Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-27 Transcription February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 1 February 27, 2002 Special Work Session 5:35 PM Council: Lehman, Champion, O'Donnell, Pfab, Kanner, Vanderhoef (5:40), Wilburn Absent (6:35) Staff: Atkins, Helling, Karr, Dilkes, Fosse, Franklin TAPES: 02-26 SIDE TWO; 02-27 SIDE ONE Agenda Items ITEM NO. 13. 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 MMS CONSULTANTS, IC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERiNG CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE SOUTH SYCAMORE REGIONAL GREENSPACE LANDSCAPE AND TRAIL PROJECT. Lehman/These evening so Karin couldn't be at the formal meeting, she'll be here for the work session, Rick has to be somewhere this evening so if you had any questions I think that's South Sycamore because Dee's not here, she'd raise, Rick's here to answer those for you. Lehman/Okay while don't we do Agenda Items first while we're waiting for Karin. Rick are you familiar with the question that Dee has on that South Sycamore that we haven't, the agenda item this evening I think to approve the engineering for that? Rick Fosse/Yes and I as I understand it she's wondering if we can do that design in house and we can do that in house, timing wise we need to wait until next winter to get that done, we're already committed for our spring and summer for our staff work and we can save money by designing in house but the thing to think about is the bidding climate right now is very favorable especially for concrete work, and it may be such that we can save more by getting good bids than we might by designing it in house. Lehman/You don't remember offhand what the have an idea of what the estimate for that project is. Fosse/I think the total project cost was around $800,000 and that was for the trail and for the landscaping and design services. Lehman/And this engineering is for the total project. Fosse/Yes. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 2 Lehman/Is that a project that we were hoping to do this year? Fosse/Yes we wanted to construct it this summer if you recall we were going to look into adding that temporary sidewalk along the west side of South Sycamore Street to link into Southpointe Subdivision, we were looking into piggy backing that onto this project if we had the money available. Pfab/So going back to balancing that you were asking about, are you stating you said you could do it in house but we may want to take advantage of as good as bidding climate as we can get? Fosse/Right we can design it in house, we'll lose a year and we can definitely save money on design, I don't question that but the thing that I'm not sure about is the bidding, will the favorable bidding climate that we have right now outweigh what we might save by designing it in house. Pfab/Some people say it'll be working better. Fosse/Yea ifI were a betting guy I'd say roll the dice with the bids that we're getting this year. (Vanderhoef arrived) Lehman/Dee we're talking about the South Sycamore item that you took off the consent calendar and Rick has stated that the bidding climate is such this year that we might very, first of all we can design it in house we'd have to delay the project for a year and that the bidding climate is such that on a project this size we may not, we may lose any savings that we have because of the bids that we have come in. So if you have questions for him we brought it up because we knew that was an item you had. Pfab/How big a project is it? Vanderhoef/But if you'd, sorry, if you designed it in house how much does that delay us? Fosse/We can probably save in the $20-$30,000 range. Lehman/But delays a full season. Fosse/Yes. Vanderhoef/It delays us a full season, okay. Champion/What's the total estimated cost of the whole thing? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 3 Fosse/The whole works is about $800,000, it includes the landscaping, design and construction (can't hear) services. Pfab/What does it do as far as money in the budget wise because I'm as it fits into the budget. Champion/It would just be. Pfab/ I'm inclined to say go on out. Champion/Yea, probably going out. Lehman/Well that's going to be on the agenda later tonight, we just wanted information here so we can decide later if we want to move forward with it. Pfab/My point was (can't hear) was there anything else that would be good to know now? Lehman/Well it is, actually it's budgeted for this fiscal year, this before the first of July of this year. Fosse/Yes. Lehman/If we let the contract for the design will that bid be let buyer to the first of July? Fosse/We hope so yea. Lehman/Okay, then I have a question for you that has never come up (can't hear). ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2003. Lehman/Obviously there's been some conversation about the dam project, and about the component of that project that is devoted to the bridge and the extension of that bridge, is it possible to build that dam with a walkway that is efficient to provide for emergency use without spending the million dollars or so that would be necessary for what's proposed? Rick Fosse/Yes, yes it is, if we, if our direction is to look at or at least abandon the idea of having it as a public pedestrian crossing or even a pedestrian observation then we can go back and look at different ways to get it to rescue issue either just a very minimal bridge where we may be able to accomplish in $300-400,000 range, it would be something narrow wouldn't have much of railings on it or there may be other techniques as putting in a pier in the river downstream that they can This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 4 secure boats and ropes to to stage their rescues from the downstream side actually and that may be in the $100-$200,000 range. Lehman/Just saying that even scaled down version of something on top of the dam is still $300-400,000, now the bridge that we're talking about up to the edge of the dam is in the neighborhood of what $700,000 to $800,000? If we stopped at the edge of the dam. Fosse/If we stopped at the edge we put in what ! showed you at the last work session that's $800,000 to get us across the dam and dead end it there. Lehman/But we could spend half that much putting in something that is just functional for rescue. Fosse/Correct. Lehman/And would not be able to be ever turned into a pedestrian overpass or walkway or whatever. Fosse/Right, right. (All talking) Lehman/I'm not making this easy at all you know that. Champion/Let me ask another question, if, of course my point would be that if we built the bridge at all it should be so it could be eventually done into a full pedestrian trail. Lehman/I think that's what he. Champion/Yea but he said we could just do half of it, but he mentioned something about just a pier upstream. Fosse/Downstream. Lehman/Downstream. Champion/Downstream, the rescue where the water runs this way, downstream, okay, so that's only a couple hundred thousand now that might not be a bad temporary idea and put that bridge off until we have money to do that trail. How long would it take you to find out about that? Fosse/We need to get back together with the sheriff's office and fire department, that idea was kicked around early on in the design of this and then when it looked like This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 5 the pedestrian bridge route was the way we were going to go we didn't develop that further. I'm thinking that we probably can develop it further, so if you want me to explore that I will. O'Donnell/What cost is it? Champion/$200 about. Fosse/It's, our construction cost estimate is about $225,000 then you add on to it the design and the other (can't hear). O'Donnell/I don't understand how that's going to facilitate easier rescues or safer. Champion/(can't hear). Fosse/What that does it puts a basically a concrete pier in the middle of the river with places to tie the rescue boats off to and that way as they can work closer to the dam they've got something that they're tethered to so that the current doesn't pull them into the face of the dam. O'Donnell/Okay. Fosse/The downside of that is trying to keep fisherman from using that for the same reason and getting themselves in risky situations. Pfab/I think there's another downside I mean that money is eventually going to be wasted. Fosse/Well it will always be there. O'Dormell/It will always be there Irvin. Champion/It will always be there. Vanderhoef/Tell me if this can be done that way would this be something that would be very desirable for rescue purposes rather than having to work off of the bridge? Fosse/That I couldn't answer on behalf of the Sheriff's office or fire department, I'd have to go back and visit with them they were happy with the bridge concept because it looked like that's the direction we were going and it made sense to build both so if you want me to develop the other idea further I can do that. Vanderhoef/I'd be curious whether they would think this was a really nice addition knowing that the bridge might come later whether it's that useful to them or not. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 6 Fosse/Okay. Champion/Is the cost of the whole bridge across I don't have my notes, it's $1.2 million, right? Fosse/Yes. Champion/And the part that would just service the rescue thing was $700,000 or? Fosse/Well if we build the full blown pedestrian bridge but dead end it at the far side of the dam and not take it across the spillway that's $800,000. Champion/Okay. Kanner/And what's the rough estimate to finish it in future year? Vanderhoef/That's the biggy. Champion/A lot. Fosse/Yea, that, I didn't get those figures I apologize for that I didn't bring those along tonight. Vanderhoef/But you had mentioned the set up costs and bringing the equipment in and so forth so we're. Fosse/We're doubling our mobilization costs. Vanderhoef/Thank you. Champion/I could support a pier I think if we do a bridge at all I'd have to do the whole thing. Lehman/Is there any portion of that bridge project that is being funded by the grant that Coralville has or is their grant strictly for the area off on the west side? Fosse/No part of the bridge project wilt be funded by the REAP grant. Lehman/Do we know how much that is? O'Donnell/! think it's 250 isn't it? Fosse/The REAP grant is in the neighborhood of $150,000 and then they will contribute about $100,000 cash on top of that to bring their total contribution to $250,000. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 7 Lehman/Now if we choose not to build that bridge we do not have that contribution. Fosse/Correct. Lehman/So now we're talking a little different situation whereas the bridge cost is $800,000, a walkway minimal sort of thing $300,000 to $400,000 which we would pay all of it. Fosse/Yes. Lehman/$800,000 if we chose to do it that way we would be paying $550,000 for Fosse/That's a good point Emie. Lehman/I mean that's a huge point. Fosse/If it's a rescue thing only then there's no value in it for Coralville and they'd be unlikely to contribute. Champion/And so instead of $1.2 million it's going to cost us $1.2 million minus $250,000. Fosse/That's in the financing package that's in our capital program yea. Vanderhoef/Okay and is there any danger of losing the REAP grant if we extend it out too far? Fosse/Definitely, we've extended the REAP grant a couple of times now, if you say go tonight it will even be a little bit dicey on if we can get this done on time to maintain that REAP grant that we already have. Pfab/ You made a statement and I didn't quite understand exactly what you said, you said when you talked to the I think it was the Sheriff's department about building the bridge they were for it or not for it. Fosse/They were for it, they were very satisfied with that. Pfab/Is that the idea, does appeal, does the pier having any advantage if you have the bridge? Fosse/I think the more tools that they have available to them the better but it becomes a balance between whatever you going to spend making the schools available and what's reasonable. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 8 Pfab/But I mean no, is the bridge a Cadillac or is it just another Chevrolet and the other a Chevrolet (can't hear). Fosse/No I didn't sense there was a clear preference on the part of the Sheriff's office of the pier over the bridge or the bridge over the pier, it's just that if we're going to build the bridge they're fine with that. Pfab/Okay so then I guess the next question I'd ask, what kind of cash flow would, we're toying with the bond limitations but what about cash flow as we start to pay those off, how will that affect us? I think I would ask. Lehman/That's a general obligation bonds as they're repaid on your tax bill they don't affect your cash flow. Pfab/Well (can't hear). Lehman/Your taxed for that but it doesn't affect the general fund isn't that correct? Atkins/Whenever we have capital projects because of our cash position the use of our reserve we normally fund them up front and then reimburse ourselves at the time of sale so cash flow has not been an issue for us, on a project of that scale. Pfab/Okay but what about paying back bonds, where does that money come from? Champion/Property tax. Atkins/That's property tax. Pfab/Okay it's a bill it's going to come up for 20 years. Atkins/Oh yea. Pfab/Yea so I mean, what I'm saying is w hat's the yearly tab on something like that? Atkins/On a million dollars worth of borrowing it's about $80,000 a year. Pfab/So we're really looking at about $80,000 per year after we get the income from the two grants or from the REAP Grant is that? Fosse/The REAP grant and the cash contribution. Pfab/Okay so we've got $250,000 if my math make any sense, it looks like we're ahead for the first year about $650,000. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 9 Lehman/We just don't borrow as much, we borrow instead of borrowing a million we Pfab/Okay so then the $80,000 okay. Lehman/Any other questions for Rick? We'll just catch you later. ITEM NO. 13. 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 MMS CONSULTANTS, IC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE SOUTH SYCAMORE REGIONAL GREENSPACE LANDSCAPE AND TRAIL PROJECT. Kanner/I have a question about the green, South Sycamore Greenspace. Is there any consideration to let's say 20 years down the road of being able to use the wetlands as part of our wastewater treatment? I know that when we, before we built the plant there was talk of wetlands as a possible filter of our water and that didn't quite work out. Fosse/I think it's unlikely that we'd be able to use those specific wetlands, but if you go to our south wastewater treatment facility we have some constructed wetlands that we're working with the University on and we're experimenting with waste water treatment in those so we've got some in place. Have you seen those yet? Have you been down there? Kanner/I saw a couple years ago. Fosse/Okay they're still there and they're still operational and right now we're looking at using them for polishing for tertiary treatment and seeing how they work for that and so it's technology we're trying to advance. Kanner/So there's thoughts that it will be expanded eventually? Fosse/It depends on the outcome. Kanner/I mean if it works that, and I would assume that technology in wetlands treatment will advance over the next decade or so tremendously leaps and bounds. Fosse/If it proves that the technology is there then it's really your all direction on where we go with it. Kanner/Thank you. Lehman/Thank you. Okay Karin we're going to. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 10 Atkins/Now Rick's going home so he won't be back tonight. Champion/Good night. Lehman/Yea, thank you. Kanner/Emie I had some more agenda items. Lehman/Okay, do you want to wait until? Lehman/Okay, well Karin you have to leave tonight as well? Franklin/I do but I've got a while. Lehman/No, let's Karin and then she can leave, go ahead. Champion/And maybe we can all leave too. O'Donnell/We're going with you. Franklin/No you have to stay. Planning & Zoning Items A. CONSIDER AN ORDiNANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 2,800 SQUARE FEET FROM LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RM-12, TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY, RM-44, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTH END OF WEST BENTON COURT (REZ01-00027) (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Okay Planning & Zoning stuff, everything on the agenda tonight just about is repeat, so it should be fairly easy. The first item is Oaknoll and this is the rezoning of that very small piece the 2,800 square feet. Pat Ringham will be here at your formal meeting to request that you expedite consideration of this, it's on for first consideration for tonight. B. CONSIDER AN ORDiNANCE TO AMEND SECTION 14-6E OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO ALLOW GROCERY STORES N THE INTENSiVE COMMERCIAL ZONE, CI-1, AS A PROVISIONAL USE OR AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION. (FIRST CONSIDERATION). Franklin/Second Item is the ordinance to amend the zoning ordinance to allow grocery stores in intensive commercial zone. You have had before you two ordinances, one to deal with this as a provisional use, and one to deal with it as a special This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 11 exception. A provisional use means somebody can come in and get a building permit as long as they meet all the requirements of the building code and the zoning ordinance and the provision in this particular case is that it be a store no larger than 30,000 square feet. With a special exception it requires action by the Board of Adjustment prior to getting a building permit and when it goes before the Board of Adjustment there are a number of standards that are looked at which are general standards for special exceptions and those would be looked at as well as the provision that is particular to grocery stores in this ordinance which again is the 30,000 square feet or less. You need to chose one of those and you can just do that by a motion tonight that you want, well one of you need to suggest which ordinance your going to vote on and vote on that one, if it does not pass then you may select the other one and see how that one goes, okay. Is that alt clear? Lehman/Got it. Kanner/Well I would think we would need to decide now which one because you read, well how would the procedure go? After you read the resolution. Lehman/Right then someone needs to make a motion for one or the other at that point we will publicly discuss the merits of the one we have the motion on and at the same time perhaps discuss the merits of the one that we don't because I think they'll be compared with the two so it should be presented during public discussion I guess. Dilkes/It would be most efficient if you had a sense of which one four of you were inclined to support before the ordinance is proposed, otherwise we're going to go through one ordinance, it's not going to get support we're going to go to the next one. Franklin/And because I won't be here later there won't be anybody here from Planning later. Pfab/I was just going to say could you. Franklin/If you've got any questions now, now would be the time. Pfab/At this time could you just kind of a little postage stamp a quick comparison or the pros or cons, the things that are different. Franklin/Okay the things that, the most striking difference is that with a provisional use essentially a person can get a building permit for the grocery store in the CI-1 zone by right. That is they can come in and get a building permit in the building department provided they've complied with all the code. Pfab/Which? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 12 Franklin/Provisional, provisional because there's a provision in the code, and they meet that provision they can get their building permit. The special exception requires that they go before the Board of Adjustment which is a different process, it's a process in which you make an application for the Board, there's the staff report wit the recommendation, there is a heating before the Board, there is public scrutiny as well as a series of standards that are in the code for special exceptions that must be met. With the special exception conditions may be imposed upon, that particular grocery store and that particular location, remember this is not just about Scott Six, this is about grocery stores in any CI-1 zone. O'Donnell/Which there are how many Karin? Franklin/How many CI-1 zones..9 O'Donnell/There are like two others that are applicable to this. Franklin/No there's more than that, I mean it's areas, there's some on Highway I, there's some on Gilbert Street south of Highway 6 north of Gilbert Street and Highway 6, there's the Scott Six, not having the map right in front of me, I think them are some on the west side farther too. O'Donnell/And all of these would accommodate something that's large is that practical for it? Vanderhoef/No. Franklin/With development or redevelopment it could happen yes, I think that you have to look at it that it could happen in any zone and my point is that with the special exception the conditions can be imposed, with a provisional use they can not. So the provisional use is quite straight forward, in the door, get the permit, out if you've complied with everything. Special exception, Board of Adjustment, there could be conditions imposed, it's a public meeting in which that decision is made. Pfab/Is there, were in the process of rewriting these ordinances right? Champion/They're written. Franklin/The entire zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations yes. Pfab/Okay so what I'm saying, well what I'm asking is, it looks, it appears to me when I can just by judging the public sentiment and other people's idea on the Council this is my take on it it doesn't mean I'm right, that this project has a lot of support so if we're going to change this and is there any reason that it is not, what was the first one you said, not to be? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 13 O'Donnell/Provisional. Franklin/Provisional. Pfab/Provisional, why we shouldn't go that way and if nothing else and set up a moratorium until the thing is changed. Franklin/If you want to make it easy as possible, as easy as possible to establish a grocery store in a CI-1 then you want to choose the provisional use. Pfab/But what I'm saying is does it really open the door? And does it open the playing field for anyone to jump in if we're in the process of changing which we expect in the next four or five months right? Franklin/By the time, you received a memo in November of last year that indicated that by the time the entire development code review including the complete zoning ordinance and subdivisions regulation gets to you it will be Fall of 2002. Pfab/Okay, now is there any reason why we couldn't put a moratorium until then until if we did or make this one and then? Franklin/I think it would be difficult to justify a moratorium Irvin just because what we're talking about with our development code review encompasses everything in the city and the equity of saying that your going to put a moratorium just on grocery stores, just in commercial areas, I don't think you could come up with, I could not come up with a good rationale for doing that, I mean why not then put a moratorium on all building in the city until the development code is done and I'm not recommending that by any means. O'Donnell/That sounds (can't hear). Champion/Well I'm, I mean I'm definitely going to support the provisional use because we've said all along that this is not just about Fareway it's about putting a grocery store in a different CI-1 or whatever it is. But, so, I think that way it would be fair is to make it provisional and I don't think we're going to see a big rush of grocery stores in CI-1 zones. And also if we decide to go special exception then they have to go through that whole thing with the Board of Adjustments, comes back to us, public heating. Franklin/No it doesn't go to you, it only goes to the Board of Adjustment which is a quasi judicial body, it is reviewed by the Board, it takes about a month. O'Donnell/But they could say no. Franklin/Of course they could say no. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 14 O'Donnell/And the recourse after that is what? Franklin/Pardon me. Lehman/District Court. Franklin/District Court. Champion/Well I'm not going to (can't hear). O'Donnell/I too am going to be supporting provisional use on this, this has been going on. (All talking). Franklin/Okay that's three people that support provisional. Vanderhoef/Well I'm going to go the other way with the exception because when I pull out the code and read the things that are listed in the code that we don't get to do under a provisional it has to do with plantings, screening, fencing, construction, commencement time, completion, lighting which I think is an important thing in operational controls, traffic circulation requirements, highway accesses, and restrictions and the number of curb cuts, parking requirements. All of these things are the things that are listed here and the Board of Adjustments conditions that they could put on if they deem necessary and under the provisional the way I understand it you can't do that. Champion/But you would just pick out a particular a grocery store in one of these areas to be subjected to all that but anyone else who wants to open that area would not be subjected to that. Vanderhoef/But these are the kinds of things that we look at all the time if it is already zoned properly for this, so we're. Champion/So what's the point if it's already zoned properly for it? Vanderhoef/The point is that if we go with the provisional we don't get to control of these things. O'Donnell/I'm not after control, I just, I'm ready for a grocery store, a great portion of the east side has said they want a grocery store, if you look at the way these businesses are set up, they have the proper lighting. Champion/Right. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 15 O'Donnell/There isn't a grocery store around that is not on a main thorough fare because that's how you get there. It was brought up about these unaccessible with bicycles, well I don't know how many people take bicycles to go grocery shopping because it's hard to get three or four bags in a bicycle. Champion/(can't hear) bicycle. O'Donnell/I'm just, what's that? Champion/On a bicycle. O'Donnell/On a bicycle, well baskets, it's, I mean. Vanderhoef/Whatever. O'Donnell/This has gone on for a great deal of time, it's, I just think it's time to move forward with this. Vanderhoef/Well I don't think it's time to move forward with it because I just think this is just spot zoning and it's not an appropriate place for it and it has a lot of safety concerns to it and we certainly have a problem with accelerating the need for capital moneys to upgrade 420th Street and we don't have any TW money to do that and so. We're going to have people coming to us immediately saying well we need a stoplight and we need to get that road upgraded because we can't get out on Highway 6 and we can't get out. O'Donnell/I can't predict that Dee, and I don't think you can't either. Vanderhoef/I can with traffic I just. Champion/I just want to ask a question. Everybody else that goes into that CI-1 zone is not subject to all this stuff your talking about, now you've been against Faraway going in there from the very beginning so is this part of that I mean you don't want it there period. Vanderhoef/I want a Fareway store or a grocery store on the east side. Champion/But you don't want it them. Vanderhoef/But we have locations that are zoned properly and to do a spot zoning for a particular store with people saying yes I want a grocery store the things that I hear are I don't care where you put it just put a grocery store on the east side. O'Donnell/I haven't heard that at all. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 16 Lehman/Okay, Vanderhoef/That's fine. Lehman/This is an issue that obviously has a great deal of concern and disagreement on the part of Council and Planning & Zoning and staff. I don't think there's any question that this is a marginal idea to put a grocery store in a area that is zoned, what is commercial (can't hear). Champion/CI-1, I can never remember. Lehman/It's on the edge of industrial, I think there are some arguments that can be made that this is a use that would be appropriate in that location but appropriate only under certain circumstances, and I think because of the controversy that's involved with this and the fact that it is in a zone where grocery stores normally do not appear but it is a use that is could be used and could be compatible I believe that it is appropriate that when we put that in that zone that we put it there with certain restrictions to ensure the fact that we have good vehicular flow of traffic, good access for whoever wants to get in and out that allows it be there but only if certain requirements are met because it isn't probably the best place for a grocery store but it's one that will work if the conditions are right. O'Donnell/Can I have a McDonald's there Emie? Lehman/As far as I know you can. O'Donnell/I believe I can have a McDonald's there, I think a McDonalds will generate more traffic than a grocery store, this grocery store, you know we've spent thousands of dollars beautifying the entrances to our cities to our city and ifI wanted to I could store construction equipment on that lot. I believe the provisional use is appropriate and I just think we need to move this thing forward. Lehman/Well we're going to be discussing that later, we're not going to go anywhere with it now obviously so. Kanner/I had a question for Karin. I guess I'm a little bit confused, at first I thought the conditions, the special conditions that would put on with special exception would be written in for that particular item. Franklin/There was no direction from the Council to do that at the last meeting. Kanner/No but it would be is that correct if we put it in there, it would go not with the general special exceptions for everything. I was, my original understanding was that we would, if we wanted to put this in as a special exception there can be This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 17 special conditions for this specific item of grocery stores, as a special exception, is that correct? Franklin/You may do that. Kanner/Okay so what Dee was talking about was something else as far as special conditions. Franklin/Those conditions that Dee was referring to are the general conditions that and standards, the standards and the potential conditions that can be placed on any special exception. You may also write the code such that for a grocery store in CI-1 you have very specific issues that you want to have addressed just for grocery stores in CI-1 because they are such a special use in CI-1 in your judgment and you can articulate what those special issues are in the code. They also however would be held up against the standards for the general special exceptions which is what Dee was referring to. So to give a progression the provisional has that one provision based upon it, it goes through by right, the special exception without special provisions for a grocery store is held up to those standards and goes before the board or you have the standards of the general special exception plus the standards for the grocery store that goes before the Board. Kanner/So if we wanted to adopt the special conditions that were recommended by the P & Z, those three items which were under 30,000 square feet and there were two other things. Franklin/The, okay. Kanner/Let me just finish. We would pass the ordinance with special exception and then we would come back to staff and ask staff to write up an ordinance that would include those three special conditions is that how it would proceed? Franklin/Okay the ordinance that you have before you fight now for a special exception to handle this includes the one provision of the size. Lehman/Right. Franklin/Whether it says provisional use or special exception, that one provision is in the ordinance that's before you. The two other issues that the Planning & Zoning Commission raised, they did not at the Commission level were not able to get specific language about how you would address pedestrian access or the mix or vehicles, I think that was the other one. Vanderhoef/Yes, traffic improvements to accommodate a mix of retail and industrial traffic. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 18 Franklin/Right. Vanderhoef/This might include upgrades of area streets, sidewalks, traffic controls, limitations on the number and location of curb cuts. Franklin/There would have to be if we were going to have those provisions in the ordinance we would have to have very specific measurable language that applied in every instance in which you had a grocery store in a CI-1 zone. So it would not have references to industrial because not every CI-1 zone is right next to industrial. But you could do what you suggested Steven in that you could pass the special exception ordinance with the provision of the 30,000 square feet or less and then you could direct us to add language of other things that you wanted to address specifically for grocery stores in CI-I whether it's those two items or something else and we would have to try to come up with language that was specific and enforceable. Champion/You could also do that with provisional use those. Franklin/You could do that with provisional use also. Champion/Right because it would have to be a special exemption. Franklin/I guess I will express at this point the difficulty we have had in thinking about what particular language you would put in that addressed the pedestrian and the traffic mix such that it was a provision that was clear, measurable and enforceable. Lehman/All right, let me ask you this. A special exception situation changes as the location changes? Franklin/That's right. Lehman/For example, yea, for example this is a location basically close to a corridor which would have different restrictions than one 200 yards away from an intersection so the special exception provision tailors the development to the particular development that is being proposed where as the general provisions if we did that as a provisional use would apply to every store that appeared in those zones regardless of their proximity of an intersection or on an arterial or whatever? Franklin/Right. Pfab/Question that's not totally related but not unrelated. At what point do we get to where we're revising the whole code, ordinances whatever you want to call it. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 19 Franklin/With this I don't think your getting anywhere close to that. Pfab/No, No, but I'm saying, okay let's say we have a target time of December 6, 2002, is there anytime before that where it would be unreasonable to put a moratorium on all future developments let's say two months out or something like that until the new code was adopted? Franklin/I would not recommend that Irvin. Pfab/In other words so what your saying is it would be until the new code was in effect and anything anybody can shove through before that. Franklin/Yea. Lehman/Okay guys. C. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SENSITiVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR LOTS 3 AND 4 OF A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 53 OF WALDEN HILLS, LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF ROHRET ROAD AND SHANNON DRIVE. (REZ01-00026) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Okay next item, this is second consideration on lot, sensitive areas development plan for lots 3 and 4 ofa resubdivision of lot 53 of Walden Hills. The applicant has requested expedited consideration of this if you can wave the second and go for pass and adopt they would appreciate it. D. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.63 ACRES LOCATED AT 707 N. DUBUQUE STREET FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI- FAMILY, RM-44, TO HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMiLY SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY. OSA/RM-44. (REZ01-00010) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Franklin/Item D is second consideration on the rezoning for the Svoboda project on Dubuque Street. E. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE 95 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN COURT STREET AND LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY, RS-5, AND MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE- FAMILY, RS-8, TO SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY (REZ01-00023/SUB01- 00025) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Item E is pass and adopt on the sensitive areas ordinance, no, yea, sensitive areas overlay for the Lindemann Subdivision on north of Court Street. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 20 F. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF L1NDEMANN SUBDIVISION, AN APPROXIMATE 95 ACRE, 261-LOT RESDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED NORTH OF COURT STREET, SOUTH OF LOWER WEST BRANCH ROAD, AND EAST OF HUMMINGBIRD LAND/SCOTT PARK DRIVE. Franklin/Item F is the preliminary plat which follows that, now that it's zoned you do the plat. G. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE THE NORTHERN 182 FEET OF THE 20-FOOT WIDE ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED SOUTH OF BURLINGTON STREET AND WEST OF DUBUQUE STREET. (VAC01- 00004) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Item G is pass and adopt on the vacation of the north 182 feet of the alley in block 102 downtown, this is near the transportation center. And I'll just refer you to item 14 which is your resolution of intent to convey and sets the public hearing for March 14 on the actual conveyance of this. Dilkes/And so we will want to defer until March 19 on this one, G. Franklin/You want to defer that? Dilkes/Yea. Lehman/March 19. O'Donnell/G. Dilkes/Yea. H. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A PORTION OF NORTHGATE DRIVE. (VAC01-00006) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Okay Item H is to vacate a portion of Northgate Drive, this says subject to the final plat of the resubdivision of Highlander first addition. You will have that, that plat has been recommended for approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission at their February 20 meeting and you will have that on your March 19th meeting. Did you want to defer this one too Eleanor? Dilkes/I don't think you have to defer this one. Lehman/Okay. Pfab/This is just to changing to do the (can't hear)? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 21 Franklin/Yea it shifts. Dilkes/This is a realignment of the road. Franklin/It shifts where the road is, it's kind of a housekeeping thing. I. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING 4.01 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF HERBERT HOOVER HIGHWAY EAST OF SCOTT BOULEVARD FROM COUNTY LOCAL COMMERCIAL, C-l, TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE, CO-1. (REZ01-00025) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/And then Item I is pass and adopt on the zoning for the Iowa City Care Center. Agenda Items (cont.) Atkins/Are there any more agenda while Karin's still here? Lehman/Oh yea anything else on agenda items for Karin. Item 3d(1) CONSIDER A MOTION SETTiNG A PUBLIC HEARiNG FOR MARCH 19 ON AN ORDiNANCE REGULATiNG AND RESTRICTiNG THE USE AND HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES AND OBJECTS OF NATURAL GROWTH 1N THE VICINITY OF THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT BY CREATING APPROPRIATE ZONES AND ESTABLISHiNG BOUNDARIES THEREOF; DEFiNiNG CERTAiN TERMS USED iN SAID ORDiNANCE; REFERRING TO THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ZONING MAP AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE; ESTABLISHiNG AN AIRPORT ZONING COMMISSION; ESTABLISHING AN AIRPORT ZONiNG BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT AND IMPOSiNG PENALTIES. Kanner/This might be you, we're having a public hearing in the consent calendar for March 19 number D is this is to restrict the high use of structures and natural growth near the airport. Well also it says establishing an Airport Zoning Commission, an Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment. Could you explain that and. Franklin/We have an. Kanner/I thought we had a. Franklin/We do and this reestablishes it under the new airport zoning ordinance which I have reviewed, it's now in the City Attorney's office for review, this has gone through the Airport Zoning Commission which is a City/County Commission and has been recommended by them and is supported by the Airport Commission. What we're trying to determine at this point is the impact that it has, fi'om my This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 22 perspective particularly the impact it has on development because it changes the overlay zones, like the approach overlay zone for different runways, just a couple of the runways. And we want to get an evaluation of that that will be part of your decision making as you look at this zoning ordinance and we'll have that for you for the 19th. Karmer/But I still don't understand why we're reestablishing this Commission. Franklin/It's just. Dilkes/It's just a rewrite of the whole thing. Franklin/The whole ordinance. Dilkes/Is the way the consultant has approached it, it's not, the way the consultant has provided it it's not in ordinance form so we haven't gotten down to the details of, it's more likely a substitution of the. Kanner/The whole block of things. Dilkes/ Yea. Kanner/Okay, so that's not really changing then the Commission. Franklin/Not the Commission and the Board. Dilkes/There will still be. Franklin/The outcome is still the same as what it is right now. Kanner/I had a couple other agenda items but I don't think I had anything else for Karin. Franklin/Okay. Lehman/Okay, thank you Karin. Franklin/Thank you. ITEM NO. 6. THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $27,055,000 SEWER REVENUE BONDS OF IOWA CITY, IOWA. Kanner/Number 6 on our agenda, public hearing on the issuance of the $27,055,000 in sewer bonds, I think we ought to start discussing if we, we'll find out probably within a month or two I imagine if we get that two million in savings. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 23 Lehman/Actually we're going to find out tonight and the savings in excess of $5 million. Kanner/Oh we know we're going to settle? Atkins/Oh yea, we're all done. Lehman/We got the rates today. Kanner/Oh it's in the brown envelope, I didn't see that yet. Atkins/It's just that Kevin will be here to give you the rundown, we put it out for bid today. Kanner/Well here's my point then even it's more appropriate that we ought to start talking about lowering our sewer water bills. This would be substantial savings I would think if you work it out to 15,000 households, I was figuring $2 million, that would be if you figure $100,000 a year for 20 years in savings which would be $6.00 a household which is substantial and so I think we need to have that discussion of what we're going to do with that savings. Or is that automatic that it will go down? Atkins/It will, the cost of this debt issue will decline, now the comprehensive implications on the sewer system I don't know that yet, that's a legitimate discussion point, it will just take some analysis for (can't hear). Karmer/Well I assume we have some choice in where we want to put that money, if we want to put it, we've had some substantial raises in these rates over the last five years, if we want to put it back into the. Atkins/That's correct. Kanner/The customers pockets that might be a good way to look at it. Vanderhoef/Well it's savings on bonded money though so it's still bonding. Atkins/It reduces. Champion/It reduces the debt. Atkins/We still have the obligation for that amount of money in it's simplest terms your monthly mortgage payment will go down. Lehman/Right. IfI understand revenue funds correctly, particularly sewer and water, our rates are computed by the cost of the operation of that system which include labor, energy, chemicals, debt retirement. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 24 Atkins/Yes. Lehman/All of those factors fill. Atkins/All of that has to be factored. Lehman/The reduction in the amount of money that is required for debt retirement would be reflected in the rates. Atkins/Yes they would be. Lehman/I mean that would be automatic. Atkins/ Yes. Champion/Because we don't make a profit. Atkins/I have not calculated the full impact on this because we just found out what the numbers were a few hours ago. Lehman/But it will impact rates because that calculation is part of the formula that sets the rates. Atkins/It can affect those rates, that's correct. Lehman/It would have to affect, I mean it would have to be calculated into the total cost. Atkins/Yes. Vanderhoef/Well the point is that you can pay them off faster. Lehman/Well my suspicion is that we're issuing debt for the same period of time or whatever. Atkins/It is a continuation, it's like refinancing your mortgage at your home, you owe so much money over X number of years, at that particular point we refinance to get a lower interest rate which we were quite fortunate to get a very low interest rate today. Pfab/So there's not much incentive to rush off to pay that off. Atkins/There's not a big incentive to pay it off Irvin because it's such cheap money, that's absolutely right, yea, see that's why we need to calculate the operating, this is one piece of the operating costs of running the sewer system. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 25 Champion/Right. Atkins/But Steven is not wrong in the sense that ifa certain, if the cost of chemicals went way down would that be affected on the bottom line of the sewer system, the answer yes it would and we'd have to recalculate that. Lehman/And so would this. Atkins/I just haven't had time to do that. Pfab/Where does the solid waste, not the solid waste, yea the price pick up? That's part of this? Atkins/No, separate. Pfab/Okay. Atkins/This is only sanitary sewer system. Kanner/So if it's as Eruie saying that automatically if it's substantial it goes into reducing the bills that people pay then there's really not much to talk about. Atkins/There's really not much to talk about other than sending us back and see if we can calculate what it might mean on rates and we haven't done that yet but we can certainly do that. Kanner/Can we get a memo when it's calculated? Atkins/Oh sure, oh absolutely, absolutely. Lehman/It definitely will reduce the cost of operation which is the number that we use in computing the rates. Champion/Of course if we chose to pay offthe debt faster. Vanderhoef/And keep the rates up. Lehman/I don't. Atkins/Folks remember interest cuts both ways, our interest income from the cash reserves is also way down. Champion/Right. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 26 Atkins/Because we can't, so that's what I mean you need to factor all these things together. Champion/And the tune of the matter is though that free money is better than interest, I mean you know if we paid offthe debt faster we save money. Vanderhoef/That's, and in that case then you just. Atkins/We intend to do an analysis. Vanderhoef/The rates alone. Pfab/Steve. Atkins/Yes. Pfab/When possibly, just roughly, how soon will you get that? Atkins/You we'll do it in the next couple weeks, I mean we want to go to work on it, I would hope to have something for you next meeting barring any unusual. Champion/That's great though. Atkins/Yea we got excellent bids, and lots of bids. Lehman/Okay. Kanner/That's it from me. Lehman/Any other agenda items? ITEM NO. 7. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1, CHAPTER 9, SECTION 3, "ELECTION PRECINCTS" OF THE CITY CODE OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TO AMEND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE VOTING PRECINCTS IN IOWA CITY, IOWA TO CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN PRECINCT 4 AND TO INCLUDE PROPERTIES ANNEXED IN PRECINCT 25. (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Karr/Mr. Mayor just to point out Item Number 7 is second consideration of the precincts and if your so inclined you could collapse the readings and expedite that. Champion/Okay let's do. O'Donnell/It seems like we've had this for eight months. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 27 Karr/Tweaking. Lehman/Okay. ITEM NO. 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2003. Pfab/Okay could I just make a comment here. I think what we just found out here what we know and what Rick was telling us about when we go back to this bridge thing if this is time to be in the money market and maybe this is not the time to be too chincy on. Atkins/There is never a better time to be in the money market time than right now. Pfab/SO I mean I, if you can nickel and dime that bridge item around it looks to me do it and get it over with and be done with it. Champion/A million dollars is not nickels and dimes. Pfab/Well. Lehman/Well we're going to get to that. O'Donnell/In a sense, it's a whole bunch. Lehman/ Okay guys the next thing on the work session, I think we probably ought to plan on trying to wrap up our work session by a quarter to seven or so because of the formal meeting. Council Procedure Issues Lehman/Council procedure issues. Steven. Kanner/Two info. packets ago from February 7 you got a reissue of what was passed out during the. (END OF SIDE TWO, 02-26) Kanner/So I'd like to have some discussion about some of these items start with number one. Lehman/Before we start the discussion I think that, I think that personally I'd like to know if we do change our policies are we all interested in following the whatever rules and regulations that we as a body make? Because I don't think historically we necessarily have followed our own rules. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 28 Kanner/I think it's a good thing, I mean that's one of the things I was going to bring up was like Robert's Rules of Order, we're suppose to follow that and we haven't exactly followed that. Lehman/We don't miss it far I don't think. Kanner/What? Lehman/I don't think we don't miss it far, we don't use it in work sessions but we certainly do during Council meeting. Kanner/To a certain extent. Champion/I don't think we can all be trained to be perfect Steven. Kanner/What? Champion/I don't think we can. Kanner/Don't mention me, Ernie's the one who brought this up. Lehman/No, I was. Kanner/Yea you would have to assume Ernie that we're going to try to do it. Lehman/Yea but I also assume when we talked about on Council meeting nights we would go through the agenda, bring this up on Monday nights what we wish to discuss on Tuesday nights, we choose not to do that. Council decided two years ago, a majority of the Council decided that we did not want to spend the money filming Council meetings, a couple Council Members decided they want to, and I'm not faulting those things, what I'm saying is that I see no need to go through with a lot of rules if we don't intend to follow our own rules. Kanner/Emie I would argue that the strongest group process happens when if you can work for some consensus. Lehman/I agree with that. Kanner/And so on the item that you mentioned, I don't think we had any consensus I think this was a suggestion from you and if we can come to some agreement, some give and take I'd be willing to abide by that and I would ask other people to, it cuts both ways. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 29 Lehman/That's true, well let's start with your list here, number one, go ahead and you can walk us through them. Kanner/Well one and two go together to a certain extent, it's the idea of in Robert's Rules of Order my understanding is that a member of the body could offer something for the agenda at future sessions and I think one of the problems I have is the feeling that I don't have access to that, individual members don't have access to that, or even individual members with a second and any body I've been a part of I don't see that happening, and I think this is one way to get over those things Ernie, I think on my part at least I can speak for myself that perhaps there's not a feeling of access and therefore feeling, I'm not feeling a trust that my point will get out not that it has to be the only point by any means but it doesn't get it. So I think that more equitable access to the agenda is something that I would push for. Lehman/You know generally and as far as I'm concerned whatever the Council wants to do is fine with me but generally when someone wants something on the agenda they tend to visit among Council folks, get some support for that so that a request, obviously during Council time any time someone brings something up and there's interest we do put it on the agenda, it's as simple as that. I don't have a problem with that, but I do think that if something is of interest enough that we think it belongs on the agenda it probably isn't too difficult to solicit the support from some of the other Council folks so that isn't just a voice in the wilderness it's, yea, Steven great idea, we talked about it, I think it belongs on the agenda. But coming in out of the cold, just an idea that pops up for one Council person I'm not sure that it's, well we could put it on the agenda and it pops up at a work session and we say okay do we have four people who want to discuss this and then we don't, and we've gotten no where and essentially we do deal with the majority, if the majority wishes to talk about it we do. And obviously it can be an agenda item and if Council at that point decides they don't want to discuss it, it doesn't go any further. I think it really, we need to visit with each other and get support from each other to put things on the agenda. Kanner/I can respond to that or Irvin had. Pfab/Okay I think in Robert's Rules of Order it's probably the chairs responsibility to be attentive to the minority position, I think that's probably one of the duties of the chair. Lehman/I think you're exactly right but the minority does not rule. Pfab/Right. Lehman/We have a policy, we have, it seems to me that since the first of the year we've kind of said that if three people want something on the agenda we've gone with This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 30 that instead of four. Is there interest on the part of the Council to changing that? I guess that's the question. Pfab/I would, I really think that three is pretty strong, I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Lehman/No but [win I remember on a number of occasions you have said I will second that motion for purposes of discussion when you had no interest whatsoever in supporting it. Why do we waste our time if two people, I'm sorry I'm not interested in two people putting something on the agenda for the very reason that you demonstrate when you second something for purposes of discussion that you don't support yourself. Pfab/It's the only way you get on, it's the only way it gets to the public as it is right now because basically you control, your the gatekeeper, I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Lehman/No but we. Pfab/But so that was what you force the issue to, I'm not necessarily supporting what Steven is saying but I said, if the public it looks that way and once they understand and if you go back to Robert's Rules of Order I think that's, that will never, you could never make that work in Robert's Rules of Order. Lehman/Well the question is how many folks do we want to be able to put something on a agenda? O'Donnell/I think it should take four Ernie, that's majority. Lehman/I don't have a problem, I don't have a problem with three. Vanderhoef/I don't have a problem with three. Pfab/But then it's not, then what's it on the agenda for? See it takes away, I think it takes away, I mean I think it's the chairs responsibility. Now this is just theoretical. O'Donnell/I don't want to spend an hour and a half discussing something that four people aren't going to approve. I mean if four people want to bring it and put it on and discuss it, then it has a chance of going somewhere. Champion/Well even three. Lehman/But three would, three is. Vanderhoef/Three is okay. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 31 Lehman/We don't have to have something that's a slam dunk that it's already a done deal. O'Donnell/Well I think it's four but I'll compromise to three here. Champion/Well the truth of the matter is you have Council time, you can bring something up, if you can get three people to agree that it's a worthy thing to discuss it can go. Lehman/But two more people so you have three people. Champion/Right, right, or two more people, we can't tie up agenda's with individual programs, I mean we can't do that but I think Steven is right in a sense that sometimes there is some merit to the minority position but four people of you might not be able to get those four votes but if you could get three then you have a reason to discuss and maybe you could swing that fourth vote so I would support three. Pfab/Connie I don't think I think your statement is not quite accurate here, I don't think you say there's merit in it, I think there's right in Robert's Rules of Order that a minority has an oppommity to be heard. Champion/Well we certainly do hear from the minority Irvin. Pfab/Well I didn't say that but I say that is a, that's not a has a merit, I think it's a right, but if right's are not protected. O'Donnell/But you know what we've made a decision that it takes three it sounds like so Irvin. Lehman/I also think though that there are probably several there are a number of occasions when we can get three folks who are willing to put something on the agenda when those three people do not necessarily support that. Champion/Right. Lehman/So I don't have a problem with three. Is that something that you can live with? Kanner/Well I can, I would take that a step in the right direction I think. Lehman/Well I mean, there are times, I mean there are things that we've put on the agenda for work sessions that I have agreed to put on the work session that I really do not favor but I do think many times we need to bring them up, discuss This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 32 them, and put them to bed one way or the other rather than just leaving them hanging out there all the time. O'Donnell/Then does that follow along with it takes three people to request staff research? Lehman/I think that's another story. Champion/Yea. (all talking) Vanderhoef/Research is, yea, the research one bothers me a little bit in that there's such a wide range of how much time, how easy it is, and how costly it is to gather all the information so that one I lean more towards four people because if people aren't going to use the information they're going to say that right up front and to have staff spend time to do something that we don't want or don't see any value in getting that information at that point. O'Donnell/I agree (can't hear). Pfab/I think I'd ask a very interesting question and I don't necessarily need an answer but how many different members of us here have asked the staff to do something on just with one question? And that was fine and nobody objected and each person I think has enough responsibility to think before they ask. Lehman/I think though the key thing here is research, I don't think that staff has any problem with, Steve correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think that anybody in this building has a problem with getting answers for Council meetings that are, Council persons if answers which are readily available. Is it the research that may take considerable staff time that we really need to know whether there's a genuine interest on a majority of the Council before we invest that stafftime. Atkins/Here's my concern. When a Council Member goes to a department director and asks for some information, and we're trained to try to provide you as much as we can, if it is something very involved the director, I want the director to call me because then I feel an obligation to bring it all back to you all, and generally your pretty good about that so as long as we understand each other that I can give you an indication, I mean, I've been doing this long enough I can say that's going to take a block of time, that doesn't mean that the research is not worthwhile as long as you as I have the ability to interject into that discussion so the number of people you choose to give us a research assignment is very much up to you. Lehman/Well (can't hear). This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of Febrnary 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 33 Pfab/Well just a minute, I mean I'd like to follow up with what he's saying, but would that request only be made in public? Atkins/I think if, Irvin if you came to me and said I'd like to know all the cities that have so and so, my response to you would be sure we'll look that up and have that for you in a couple hours, or maybe a couple days that's routine. But if you said what would be the policy implication on so and so, woo, time out, it's your policy, it's your discussion, I need all of you to say, or a group of you to tell me, go ahead. Pfab/But would that be done in public? Atkins/Oh yea. Pfab/Okay then that's fine, I don't have a problem with that, if you, if something that somebody goes to a staffperson and the staff person says that I have instructions to get back to the City Manager, City Manager says well you know I think you've got a point there, and that would be the only time that that would be decided would be in public session I have no problem. Atkins/As long as each of you respects that, I mean it's not like I'm trying to tell you no I don't want to do things on your behalf but I do need to have some understanding that the rest of the Council is on board. Lehman/All right let me state what I believe to be the policy. Pfab/Oh yea I mean that's. LehmanJ You have, when a Council Member requests information from a department head or a staff person in the Civic Center and that person determines that that is extraordinary when it comes to work, they will contact you. Atkins/Yes. Lehman/You will at that point in time, call the Council person and say this is really a lot of time, your going to have to talk to the Council and see if there are other Council people who are interested in us pursuing the amount of time it takes for that and you would come to us and we would say yea or no. Pfab/But it would be done in public. Atkins/I have to do it at a work session. Dilkes/But you've really come no where though in this discussion and now your back to Council and that's where we started and where, how many on Council does it take to tell us to research something? This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 34 Lehman/Authority. Champion/Four. Dilkes/Okay. Kanner/Emie I wanted to address, Eleanor was bringing up the point I was going to make that's a separate issue and we've lived with that for two years pretty well for the most part what Steve was describing and I would say we keep that. The issue is for major policy proposals how do we request stafftime for major policy proposals as a body? And the way I look at it is that currently need four people to try to do something to convince four people and it just makes sense in my mind that you would have lower level, you go from lower level up to the majority and we went down to three to request, for putting something on the agenda. And I would say in the same sense it would go down to three to ask for stafftime so if you or I had some sort of, let's say we had some sort of policy proposal that we wanted research, it's hard to do that, ideally we want to be able to convince other Council members on the merit. One way you do that is with information so if we already have four people it doesn't make sense in my mind, if we already have four people say to do research we already have the votes. Lehman/No, no. Champion/No, no you don't. Lehman/No I don't think that's necessarily true. I think some of us are interested in hearing both sides of an issue and I think we can get a fourth person who maybe they don't support the position but is willing to do the research to reinforce what they've (can't hear). Kanner/So maybe I missed both though in the sense that I think we, there should be different levels at different stages of the game is the way that I see it making sense and maybe people don't feel comfortable with one or two people but surely three people constitutes a sizable minority and there's a good chance it can pass if we can convince four people out of this. Pfab/I tried, could I make a comment here? Here's what I would suggest, I'm not totally uncomfortable with four, I'd be a little happier with three, but I would suggest why don't we try it let's say until the end of the year? See how it goes. O'Dormell/No. (Can't hear). This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 35 Pfab/No, no, at that point. O'Donnell/No, let's go with four, I think there are four of us who say four is appropriate so let's move on. There's four people here who request staff to do something. Pfab/Is this something we're going to do in public? This is just. Champion/It's always done in public. Lehman/It requires the approval of four Council people it has to be public because that is a public meeting, if it isn't public your breaking the law. O'Donnell/Yes. Dilkes/If that's not obvious we have to start. Champion/All over again. Dilkes/Right at ground zero. Kanner/These are at public meetings, I'm making the assumption these are, we're doing these in public. Lehman/Oh absolutely, absolutely. Kanner/Yea this is not anything with (can't hear). O'Donnell/We're done with one and two if we're going to be out of here by quarter till 7 we've got to rush. Lehman/It seemed, a really significant amount of work by the staff I really feel particularly if we're talking about a lot of staff time and the mai ority of the Council should agree the staff time, and I don't have a problem before and I don't have a problem before and I really think that there's among respect among Council folks that if three people could get a fourth person to go along with it. Atkins/As long as you folks understand, I don't like telling you no, but if it's going to be of something of some consequence, what's the speed limit of so and so oh I'll look that up, take care of it, get that for you. I'd like to have an analysis done over the next month or so on the speed's at so and so, well wait a minute, let's talk a little bit about that. Lehmarff But if we for example, we say three people can ask for research Steve I would, Dee, Mike and I would like research on the advantages of disadvantages of the This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 36 Municipal Electric Company, I'd like you to do that for us. Now we have (can't hear). Atkins/And my first response would be, I can give you a brief outline probably in a couple of days. Lehman/Yea but we want something deeper than that but there's still only three of us. Atkins/Then I'm going to say I want a $50,000 budget so I can do it. Lehman/No, no, but three of us can, I think we have to have the four to do the extensive research. Vanderhoef/Yea, I do too. O'Donnell/It is four, we've decided on four, let's move. Dilkes/So it sounds like one of the problems you've identified is that if it's less than four it directs staff, that direction can be given not in public. Champion/No. Lehman/No. Pfab/No. Atkins/It can be. Dilkes/I'm just, I mean I think that's. Atkins/That was Tom's point. Dilkes/Yea that was Tom's point. Atkins/But there's a practical side to it I mean having three of you call me and ask me the same identical question has never happened before. O'Donnell/Give it a rest. Atkins/Now I've got three of you call me on a particular issue in a different angle and I'm telling you if I had three Council members about a topic I'm bringing it back to you. This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 37 Lehman/Okay the next item is changing the times at which we meeting, changing informal sessions to 5:30 and formal meetings to 6:30, what's the Council's thinking on this? O'Donnell/I'm not interested in that, I, you know I. Pfab/I will do my utmost to be agreeable to anytime you choose. O'Donnell/Well I work until 5:30 and I think most of the people would come and see us work until at least 5:00 or 5:30 and I think by the time they get home and have a bite to eat and get dressed it's 6:30 is a burden for a lot of people. Champion/Yea, I'd like to move them up to 7:30. O'Donnell/Yea I would too. Lehman/No, I don't want 7:30. O'Donnell/But ! definitely, 5:30 is just such, that' s such a, I don't think we're going to reach a lot of people that way and. Lehman/Well we do have the ability which we have exercised in the past if we ~vant to change a work session time we obviously can do that on an individual basis as far as our regular times we seem to be at 6:30 but for example today we met at 5:30 we have met at 4:00. Vanderhoef/I think that's appropriate. Wilburn/I think it depends on the, I think it depends on the expectation of the meeting time, if moving it up is indeed going to make it more convenient for folks then I think that's fine, if the expectation is that we're going to get done any sooner we're kidding ourselves so. O'Donnell/We have a tendency to use over time as allotted. Kanner/Well actually. Pfab/The meetings will be 15 minutes from now on. Lehman/All right Steven. Kanner/Well actually I think it is more convenient for not only Council Members but for the public, I think it's more convenient for the press, I think it's easier to take public transportation, the buses stop running to the east side after about 9:30 and I think if we start our formal meeting earlier I hear what your saying Mike and if This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 38 it's difficult for people to have that scheduled 5:30 1 understand that and I but still I think 6:30 starting for our formal meeting still allows time for people to get back and it does give us the opportunity to end earlier. And I think it, we get better press coverage when we, it gives us the opportunity to end earlier, a half hour earlier and have a little more freshness I think instead of going in a half hour later. Lehman/Steve how many? Vanderhoef/Sometimes it creates the opposite problem though that if you have the afternoon meeting and then the turnaround for the people who are at work that it's a little difficult to do that particularly if your traveling. Wilbum/Yea, I think it would be helpful for the press obviously I think but I think the point about just trying to get somewhere and if you have children get your kids fed and get here can creme a barrier, it's a judgment call. Lehman/Well and getting home from work, having if your, just the general public who wants to come to our meetings, if they get off work at 5:00, they drive home they get their lunch or dinner, they get back get ready to come down here, 6:30 pushing them time wise, I don't know. Champion/Well it would be very difficult for me to do it on a regular basis. Lehman/Well obviously this is kind of a fluid sort of thing and we can change it, do I sense anybody interested in changing it at this point? O'Donnell/No. Champion/No, I don't think so Emie. Pfab/It makes no difference to me. Vanderhoef/I'm trying to. Pfab/Try to accommodate whatever works. Vanderhoef/I'm happy to float with it w hen we have special needs because of long agendas or scheduling problems but on a regular basis I tend to think that 7:00 serves the most people. Lehman/Well obviously we can change it anytime we want. We're going to have to proceed with the rest of this at some future work session. Kanner/Ernie can I take a couple minutes for one other thing that I'd like to bring up at and maybe we can't make the decision tonight but in regards to following This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 39 Robert's Rules of Order sometimes I don't think we follow it and that could be okay but especially in our informal meetings, we do make decisions and I think we need to be clearer about that and I still think there's somewhat of a problem of saying that we have an informal work session and a formal session because there's an expectation that we're not making decisions on Monday night and we do make decisions, and we make decisions and sometimes the public by our rules doesn't have input in the sense of speaking to us there. And there's also problems of sometimes of the Clerk being able to discern what was decided. And we still have the problem of some people coming up and being able to come up and speak to Council at Council informal meetings and others not. Lehman/Rarely, if they're not on the agenda rarely do we allow anyone to speak, I've tried to be very careful about that so we're fair to everyone. If someone is on the agenda and you see their name it's about the only time you'll see them be able to speak. Kanner/I still would say it's a bit of problem maybe not as bad as perhaps I would think, I had thought and you make a case perhaps it's not as bad. But I think we have to somehow look at ways to make it more fluid between the informal and the formal meeting to deal with some of those problems that we have. I don't know the exact answer to it. Lehman/Well I think first, one issue you bring up and the point is very well taken, we will ask, or I will ask are there four people, and rather than say Mr. Kanner, Mr. Wilbum, Dee and myself are the four, I'll just say we have four and the record doesn't always show that and I think that that's a good point that we really should indicate which four people or five or six support something informally and I agree with that and I think that's something I should be doing and I'm not doing and I'll try to remember that if I fail to do that remind me but as far as allowing people to speak at work sessions that is a situation that may make it extremely difficult for us to get our work done, anybody who attends a work session or sees the agenda certainly can speak to us the following evening that was on that work session, but if we do allow the public to speak at work sessions we must allow both sides of any issue to be present and that's one of the reasons why I have been chastised by one member of the staff who I will not bring up nor will I look at her now. It is unfair for us to allow someone from, and it's not Eleanor, unfair. Dilkes/It's got to be Marian. Lehman/It's unfair to allow one person to represent one side so somebody's here and they want to speak to us and the temptation is huge then let them speak, I have a real problem telling them they can't talk because I think that's just not the way to do it but if we allow one side to talk and then the other side was under the impression that this was a work session where the public was not allowed to address the Council, they did not have that opportunity, that's unfair. So I don't This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002. February 27, 2002 Special Work Session Page 40 have a problem with not taking public input on work session as long as they have the ability and they do to speak to the same issue the following night. I don't know how else to do it. Kanner/I'm not quite sure either and I don't think it has to be all or nothing that it's all open to everything and it's all formal both nights or it's half one half the other, I think there's other combinations that might work that perhaps we can look at and see other cities how they do it and some other jurisdictions. Lehman/I just talked to the Cedar Rapids Mayor today, their formal meetings, they allow at the beginning of the meeting you may speak to any item that appears on the agenda, period. At the end of that public discussion they go through the agenda, no one is allowed to speak to any item on the agenda during the meeting. After the meeting they turn the television camera's offand anyone can address the Council on any issue they wish. Coralville allows 15 minutes of public discussion. I didn't know this until today when we were discussing it, and for the most part I think we do accommodate people pretty well, there are occasions when there really is, and we've extended that public discussion period when it's been necessary but. Pfab/ You bring up a point, you triggered something in my mind. I noticed the way that Coralville introduced motions or what is it? Vanderhoef/The legal does it. Pfab/And it's done in a very quick way, and they have it first. O'Donnell/The City Attorney reads it and then it's seconded. Pfab/And is there any reason we couldn't do that or we should because they cut a lot of time out of it? Lehman/Does the City Attorney read faster than I do? Pfab/Yes. Lehman/I can't imagine that there's any difference in time, folks we're going to take a break until 7:00. Adjourned 6:50 PM This represents only a reasonable accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council Meeting of February 27, 2002.