There is an easement.
Lehman: An easement.
Karmer: There is a diagram. Is this a previous vacated alley?
Carlson: No.
Champion: No.
Vanderhoef: It is a dead end piece.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#21 Page 69
Dilkes: There- the diagram shows a vacated alley-
Kanner: From previous?
Dilkes: -on the other portion. The farther east portion of the alley. Right.
Carlson: The east portion of the block of the alley has been vacated years ago.
Lehman: We are not dealing with that. Right.
Dilkes: But that is not the portion that we are dealing with here. You can see the
portion that we are dealing with here is the crosshatched lines on blocks
three and four.
Atkins: We are not giving up the alley.
Champion: Right.
Dilkes: No, the- we are dealing ~vith Mercy's property.
Champion: My only question is since Mercy is starting to widen the alley, because we
are going to have an easement on their property are we then going to be
responsible for repairing that alley?
Dilkes: No.
Champion: Okay.
Dilkes: Mercy is agreeing to use, manage and maintain the addition.
Champion: I like that. Good.
O'Donnell: Fine. Thank you.
Lehman: Other questions? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#24 Page 70
ITEM NO. 24. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
CLASSIFICATION/COMPENSATION PLANS FOR
CONFIDENTIAL/ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES AND
EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES FOR FY02 AND FY03.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? This
basically brings those employees into line with the same percentage raises
as we negotiated by our union (can't hear).
Atkins: AFSCME, yes.
Lehman: AFSCME. I am sorry.
Atkins: It virtually mirrors that.
Lehman: Right.
Vanderhoef: Which is three and a quarter.
Lehman: Three and a quarter I think. Discussion? Roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#25 Page 71
ITEM NO. 25. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING ASSIGNMENT OF
CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE FROM CABLEVISION VII,
TO MEDIACOM COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION AND ITS
DESIGNATED AFFILIATE.
Pfab: So moved.
Lehman: Moved by Pfab.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Kanner: I have a question about the rebuild of the system provision that is in there.
Dale, has that happened?
Helling: Yeah, the rebuild was part of the original renewal of the franchise. And
that is completed.
Lehman: They basically- we are just changing the name on the contract with the
City. Is that correct?
Helling: This is a complete sale.
Lehman: Yeah, but they still have the same obligations and requirements that the
previous owner had?
Helling: Absolutely. The have the same obligations under the existing franchise.
Lehman: Right. So we are just changing the ownership of it?
Helling: Changing the ownership, that is fight.
Kanner: It does say here in City Code that we won't approve any transfer or
assignment of the franchise prior to construction or the completion of the
rebuild of the system. And so Dale says that is completed.
Helling: It is complete.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#26 Page 72
ITEM NO. 26. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REQUIRING THAT CITY
COUNCIL APPOINTEES VOTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY
COUNCIL POLICY AS ESTABLISHED BY MOTION,
RESOLUTION, OR ORDINANCE, AND ESTABLISHING TItAT
FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL BE JUST CAUSE FOR REMOVAL.
Vanderhoef: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Wilbum: For clarity's sake shouldn't this be amended to include "just cause for
removal from that appointment"?
Champion: That is a good point. It entered my mind too.
Wilburn: When I first Iooked at it- I know it is spelled out in the rest of the
resolution but I think just for clarity' s sake.
Dilkes: Sure, we can add that.
Karmer: Where is this at?
Wilbum: The end of the sentence it says "failure to do so shall be just cause for
removal" and I am suggesting to- I move to amend by including or
inserting-
Dilkes: From said appointment.
Wilbum: -removal from that appointment.
Champion: Does it mean that we put them in a police car and drive them to the edge
of the City if they don't obey the ordinance?
Lehman: We have a motion to amend to add that.
Dilkes: You don't need it. I can just clarify it.
Lehman: We don't need to do that. If the motion (can't hear). Discussion?
Wilburn: (Can't hear) as opposed to a removal from office or something like that.
O'Donnell: No discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#26 Page 73
Kanner: I think this is a bad policy that the Council is going down this road. I
think especially where we have six representatives to an appointment to a
body. I think actually you say you want people to represent Council but if
there is a split vote on Council of 6-1 it is probably (can't hear) that you
would have the possibility of the person who voted no to vote no on the
other body, on JCCOGs, which would be more representative of how the
Council proceeded. I think that it is not the right road to go down to limit
options in these ways. We are elected to represent the citizens of Iowa
City, the Constitution of Iowa and the Constitution of the United States.
That is what we are here to represent. And sometimes we have members
that are against the majority but we are not here necessarily to represent
the majority. That is not necessarily always in the best interest. So I
would ask fellow City members to consider not voting for this and to
make a move in a direction of more openness and inclusiveness and
democratic process for our Council. I think we have had a tendency in the
last year throu~ proposals such as limiting public discussion and this
proposal and our limit on people talking at work session where we don't
allow for instance the head of a commission to speak yesterday at our
work session, I think those things are bad for the democratic process. This
is bad for the democratic process. So I would urge you to vote against this
and I will be voting against this.
Lehman: Other discussion? Go ahead Dee.
Vanderhoef: I will be supporting this. I am sorry that it had to come to this level.
However, as a Council body we are representing the City of Iowa City
once we make a decision. So when we go out into a more regional arena
and we are competing for dollars for our taxpayers and their projects
withiri the City I feel like we should go with the majority. This is the case
that brought this all to attention. In a future time period there would be the
possibility of a fourth revote here and then get to JCCOG and not keep the
transit dollars that are sent to us. So it is a real dilemma when you get at
that level and you are representing all of the City but especially you are
appointed as a member of this Council and this Council majority says that
we want these dollars for this project. So I think you need to go forward.
It wouldn't have made any difference because as I recall your comment at
that time Steven was you wanted to use those dollars for transit. Well,
there weren't any transit projects on the agenda or on the transportation
plan. So that wouldn't have happened ifsay four lowa City Councilors
had chosen to go different then the Council policy. Those dollars could
have gone for a road project in another municipality or out in (can't hear).
Kanner: Indeed it could have but the vote was 13-1. And actually we are part-
when we are appointed to another body my idea of representative
democracy is that certainly you take that as part of you that you are with
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#26 Page 74
that perspective. And that is why for instance that at the Senior Center we
have people from the County and from the City assuming that they are
going to represent that position but we also assume that they are part of a
new board and there is a new dynamic and there is new interactions and
there is new ways of relating to other people. So, I think if we did have a
situation where all the sudden Johnson County Council of Governments
voted totally different and with my position on that, I think the Council
needs to then take a hard look at it. I think that is sending a strong
message. But the case is it was 13 to 1 and I think it is more than just so
called representing but it is a limiting of different voices and a limiting of
different voices being on the official record and I think that is a sad thing
for our community. I think it really hurts us. I don't think it is the right
move to make for our representative democracy.
Vanderhoef: And I will just say no one is saying with this ordinance that you cannot
speak and be on the public record as choosing transit in this case over a
road project. But when it comes down to the final vote for the dollars,
then you still must follow the Council direction. You spoke your piece
from the time we were in budget hearings and putting together Capital
Improvement plans. You spoke them again when we did budget. You
spoke them again when we had the Council vote. This is not limiting your
ability to speak. It is full democratic process and you are speaking. And
no one has asked that you not speak. It is just support the Council's
majority.
Wilburn: You know, when we had the work session to discuss this I was
uncomfortable with construction of this resolution because I think it is- I
disagree- I think it is implicit when you are- whether it is this context or
another context- if you are appointed to something to represent the policy
of the appointing body, it is implicit that you should vote their policy. At
JCCOG meetings we are implementing Iowa City policy. You know, I
wasn't going to support this because I thought it was implicit. I think it is
implicit. So, maybe it needs to be explicit. So I am willing to go ahead
and support it so that it is clear for future Council Members that you are
there implementing City policy. You know, several times you have
mentioned the democratic process or you have talked about democracy
and bad for the democratic process and representative government. You
can have all the discussions you want but at some point you are a decision
making body and you have to make the decision. At some point there is
going to be a vote. At the work session you brought the example of the
Supreme Court having dissenting view, yet (can't hear) dissenting view
expressed but that is there final decision. At some point the decision has
to be made and you go on.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#26 Page 75
Karmer: Right, and I think just like that is what is good. You hear that not only in
opinion but in actual votes which is what counts as we have been told time
and time again. That it comes down to vote. And I think that for instance
when political parties hold their conventions and they have delegates I
think what makes it a strong convention is that- or one could even say for
electoral college that people are not locked into that position because there
is perhaps a new dynamic that happens when they come together in
another body. And that one will assume that they are going to vote that
way but they are not locked into that. And I think it is the same case for
here. That one could assume that one is going to carry with you some of
that Council majority but there is a new dynamic. That is why we have
the Council of Governments, to come together and perhaps new things
come up that will influence a vote and should allow someone to change
their vote. I think that is an important thing to have. And again I think
that is good for the process to have that kind of debate and that kind of
representative democracy.
Wilbum: I disagree, when you are implementing policy if we drafted a- passed a
resolution and made it policy that all of- any funds coming through
JCCOG need to be devoted to transportation and mass transit and then we
go to okay, that is policy so we go to that JCCOG meeting and some of us
vote against it. How would you respond? How would you react?
Kanner: I would respond that- I would try to argue against your vote and I would
respect your vote as what you did. And if that was the case we would
have a different scenario. We wouldn't- it would be a future that the
whole context would be different. Because right now we have a context of
13 to 1. If it was 13 to 1 the other way or 7-6 or people changing, I think
that is okay. And I take that as part of the process that there is this debate
going on at JCCOGs that I think is important that we have that freedom to
be able to vote. Especially with six representatives. I think that it would
possibly be a case if you were the only representative. But with six out of
seven Council Members going I think it is clear that we should be able to
have our vote independent of (can't hear).
Wilbum: I disagree.
O'Donnell: But, you know, we are talking about the Supreme Court, we are talking
about the electoral college- you know, we are a long, long way from 1600
Pennsylvania Avenue. We are a bunch of City Councilmen in a small
town trying to do a good job. I firmly believe when you go to JCCOG you
represent your City Council and their policy. So I will support this and I
think we have had enough discussion.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#26 Page 76
Lehman: I just want- Steven, I don't disagree whatsoever with your ability- nor do I
disagree with the feeling of obligation to argue against a position that the
Council has taken at JCCOG. I have no problem with that. I believe that
if you strongly believe that that you have a moral obligation to yourself to
argue against the position taken by the Council. But you are at JCCOG as
an appointed representative of the City Council and you represent the view
of the Council. In all previous discussions- discussions tonight we all
represent the people of Iowa City. We vote our conscience. But once this
body makes a decision and this body then interacts with another body, it is
incumbent on those folks who are representative of this body to support
this position taken by this body when it comes to their vote. And maybe
they philosophically disagree. But I do think that the appointment is to
represent the decision made by the Council. I don't disagree at all with
your wanting to express your opinion and heaven knows you should. But
I do believe the vote needs to be consistent with the body that appointed
you to go represent them. Roll call. Motion carries 5-2, Kanner and Pfab
in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#27b Page 77
ITEM NO. 27b. CONSIDER MOTION TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE REGARDING THE LIQUOR
CONTROL LICENSE FOR ETC.
Lehman: We need a motion to- well the motion is to appeal the decision of the
administrative law judge.
Champion: Move to appeal.
Lehman: You move that we appeal?
(Several talking)
Kanner: Before we vote, I do not know where that is.
Karr: Before we vote we need a motion on the floor.
Lehman: It was passed out tonight.
Karr: We need a motion. So we have got Champion-
Lehman: We need an affirmative motion. Moved by Champion, seconded by Pfab
to appeal the decision of the administrative law judge regarding the liquor
license for Etc. An affirmative vote means that we would appeal that
decision granting the license and a negative vote would mean we would
choose not to appeal. Discussion?
Wilbum: It was indicated to us that the administrator will be reviewing this.
Lehman: Has all the facts that we have.
Wilbum: And has all the facts that we have and probably has more experiential
awareness of the background because of his involvement with the different
cases.
Dilkes: The administrator may choose to initiate his own review.
Kanner: I think this- if we vote in the affirmative this sends a strong message even
if the administrative head was going to hear it anyhow. I think we need to
send that message that there are a number of items that we are concerned
with in the application for a license by the owner of Etc. and the
management that is considering application there. I think we also found
out there is a previous suspension of the Kip Pohl as owner of a bar
previous to his application. And I think it is important that under the state
code of Iowa that we do appeal this. We have the right to do that and to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#27b Page 78
deny this. And I think it is within our fights to deny it and I would hope
that we would vote to appeal it.
Pfab: I would support appealing it because of the fact even if the- what was the
term you used? The administrative-?
Vanderhoef: Review?
Dilkes: The administrator of the Alcoholic Beverages Division?
P fab: Even if he does review it the administrative law judge still didn't have all
the information and made the decision that was based on a lack of total
information. So I think I would strongly support the appeal.
Dilkes: The administrator has communicated to us that he is aware of that
information and would take judicial notice of it.
Lehman: I won't support this appeal. I think we have sent very strong notice to
Linn Walding who is the administer. He has indicated he is well aware of
the past omissions that have been involved in this. I see no purpose in
appeal.
O'Donnell: I don't either.
Champion: They were minor anyway.
Lehman: Roll call.
Karr: The motion?
Lehman: The motion? Okay, all in favor of appealing this raise their fight hand.
All opposed raise your right hand. The motion is 5-2 not to- denying the
motion to appeal. The two affirmative votes being Kanner and Pfab.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#29 Page 79
ITEM NO. 29. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES
Lehman: Current vacancies- Housing and Community Development has three
vacancies to fill a three year term September 1, 2001 to September 1,
2004. Deadline for that application is 5:00 Wednesday July 25. The
Police Citizen' s Review Board has two vacancies to fill a four-year term
September 1, 2001 to September 1, 2005. Application deadline is 5:00
Wednesday July 25. The Human Rights Commission has one vacancy to
fill an unexpired term ending July 1, 2003. Deadline for that application is
5:00 Wednesday July 25. Previously announced vacancies- the Historic
Preservation Commission has one vacancy to fill a three year term March
29, 2001 to March 29, 2004. Deadline for that application is 5:00
Wednesday June 20. Public Arts Advisory Committee has one vacancy
for an art professional to serve an unexpired term ending January 1, 2003.
That deadline is 5:00 Wednesday June 20. I certainly would encourage
anyone who would like to become involved and active in city government
to look at those boards and commissions and make an application.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 80
ITEM NO. 31. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION
Vanderhoef: I have one thing. I guess I will just start. Last night in our discussion on
the Alcoholic Beverage Department and the administration of fines and
suspensions and so forth I would like the Council to consider sending a
letter to the administrator of the Alcoholic Beverage Division and request
some opportunity for input into the timing of suspensions for suspensions
in our city. I think there are some times of the year that it isn't much of a
penalty to have a suspension. For instance, in August when the University
is not in session and a lot of folks are on vacation the typical pattem in
Iowa City is a lot of people leave. And so it wouldn't be nearly as a large
of concern perhaps for an owner to be closed down in August versus if
they were closed down on the first two football weekends in Iowa City for
instance. So I would like to have some input into when the suspensions
are set and the timing of them. WouId anybody else be interested in that?
Champion: Yes.
Kmmer: It makes sense.
Lehman: I think the problem is allowing the person who is being penalized to name
their own penalty- name their own dates. I don't know- I would like to
have an input but I think it would be much better if there was some sort of
a formula where a certain number of days starting wherever after
conviction or whatever. Rather than just having- if I ran a bar and I am
going to be suspended I promise you it is going to be during summer
break. And I am going to remodel or I am going to do it during winter
break and go to Florida with the rest of the kids.
O'Donnell: I think it makes sense.
Lehman: I just don't think that is appropriate.
Dilkes: We will have a conversation with Lynn Walding about it.
Lehman: Anything else Dee?
Vanderhoef: That is it.
Lehman: Ross?
Wilburn: I just want to say that it was a great weekend for the Arts Festival and the
City was one of the contributors. It was money well spent and I look
forward to the Jazz Festival coming up June 30- July 1,2.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 81
Lehman: A lot of people. Steven?
Kanner: A few things. One, there is going to be a Greater Iowa City Housing
Fellowship Tour that we are invited to. I am planning to go. I am just
checking to see if there is going to be more than three of us.
Lehman: What is the date?
Kanner: It is tomorrow at 7 PM. It is a bus tour from Eastdale.
Lehman: I can't go.
Kanner: Okay.
Champion: (can't hear).
Lehman: Will there be more than- how many folks are going to be on that tour?
Pfab: I am planning to but let me just check something. something may have
come up.
Kanner: It looks like there won't be more than three.
Lehman: Okay, that is fine.
O'Donnell: I might go.
Vanderhoef: I am out of town, otherwise I would go. In fact I visited with Mary Anne
Dennis and she had said that they had planned to go on Monday they
especially moved it to Wednesday because perhaps some of the
Councilors could go. And when I told her I was already booked at another
meeting she said she would work with me and give me an opportunity to
see some of these things.
Kanner: And speaking of their organization we saw the house that they helped
build for Community Development Day- the student built house across
from City High. It is a great house. A couple with a child is ready to
move into that. It is very nice work that they did over there. We had an
invitation at our joint meeting from the county to sit down and talk about
the jail. And I don't know if we had any discussion on that. I think it
would behoove us maybe at our next work session to talk about that if we
want to get involved.
Lehman: We talked about that but has there been an invitation? Has there been
anything- I am assuming the county will set something up.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 82
Atkins: Yeah, I think Steven is correct. You were sort of informally asked to
participate in discussion.
Lehman: Which we (can't hear).
Atkins: Remember, they had listed a series of questions and were going to prepare
some information routinely which we will certainly shall with you.
O'Dormell: Was it as a Council or was it Council representatives?
Atkins: I had the impression as a Council. That is the impression I got.
Lehman: We are kind of waiting for them now?
Atkins: I would think Emie that as they (can't hear) up this debate it would not- I
think you may want to give the chair of the county board a call and just
find out what is going on.
Lehman: Is it okay with the Council if we drop them a note?
Champion: Sure.
Lehman: And refer to this conversation and ask the to pursue the possibility of a
meeting between the county and the city?
Champion: Yes.
Kanner: Hopefully we will move it kind of fast because I think they want to get
some sort of forum for discussion with more than just us. More of a
community type thing. It sounded like a good idea to me.
Atkins: There is no reason why we can't get that out tomorrow or the next day.
(can't hear).
Lehman: Good.
Atkins: I will take care of that for you.
Kanner: And just so folks watching ~know that yesterday we had discussion about
the Police Citizen Review Board and in the next month or so we are going
to be talking about it some more. And so if people have comments what
they would like to see in our ordinance for the Police Citizen Review
Board please talk to us at Council and we would appreciate that input. I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 83
know that I would. And then finally Students Against Sweat Shops are
having a rally on Friday. Does anyone know what time?
Pfab: It is at noon I believe.
Kanner: At noon Friday I believe, to rally around issues of garments made under
sweat shop conditions and whether or not that is happening with
paraphernalia that is sold by the University. So that is going to be this
Friday at noon. Is that at the Ped Mall?
Pfab: At the Pentacrest.
Karmer: At the Pentacrest. Thank you Irvin.
Lehman: Dee, you have one more things?
Vanderhoef: Yes. We had the dedication this (changed tapes) three new art projects:
Balance, Solar Marker II, and Dorothy. And the downtown for those
activities and having art that is down there and the pancake breakfast I had
a lot ofvery positive comments about the artworks that were chosen. And
they do look beautiful down there. So I want to thank the artists and our
art committee for the work that they did to bring those to us.
Lehman: Mike?
O'Dormell: The county celebrated the 100th birthday of this courthouse. Can you get
the picture of this on here? Our City Manager (can't hear) celebrated what
this building has stood for a hundred years- but our City Manager made
this poster up and I presented it to the Board of Supervisors. He didn't
made it up- he had it made up.
Atkins: Thank you.
O'Donnell: Actually, I should have known that.
Atkins: Barb Coffey in our Document Services, her folks made it.
O'Donnell: It was a great idea. And I presented it to the Board of Supervisors and it
was very well received. And they really liked it.
Atkins: There is a large one, as you know, hanging in the lobby. We will keep it
up for awhile yet.
O'Donnell: I thought it was great. And ICARE had a pancake breakfast Sunday
morning and I normally cook pancakes with Ernie Lehman, and last
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 84
Sunday I cooked beside Henry Herwig a Councilor in Coralville and it
was very disappointing. No, we had a great time and a good attendance.
Ernie, I wish you would have been there.
Lehman: I would like to have been but I wasn't sure I could be there so I didn't- it
turned out that I did go down for breakfast later.
Champion: They didn't want to have to hose the pancake batter off the Ped Mall.
O'Donnell: (Can't hear).
Lehman: Connie, do you have anything to add to the cause?
Champion: I have two things. I am wondering if the Council is interested at all or if it
is even possible to look at zoning Iowa City for the number of bars you
can have in them. Per mile, block- I don't know. Is it-?
Lehman: Limiting the number of bars by zone is what you are saying? I would be
interested in looking at that.
O'Donnell: I would too.
Karmer: And it is certainly appropriate with the review we are having. I think that
would fit in with their purview.
Lehman: I think we have-
Vanderhoef: We don't have an ordinance yet so there isn't anything to review until we
wrote one it seems to me.
Dilkes: I assume (can't hear).
Atkins: Just so I understand, you would like us to do a sort of basic research?
Lehman: A little background work.
Atkins: A town that might use their zoning code to regulate the number of bars
within that zone? That is what you are asking?
Champion: I don't even know if it is possible.
Dilkes: Yeah. We have mentioned it as a possibility. It is based on the negative
effects- we would have to do some investigation of it. But it is- the idea
would be similar to like adult bookstores and that kind of thing. If you get
too many clustered in one area you have negative effects. So it is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.
#31 Page 85
something that we can take a look at. It is not limiting- we can't limit the
number of liquor licenses we give out. And clearly there would be a lot of
grandfathered uses. But it is something we can (can't hear).
Lehman: You did some preliminary work on that for us a couple of years ago.
Dilkes: Yeah, I think in the list when you were generating ideas on the whole
alcohol thing that is one of the ideas I said that yes we could look at. And
you all chose at the time anyway not to look at that one further.
Champion: And then I did meet and greet Sally Peterson, Lt. Governor Sally Peterson,
who is a very gracious woman on her Discover Iowa tour. And she
presented this certificate to Iowa City. I will try to cover up Coralville. In
recognition of valuable contributions to art, culture and tourism in Iowa.
It was a nice afternoon and she was a very pleasant woman. I thought the
City Council would like to see it and I think we should pass it on to
Coralville and then the people at the Convention Center because they
would love to hang it in there.
Lehman: Sure.
Vanderhoef: Good idea.
Champion: I wanted all of you to see it so if we can get a picture of that- I will just put
my hand over that.
Lehman: No, Connie. Irvin?
Pfab: I would like to take this opportunity to thank Lynne and Roger Holdeman
for taking it upon themselves to open up a full-service grocery store over
in the old Best Buy space over in the Broadway area. I think where the
City is going to be very well- it is going to be a big help to the City and
especially that neighborhood. I think they are going to open something
that we all will be very proud of and it will provide good service to those
people over there. I look forward to working with them.
Lehman: One thing- I sure would like to see newspapers in those kiosks. Those
dispensers.
O'Dormell: (Can't hear).
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City council
meeting of June 12, 2001.