Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-11-15 Transcription#2 Page 1 ITEM 2 PROCLAMATION. a) Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week- November 14-19, 2005 Lehman: (reads proclamation) Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is James Smith. (applause) Smith: Hi, I'm James Smith, Social Work Intern with Iowa City V.A., and I'm accepting this proclamation on behalf of the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board. Each year, one week before Thanksgiving, the National Coalition for the Homeless and the National Student Campaign Against Hunger and Homelessness co-sponsor National Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week. During this week, a number of schools, communities, and cities take part in a nation-wide effort to bring greater awareness to the problems of hunger and homelessness. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #3 Page 2 ITEM 3 OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARD - SHIMEK ELEMENTARY Lehman: Would the young folks from Shimek come forward please. Come back here with me; I get lonesome by myself. (laughter) This is the fun part of it. You're scared, but you don't need to be because we do this every week and it's one of the most fun things that we do in the entire Council meeting. So, if you would like to give us your name first and why you were nominated. McCoy: Hi, I'm Melissa McCoy. I'm in 6th grade at Shimek Elementary. I think I got chosen for Outstanding Student Citizen because of some things I do in school and outside of school. Things ! do in school are: I'm a Lieutenant on the Safety Patrol, a member of Green Team - Green Team is a group that promotes environmental activities and I'm a Class Ambassador. I think I work well with others, and I'm responsible. Outside of school, I'm involved in 4-H, Girls' Choir, Band, and Volleyball. I feel that I'm helpful at home with several household chores like vacuuming, cleaning the bathrooms, feeding the animals, and dusting. My family also does respite care for foster family children. They take care of foster children on a short-term basis. Some of the ways that I help these children in my family are playing with them, getting them ready for bed, reading and singing to them, helping out at bath time, and I also change their clothes and diapers. In conclusion, I have to say thank you so much to Mr. Zeckler and Mrs. Morgan for choosing me to be an Outstanding Student Citizen. I also want to say thanks to the City Council for giving me this award. (applause) Theisen: Good evening. My name is Jordyn Theisen and I'm a 6th grader at Shimek Elementary. I'm honored to be receiving the Outstanding Student Award tonight. I really enjoy school and I try to be as helpful and responsible as I can. At Shimek, I was chosen as one of two Captains of Patrol. I'm responsible for assigning belts to patrol, finding substitutes if someone is absent, relieving Lieutenants for two-week periods, and making treat schedules and reporting charts. I have been a part of ELP for three years - my whole time at Shimek. ELP stands for Extended Learning Program and challenges me outside of the regular classroom. Last year I was a member of the Green Team, a sort of club that has a lot to do with nature. We also collected "box tops for education." As a 4th grader and new to my school, I was chosen to be a Student Ambassador. I helped organize assemblies and showed new students around. These are some of the ways I've gotten involved in my school. Outside of school, I am involved in gymnastics, basketball, and volleyball. I practice many hours a week to improve my skills. At home, I am to help clean the house, take care of pets, and babysit my siblings. This year I also babysit a neighbor. I believe these are some of the reasons I was chosen for this award. I would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. Page 3 like to thank my teachers, Mr. Zeckler and Mrs. Morgan, along with the City Council, for allowing me to receive this award. (applause) Lehman: First of all, the Council doesn't allow you to receive it. You earn it, and you should be very, very proud of yourselves. Now, Council's very proud. We're going to give you a little plaque, but the pride the Council has in you young ladies is not even close to what your parents and especially your grandparents feel, I can tell you that! I'll read one of the plaques (reads award). Thank you. (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #4 Page 4 ITEM 4 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS. a) Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting - Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2004. Lehman: (reads remarks) I thank them for their good work. I'd like to present the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the year ended June 30, 2004, to Finance Director, Kevin O'Malley, who is here tonight to receive, to represent the staff of the Finance Department. Kevin. (applause) Twenty years, you know, this isn't written, but Council are very, very proud of you, as we are, I think, all our staff. Twenty years, and this is, you know, a very, very distinguished award, very few people get it, and congratulations to you and your staff. O'Malley: Honorable Mayor and esteemed Council, I am excited to receive this award. I remember twenty years ago when we first got it, and we had a big party because it was something, and I still have that same excitement that my staff does this... I'd like to take the credit, but I can't take the credit. I've got some good people working for me, notably the Controller, Erin Herting; her Assistant, Sara Sproule; Senior Accountant, Ann Maurer. We have a new person, our Internal Auditor, Robin Marshall; Payroll Accountant, Pam Thodos. We have two good people in Accounts Payable that helped out, Michelle Cook and Joan Kramer. Some of these people are new, so I'm trying to remember their names, and we also had a nice Intern who also helped out, let's see, Marta Laskowska, but a lot of the other credit also belongs to my colleagues and their division managers who helped, who cheerfully comply with my, our, internal control policy. I shouldn't say "my"-"our" internal control policies. (laughter) And I also want to recognize the efforts that they do, and I also want to thank you for taking time out of your agenda tonight to recognize the efforts of my staff. Thank you very much. (applause) Lehman: Thank you. Vanderhoef: Is it time for another party? Lehman: I don't know. Are...you heading for the party? No! O'Malley: It's not in the budget. (laughter) Lehman: He would know! Wilburn: Yes he would! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #5 Page 5 ITEM 5 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Champion: I'd like to remove e(1) for separate consideration. Lehman: Okay. Bailey: Second. Lehman: We have a motion by .... we need a motion for the Consent Calendar. Do we have that? Champion: Oh, so moved. Lehman: Motion by Champion; seconded by Bailey, and we've been asked to remove e(1). Is there any discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. Is there a motion to approve e(1)? O'Donnell: Move to approve e(1). Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 5 to 2; Champion and Bailey voting in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #6 Page 6 ITEM 6 COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). Lehman: This is a time reserved on the agenda for folks to address the Council on issues that do not otherwise appear on tonight's agenda. If you wish to address the Council, please give your name and limit your comments to five minutes or less. Cohen: I'm Leah Cohen. I live Teg Drive Iowa City, and I'm here as one of the co-chairs of the Iowa City Alcohol Advisory Board. We've included some information in your packet tonight, and I just wanted to briefly comment on that and kind of give a little bit of our viewpoint and what we've come up with. Basically, we have decided over the last year, we've really been working on this plan very heavily since summer. In putting it together, we decided the key players in this are obviously the University, police department, City of Iowa City, and downtown restaurants/bars, our Board, ICAD Board, which is trying to do some regulation downtown, and in looking at that, what we did is we spent a lot of the summer researching, basically, other communities, what's going on where, Big-10 Universities visiting just to kind of see what we came up with. At this point in time, we have not favored the 21-ordinance. There's a lot of reasons for that. We really did not talk about it very thoroughly until summer because we didn't want to get stuck in that issue. So, we waited until more towards the end to really research and look at everything that we had found, and I included a letter from the East Lansing, President of the university there. Communities that have a downtown connected with the university town have had a major problem when they have gone 21. East Lansing, that letter is pointing that out to you in the letter to the residents. They've had basically destruction of neighborhoods. They've compromised the safety of the townspeople and the students, and in visiting with their president, we found out it's been about six or seven years since they have been 21, and it's just gotten worse every year. So, that just gives you why we have not put 21 into this program, but just to highlight some things, what we did is we looked at what realistically each of us could do. The University, we felt in their area, was education, alcohol-free events, and using possibly a mentor program. We've been able to secure funds for advertising using the coaches, that sort of thing. University has already working very well in education. We'd like to see that more detailed. We'd like to see required freshman class, and possibly even getting towards the sophomore age. We feel that that's real key at this point. The police department - we've met with the police chief and we've talked to him in regards to what we have asked of the police department, and we feel that's key also, and we think it's key for the City Council to approve what the police department may be looking at with it, but we feel at this point it's essential to define a problem bar. We had talked to Eleanor who said that we can legally define a problem bar. We're all taking the blunt of what a few may be doing and we feel that it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #6 Page 7 is essential to do that, to let those bars know why they are a problem bar and they can be policed accordingly. Then there's, you know, not as much excuse. I think a lot of things go on that possibly bars don't know about also. We've talked about how we've always approved of the compliance checks and would like to see continuance of those. We would like to see the continuance of the PAULAs - not any more or any less. We feel there needs to be a student responsibility along with this, also. We would also like to see a TIPS training required. In order to do that, we don't know if whether...we know there's PAULA monies now that maybe police department, in fact, he had mentioned maybe he could use it for some of their training and free up some more of his budget in regards to some of these others things that we're looking at. With the City, what we have come up with is basically, you know, asking the police department's help, really looking at a plan. With the City and police, we feel there's a major problem with the towing of the cars downtown and what goes on Thursday, Friday, Saturday nights. We feel that's kind of counter- productive for us to be emphasizing all the time this drinking and driving, not drinking, driving when you drink and then having that issue. So, we're hoping we can come up with some imaginative ways that people can, if they decide to have a few drinks, not have to worry about that. We have had put into effect the bar crawl container ordinance, or bar crawl container with all the bars, that they aren't using them anymore. It has been extremely effective. We would like to see a simple addition of that to the ordinance, just because we feel then it's there. We would like to see some limitations on ads that are in the windows. We have talked and had good compliance, although we haven't had perfect compliance on that with what's going on with that. We would like to, we have suggested in here the possibility of a late-night fee. Bars downtown are very willing to pay for cleanup. The problem is, we can't coordinate that this one would do it this time and this one would do it another time, and it just does not seem to happen, and I think that we would have very little opposition to that, and people that we have talked to - if we used, it would be totally different than other taxes and whatever. It would be a very specific fee in regards to whether it's cleanup or additional officer on every night or whatever the City would want to do. Lehman: You need to wrap it up, Leah. Cohen: Okay. Capacity, we believe, is being taken care of now through the fire department has someone and we're hoping they're working nights, but anyway, just to let you know, we're hoping that the City Council soon, we know it's a holiday and that you'll be able to come up with the time the first part of the year that you can meet and talk about some of these issues and that we can move forward with it. Thank you so much. Lehman: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #6 Page 8 Bailey: I have a question. Where does everyone leave their car overnight downtown? Atkins: Chauncey Swan. Bailey: Okay, so we do have... Atkins: Transportation Center, yeah. Bailey: Okay. Cohen: Is that free? Atkins: Chauncey Swan's free. (several talking at once) 8:00, I believe. Cohen: Okay, so this one down here is free. Bailey: And the new one, the transportation... Cohen: And the new one, okay. That may be good information to put out then, because I know the fees got raised on the other ones, yeah, okay. Thank you. Lehman: Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 9 ITEM 7 PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. a) ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14 ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE" BY: REPEALING CHAPTERS 4, 6 AND 9 AND REPLACING THEM WITH THE NEW TITLE 14 ZONING CODE, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTERS 1 AND 5, RENUMBERING CHAPTERS 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10 AND 11, AND REPEALING CHAPTER 12. 1. PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED FROM 10/5, 10/10, 10/18, 11/1, 11/7) Lehman: (pounds gavel) Public hearing is open. Before we start the hearing, I'd like to just go over with you the proposed changes that the Council has talked about. (reads statement) Eastham: My name is Charlie Eastham. I'm President of Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, so I don't bore you with any comments you've already covered. I would like to make a second recommendation made by Karin Franklin in her memo dated November 10, which is in your packet tonight, in which she indicates that the staff, I believe, has recommended retaining the provisions for single-family housing bonus density parts of the code that are found in Section 1.B, 2.B, and 3.B, I think it's Chapter 14. I'm not quite sure, which would provide an option for developers wishing to do smaller lots in those, I think RS-8, 5 and... Lehman: We did that last night. Eastham: Yep, well, is that... Lehman: That's in.. Eastham: You agreed to do that? Lehman: Yes. Eastham: Okay. Thank you very much. Bailey: With the exception of Item A, under each of those. Lehman: A was the one that referred to... Bailey: Except (can't hear) garage. Eastham: Yeah, the garage... Lehman: ...smaller lots will be allowed. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 10 Eastham: ...small lots. Thanks very much. That's an important part, I think, for scattered house planning and policy. McLaughlin: My name's Mike McLaughlin. I have a copy of my presentation for each of the Council members, as well as the City Attorney. It has come to my attention that the redefinition of the word Household in the proposed zoning code, Title 14, Chapter 9, Article A, which would reduce the permitted roomers and unrelated individuals by one in some zones, is a change in the text of the zoning requirements. This has been confirmed- with the City Attorney's office. In the current city code, Title 14, Chapter 6, Article B, Section 2, rezoning, a change in land use regulations, is defined in three forms: A. a comprehensive revision or modification of the zoning text and map, B. a text change in zone requirements, C. a change in the map. At a minimum the new proposed zoning code would be a text change in zone requirements, from the current code, if not also a comprehensive revision. Therefore it is my belief that the zones proposed to have a density change, such as it is proposed to reduce the roomers and unrelated individuals by one in the RNS- 12(formerly RNC- 12), RM- 12, RNS-20 (formerly RNC-20), RM-20, are due the process outlined in the City pamphlet, A Citizen's Guide to the Rezoning Process. This is the same process that we recently experienced when the CB-2 landowners were notified of the proposed rezoning for their property. In general all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed area(s) need to be notified by mail and signs posted in the area providing notice of a rezoning proposal, with contact information. All publications to date have announced this proposal as a new zoning code at this time, the position of the City Attorney's Office is to not interpret the changes, from the current code to the proposed code, as a rezoning. Therefore, the City Attorney's office has not been receptive to allow notarized petition signatures as a means to protest such rezoning, denying the process due the property owners. At this time I request that the definition of Household and all other related definitions, including but not limited to nonconforming residential occupancy, all related Chapters, Articles, Sections and Subsections be stricken, until the time that City staff may present this as a rezoning and by its required protocol. Further discussion and passage of these cites in this proposal would result in an ineffective code and not be legally binding. I was also hoping to present to you tonight a letter from a local attorney who is well versed in the City code (can't hear) and I'm not sure if that made it. Dennis... Lehman: We all have it. McLaughlin: Okay, good. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 11 Dilkes: Let me just comment in response to that. Mr. McLaughlin, as well as Greg Allen, have been in touch with my office. We had given them our general interpretation of the protest provisions that they apply to rezonings of areas as opposed to text change, but we have urged them first to consult with Council and second to present any protest that they believe to be appropriate and we will review the protest at that time. It's very hard to talk hypothetically about these things and a lot of misunderstanding's resolved if we do that. So, contrary to what is in Mr. McLaughlin's letter, we have urged them to go ahead and present whatever they feel is a, is appropriate protest and we'll take a look at it then. Lehman: Okay. Vanderhoefi And you have not received any protests to this point? Dilkes: Not to date. Vanderhoef: Okay. Thank you. Nowotny: Dennis Nowotny, 511 E. Washington Street here, across the street. I have a house up there on, in the RNC-12 area and I guess ifI was going to have my occupancy reduced by another one, I'd obviously protest it. I obviously don't know about that yet, or don't about it at this time. I didn't think it was being reduced. If it is, I'd certainly like to know about it. I don't know, how many times do we have to worry about whether or not we're being attacked, essentially, by reduction in values or reduction in occupancy or basically not notified or anything like that because, I just walked in here about five minutes ago, didn't think anything about that there was any kind of problems like this coming up, particularly about occupancy. Particularly about anything that...I knew about the occupancy reductions over there in RNC-20, but I didn't know anything about RNC- 12 being reduced. I don't know what it takes to basically keep up on these slight attacks, right and left. This is the second time we were attacked over there on Washington Street and CB-2 area. I'm getting tired of it. If we have to keep, cover our backsides every time we come down here. If we have to come down here every dog-gone meeting just to make sure they're not sneaking in some sort of attack of devaluation, reduction of density, whatever you want to call it...I don't think we should have to do that. I don't think we should have to cover our backs like that all the time. Champion: Could you explain to me .... Nowotny: I'm sorry. Thank you. Champion: ... occupancy, Ernie? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 12 Lehman: Well, I think, no, I think the issue is that he was not aware that he has property that's going to be subject to...you're aware we're talking about .... Karin, go ahead. Franklin: Anyone who has an existing rental permit with tile number of roomers, the number of occupants will be listed on that rental permit. Those will be conforming. Lehman: Yeah. Franklin: Any reduction in the number of roomers will be applied to new situations. So, if you have a rental property now, you have the occupancy as determined by HIS. Lehman: All grandfathered in. Franklin: All .... they're not just grandfathered. They are conforming. Lehman: Until such time as the use changes. Franklin: Exactly. Lehman: Right. Champion: So, even if they sold the property and that person kept the rental permit, the occupancy would not change. So, I don't know why the big problem. Franklin: Yes. Lehman: Okay. Thank you, Karin. McLaughlin: I had a question regarding the changes through the work session on the...I guess the definition, page 2, I'm not sure if everyone's working off the same document. I guess, I'm looking for clarification, where it says, "The nonconforming residential occupancy provision to enable the occupancy allowed per the rental permit for the life of the permit." This would be on page 2, it'd be Item 4, and I'm...I guess I'm looking for a definition for the life of the permit. Lehman: As long as you renew it. McLaughlin: Okay, and there's no... Lehman: There's no limit on it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 13 McLaughlin: ...break in the renewal, because on the permit you'll be given a date range where it's valid. Lehman: Right. McLaughlin: And then you have to renew it at that point. Lehman: Right. McLaughlin: And I just wasn't sure if the life of the permit would be... Lehman: No, no, you may renew it; if you sell the property, the permit will go with that property. As long as the use does not change. McLaughlin: Right, correct. Lehman: If the use changes, the property will be subject to the new provisions of the code. McLaughlin: Okay. Lehman: As long as the use does not change, it will be, actually it'll be a conforming use until, it's grandfathered in, it is not a nonconforming use until such time as the use changes. McLaughlin: Sure. Franklin: As long as that rental permit is valid, as long as it has not been revoked, abandoned, discontinued, not renewed - those occupants are locked. Champion: Right, okay. Lehman: Okay? McLaughlin: I'd like to read...this is 14-40-9, Regulation of Nonconforming Residential Occupancy. There's Sections A, B, and C. I'm going to read C here: the maximum occupancy as determined by the building official based on the applicable regulations effective March 1st will be applied to any residential use for which a valid building permit was issued on or prior to March 1, 2005, and/or for which a valid rental permit was issued prior to, that'd be the effective date of the new ordinance, which would be the effective date of the current maximum occupancy regulations, for such uses this states legal, nonconforming rights, will be granted for this maximum occupancy. Again, I guess, from what I read and understand, that does not provide conforming rights for a current, for a rental permit. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 14 Lehman: Use will not be conforming to the new code; however, it will be grandfathered in and retained as long as you own the property and... McLaughlin: I understand that, but at a nonconforming status. Lehman: What difference does that make? McLaughlin: It makes a big difference. If there is damage or destruction, which I pointed out earlier... Lehman: No, no, Karen, explain it to him. Howard: The occupancy has its own section in the nonconforming, has nothing to do with the structure, has nothing to do with the use, it only has to do with the occupancy, and that's the only thing that section regulates. So it doesn't make it a nonconforming use, it doesn't make it a nonconforming structure, and none of the regulations that go along with a nonconforming use or a nonconforming structure apply. So, if they have a valid rental permit and they keep it up, they get that occupancy.., forever. Lehman: Forever. Dilkes: My office has reviewed those provisions pretty closely since we had this last conversation, and we agree with that interpretation, if the clarification is made that is going to be made in light of the list that Council has in front of it. Lehman: Okay. McLaughlin: However, when you have a nonconforming occupancy, it does limit you from other changes in use, and that's one of my oppositions to this because you're then, you're restricted to bring it into compliance with what the current codes are, which are more restrictive. Lehman: I don't think that's true either. Karen, you want to explain that to him. Howard: A change in use is defined in the code as changing to a different use category. So if you had an apartment building, they're considered multi- family uses. Only if they would change that, tear down the building, build something new, commercial building or single-family house or some other use in a different category, and of course then you wouldn't have a rental permit that would apply. So, somebody wanting to change the use is a significant thing. It's not a change from, it's a very specific thing and it's defined in the code. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 15 Lehman: But there'd be no restrictions on renovations, remodeling, whatever to the building because the nonconforming is to the use only. Howard: Right. Lehman: Has nothing to do with the building. Howard: Right. Lehman: Okay. McLaughlin: What...at the density that you currently have? Lehman: Right. Bailey: That's on your rental permit now. McLaughlin: I guess, just in reference or relation to my earlier presentation, it is correct in that myself and Greg Allen, when we brought up these questions regarding the, this change definition constitute in rezoning because it's affecting the density by change in text. We...we're told that any petitions or signatures would be accepted, interpreted at that time, and could be provided as a statement in our opposition to this process; however, again, I would like to stress that in our belief, and the letter from our attorney's opinion, is that this constitutes a rezoning, which again requires certain procedures to take place, which at this point, those have not taken place. Lehman: If I understand correctly, the City Attorney just indicated that you were encouraged to bring the petition. McLaughlin: That's correct, but the owners of the properties have not been notified that there's a rezoning going on. Dilkes: That is simply not the case. Lehman: That's not the case. Dilkes: But... McLaughlin: Whenever a rezoning occurs, the neighbor, the property owners are notified directly by letter. Dilkes: I'm not concerned about the process to date, and I really urge you to go out there and collect whatever signatures you think are appropriate to collect and file them and we'll take a look at them. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 16 Lehman: Okay. McLaughlin: Then, not only has the process taken place, but also it hasn't done so in the form that people were notified that this was a rezoning. It... everybody was notified in publications and the newspaper and open houses that this was a change in the zoning code, and it is my belief that there's a significant difference. Lehman: Okay. McLaughlin: Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. As we have a...oh, go ahead, Glenn. Siders: Mayor, City Council, I am dense and I'd find it refreshing if you could change that. Champion: We'll make an ordinance. (laughter) Lehman: You'll be grandfathered in. (laughter) Siders: My name is Glenn Siders with the Land Development Council. I want to thank the Mayor and City Council for listening to our remarks. We have made all our presentations. I believe we've given you all of the written material. If any of you do not have everything that we said we were going to get you, let you know. We still want to be part of the process. I want to thank you for the opportunity to address the Council and be part of the process and encourage you to ask questions if you have concerns from a developer, a builder's perspective, we'd be more than happy to respond to any questions or anything you might have. We know it's been a long process. We appreciate your indulgence with that process, and hopefully we'll bring it to a close pretty quick. Thank you very much. Lehman: Thank you. Dee, I think you...we have a lull in the hearing. You had an issue, you said. Vanderhoef: Oh, we've got one right there. Lehman: Barbara, come on up. Actually, we weren't going to stop when Dee gave us hers. We'd continue and (several talking and laughing). Vanderhoef: Let me ramble for a while. Buss: I'm Barbie Buss. I live at 718 S. Summit Street. I would like to speak in support of the good neighborhood, good neighbor policy, as required by This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. //7 Page 17 the proposed development code before you. I know that the Council is considering... Lehman: We've decided to remove it last night, but go ahead. Buss: That's why I'm here. I know that the Council is considering dropping this requirement from the code, and I'm curious about the reason for it. I suspect it is driven in part by the realization that involving neighbors in the planning of a development may slow down the planning process, and time is money. Increase the, and increase the cost of the development to the developer. I don't dispute this possibility, but I would argue that it is unfair to consider the economic interests of only one side in this matter. People who live in established neighborhoods are people who have invested a great deal of their savings in their homes and in their neighborhoods. Changing the area adjacent to a neighborhood can affect the values of these homes and the character of their surroundings. A developer can profit from a development that devalues the existing properties next to his development and leave the scene. It is the neighborhood that has no choice but to adjust to the new circumstances this development has created. It is a matter of time and money for the residents of an altered neighborhood to accommodate to new property values and a changed environment. In the interest of fairness, it would seem a good idea for the developers and the neighbors to meet during the planning process. Courtesy would dictate that the outsider to a neighborhood would be aware of intruding, and make an effort to minimize the potential unpleasantness of that intrusion. Asking the neighbors to take the initiative in notifying a developer of their concerns about a proposed development tums this courtesy on its head and is not an appropriate substitute for the mandated form stipulated by the Good Neighbor Policy. Please, consider the community of established homeowners and their investments in your final vote on this matter. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Vanderhoef: Okay, I apologize. I went to sleep on this...so late. I have some questions and I'm going to need one of the Karens to probably help me with this, but I've had a concern about the setbacks in residential areas and the space for both the public utilities and the amenities of proper size shade trees and any kind of landscaping that needs to go in there. I was alerted to the fact that there was a possibility that in the next round of development standards, there may be a change, but I need to have a better feel of, if we can put in the zoning code that we must have enough space to put a shade tree in the front yard or in the parking, which is public right-of-way, and I don't see anything in the code that tells me this right now. When we're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 18 talking about 15 foot setbacks, 15 feet may be well enough, if the public parking area is big enough. If it's not...page 16. Lehman: Dee, you mentioned this earlier, and we got a handout with it. Do you have that? Vanderhoef: ! don't have that handout right here. Lehman: Karin? Right, a letter from the forester. Vanderhoef: Right, and that is what I had requested, but until I see the subdivision... Franklin: Subdivision... Vanderhoef: ...I can't be assured what's going to happen if there's a 15-foot setback and the development codes maybe don't get this wider right-of-way. It's an either or, as far as I'm concerned. Franklin: Understand (TAPE ENDS) a minimum setback, and so what that means is that if the developer chooses, or the builder chooses, to have enough space in that front yard for utilities and trees and does not feel that that 15 feet is sufficient, they may push their building farther back. It's their choice. Vanderhoefi I understand that. Franklin: Which we've understood is an important aspect for this Council. Also, if you're looking at single-family, and single-family neighborhoods, we do not require right-of-way trees. Vanderhoef: Well then... Franklin: Single-family has been exempt for years. Now, if you wish to change that and require trees in the front, along the right-of-way, for single-family neighborhoods, that is certainly a possibility, but it's not something that we have required in the past. It has been left to the single-family homeowner to put in any trees in the front. But I guess what I'm saying is that, because this is a minimum, there is opportunity. You can plant trees in that 15-foot utility easement if you wish. Now, 15 feet is not going to be big enough for an oak tree, but if it's 20 feet, it's not going to be big enough either. Vanderhoef: Uh-huh, so it depends then on what the size of what we call the parking, which is part of the public right-of-way, how big that is, whether we can do this, and what is concerning me is I don't have a picture then as we go down to smaller and smaller lots, total square footage particularly in the RS-8 and RS-12, then if we push the frontage back say 20 or 25 feet, what This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 19 do we have left for a backyard, or for instance, if this was going to be one of those that had garages on the alleys. Then, how do we get...pardon? Franklin: It'll depend on the depth of the lot. Vanderhoef: I understand that, but when the smaller we go and the amenities, so the forester had mentioned to me, for one thing, that he was going to research ordinance, I believe he said Davenport, but don't hold me to that, where they have an ordinance where homeowners share in the cost of a tree that is jointly selected, is the way I understood it from, by the owner and the city, and with work with the forester, it could be placed in the parking, but it would become a size that would provide shade for their house. Lehman: With minimum...the minimum setback for garages is 25 feet, is it not? Franklin: Right, that's so you can park a car or truck in the driveway and not have it hanging out over the sidewalk. That was something that you all wanted... Lehman: Right, right. Vanderhoef: But the house can be further forward. Franklin: The house can be further forward, but it doesn't have to be, either. It can be anywhere in there, and so that then becomes an individual market choice as to whether it's up there at the 15 feet, it's back at 20, 25, or it's 30 feet back. And I'm sure that that choice is going to be based on the size of the lot, what they have to work with in terms of the back as well as the front, as each builder or buyer makes their decision. Vanderhoef: I guess the question for Council is then what you suggested, do we require a tree in the parking every so many feet, or so many per block, something, but we can have that discussion later. Franklin: Yeah, you can, I mean, maybe it would be good to consider that at the time, it would be a zoning ordinance amendment, but to consider at the time when we're doing the subdivision regulations and see how you get through those dimensional issues at the subdivision regulations and whether that's going to be satisfactory. Vanderhoef: Well, somehow I want this all put together so we have a complete picture. Franklin: I guess I have to ask because we're in this tight time crunch here, if there are four Council members that have an issue with the 15-foot setback that you wish us to reconsider something there. Vanderhoef: Until I see the other, I don't know whether I want to change the setback. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 20 Lehman: Well, I think that Karin's question is are there four Council people who have sufficient concern about this, if they want to look into this further before we proceed with the ordinance. Elliott: I'd take up Dee's concerns at a later point, but not now. I don't want to delay things now. Lehman: All right. Bailey: I was under the impression that we were going to discuss them with the subdivision regulations. Vanderhoef: As long as we can look at it in the context of what we have set here for setbacks, minimum setbacks. (several talking at once) Okay. Bailey: That will be the context that we'll be operating in, so we will have to... Vanderhoefi Okay. Lehman: Anyone else wish to speak? If not, I ~ould entertain a motion to continue the hearing to the 12th of December, it s a Monday night. Elliott: So moved. Lehman: We have a motion. Champion: Second. Lehman: And a second. That's a Monday night. That will be a special meeting, at which time we will close the public hearing and have first consideration of the zoning ordinance. Elliott: Is that the 12th? Lehman: That is the 12th. Champion: Is this the longest public hearing ever? Lehman: This is, yes it is, undoubtedly. All in favor of the motion to defer? Opposed? Motion carries. Karr: Mr. Mayor, can we agree to a 7:00 P.M. start time, just for the purposes of the formal? We won't decide work session now, but...for the special meeting? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 21 Lehman: Makes no difference to me. That's, in fact, that would be better that it be Karr: ... as it takes shape on the work session. Lehman: We'll write the work session in such a fashion that we can interrupt it and go to the regular meeting and then go back to the work session. Okay. Vanderhoef: Are we notifying our citizens that once we take first vote, we will be doing number 2 and number 3 fairly rapidly because we do choose to get it done before the first of the year? Kart: In accordance with your wishes, I had planned to do a revised schedule for distribution in Thursday's packet, which would indicate the plan you talked about last evening, which would be that accelerated. Vanderhoef: Uh-huh, I just want the public to be alerted to look at those special sessions that we're going to have in December, because that's where we will be taking second and third reading on... Lehman: Well, in all fairness, the public really should have been alerted by now because by that time it's going to be too late. We're going to have done our work and hopefully that will pass quickly. We've done this, this is like the 5th public hearing, and I suspect that we're not going to be planning to make many changes at that point. Karr: Is it your desire then not to have the meeting tomorrow on any... Lehman: I don't sense the need for a meeting tomorrow. Does any...(several talking at once). Karr: Okay, so I need...I just wanted to make sure we could cancel that because we noticed that last evening. So we want to cancel that one. (several talking at once) Lehman: We're going to take a quick break. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. O'Donnell: So moved. Champion: So moved. Lehman: Second, all in favor? Opposed? (TAPE OFF) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #7 Page 22 ITEM 7 PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. d) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY FROM CENTRAL BUSINESS SERVICE (CB-2) ZONE TO CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB-5) ZONE, MIXED USE (MU) ZONE AND PUBLIC (P) ZONE, FOR CERTAIN AREAS CURRENTLY ZONED CB-2 LOCATED SOUTH OF DAVENPORT STREET AND NORTH OF JEFFERSON STREET. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) O'Donnell: Move second consideration. Vanderhoefi Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell; seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Champion: Is this, did we vote this down or, I can't... Lehman: It's second consideration so we had to have passed it. Roll call. Champion: Am I supposed to vote no? Wait a minute, ! have...can I... Lehman: You may. Dilkes: This is the one where we went back to CB-2 in those two areas. Champion: So I should vote no on this, because... Lehman: You want to vote yes, Connie. Champion: I want to vote yes is what I meant. Dilkes: You voted yes last time. Champion: Yes, sorry. I just got confused about this. (laughter) Lehman: Motion carries 5 to 2, with Bailey and Wilburn voting in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. # 10 Page 23 ITEM 10 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE CITY CODE, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "COMMERCIAL USE OF SIDEWALKS," TO LIMIT FENCES TO THREE (3) FEET IN HEIGHT, TO ALLOW SIDEWALK CAFES ONLY IN ZONE 1 IN CITY PLAZA, TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITION OF AMENITY, AND TO REQUIRE ANCHORED FENCING EXCEPT IN THE WINTER MONTHS, AND CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "CITY PLAZA," SECTION 7, ENTITLED "USE OF CITY PLAZA," PARAGRAPH A TO CLARIFY THAT SIDEWALK CAFES ARE A PERMITTED COMMERCIAL USE IN CITY PLAZA. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Bailey: Move first consideration. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by Bailey; seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Champion: I have a question. Lehman: Yes? Champion: ! should have thought of before Karin left. We have one conforming height. Wilburn: I think Karin's still out there. Bailey: Karin? Dilkes: I'm not sure this is probably her issue. She hasn't been involved... Wilburn: Never mind, never mind. Champion: We have one nonconforming height fence in the caf6. Do they have to change the height of their fence if this ordinance... Dilkes: Yes. Atkins: Yes, hacksaw the bottom off. Bailey: It's tall, not short, so they could hacksaw the bottom off. Champion: They don't have to replace the whole fence, you don't think, because that would seem a little unfair to me. (several talking at once) All right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. # 10 Page 24 Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. **Additional comments at end of meeting.** This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #11 Page 25 ITEM 11 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REBIDDING THE PROJECT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DUPLEX HOME UNDER THE AFFORDABLE DREAM HOME OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM LOCATED ON LONGFELLOW PLACE, DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, AND FIXING TIME AND LACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. Vanderhoef: I move that we defer this indefinitely. Bailey: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by Bailey. Would you like to explain why, Dee, because I think this is... Vanderhoefi Yeah, we had just one bid on the previous letting for this project and last night we discussed and asked staff to find some information for us on manufactured housing to be used as a possible different form of housing in there. So, we'll wait until we have new information. Lehman: Thank you. All in favor of deferral? Opposed? Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #12 Page 26 ITEM 12 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 05-334. Bailey: Move adoption of the resolution. Wilburn: Second. Lehman: Moved by Bailey; seconded by Wilburn. Discussion? Bailey: I just want to make sure that people understand that this is a clarification of some of the policies around this youth commission. It's not fundamentally changing anything about the establishment of it. Lehman: Right. Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #17 Page 27 ITEM 17 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Elliott: Are we going to be working with the young people who've presented us with information on this youth council? Because I think we need to do recruiting in a way that certainly differs from our usual, as we're talking about an entirely different audience. Bailey: I've been in contact with that group, as well as others. I did a lobbying workshop a couple of weeks ago and there were many young people there, so I've been in contact with them, as well, and will send them a link to the application. Lehman: Okay. Connie? Champion: I just wanted to remind people that this is Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week and we have two great organizations that could really use donations, especially this time of year, we all have plenty and we're going to have huge Thanksgiving dinners and holiday dinners, to remind people that the Shelter House and Crisis Center could not only use goods, but could use some money. So, please, be a little generous with them, especially this week. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you, Connie. Mike? O'Donnell: Nothing tonight. Lehman: Dee? Vanderhoef: Just one thing. We received a letter, handout, tonight asking us to talk about using the old bus depot for the moving crew. I would like to put that on a work session, if we might, just to talk about it. Lehman: I think we already have the old bus station coming up on a work session anyway. Elliott: That's the Connie Champion Memorial Station. (laughter) Champion: It could be really cute! Kart: There are two letters. One was distributed this evening; there was another one on your Consent Calendar. Lehman: Steve, you were going to get back with us, I think, with some... Atkins: A schedule. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #17 Page 28 Lehman: Yeah, for that building. Atkins: I sent you a memo on the rehab costs. Yeah. Champion: I got it. Atkins: Little pricey. Champion: It might qualify for Historic Preservation federal funds. Atkins: We could make it cute, if you want it that way. (laughter) Vanderhoef: I would like to talk about it in the context of temporary use until we make other decisions. Atkins: I understand. Lehman: Okay. Ross? Wilburn: I went to the 2005 Philanthropy Award luncheon today, today was National Philanthropy Day, and I wanted to just let the Council and the public know there were several - it's Eastern Iowa organization - but there's several Iowa Citians recognized, received awards today. Frank and Lucille Boyd from Iowa City received the Outstanding Individual Philanthropist Award; Project GREEN received the Outstanding Philanthropic Organization Award for their work and all their volunteer work. Unfortunately, they had to nominate themselves, but the Committee awarded them an award today, too. Someone the Council's familiar with, Children Helping Innocent Laborer's Dramatic Child of Iowa City won the Outstanding Philanthropic Youth Award, and Sandy Boyd won the Benjamin Franklin Award. So congratulations to all those folks today. Elliott: May I piggyback on that? Frank Boyd is an Ainsworth boy and his generosity, I think, was created because my mother was his teacher. So there you go! Wilbum: Should we nominate you for an award? Bailey: Did you want an award for that, Bob? Elliott: Please! Wilbum: Okay. (laughter) Lehman: We'll give you some Cardinal award. (laughter) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. # 17 Page 29 Vanderhoefi And that certainly speaks well for our community. Bailey: I wanted to let the Council and the public know that the corridor group looking at light rail transportation, either for leisure or commuter, is having two whistle stop forums this Thursday - one, this is the one you'll probably be at, Bob, at 7:30 in the morning, and one at 5:30 in the afternoon on Thursday, and these will both be in the Coralville City Hall, and the time frame probably won't take more than 45 minutes of your time, and there's a questionnaire that we'll use and present some information. So, I encourage you all to attend. Elliott: What day was that? Bailey: This Thursday. Champion: Have a lot of things going on this Thursday. Bailey: Yes, we do. Lehman: Okay, one of the things going on Thursday is the Employee Appreciation Luncheon at 11:00. Hopefully all of us will be there. It's a wonderful... Atkins: As many as you can. Lehman: Yeah, it's a lot of fun. Vanderhoef: I have a conflict, so I will tell you I'm very sorry I'm not here to assist , with all the fun and visiting with our staff. Lehman: I'll give them your regards. Vanderhoef: Thank you. Lehman: Okay. I thought the CVB luncheon last Friday was delightful. Bailey: Oh good. Lehman: Regenia, it was a great group. You did a nice job of representing them in your remarks. That group does a tremendous thing for this entire community, and I think we've very, very fortunate to have the kind of leadership that we have there. And finally, last but absolutely not least, congratulations to Amy Carreia and Mike O'Donnell in the election last week, and Connie Champion, who had (laughter) a new record for the most, I believe, right Connie, the most, highest number of votes ever on City Council election. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #17 Page 30 O'Donnell: She actually set three records. Champion: Well, in eight years, but we won't discuss those. Lehman: Pretty incredible, but congratulations to you folks. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #18 Page 31 ITEM 18 REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF. Atkins: Nothing, sir. Lehman: Eleanor? Marian? Oh, sorry. Marc Moen: Sorry, before you adjourn, I am going to ask if you would possibly reconsider Item 10, on the agenda. Lehman: Why were you not here for Item 107 Moen: I was not here because I was watching you on TV and you went through Items A through J with lightening speed and the minute you said you were going to do those all in one vote, I ran down here. Lehman: Well, that's up to the Council. O'Donnell: I'd like to hear it. Lehman: Well, I think in order to get it back up you're going to have to move to reconsider. (several talking at once) Karr: You could listen without reconsidering. Bailey: We do have second consideration, so... Lehman: All right, go ahead. Moen: Just so I'm up to speed, was it first consideration tonight? Okay, and can you fill me in on what the vote was? Lehman: The vote was to require that you comply with the same standards as every other sidewalk cafe. Moen: But was it, what was the... Karr: 7 - 0. Moen: Well, I appreciate your hearing my comments late. You know, I try not to come down here and bug you unless something is, at least to me, very important, and this issue has gotten so out of whack and I think the practicality of how to resolve it has gotten so out of whack, that I just at least wanted to give you my perception of it. The issue, as I understand it, by the way, my name is Marc Moen and I live at 226 S. Clinton Street. My office is immediately adjacent to this building. I do not own the Giovanni's building. Jim Mondanaro and Maureen own that building, but This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #18 Page 32 I think this is an issue that greatly impacts the Pedestrian Plaza and the value of that Pedestrian Plaza, so I wanted to address it. The issue, as I understand it, is whether or not one can use zone 2 on the Pedesthan Plaza for outdoor cafes. Zone 1, I think if I'm not mistaken, is about ten feet from the building, and then Zone 2 if the area between that ten foot section and the fire lane, and Jim, with the City's permission, installed an outdoor caf6 in Zones 1 and 2. The issue, I believe, is one of obstructing pedestrian travel and I think it's a very legitimate issue for the other businesses on the Pedestrian Mall, and for other people who are using the Pedestrian Plaza. When Jim initially put that fence up, with my encouragement, he did not put the last section that attached it to the building, on the east side of the sidewalk caf& On the west side there was an opening and he matched that opening on the east side. During the time that was open, until the City made him close it off, there were no complaints. After that was closed off, I think almost everyone on the Pedestrian Plaza came to my office and complained. And they said, what their complaint was, why in the hell did he close it? It was perfect the way it was. Nobody had a problem with it, when pedestrians could walk right in front of the building, and I, my office, as I said, it's right there, it's on the second floor and my window looks right down on that plaza, on that caf6, and there was not any problem as long as pedestrians could walk in front of the building. So the question, I think, is, is there something illegal and improper, is there some prohibition to leaving an opening for pedestrians on the east and west side of that caf6? And my opinion, after looking at the statutes, is no, there's absolutely no prohibition to that. Somehow, and I honestly don't know how, I had heard rumors third hand, second hand, along the way that somebody had taken the position that this gate or this fence had to be attached to the building. That's the rub, that's the problem. If there's a walkway in front of the caf6, in front of Giovanni's, then there's no issue as far as I can tell. What I...and I don't know how many of you got a chance to come down and enjoy that outdoor seating, but it was a huge success and it added an awful lot the Pedestrian Plaza. Jim spent, I think, $8,000 or $10,000 putting that thing in and it really, you know, to me what we should look for is a practical solution to these things where somebody is willing to invest, you know, Jim and his wife have invested millions of dollars in downtown Iowa City. We should look for practical solutions when somebody is doing something on the Pedestrian Plaza that is not focused on drinking alcohol, and it's focused on fine dining, let's see if there's a way, a practical way, to allow that to happen, rather than find a way to put a roadblock up. And, you know, I could tell you stories about my involvement with, I mean, I've sat in meetings with architects and engineers, where I'm paying them $200 an hour each, we've got $1,500 an hour clicking away. We've hired the best designers, the best engineers, the best people that can give me the best advice, and these meetings end up being sitting around, literally prayer sessions that the City will allow us to do what we are putting the best This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #18 Page 33 designs and the best engineering standards that we can come up with, and we go down to City Hall, and I'm not pointing the finger at any particular person, but you go in there and literally on your knees begging, not only begging that they will see that you're doing the best you can, but that they'll just give you an answer. We have a portion of Plaza Towers that's been delayed for two months because we couldn't get an answer from the City. So, and I'm not complaining about that. I'm a big boy and I can deal with it, but what we need is to have a very user-friendly City Hall that's promoting these kind of businesses. Jim is doing things right. He's focusing not on alcohol; he's focusing on fine dining and there's a very easy solution to this, that allows Jim to have his caf6, allows people to enjoy that caf6, and it allows the other businesses on the Ped Mall to have travel right in front of that restaurant. And it's exactly what he did. He left an opening on the east side, he left an opening on the west side. And there's no prohibition to that. The State law under the Administrative Code... Dilkes: Maybe we can shorten this up a little bit. Um, I told the Council last night, Marc, that the configuration that Jim and I and the Mayor and Marian discussed in her office yesterday was all right legally. They decided from a policy perspective that they weren't going to allow it. Moen: And that is just so sad to me. I mean, it is so sad to me that you will not allow this. It was a beautiful...I don't know. Did any of you eat down there? It was a beautiful outdoor caf~ that everyone loved. I had a client in today that signed a five-year lease on the largest apartment at Plaza Towers. They're from Idaho. Jim happened to be in my office when they came in and I introduced him as the owner of their favorite restaurant. They eat at Givanni's every chance they get, and their favorite part of it is that, was that outdoor cafe, and Jim told them it wouldn't be there anymore. And they were mad, I mean they were mad! Lehman: Well, Marc, we're going to have an opportunity to discuss it again at the next... Moen: I think it's really sad. There's a practical... Bailey: Can I just tell you why we had concerns about that wall...it was simply safety. It's as if people are walking through a restaurant, and that's exactly how that discussion went last night. Moen: Did you go down and see it? I sat and watched .... Bailey: I have eaten there, believe me. I've eaten at every sidewalk caf~ in Iowa City, but that was the discussion, just to let you know, and we can This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #18 Page 34 continue this discussion, but I just wanted to let you know what our discussion was last night at the work session. Moen: You know what's unsafe? I watched a blind lady walk in from the, I swear to God this happened, walked in from the west side of that and right into the fence on the opposite side. Smacked right into it and fell down. I went and helped her. O'Donnell: This is only the first consideration. Moen: That's what's unsafe. It...I didn't see anything unsafe about people walking in front of that. Bailey: Well, I wasn't aware that there was previously a walkway through it. Moen: It was at my instigation and I did it for this very reason because I knew what I would hear is that for some reason this couldn't work, the "what if's?' If the entrepreneurs are willing to risk their dollars and time in this community, and we were people saying "what if, what if," none of this would be happening. No development would be happening. Champion: I think you bring up some valid points. One of my concerns, and maybe you can answer it for me, is I'm just always freakish about people on bicycles downtown who are riding very fast on sidewalks. Bailey: Illegally. Champion: Illegally, right, and very fast on sidewalks, and, it's very frightening to me that somebody would ride through that pass-through on a bicycle, with a customer going out of the restaurant or coming into... Moen: And that's the kind of, and I don't mean to be critical, but that's the kind of...we can find a reason to deny this. I'll grant ya! If you want to deny that cafe, you can find some justification somewhere, but those are far- fetched. Nobody's going to ride a bicycle through that. Lehman: Marc, let's...we're going to obviously discuss this and vote again, but I think it's only fair to point out that at the time the permit was issued initially, it was made very clear that the Council and staff considered the issuance of that permit to be in error, but because all of the conditions had been made for the issuance of the permit, we felt obligated to issue that permit. It was issued knowing that it might not be renewed. Moen; And I'm, that's...to me it's totally irrelevant. I don't care. I'm saying... Lehman: I understand...we'll get to it on the 13th. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005. #18 Page 35 Moen: You know, the City has spent an enormous amount of money doing wonderful things with that Pedestrian Plaza, now let's capitalize on it. This was a great cafe, and that walkway wasn't hurting a soul. Karr: Mr. Mayor, ifI can just clarify something, and I too have frequented and I love the sidewalk cafe, as well. Marc is correct that when it was put up there was a section missing. It was never approved to have that section missing, and once it was put up without that, it was enforced and it was closed. Moen: Right. Kart: So, the fact it was put up was not because it was allowed. It was approved closed. Moen: It was put...you're exactly right, and it was my instigation, I went to Jim and the people who were building it and I said, 'Leave that off,' because I wanted to see how it would work with it off and I knew that it was, I mean, I'll take the blame. Karr: I just wanted Council to be aware that it was not up approved. Moen: Absolutely it wasn't, and... Champion: Well, I'm willing to talk about it, okay? Moen: Well, I appreciate that. Lehman: Thank you, Marc. We have a motion to adjourn. Elliott: You bet. Vanderhoefi Second. Lehman: Second, all in favor? We are adjourned. Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of November 15, 2005.